Suzerainty refers to a situation in which a region or people is a tributary to a more powerful entity which allows the tributary some limited domestic autonomy but controls its foreign affairs. The more powerful entity in the suzerainty relationship, or the head of state of that more powerful entity, is called a suzerain. The term suzerainty was originally used to describe the relationship between the Ottoman Empire and its surrounding regions. It differs from sovereignty in that the tributary has some limited self-rule.
Although it is a concept which has existed in a number of historical empires, it is a concept that is very difficult to describe using 20th or 21st century theories of international law, in which sovereignty either exists or does not. While a sovereign nation can agree by treaty to become a protectorate of a stronger power, modern international law does not recognize any way of making this relationship theoretically irrevocable by the weaker power.
China
Historically, the Emperor of China saw himself as the emperor of the entire civilized world, and diplomatic relations in East Asia were based on the theory that all rulers of the world derived their authority from the Emperor. The degree to which this authority existed in fact changed from dynasty to dynasty. However, even in periods where political power was distributed evenly across several political entities, Chinese political theory recognized only one emperor and asserted that his authority was paramount throughout the entire world. Diplomatic relations with the Chinese emperor were made on the theory of tributary states, although in practice tributary relations would often result in a form of trade under the theory that the emperor in his kindness would reward the tributary state with gifts of equal or greater value. See also the article "List of Chinese tributaries in history".
This system broke down in the 18th and 19th centuries. One way European states attempted to describe the relations between the Qing Dynasty and its outlying regions was in terms of suzerainty, although this did not at all match the traditional Chinese diplomatic theory.
The 1895 Treaty of Shimonoseki, signed between Japan and the China, transferred control over Korea from China to Japan on the premise that China exercised suzerainty over Korea.
The claims of both the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China to Tibet are based on the Qing Empire having exercised suzerainty over Tibet. This is important to the Chinese governments because it establishes a history of rule over Tibet. That the Qing Empire once exercised suzerainty over Tibet is not in doubt: the Qing Empire occupied Tibet throughout the 18th century and signed treaties with Great Britain in which Britain recognized Chinese suzerainty over Tibet. However, pro-Tibetan independence supporters argue that suzerainty does not equate with sovereignty and that Tibet therefore should not be part of China.
India
Sikkim
Following India's independence in 1947, a treaty signed between the Chogyal and the then Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru gave India suzerainty over Sikkim in exchange for it retaining its independence. This continued until 1975, when the Sikkim monarchy was abrogated in favour of a merging with India.
Bhutan
Currently India looks after the external defence, communications and foreign affairs of Bhutan.
Reference
- Garver, John W. Protracted Contest: Sino-Indian Rivalry in the Twentieth Century. Seattle: U of Washington P, 2001.
See also
