The tensions between Nepal and India regarding border issues and the land encroachment is not a new one. The potential room for the occurrence of such encroachments arises from the territorial concessions signed between the then king of Nepal and the East India Company, which is inherently sown on the Sugauli Treaty (also known as the Anglo-Nepal Treaty) in 1816. Though the treaty of Sugauli goes through several modifications and updates, it has not addressed the unfinished borderline issues between Nepal and India properly. On 20 May, 2020, unveiling the political and administrative map of Nepal by the cabinet minister for Land Management, Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation, Padma Aryal, given the current encroachment of the Nepali soil , such as Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalpani by India, has surged a border issue into a different height than ever followed by the unilateral publication of the Indian map on October 31, 2019, together with the Lipulekh and Kalapani domains in its state’s territory. Despite the unique relation between Nepal and India–such as having the bread-and-daughter relationship between Nepal and India, sharing the Nepalese border with India from three sides ( east,west and south)– the virtual inauguration of the incomplete and unilaterally constructed roadways on May 8, 2020 in the Nepali territory connecting the Uttarakhand State of India to the Kailash Mansarovar of Tibet all through the Lipu Lekh Himalayan Pass, which is one of the strategically shortest possible and the most practical paths for the trade between India and China, by the Indian counterpart has freshly triggered the original altercation of the Nepali border encroachment across the strategically significant land at a three-way junction with China and India, calling for the strategic, diplomatic, peaceful and the permanent resolution of the dispute through the respect of the sovereignty of each nation. Historically, there are more than 150 disputed territories across the world, namely Kuril Islands between Japan and Russia, Antarctica among the United Kingdom, France, and Argentina, Israel/Palestine in the Middle East, Somaliland between European colonial powers : Britain and France etc. Such disputed territories are primarily in Africa, Asia, and the Pacific region, while some are also in Europe and the Americas. Regarding India, there are several clashed regions with most of its neighboring nations, namely China, Pakistan, Taiwan, and Nepal. However, India has settled its demarcated boundary with Bhutan, and resolved its frontier disputes with Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Even though Colonial authorities try to draw boundary lines on geographic maps among neighboring countries, the ground reality among nations being different and unique creates an opportunity for border disputes among colonized and neighboring non-colonized nations and hence the problem occurs. It shows that the emperor countries seem to sow the seed of border contentions, to some extent, among colonized and/or non-colonized countries globally. On the other hand, the area of the disputed border land between Nepal and India is approximately estimated to be 60,000 hectares on the border of the disputed regions, namely Kalapani, Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh, Susta, Mechi, Tanakpur etc. In essence, when there are political changes and natural calamities in Nepal, there have been threats for the loss of natural resources (water resources, land) from the Nepalese territory in the name of agreements and treaties, such as the Kosi Agreement between India and Nepal in 1954, the Gandak agreement between India and Nepal in 1959, the Tanakpur treaty in 1991, the Mahakali Treaty between Nepal and India in 1996, the undeclared (unofficial) blockade in Nepal by India in September 2015 immediately following the the April 2015 Nepal earthquake. Now, the current Nepali land encroachment by the Indian counterpart has taken the height midst the world pandemic–COVID-19. However, the ongoing border issues on the northern frontier of Nepal arises from the negligence of the then and the current rulers of Nepal, who might want to preserve their leadership persuading neighboring countries like India. In this sense, the solution of the current border problem to get back the encroached Nepali lands by India has its own unique feature. Consequently, Nepal has come up with several serious ups and downs through her independent history while maintaining her border and territory in her neighborhood.
However, India has settled its demarcated boundary with Bhutan, and resolved its frontier disputes with Bangladesh and Sri Lanka.
Moreover, the Rana dynasty is in power in Nepal from 1846 A.D until 1951 A.D unless democracy is declared in 1951 A.D. (2007 B.S.). Still there are several political changes and movements in Nepal after 1951 AD, such as the then King Mahendra institutes the party-less Panchayat System in 1962 A.D., the 1980 Referendum in Nepal, the 1990 People's Movement to commence the constitutional monarchy, the 2007 People's Movement-II etc. Despite through a varieties of political changes in Nepal, the then and the contemporary political leaders are neither able to address the domestic (e.g., economic development of Nepal, Poverty alleviation in Nepal etc.,) nor the external problems, such as the boundary issues with its neighboring countries, especially with India. Rather, politicians are psychologically afraid of losing their leadership due to external factors despite a multitude of political changes in Nepal if they try to exercise any diplomatic and strategic actions with neighboring countries to address any external issues. This shows that the long-time prevailed political instability in Nepal is one of the crucial factors which could not provide enough strength to politicians to resolve our internal as well as external issues. Since politics has a significant impact on socioeconomic, cultural, internal, and external aspects of society, the borderline problem in Nepal has not resolved due to the frequent and ineffective political disorders. Hence, an accountable and rational Nepali citizen can patriotically anticipate to resolve problems like boundary issues permanently with the neighboring countries by the present Oli-led stable government of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal.
Historically, there are more than 150 disputed territories across the world, namely Kuril Islands between Japan and Russia, Antarctica among the United Kingdom, France, and Argentina, Israel/Palestine in the Middle East, Somaliland between European colonial powers
Furthermore, the bilateral relation between Nepal and India reveals a significant impact on different aspects of lives socially (individual-to-individual ties), economically, and culturally in two countries. Most importantly, Nepal and India have significant historical relationships in terms of trade and commerce. Since Nepal is heavily dependent upon India for its import, approximately constituting 58% of its imports from India based on January 2020 data, there would be a high inflation in Nepal if there occurs a difficulty in delivering goods and services to Nepal due to the aftermath of the border issue with India. So, Nepal should prepare to make enough investments in the agricultural sector via subsidies and grants to Nepali farmers to produce especially the agriculture based imported products to cope up with the potential inflation in Nepal because of the border issue with India. Hence, the boundary problem can at least be an opportunity for the Nepalese economy to be self-reliant on agriculture-based imported products initially. At the same time, the Nepali government can encourage Nepali farmers to assure a guarantee for the purchase and sale of domestic products through cooperatives in local, provincial and federal level, which can give a long-term solution to address the import prone as well as other domestic economic problems because agriculture is the basis for the growth and development of other sectors of the economy as well. Besides, further investments in different sectors of the Nepalese economy can be determined through the evaluation of domestic and external demand of such products once the policy makers can estimate the effect of COVID-19. I hope the present government of Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal transforms such challenges into opportunities to make her more economically stronger, socially binding, culturally diversified and stably harmonized country, finding the permanent and reliable solution to border issues.
approximately constituting 58% of its imports from India based on January 2020 data
In addition, different colonized and non-colonized countries have different reasons to have border dispute and encroachments with their neighbors. But for Nepal, it is a bit different as it is a sovereign and independent country since its birth in the history.For me there are principally a couple of root causes of why the ongoing border encroachment arises between Nepal and India. Initially the deployment, but not the withdrawal, of Indian army personnel equipped with arms and communication equipment on Nepali soil on the Sino-Indian War in 1962 encourages the Indian counterpart to claim and encroach the Nepali land. During that time period, the then king of Nepal, Mahendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev, is busy in suspending the then constitution after democracy and dissolving the elected parliament, instituting the party-less Panchayat system. In one side, he is looking for the support of neighboring countries for his Panchayat System. So, his authorities might not ask, though monitor border regions of Nepal silently, to withdraw the check-posts established during the Sino-Indian War in 1962, providing enough room to the Indian counterparts to claim Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani as its own territory at least for the time period unless Nepal seeks to demonstrate its readiness to claim and have those so called encroached regions via sufficient evidences and proofs verified by documents upon it. In this scenario, we, the Nepali side, should collect all relevant historical documents , such as receipts for the then collected land revenue from Nepali residents, the then documents for the population census survey (1961) from the Neapli side, the voters’ name list of the 1959 AD election in Nepal , Five British- Indian maps issued between 1819 and 1894 depicting Limpiyadhura as the headwaters of the Mahakali , an interview and/or demonstration of any living legends if available, verification of legal status of currently living residents etc. in those encroached areas. Meanwhile, we should also equally be ready to deal with fake evidences probably going to be presented by the Indian counterparts, such as the fake distribution of the Indian ration cards to the Nepali citizens, residing on the encroached regions of Nepal. In addition, in 1975 the Nepali authorities has also released the political and administrative map of Nepal on the occasion of the coronation of the then king , Birendra Bir Bikram Shah, without including the currently encroached areas (by India) of Nepal. The similar kind of mistake is repeated in I975 again to get the supports of neighboring governments, such as India amid the ongoing Panchayat system of government in Nepal. Most importantly, the latest border encroachment is partly due to the aftermath of the the Mahakali Treaty between Nepal and India in 1996, because of its endorsement without clearly defining Limpiyadhura as the headwaters of the Mahakali river. Thus, the above- mentioned blunders from the Nepali side would sadly lead the Nepali land encroached from the Indian counterpart, and the border issue between Nepal and India comes into play.
What’s more, the government of Nepal should be such passionate and disciplined for not letting the border issues to be agitated between Nepal and India in a way which can hamper the Nepal-India relationships. However, if the Indian government is not ready to resolve the problem in a straight forward way seriously, Nepal should proceed and verify its proofs with the international community which would prove that Nepal is an innocent country in this issue , invoking and demonstrating all possible evidences that would prove India has encroached the Nepali land. The bottom line is one should not let the iron be cold as it has already been heated. More importantly, Oli-led government or other political parties should not take this issue just as a vote bank; rather all political parties inside and outside the government should take this challenge as an opportunity to serve the nation as demanded by the history. Again importantly, news are widespread in the media about the encroachment of the Nepalese land, confiscating 33 hectares of Nepali land in Humla, Rasuwa, Sankhuwasabha and Sindhupalchowk districts and thus capturing of Rui village in Gorkha district by China. However, the government of Nepal has argued that the Nepalese land is being retreated by the Chinese counterpart to digress the flow of rivers on the border between Nepal and China. In short, the present KP Oli Sharma-led government should handle this issue with much efficiency and expertise through dialogues in peaceful and harmonized strategic and diplomatic means such that there would not be any rooms to play for any probable counterproductive third parties.
However, the government of Nepal has argued that the Nepalese land is being retreated by the Chinese counterpart to digress the flow of rivers on the border between Nepal and China.
However, the China–Nepal relations have its own geopolitics, the school of thought regarding geography as an element of politics. Even though the historic and multidimensional bilateral relationships between China and Nepal is assumed to be cordial, beneficial and friendly, the bilateral agreement of India with China in 2015 , without involving Nepal, to construct a new road through Lipulekh gives Nepal a kind of susceptible feelings towards China. Similarly, the bilateral relationship of Nepal with India though said share unique affable relationship socially and culturally, followed by an open access to borders and people-to-people ties , India’s strategic and diplomatic course of actions always make Nepal heads up and cautious. The virtual inauguration of incomplete Kailash-Mansarovar road on 8 May 2020 amid the COVID-19 pandemic by the Defence Minister of India, Rajnath Singh, is a recent example when Indian counterparts disregard Nepal, encroaching the Nepali soil. In this scenario, the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Nepal, Pradeep Gyawali, has revealed recently that India denies to sit for diplomatic discourses about the Nepal- India border problem, further stating no boundary dispute with China. However,it should also be noted that India has held high-level meetings with the Chinese counterparts to close the border dispute even during the ongoing COVID-19 despite putting off diplomatic discourses with the Nepali counterparts. In this regard, we should weigh both of our neighbors, India and China, on the same diplomatic and strategic balance, while dealing ours bilateral and trilateral issues with them cautiously and carefully and presenting our agenda firmly.
Moving forward, there are explicitly outstanding territorial disputes between Nepal and India, which need to be resolved through gentle negotiation means, prudent strategic and diplomatic dialogues, extensions and modifications of the former treaties and agreements to reform and strengthen the pertinence of affable relations between the two nations, equipping the best diplomatic policy for Nepal. More importantly, this is the right time to resolve this border issue with India because there is a solo consensus among all political parties as well as general public throughout the nation, approving the new map of Nepal by the Nepali Parliament on 18 June 2020, deploying its troops near the Kalapani and other disputed areas on 19 June 2020. Most importantly, all political parties and all intellectual people along with human right advocates should be very much careful about the probable faction of the any political parties in Nepal at present , avoiding a fragile political environment and stopping to dissolve the present ongoing government in Nepal because today’s political stability is the heart of the current stance from the Nepali side to deal with such national issues, such as border issues. The last but not least point is that the government should deal with India– if possible in a packaged format taking all the border issues at once, because the solution of this issue becomes a precedent for such border issues for other disputed territories with India again and the other neighboring country-china, too. Finally, India should also act to commit its national motto of "Satyamev Jayate" (truth gains the victory) with due respect of sovereignty of Nepal because peaceful and harmonized strategic and diplomatic discourses are the best way forward for the current border dispute between Nepal and India.
Narendra Raj Tiwari (Email: [email protected] )
PhD student (Economics) at Texas Tech University
Comment