By Sophie Nepali
Sitting uncomfortably between the titans of India and China, it’s easy to see why Nepal has earned the unofficial nickname of ‘the yam between two boulders’.
As a result of the geographical reality handed to it, Nepal must delicately balance itself to uphold diplomacy between both countries. Therefore Nepal’s geographical positioning, which is as a landlocked country at the centre of the Indian plate sub-ducting the Eurasian plate, has meant that trade through the Himalayan range has always been difficult. In sharp contrast, the southern belt of Nepal is very open and throughout history has allowed Nepal and India to develop a strong bond that is held together through religious, economic, historical, cultural, and political relations. The strength of that bond led to the development of a formalised Treaty of Peace and Friendship in 1950. Despite such a friendship, an unresolved land dispute between India and Nepal has surfaced yet again.
The Kalapani Region
Limpiyadhura, Kalapani and the Lipulekh pass, also known as Kalapani region, amount to a total of 335 square kilometres. The region also represents the point at which China, India and Nepal meet.
A map outlining key landmarks in the region can be found here.
The Lipulekh pass in particular holds great importance. At an altitude of 5000 metres, it is the shortest land route from India to China. It is a gateway for China to access South Asia and for Nepal to export northwards and utilise China’s ports, which has been a theme of recent relations between the two countries.
As of November last year, The Indian Ministry of Home Affairs released a new political map of India after formally splitting up the disputed Kashmir and Jammu state into two federal territories, and including Kalapani region inside India’s borders. Nepal did not respond immediately but in May, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced that there would be a new road link via Lipulekh that connects India to Kailash Mansarovar in the Tibetan Autonomous region. In an immediate response, Nepal’s minister of Land Management, Cooperatives and poverty alleviation, Padma Kumari Aryal, unveiled a new political map placing Kalapani within its borders without any formal discussion with India. This was later approved by the Nepalese parliament and PM Sharma Oli in June as enraged protesters stood outside the Indian embassy in Kathmandu.
There are many factors including war, over-reliance, geology, and lack of governmental organisation that are responsible for the unresolved dispute. One of the more significant is the Sino-India conflict in 1962. Nepal and India’s strong ties were evident as King Mahendra granted the Indian army permission to set up camp in this region. Despite multiple requests from the Nepalese government to evacuate the camp, Indian troops remained on Nepalese soil and Nepal have failed to withdraw the troops since then. From this case study, much can be learned about the dysfunctional dynamic of power between India and Nepal. Where one side has the power to act as it pleases, the other must consider its delicate geopolitical position before making any decisions.
The second factor is the time that has passed since the Sugauli treaty was signed, and geological changes. The treaty of 1816 established a boundary line between Nepal and India. At the time, the British Indian Government formed an agreement with Nepal after the Anglo-Nepalese war, otherwise known as the Gurkha war between 1814-1816 whereby Nepal retained its independence. The treaty designates the Mahakali river as the boundary between the two countries.
A century after the signing of the Treaty of Sugali in 1911, it was recorded by the that that the Kali river is formed by the union of two smaller headwaters: the Kalapani river that originates below the Lipulekh Pas and the Kuthi Yankit river that is located below the Limpiyadhura range. The issue is that both streams have been named the ‘Kali River’ which is what defines Nepal and India’s border and is the final factor. Furthermore, these two rivers as well as additional rivers along the border have naturally changed course over the years. Geological change and Nepal’s lack of cautiousness merged with India’s refusal to withdraw troops has led to the encroachment of a total of 60,000 hectares of land in 23 out of the 75 bordering districts, which is undoubtedly a source of discomfort for Nepal.
Nepal had always objected to the 2015 bilateral agreement between India and China that opened up Lipulekh for trade and has remained consistent through multiple governments.
A Turning Point: The 2015 Earthquake
Looking back, the events during and after the earthquake could may represent the turning point for Nepal and India’s friendly relationship. Both India and China were quick to respond through aid and relief efforts whereby India pledged $1bn, China $500m and $600m from the Asian Development Bank.
At the time the devastating quake struck, Nepal had developed a controversial constitution under the former PM Sushil Koirala. This angered the minority Madhesi community of southern Nepal as the established parties, including the Maoists are made up of mostly male, high-caste leaders. The Madhesi community felt that they had always faced discrimination and lack of acceptance by the Nepalese state. This affected India, as the new constitution tightened regulation on cross border marriages which is common along the Terai (a lowland region that stretches into India and Nepal).
What followed after the release of the new constitution is an unofficial blockade imposed by the Indian government and supported by the Madhesis. This had a devastating impact in the country as there was a shortage of fuel, food, medicines and vaccines right before the winter months. Therefore the risks of over-reliance on India became reality for Nepal and an alternative had to be considered.
Not only is Nepal sandwiched in between two competing superpowers with contrasting political ideologies, but it is unfortunately placed at a plate boundary meaning it is prone to earthquakes, landslides and flooding. However, Nepal has the ability to be self-sufficient with renewable energy such as hydro-power and solar-power due to its physical geographical characteristics. Although there is still high demand for fuel from India, the demand could decrease once there are a sufficient number of hydroelectric plants. This is an example of where China’s influence is proven to be a positive one, as China have agreed to invest in hydroelectric plants in eastern Nepal, as well as bringing Nepal into its the one belt one road initiative, which allows Nepal to increase domestic consumption as well as export power to surrounding countries. Global hegemony is the end goal here for both India and China and whilst India makes bold moves, China utilises their monetised power to bring their ambitious projects into reality. In the past four years, Nepal’s Department of Industry stated that China was the largest foreign direct investment source to Nepal.
Communism and Nepal
Nepal’s diplomatic relations with China kicked into gear in 1955 with the opening of the Kathmandu – Kodari road, thus increasing Chinese presence in Nepal’s developmental activities. However, Nepal’s relations with India could never be contested and ultimately influenced regime changes that were not motivated by communist ideology. In contrast, the end goal for Parties both ‘left’ and ‘right’ was to establish multi-party democracy. Nepal’s Communist Party (NCP) is rumoured to be the result of China’s increasing influence but because of its location, traditional relations and religion, the communists do not have the freedom of action that they wish they could have. This again traces back to Nepal’s delicate balancing act to keep its neighbours.
This ultimately raises the question of whether communism and democracy can coexist. So far, Nepal has maintained its sovereignty, and the NCP has been elected democratically with a two-thirds majority, but this isn’t to say that Nepal has started to grow impatient with India.
Although the newly-formed communist government has taken a lot of criticism from democratic India, Nepal has gone through many years of continuous governmental change, where it has remained unstable since the 2001 Royal Massacre and later the abdication of the King. The new communist government has been the most secure Nepal has had in a while, which suggests closer bi-lateral relations with China.
Despite the actions Nepal is taking to retain its autonomy, there are many underlying issues associated with Nepal’s organisation and development. The two most important treaties – the 1816 Sugauli treaty and the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship have, somewhat bizarrely, ‘gone missing’. They have both shaped the border agreements and it wasn’t until May 2019 that the issue was raised in parliament.
Recent Events
The most recent border dispute between India and China in Ladakh has led to 20 Indian soldiers being killed. This is the first fatal clash since 1975 and overshadows the ongoing disputes between India and Nepal. However, resolving these territory disputes are essential for future trilateral relations and Nepal wishes to find a peaceful solution.
Although Nepal claims to have independently made political decisions that shape its own parliament over the past few years, China’s part to play shouldn’t be dismissed. This argument is amplified further by the ill-timed virtual meeting with Chinese Communist Party after the tension between India and China. The ruling party organised the meeting without the foreign Affairs Department being informed. Key members of the party were not present but Party co-chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal was and informed those at the meeting that ‘Nepal will not accept any foreign assistance if there is any military or security interest attached.’
While the Nepalese Communist Party was elected democratically, the rising control of the party poses a threat to India and Nepal’s relationship. Keeping India on-side is valuable to Nepal, as the relationship connects the country to the West and keeps it politically neutral in the eyes of the international community. So far, Nepal has handled many conflicts amicably and the main concern with the China-India dispute is that peace should be restored in order for trilateral relations to move forward and for Nepal to bridge its trust deficit with India.
Sophie Nepali is a staff writer for The International. She runs the Smiles Across Nepal Instagram account, which you can follow here.