Phurba Tenzing Sherpa, (M.A International Relations)

In August 2019, when the Indian government abrogated Articles 370 and 35A of the Indian Constitution which had given a special status to the State of Jammu and Kashmir, the government bifurcated the state, consequently requiring the immediate release of a new map. In November, two months later, they released a new edition of the Indian political map, showing Jammu and Kashmir along with Laddakh as the new union territories of India. The new map also showed the disputed ‘Kalapani’ region within India’s borders as part of Pithoragarh district in the state of Uttarakhand. Nepal immediately called out on the new map alleging encroachment while India claimed the map has accurately depicted the Indian Territory. Since last October, Nepal had twice published statements addressing the Indian government proposing dates to hold bilateral meetings between foreign secretaries of the two countries as representatives. But, India has not responded yet and as a result, no diplomatic discussions have been held between the two nations to resolve the issue. Despite the furor in Kathmandu over Kalapani, India recently inaugurated a road link to China via Lipulekh pass, another controversial area. Under these circumstances, Nepal also prepared a new political map incorporating Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani under Byas Rural Municipality in Darchula district of Sudurpaschim province which has created a diplomatic standoff between Nepal and its southern neighbor, India.

Background:

Until the first quarter of the nineteenth century, Nepal had already annexed western states of Kumaon, Garhwal and Sutlej river area and up to Sikkim in the eastern region. The certain border disputes in the Terai area with British East India Company led to the Anglo-Nepal war (1814-1816). Nepal lost the war with the British and was forced to ratify the Sugauli Treaty on March 4, 1816. The Treaty of Sugauli was catastrophic to Nepal as they lost one-third of its territorial acquisition. According to Articles 5 of the Treaty, “The Rajah of Nepal renounces for himself, his heirs and successors, all claim or connexon with the countries lying to the west of the river Kali and engages never to have any connexon with those countries or the inhabitants thereof.” The Treaty clearly mentions that Kali (Mahakali/Sharda) River is the geographical demarcation that separates Nepal and India.

According to Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, former Director General of Nepal’s Land Survey department, the historical maps of 1827 and 1856 and some other maps published by the British Survey of India indicates the river originating from Limpiyadhura which is about 30 kilometers northwest of Kalapani is the main Kali River. These maps depict the Kali River, as per the spirit of the Article 5 of Sugauli Treaty. Hence, Shrestha claims not only Lipulek, but also Kalapani and Limpiyadhura belong to Nepal. Most maps created during the periods 1846-1860 and 1860-1880 have maintained the original geographical position of Kali River and Kalapani. The difference with the latter phase is the name of the Kali River was then being called ‘Kuti’ and later ‘Kuti Yangti’. However, the maps after 1880 started mentioning a small stream originating from the Lipulekh Pass, nameless in the previous map, which was subsequently named Kali River. Henceforth, a subtle but deliberate attempt to misname the Kali happened.

In the early fifties with the turn of events in Tibet, the China factor assumed critical importance in bilateral relations between Nepal and India. Against this backdrop, Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship was signed in 1950. Consequently, Nepal allowed India to stay their troops in Kathmandu and Nepal’s northern frontier including Kalapani. India viewed the Himalayas as India’s northern boundary. In 1962, the border disputes between China and India led to full fledge Sino-India war. After Chinese victory, India realized the importance of strategic locations along the Nepal-China (Tibet) border and necessity of reaching an understanding with Nepal.

In 1965, Nepal and India entered into a defense agreement. As a result, more Indian army technical personnel were deployed and Indian military liaison group continued to function at Nepal Army Headquarters in Kathmandu. During the period, Nepal and China opened a road link (Kathmandu-Kodari Highway) despite the opposition from India. Simultaneously, Nepal felt India’s security perspective based on the proposition of ‘Himalayan Frontier Policy’ is insensitive to Nepal’s sovereignty and demanded the withdrawal of the Indian military mission. Finally, in 1969, all Indian military checkposts were withdrawn from Nepal except Kalapani. Unfortunately, Nepal lost some 335 square kilometers of land and unstable internal politics in Nepal shadowed the ‘Kalapani issue’. However, the debates took life in the 1990s after Nepal restored its democracy.
During the official visit of Indian Prime Minister Inder Kumar Gujral to Nepal (June 5-7, 1997), Nepal raised the Indo-Nepal border issue including Kalapani. The Joint Statement of Nepal and India stated “The two sides directed the Joint Working Group (JWG) constituted by the Joint Technical level Boundary Committee, to meet within a month to examine relevant facts relating to the demarcation of the boundary alignment in the western sector, including the Kalapani area, and to propose, if necessary, further measures in this regard.” In the new millennium, the interaction between Prime Minister G.P Koirala of Nepal and India’s Prime Minister Atal Bihari Bajpayee is noteworthy. The two Prime Ministers agreed to conduct a field survey to affirm the demarcation of Kalapani, and set a target of completion by 2002. However, successive governments had repeated discussions on Kalapani issue but failed to generate any specific conclusions.

Sino-India Bilateral Agreement:

During the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to China in 2015, the two governments signed a deal to expand the trade route via Lipulekh. Since, Nepal and India need to settle the disputed Kalapani region, the new agreement on using Lipulekh further gave rise to Nepali anxiety for being ignored by the two neighbors. Nepal immediately condemned the Sino-India agreement pact by stating it was against International norms and values at the time when Nepal and India were working to resolve the boundary issues.

The 41-point agreement signed on 15 May 2015 has mentioned Lipulekh in these words:

The two sides recognized that enhancing border areas cooperation through border trade, pilgrimage by people of the two countries and other exchanges can effectively promote mutual trust; and agreed to further broaden this cooperation so as to transform their border into a bridge of cooperation and exchanges. The two sides agreed to hold negotiation on augmenting the list of traded commodities, and expand border trade at Nathu La and Qiangla/Lipulekh Pass and Shipki Pass.

Own stance over Kalapani:

As per India’s stand, the source of Kali River lies at the Kalapani village, which falls under the jurisdiction of Pithoragarh district of Uttarakhand. They argue that the Kali River originated from a smaller stream lying on the southern portion of Kalapani and the subsequent ridge on the eastern part of this area is the true border. Therefore, India claims the ridgeline to the east of Kalapani as the Indo-Nepal border. Highlighting the point, India claimed that the recently inaugurated 80 km long Lipulekh road is completely within the territory of India. On the other hand, Nepal claims that the river originating about 30 kilometers northwest of Kalapani at Limpiyadhura is the main Kali River.

In support of its argument over territorial claim of the Kalapani region, it has shown the tax records paid by villagers from Kuti, Nabi and Gunji to the Nepal Government until 1940s. Likewise, the historical record shows that Nepalese living in that region also cast their votes in the general election of 1958. Nepali authorities claim that an artificial stream was constructed in Kalapani which later meets the river originating in Lipulekh, which was done by the Indian officials to prolong its illegal rule in Kalapani. However, official records are absent claiming this stream to be the border line. During his address to parliament, Nepalese Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli reiterated, “Lipulek, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura is integral part of Nepal and will leave no stone unturned to regain lost territories.

”

Way Forward:

Since the last quarter of the twentieth century, border issues such as Kalapani, Susta and others including 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship have been perennial irritants of Indo-Nepal relations. When India unilaterally released a new map including Kalapani-a long pending disputed area and inaugurated a road link to China via Lipulekh, the relations between two neighbors culminated into a full blown diplomatic crisis. To unlock the deadlock, the two governments should fill the communication gap as a matter of urgency. India should respond positively to Nepal’s request for high level talks involving senior officials/political leaders and pave the way to hold immediate bilateral talks amidst the covid-19 pandemic.

Since Nepali Parliament has taken up the issue seriously with the release of the new map, India should not make any excuse rather sit with the Nepali counterparts to resolve the issue based on accurate historical documents and evidence. India should also move beyond its insecurities related to China. India should not be skeptical about Nepal’s closer ties with her northern neighbor which is based on Nepali aspirations for development and prosperity.

As far as Nepal is concerned, the government should form an experts group and prepare necessary technical/diplomatic documents with facts and figures, maps and images, past evidences and experiences and devise ways and means to resolve the border issues with India. Needless to say, the current government led by Prime Minister KP Oli must utilize the Nepali people’s uprising with unanimous support of parliamentarians on this sensitive national issue as an opportunity to counter against cartographic aggression and regain lost territories. Finally, every country should respect the sovereignty of other countries. Countries, whether big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor should be equal. To maintain cordial bilateral relations between Nepal and India, mutual dialogue, trust, understanding and coordination must prevail.

# The author is a lecturer: Ed