A Shift In Narrative? Nepal PM Seeks Balanced Approach To Border Dispute With India
Nepal’s proposal for historian and surveyor-led talks has revived attention on unresolved India-Nepal boundary disputes rooted in colonial-era treaties and maps.
Published : May 31, 2026 at 9:05 PM IST
New Delhi: Nepal Prime Minister Balen Shah has opened a potentially significant new chapter in the long-running India-Nepal border dispute by acknowledging that territorial encroachments may not be a one-sided issue.
His disclosure that Kathmandu and New Delhi are considering a joint process involving historians, surveyors and territorial experts suggests a renewed effort to address one of the most sensitive issues in bilateral relations through dialogue rather than political rhetoric.
“You may find this surprising, but I came to know after becoming Prime Minister that not only has India encroached on Nepal’s land, Nepal has also encroached on India’s land in several places,” the newly elected Prime Minister Shah said while addressing lawmakers in the House of Representatives of Nepal’s parliament on Sunday.
“We have encroached in some places, and they have as well. We want to resolve these issues by sitting together as friends,” he stated. Shah said that Nepal had already sent an official diplomatic note to India and received a response. “The response states that both governments will form teams comprising historians, surveyors and experts familiar with the territory and seek a resolution through table talks,” he stated.
Shah’s remarks come even as Nepal recently raised objections over the use of the Lipulekh pass by Indian pilgrims in the upcoming Kailash Mansarovar Yatra. On April 30, the Ministry of External Affairs announced the launch of the Kailash Manasarovar Yatra in coordination with China, set to take place from June to August 2026. The pilgrimage is administered by the Ministry of External Affairs and is open to Indian passport holders. Its conduct involves close coordination with multiple agencies, including the Indo-Tibetan Border Police, Kumaon Mandal Vikas Nigam, and the Sikkim Tourism Development Corporation.
However, following the announcement of the 2026 Yatra by India, in early May, Nepal’s Foreign Ministry issued a formal protest, saying it was neither consulted nor informed before the announcement, and reiterated that Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani are integral parts of Nepal. Kathmandu communicated its stance to both India and China and urged New Delhi to reconsider, stressing that such activities should not take place without Nepal’s agreement.
Shah’s statement also assumes significance as it comes a day ahead of the visit of the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party’s head Rabi Lamichhane to India. Lamichhane will be visiting India amid reports that Shah will not undertake any foreign tour in the first year of his tenure.
In his address to the lawmakers on Sunday, Shah also said that Nepal had discussed the issue with the United Kingdom, arguing that Britain should also bear responsibility for unresolved border disputes dating back to the British India era. The India-Nepal border issue is one of the most sensitive and enduring aspects of bilateral relations between the two neighbours. Despite sharing exceptionally close civilisational, cultural, economic and people-to-people ties, certain sections of their 1,751-km-long open border remain disputed. The issue periodically acquires political significance in both countries, particularly during periods of heightened nationalism or domestic political change.
The modern India-Nepal boundary largely traces its origins to the Treaty of Sugauli signed in 1816 after the Anglo-Nepal War. Under the treaty, Nepal ceded large territories to the British East India Company, and the Kali (Mahakali) River was designated as the western boundary between Nepal and British India. However, the treaty did not conclusively identify the exact source of the river, a question that remains central to one of the major territorial disputes today.
Following India’s independence in 1947, the India-Nepal boundary was inherited from the British-era arrangements. Over time, most of the border was jointly surveyed and demarcated, but a few segments remained unresolved. The most significant dispute concerns the Kalapani-Limpiyadhura-Lipulekh region located at the tri-junction of India, Nepal and China.
Nepal argues that the Kali River originates from Limpiyadhura and territories east of the river belong to Nepal. Therefore, Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura are Nepali territory. Nepal bases its claim on historical maps dating back to the 19th century and its interpretation of the Sugauli Treaty.
However, India maintains that the river originates from a point further downstream. The disputed territory lies on the Indian side of the boundary. Indian administrative control over the area has existed for decades. India also points to long-standing administrative jurisdiction and security considerations, particularly given the area’s proximity to China.
The issue gained renewed prominence in 2020 after India inaugurated a road connecting Lipulekh Pass with Uttarakhand for access to Kailash Mansarovar. Nepal objected strongly, arguing that the road passed through territory it claimed. Subsequently, Nepal issued a new political map incorporating Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura within its national boundaries. Nepal’s parliament later amended the constitution to include the revised map.
India rejected the map, describing the move as a unilateral action. The second major dispute involves Susta, a fertile area located along the India-Nepal border in the plains region. Unlike Kalapani, where the dispute centres on treaty interpretation and river origin, Susta is primarily linked to changes in the course of the Gandak River.
Centred around the village of Susta in the Gandak River (also known as Narayani River) region, it involves Nepal’s claim of over 14,860 hectares of land that it alleges India has gradually encroached upon. Under the Treaty of Sugauli, the mid-stream of the Gandak River was established as the international border. At the time, Susta sat on the right bank, placing it within Nepal.
Over the past two centuries, the Gandak River has frequently changed its course. Because of the river shifting from east to west over time, the physical location of Susta shifted to the left bank – the Indian side. Nepal argues that shifts in the river’s course have resulted in encroachment into Nepali territory. India generally regards the issue as arising from natural river movements and administrative realities on the ground.
The dispute remains unresolved largely because riverine boundaries are inherently difficult to manage when rivers change course over time. Apart from Kalapni and Susta, there are several smaller areas where boundary pillars have shifted or disappeared, river course changes have complicated demarcation, local communities contest land ownership, and agricultural and settlement patterns create overlapping claims.
However, former Indian Ambassador to Nepal Ranjit Rae maintained that Kalapani and Susta are the two main areas of border dispute between the two South Asian neighbours. “Rivers changing course is a complicated issue,” Rae told ETV Bharat. “Whenever a river changes course, the border changes. The issue can only be resolved through dialogue.”
Unlike many territorial disputes elsewhere in the world, the India-Nepal boundary issue has not resulted in militarised confrontation. Both countries continue to favour negotiations, historical research, joint surveys and technical consultations.
If Prime Minister Balen Shah’s remarks accurately reflect ongoing diplomatic exchanges, the proposed involvement of historians, surveyors and territorial experts would represent a continuation of the long-standing approach adopted by both governments: addressing competing interpretations of history, geography and cartography through institutional dialogue rather than unilateral action.
Read More
