According to the joint statement issued on May 15 in Beijing during Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to China, the two countries have agreed to expand border trade through the Lipulekh Pass. The 28th point of the joint communiqué states, “the two sides agreed to hold negotiation on augmenting the list of traded commodities, and expand the border trade at the Lipu-Lekh Pass.”

The main intention of the joint communiqué is to recognise and enhance areas of co-operation through border trade, pilgrimage and other exchanges between the peoples of the two countries. It also agreed to effectively promote mutual trust and broaden co-operation, so as to transform the border into a bridge of cooperation and exchange.  

From Nepali perspective, there could be a question as to whether India and China needed to obtain Nepal’s consent to expand border trade at the pass, a Far-Western point of Nepal, which Nepal claims to be a part of its territory. The Lipulekh Pass is located at the Nepal-China borderline. However, Indian paramilitary forces have occupied it since 1962 after the Sino-Indian War. It is an ancient route for traders and pilgrims transiting between Nepal and Tibet.

Sino-Indian War

There was a brief but fierce Sino-Indian border war from October 20-November 21, 1962. During the war, in the Western sector, the Chinese forces marched up to the borderline shown in the Chinese maps dating back to the Manchu Dynasty. After the Chinese carried out an all-out counter attack along the entire Sino-Indian border, the Indian forces were compelled to retreat.

The Indian military, while pulling back, came to realise that the Lipulekh Pass could be a potential strategic point, given that it is located at 5,029 metres in the Nepali frontier. They established a camp in the Kalapani area. The camp, which is outfitted with underground bunkers, is near about 10 kilometres west of the pass.

Nepalis not allowed

Nepali nationals, even those on a pilgrimage to the Manasarovar Lake and Mount Kailash, are not allowed to enter into the Kalapani area and the Lipulekh Pass. It is baffling that Nepalis cannot even travel through their sovereign territory. Regarding the issue of Lipulekh-Kalapani-Limpiyadhura area, Nepal has also, in a sense, been negligent. It has not yet delineated the origination of the Mahakali River, though the treaty of Sugauli (1816) mentions, “Kalee is the western border of Nepal with India.” Even the Joint Technical Level Nepal-India Boundary Committee, which worked for 26 years up to the end of 2007, never ventured into delineating the source of the river because it needs a political decision.  

In this context, it was not a diplomatically sound move on part of China and India to reach an agreement to expand their border trade through the Lipulekh Pass.

Case for Nepal  

That the pass is a part of the Nepali territory is supported by many facts. The historic maps of 1827 and 1856, among others. published by the British Survey of India, depict that the Western boundary of Nepal is extended up to Limpiyadhura, and the river originating from this point is named as ‘River Kalee’. Similarly, the ‘Old Atlas of China,’ a map published during the Qing Dynasty (1903), depicts, in Chinese characters, Limpiyadhura as the source of the Kali River. The word ‘Nepal’ is scribed in the map for the Northeastern part of the river.

Former spokesperson of China’s External Affairs Ministry Zhang Kiyu has said, “the border issue of Kalapani should be resolved through a friendly bilateral consultation between Nepal and India. The Chinese side fully understands the concerns of the Nepali side and respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Nepal.” The then Chinese Ambassador to Nepal Zeng Xu Yong has also said, “Three and a half decades ago, when Nepal and China signed a border agreement, the Lipulekh Pass was designated as the tri-junction between Nepal, India and China, according to which the Kalapani area belongs to Nepal. However, during the agreement, older facts and evidences that extended the Nepali border to Limpiyadhura, the origin of the Mahakali River, were largely ignored”(Kantipur, September 3, 1999).

On the Indian side, Indian authorities including current Prime Minister Narendra Modi, former Prime Minister IK Gujaral, and former Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee have stressed that they “…have agreed to resolve the outstanding border disputes between the two countries at various places including Kalapani and Susta through further discussions.” Most recently, Communist Party of India (Marxist) leader Sitaram Yechury denounced the May 15 joint statement of India and China and said the two countries should have consulted Nepal prior to deciding on the plan (The Kathmandu Post, June 11, 2015).

Former Nepali Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala has also said, “We think that the territory of disputed Kalapani is ours. This dispute should be resolved on the basis of all our historical documents. If the evidences prove that the territory belongs to us, India should move out from there”(Gorkhapatra, June 9, 1998).

Technical tantrums

Some areas in the tri-junction, where the Nepali-Indian-Chinese territories meet (on both the Western and Eastern segments), have not yet been demarcated due to India’s absence during the Nepal-China border demarcation, which took place in 1961-62. Issues of Lipulekh and Kalapani were raised during the Nepal-India Boundary Working Group’s meetings. Nepal has strongly argued before the Indian side that ‘Kalapani belongs to Nepal’ (Himalaya Times, July 16, 1998). But due to the controversy over the origination of the Kali River, ‘strip mapping’, which is 97 percent complete, is yet to materialise. Nepal seeks the spirit of the Treaty of Sugauli and the application of the watershed principle to determine the source of the river.

Nepal’s moment

With all these facts and figures in place, the expansion of Sino-Indian border trade activities must not take place through the Lipulekh Pass. Both India and China do not have sovereign rights over the Lipulekh-Kalapani-Limpiyadhura area. The recent China-India negotiations on augmenting the list of traded commodities and expanding the border through the Lipulekh Pass contradicts the Nepal-China Boundary Treaty of 1961.

In the meantime, the Nepal government and some political party leaders have raised serious concerns over the recent understanding reached between India and China regarding Nepal’s Lipulekh Pass. A meeting of Parliament’s International Relations and Labour Committee raised serious objections over the agreement reached between India and China to boost border trade at the pass, close to an area which Nepal claims to be a part of its territory. The committee has also directed the Foreign Ministry and the government to conduct a study over the deal, and take up the matter with India and China while urging both the neighbours to correct their agreement pact immediately (Kantipur, June 10, 2015).

Given the historical facts and evidences we have, Kathmandu should take up the matter with both New Delhi and Beijing through diplomatic channels. It must approach China and remind it of the decision taken during the demarcation of the China-Nepal border. At this point of time, Nepal should create a situation that can lead to India and China either amending the concerned article of the joint communiqué or making an understanding in consultation with Nepal, so that Nepal can be incorporated into the Lipulekh border trade.

Shrestha is a border researcher and board member of the Institute of Foreign Affairs