Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and the opposition party leader KP Sharma Oli on Monday had a face off in Parliament on Dahal’s recently concluded India state visit, its achievements, issues related to the boundary dispute with India, the idea of a land swap, besides the Citizenship Bill that was authenticated by President Ramchandra Paudel last week.

Before Dahal and Oli sparred, the opposition lawmakers from the CPN-UML and the Rastriya Swatantra Party too, disturbed the regular proceedings in the House.

In the beginning of the House proceedings, Sisir Khanal, a Rastriya Swatantra Party lawmaker, mocked the prime minister by saying ‘he took a ride on a buffalo from India’ after completing his visit. The Chief Whip of the CPN (Maoist Centre) Hitraj Pandey objected to the statement made by Khanal. He asked the Speaker Devraj Ghimire to remove the statement from the parliamentary record.

“We wanted to see our prime minister landing at the newly inaugurated Pokhara airport, but unfortunately, he came riding a buffalo from India,” said Khanal.

Dahal concluded a four-day official visit to India on June 3 where he met India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the two sides reached several agreements and signed memoranda of understanding.

The Maoist lawmakers opposed the “indecent” language being used by Khanal with the Speaker instructing the removal of the expression from the record. The Speaker then gave time to the prime minister to make his statement on his India visit and for other issues being raised in the House by the opposition lawmakers.

However, the lawmakers from the opposition parties kept on disturbing the House proceedings while seeking Dahal’s clear response on why the Citizenship Bill was authenticated by President Paudel just hours before Dahal embarked on his official visit to India on May 31.

The UML sought an answer from the prime minister as to who gave him the authority to discuss land-swapping with India in order to resolve the boundary dispute with the southern neighbour.

“The prime minister does not hold any authority or the rights to carry out land-swapping with India,” Yogesh Bhattarai, a UML lawmaker said. “The prime minister does not have any right to abandon Nepal’s claim over Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura.”

Nepal’s other issues with India like air entry route, inundation and Pancheshwar Multipurpose Project too could not make the desired progress, Bhattarai added.

“We thought the prime minister would raise the issue of Saarc and Bimstec, but he did not. He did not raise the issue of India receiving the report of EPG because it will spoil the environment of his bilateral visit. If the environment gets spoiled when we raise the issue of EPG, inundation, boundary and others, what would create a favourable environment for negotiations?” Bhattarai questioned.

In the midst of the disturbance in the House, Speaker Ghimire intervened and ruled that the prime minister speak. Nepal and India are embroiled in a boundary dispute over Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura following the unveiling of a new map by India in 2019 showing these areas as Indian territory. Soon after, then prime Minister Oli too released a new map of Nepal, which showed the three places inside Nepal. Their differences over boundaries have become a major bone of contention between them.

The prime minister clarified that he did not propose land swapping during his India visit and he tried his best to establish the rights of Nepal over Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura.

“I am very much clear about the boundary dispute with India. I have never proposed land swapping as an option to resolve the dispute. There is no confusion over it. We have already said that Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura are very much a part of Nepal and I am very much clear that we have to establish our rights over them. Accordingly, I have played my role. We are also upbeat and convinced after the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi assured us to resolve the boundary dispute, once for all,” Dahal said during a fraught House meeting.

 speak out. I condemn your India visit because it has become comfortable for them, not for the Nepali people.” 

He said there will be some good and positive progress on getting a high-altitude air entry route from Nepalgunj or Mahendranagar. He also gave a long clarification over his visit to the Mahakaleshwar temple in Ujjain, in India’s Madhya Pradesh state. “I do respect all religions but I am a secular man,” said Dahal. “Though the state should not have its religion, I have visited various temples and religious places of the Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists and Christians.”

Dahal added: “I should not disrespect the beliefs of the people, so I donned saffron robes while worshipping at the Mahakaleshwar temple in Ujjain. We are also promoting various kinds of cultural and religious circuits inside the country. Some people said that we had received a rousing welcome in Madhya Pradesh, which probably no other foreign leader had received in the past. Even one American president had visited the temple.”

Dahal said that he had also communicated to India that “until we resolve the boundary issue, the ties between Nepal and India would not return to normal, which I made clear to the Indian prime minister and other leaders. This is the first time that we have had frank discussions over the boundary issue.”

He said although he had mentioned land swapping, “I did not propose it, officially.” On the issue of importing 15 improved buffaloes for breeding purposes, the prime minister said that the request had been on India’s table for seven years, which has materialised now.

“Comparatively, my India visit was successful and productive too. The visit was mostly focused on working issues like economic cooperation, tourism, boundary, trade and transit. We also discussed political matters and we agreed to discuss the political matters in the future too in order to build mutual trust,” said Dahal.

On the citizenship issue, which is now under consideration of the Supreme Court, Dahal said that ruling and opposition parties should come together on the issue. “ The issue has reached the Supreme Court, so there is no need to discuss it in the House. We have to wait until the Supreme Court’s verdict. There is no difference between the two citizenship-related bills being forwarded by the two previous governments led by Sher Bahadur Deuba and Oli,” said Dahal.

Dahal also read out the content of the bills being forwarded by the Oli government and a new one, which was recently authenticated by the president, Paudel.

The Speaker gave time to Oli to make his statement. While delivering the statement, Oli lambasted Dahal on several issues, including the controversial land swapping proposal. “Under the Bangladesh, Bhutan and India framework, we had discussed the transit operations among the four member states, but this idea could not be taken up after Bhutan showed its reluctance to join,” said Oli, adding that Nepal had already received the transit rights up to the sea ports via Bangladesh and India.

“ But this issue (land swap) has been raised from a very weak position. The land swapping deal between India and Bangladesh happened in a different context with open and frank discussions. They did not swap the land but they only abandoned their claims over certain territories. There is no question of giving our land to others,” said Oli.

The boundary dispute between Nepal and India reached a tipping point in 2020 when Oli was the prime minister. Oli said several pieces of evidence including the Treaty of Sugauli, correspondences made by the government of Nepal and British authorities and old maps clearly establish Nepal’s claims over Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura.

“ Why and when did we stop speaking against the boundary encroachment? The Indian forces are building infrastructure inside our territory. They are building bunkers around the Mahakali River in the farwest, but we are making statements either very carefully or we are just not speaking. The prime minister has taken a very hollow position in Delhi. He could not raise our concerns and issues that matter to us,” said Oli.

He objected to the prime minister’s daughter being present in the meeting with Indian leaders.

“ Where were the foreign minister, foreign secretary, chief of protocol when we were meeting with the Indian officials and ministers? How come your daughter became the First Lady [stand-in lady] in the entourage? A female family member of the prime minister does not count as the First Lady. It should be the spouse. Neither have we seen the foreign minister nor the foreign secretary or the chief of protocol or any other note takers during some of your meetings. We need official records of such meetings,” said Oli.

The former prime minister gave some examples on how some of the irritations and misunderstandings with India were removed in the past after talking to the Indian leaders and officials.

Oli raised a question as to why the hydroelectricity projects are being awarded to one particular country without following a competitive bidding process and why some countries are being barred from coming and developing hydropower projects in Nepal.

“We are opting for a policy of non-alignment. India is not the place where you go and make an announcement. We are worried now because our prime minister could not be respected in India. You could not become patriotic. You are being seen as a comfort person by certain powers,” said Oli.

The former prime minister also said the agreements and memoranda of understanding reached during Dahal’s India visit were nothing new, from signing the project development agreement of Lower Arun to the inauguration of the integrated check post. “How many times do we need to inaugurate the cross-border petroleum pipeline?”

On the issue of citizenship, Oli asked the prime minister to table the Citizenship Bill in the House. “Why didn't you recommend the Citizenship Bill for authentication earlier in December, January or February, why just hours before your India visit? Why do you need to carry a copy of citizenship authenticated by the President during the India visit? This has sincerely raised the question about nationalism. You gave India so many things, but in return, you only brought some things in principle. Why?”

Oli claimed that there was no such thing as Akhanda Bharat.

“We are losing so many things to our neighbours. We should stand resolutely in favour of our national interests. We have failed to speak up to India. India does oppress us, but we have to stand up and