Unconventional leaders tend to indulge in political rhetoric in order to play to the gallery and then professional diplomats and wise and pragmatic party leaders scramble to contain its impact. That’s precisely what happened when Nepal’s new Prime Minister Balendra Shah raked up the controversial and sensitive border issue with India and diplomats and political veterans had to buckle up behind scenes to cushion the blow.
In his first formal address to the Parliament, the country’s youngest prime minister claimed that his country, too, had encroached Indian Territory “in many places” just as its bigger neighbour had done. And, therein lies the rub. Wittingly or otherwise, he also ruffled India’s feathers by revealing that they have approached China and the United Kingdom regarding the issue.
As expected, and rightly so, India’s Ministry of External Affairs responded firmly and unequivocally in rejecting “third party role” in matters between India and Nepal. New Delhi also made it clear with a degree of finality that about 98% of the border between the two countries has already been demarcated, but acknowledged that there were “some unresolved segments”.
However, both countries agree that the issue needs to be resolved through talks and India pointed out that it is being done through the established bilateral mechanisms in place to deal with border issues.
Apparently, Nepal is looking to the former colonial power UK to provide some cartographic assistance to the Himalayan country which possibly lacks them and without which it will not be able to effectively negotiate with India. Nepal’s border with India was originally demarcated through a treaty with colonial Britain over two centuries ago. Later, independent India made concerted efforts to resolve the pending border disputes. India will naturally be wary of China with regards to India-Nepal dispute over Kalapani region abutting the three countries, and therefore is of high strategic interest to New Delhi. Likewise, India should ensure that the ongoing discourse does not cast a shadow on the annual Kailash Manasarovar Yatra and maintain that Lipulekh Pass should continue to be the route despite Nepal’s claims.
In India, too, sometimes domestic political messaging impacts foreign relations. For instance, in the new Parliament building, there is a mural which several BJP leaders claimed it to be of “Akhand Bharat” depicting Lumbini in Nepal among other places now in neighbouring countries. It triggered angry reactions, especially in Nepal, and the leaders there warned that it would cause unnecessary and harmful disputes.
The MEA had to step in to firefight with a clarification that the imposing art work was not of Akhand Bharat but instead was a depiction of the geographical coverage of ancient King Ashoka’s empire. Interestingly, in a tit-for-tat move, PM Balendra Shah, who was then the Kathmandu Metropolitan City Mayor, had displayed a map of “Greater Nepal” in his office.
India should continue to adhere to its stance that Nepal’s unilateral, artificial enlargement of territorial claims is neither justified nor based on historical facts and evidence and therefore untenable. However, New Delhi should continue to work on constructive interactions with Nepal to resolve the agreed outstanding boundary issues through dialogue and diplomacy. This message was reiterated by Union Home Minister Amit Shah during a meeting in New Delhi with the visiting Nepalese delegation led by Rabi Lamichhane, chairman of the ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party.