Nepal’s politics went off the rails last week after Prime Minister Balendra “Balen” Shah told Parliament that the border dispute with India was not a one-sided affair. His comments ignited a political maelstrom, with opposition parties and students calling for his resignation. Balen rode to office on a wave of protests and is again facing mass protests barely months into his tenure as the PM.
The debate has again thrown focus on the India-Nepal border issue especially the areas of Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura.
“Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura are an important part of India. The Ministry of External Affairs has reaffirmed time and again that India’s position on the matter is clear, consistent and non-negotiable.
Prime Minister Shah told a session in Nepal’s Parliament on the long-running border conflict that Nepal had crossed into Indian territory at various spots along the border on Sunday. The comment generated a tremendous scandal.
Shah has reportedly asked both countries to the help of historians, surveyors and specialists to address the issue and citing diplomatic correspondence exchanged with India, even suggested the intervention of the United Kingdom because of colonial era maps. He said the issue should be one of mutual understanding, not unilateral charges.
There is no place for any third party in any Indo-Nepal border problem, the Indian government said in a statement on Tuesday. “Boundary related issues are strictly bilateral and are being addressed through existing mechanisms established by the two countries,” MEA spokeswoman Randhir Jaiswal said.
Balen Shah’s comments come years after Nepal, under then PM KP Sharma Oli, took measures to stake claims over the disputed territories, including approving changes to its national map.
Shah, a former rapper, Bengaluru-trained engineer and ex-mayor of Kathmandu, rose to prominence and became the PM as an outsider opposing Nepal’s conventional political parties.
The Kathmandu mayor had raised eyebrows by putting up a “Greater Nepal” map in his office, perceived as a tit-for-tat to the “Akhand Bharat” map exhibited inside the Indian Parliament.
PROTESTS, RESIGNATION DEMANDS OVER BALEN’S IRRESPONSIBLE REMARKS
The comments were met with instant and public backlash. Student associations protested against the Prime Minister’s words at Maitighar Mandala in Kathmandu on Monday, The Kathmandu Post reported.
Demonstrators under the banner “Let’s protect sovereignty” accused Balen Shah of making “anti-national” sentiments.
In the meantime, the Tarun Dal, associated with the Nepali Congress, staged a peaceful protest march at the same venue. They denounced what they called the prime minister’s irresponsible remarks. Shah’s statement was seen by opposition parties and other groups as hurting Nepal’s long-held position on the border issues.
The Kathmandu Post said that the rallies reflected deeper worries over national sovereignty, with protesters claiming that any admission of Nepali incursion would weaken Kathmandu’s bargaining hand vis-a-vis India.
In Parliament proper, both the House of Representatives and the National Assembly were disturbed as legislators protested. Opposition MPs asked that Shah apologise and withdraw the remarks from the official records.
NEPAL’S FOREIGN MINISTRY STEPS IN TO CONTROL DAMAGE
Commentators across the political spectrum in Nepal argued that Balen Shah’s statements could undermine the steady diplomatic discourse of Nepal on Indian activities in the contested areas.
As reported by news agency ANI, members of multiple opposition parties led by the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML staged a demonstration inside Parliament on Monday, chanting slogans and demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Balendra Shah for not answering to the House.
Nepal’s Foreign Ministry issued a clarification later, saying the Prime Minister was referring to practical, localized border management issues – such as those in no-man’s land or shifts due to natural features like rivers – not formal territorial claims or concessions on core areas of dispute. The government said that experts from the Nepali and Indian sides are holding regular technical talks to resolve boundary issues.
“The prime minister’s issue in Parliament is practically about encroachment in the Dasgaja area [no-man’s land] and cross-border occupation,” the ministry said.
The correction was issued, but the harm seemed to be done.
THE CORE DISPUTE OF KALAPANI, LIPULEKH, LIMPIYADHURA
India and Nepal have a long-standing territorial dispute in the Himalayan region near India-Nepal-China tri-junction. The territory in question comprises Kalapani and the strategically vital Lipulekh Pass and Limpiyadhura, covering roughly 370 square kilometres.
The disagreement dates back to the Treaty of Sugauli, signed in 1816 between the Nepalese ruler and the British East India Company after the Anglo-Nepalese War. The treaty had defined the western border of Nepal as the Kali River. However, India and Nepal do not agree on the exact source and flow of the river and hence have different interpretations of the boundary.
Nepal claims the river comes from Limpiyadhura, which would situate Kalapani and Lipulekh inside Nepal.
India, citing historical records, surveys and long-standing administrative authority over the area, says the line is based on a distinct source of the Kali River near Kalapani.
India claims the area as part of Pithoragarh district in the northern state of Uttarakhand and has maintained a presence there for decades due to its strategic location close to the Chinese border. In recent years Nepal has continued to assert its claims by diplomatic and political means including the release of new maps. India has denied the assertions, saying its stance is supported by historical and legal grounds.
The Lipulekh Pass is particularly important as it is a crucial commerce route and also for Indian pilgrims coming to Mount Kailash in Tibet. The issue was brought back into focus in 2020 when India’s Border Roads Organisation (BRO) opened a road to the pass, a move condemned by Nepal.
Then Army Chief General MM Naravane, speaking on the debate over India’s route to Lipulekh Pass in Uttarakhand, hinted that Nepal’s opposition to the project could have been influenced by a foreign party, apparently China.
It has since been a thorn in the side of bilateral relations.
This border episode highlights the fine line Nepal has to walk with India. India and Nepal share significant cultural, economic and people-to-people links and free movement and trade across open borders.
For Balen Shah’s government, it looks like it’s more about damage control and reasserting the government’s commitment to dialogue to resolve disagreements. The irony. A young leader who rode a wave of protests to the top office in Nepal is facing protests just months into his new job.
