After China and India agreed to trade through Nepalese land Lipulek, the area has come back into debate. China has also been involved in this matter after agreeing to do business with the land occupied by India by force. When there was a similar agreement in 2015, Nepal protested by sending a diplomatic note.

Since then, Nepal has updated its map and also amended the constitution, which both countries are aware of. Ignoring all these backgrounds, what is the meaning of the agreement made by both countries? Now what are the solutions to the problem? UML Deputy Secretary General and former Foreign Minister Pradeep Gyawali Kishore Dahal of Kantipur had a conversation : China and India have recently agreed to open border trade through the Lipulek Pass in Nepali territory. Why did they go ahead to fight in Nepali land?

The agreement made between China and India to conduct bilateral trade through Lipulek Pass is unexpected for Nepal. Because in 2015, after they issued a statement that they had reached an agreement on this issue, the Nepalese government had made its position clear by formally objecting to both countries through a diplomatic note. When India revised its political map in 2019, even after its claims were repeated in areas including Limpiyadhura, Lipulek and Kalapani, we opposed it through diplomatic-formal means, clarified our 'position' and finally included it in Nepal's map and placed it in the schedule of the constitution.

Border disputes can arise between different countries of the world. There may be disputes. But it is not according to international practice for two other countries to decide on the annexation of the territory of a sovereign country. Not even acceptable. Nepal does not even expect such behavior from its two neighbours. The government has made its formal 'position' clear - that territory belongs to Nepal, any decision made in the absence of Nepal is not acceptable for Nepal and we want to resolve it through diplomatic means. I think that is the position of the whole country. Publicizing

ideas, sending diplomatic notes is becoming a popular practice. It has happened before. But the result did not come. This time too, do we repeat the same undertaking and remain silent again or do we need to do something more?

We are not silent. We are seriously raising this issue especially in the discussion with India. The dispute is over the border with India. But China is also coming to join. Therefore, a new situation has arisen where this matter should be taken seriously with China as well. In 2014, Nepal and India have already agreed to form a mechanism of foreign secretaries of the two countries to resolve the issue of Kalapani region. But despite Nepal's many efforts, India is not yet ready to hold a meeting of the mechanism.

Why did this happen? I think they are ignoring this issue. They think that this issue can be resolved in the same way. Or, they know, they don't have enough evidence in this regard. They may have been reluctant to negotiate because Nepal has enough evidence and they don't. But the subject must be changed. Until it is resolved, it will be difficult to develop fair, problem-free, cordial, mutual respect and trusting relations between the two countries. Nepal has contributed a lot for the development and security of India, in this background, there is no reason why the issues raised by Nepal should not be addressed.

Should we wait for a diplomatic dialogue with India and the issue will be resolved or should we look for more options?

It is still believed that the issue can be resolved through diplomatic channels and bilateral talks. We are being patient. As we know, India has solved a similar problem with Bangladesh some time ago. Border disputes with other countries have also been resolved. There is no reason why it should not end with Nepal. If he is a true friend, a friend should listen to a friend. Be prepared to discuss based on facts. Be ready to solve the problem based on the truth. Now we have to proceed with diplomatic efforts. Later options can be discussed immediately.

China was comparatively portrayed as a country that cares about Nepali sensitivities. But the agreement to trade through Lipulek Pass with India in 2015, the map issued in 2023 showing the Nepali territory Lipulek, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura on the Indian side and the recent agreement to reopen border trade through Lipulek Pass have shown a different picture of him. Why is he becoming a partner in Indian strategy? Until there is

information, any country can make its own opinion in its own way. But after 2015, we have formally informed China with facts and evidence that Lipulek, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura areas belong to Nepal. Delegations from Nepal have also drawn their attention. You have also said that we will not do anything that will hurt the heart of Nepali people or hurt the sensibility of Nepali people. But when the same situation is repeated after 10 years, we have become serious.

China knows very well that the trilateral point between Nepal, India and China has not been settled. That is why the border pillar with China starts with 'No. 1', we have not established 'No. 0' yet. Because, in order to establish the border post 'No. 0', the trilateral point has to be determined. For that, first of all there should be an agreement between Nepal and India. After that, the trilateral point should be settled by joining China as well. If India has stronger evidence than us, let's sit and discuss. We have full confidence, they do not have such facts and evidence. That's why I think they are trying to avoid the talks.

Since that could not happen, the counting of Nepal's border pillars starts from 'number 1'. Therefore, China knows that Nepal's western border has not been resolved. Knowingly, the agreement to make Lipulek a point of bilateral trade shows that China does not pay attention to the sensitivity of Nepal.

There is now a tendency in big countries not to look beyond their own interests. As good neighbors of both China and India, we are happy that they have good understanding and improved relations. But the price of relationship improvement cannot be paid by Nepal, Nepal's geographical integrity, sovereignty. In conclusion, the lack of sensitivity towards Nepal was also seen in China.

The power struggle between China and India is taking place. We are also criticized for raising the issue of borders for political consumption, but we are weak in taking diplomatic initiatives and finding creative ways to solve problems. Is there a weakness from us too? 

Some governments and states in history may have had their own boundaries. At one time, Nepal did not have the power to make a map by itself. For a long time we had to rely on the maps made by British-India. But the map made by him from 1816 to about 1860 also clearly shows the source of (Maha) Kali. But the British-Indian encroachment of the border took place when it was felt that the territory east of Limpiyadhura and west of Kalapani/Tinkar could be more effective for trade with Tibet. It appears that the border has been crossed twice. First, the map was changed so that the Mahakali from Limpiyadhura was not considered as the estuary and the Lipu river from Lipulek was considered as the boundary. Second, that map was also changed. Leaving the Lipu River and leaving the Kalapani, a small creek was made a border.

The state at that time had its own borders. There was also a lack of resources. But it seems that Nepal was not able to 'protest' in the way it was supposed to at that time. Just because a country could not maintain formal control over its territory at one time does not mean that another country has the right to do so. The issue of entitlement is determined by the boundary treaty between the two countries. Sugauli Treaty There is no treaty between Nepal and India to demarcate the border. So we have to take the Sugauli Treaty as a base. It clearly considers the Mahakali as a boundary river. While searching for the Mahakali spring, we will undoubtedly reach Limpiyadhura. On the contrary, British-India seems to have mixed forces. The present India also carries the same legacy. 

Another fact we cannot forget. In 1962, India lost its hand during the war between China and India. The Indian army, defeated by the Chinese army, made temporary accommodation at Kalapani. Later, by making it a permanent border post and barracks, Nepal's access and entry to that western territory was blocked, which has become the current problem. Relying on someone taking shelter when you are in trouble will get you nowhere. Therefore, Nepal does not seem to have failed in this matter. At times, there may have been weaknesses in presenting factual evidence on time. But based on that, it does not mean that Nepal's rights in those territories are weak.

We have many facts on our side. We are in a strong position even if we are talking about the historical map. Internal unity also seems strong on the border issue. However, that geography is not becoming ours. Why?

We have tried systematically in this matter. Only after 2076. When in 2014, the Nepal-India Foreign Minister's Joint Commission said to create a mechanism of Foreign Secretary. Our effort was towards making it active. India was not ready for our proposal. Its meeting has not been held even once.

has not even consulted with Nepal. In the minutes of the joint meeting between the two countries and in the issued statement, there is also a reference to the 'outsending issue'. But in the way they tried to maintain one-sided pressure by publishing the map. After that, Nepal moved forward with more readiness. At that time I myself was the foreign minister of Nepal. We sent diplomatic notes continuously. We made a formal proposal at the meeting. But on the pretext of covid it was taken aside. Instead, a virtual opening of the road to Lipulek was made in the midst of Covid.

I think every prime minister and government since then has spoken in favor of a broader national consensus on this issue. I cannot tell you how effectively you spoke in the bilateral meeting. In this position of Nepal, there is no government left or right. But it has not been heard from India. After learning from this, we should seriously put this issue on the agenda in every meeting, take calm, mature and effective diplomatic steps and try to find a solution through it.

When you were the Minister of Foreign Affairs, we released a new map in 2077. We also amended the constitution. Why did we fail to internationalize the updated map by sending it from China, India to the United Nations?

We had to talk about our 'position' in negotiations and diplomatic correspondence with India. We have also informed China sufficiently about this. I called the then Chinese ambassador to my office and talked to him. It was also necessary to inform the border countries and since China is also a party in the 2015 dispute. In that order, the historical facts and proofs of Nepal are these, for this reason it has been informed that the territory belongs to Nepal.

Until then, it was not considered necessary to provide such information, as we were waiting for the bilateral mechanism to resolve the dispute. But because unilateral steps were taken without holding a meeting of the mechanism, I have informed both the friendly countries of Nepal about the 'position' of Nepal. So it is not correct to say that there is no information. But it is true that we have not entered into the work of raising it on the international stage and going to the international court like some countries, which is called internationalization. Even today, we are clear that the problem should be resolved through bilateral talks and diplomacy. But there has been no weakness in the matter of informing the two countries about the amendment of the constitution.

Did anything else happen besides your discussion with the Chinese ambassador?

Delegations of different levels from Nepal to China have also raised this issue. Even, when high-ranking officials of the Nepali Army went to meet with their counterparts and in courtesy meetings with the Defense Minister, the Prime Minister also spoke about our position while talking at various levels. There is no weakness in conversation.

Did we inform China and India by sending a letter about our constitutional amendment or not?

We are going to send them formally that the territory claimed by India is not yours because of this. We also sent to China that these territories are ours based on these historical facts. After that naturally the map of Nepal has changed. There are issues mentioned in all our government documents. Correspondence is in the same latehead. So the subject associated with the map and map have adequate 'shares'. • What was the reaction of the Chinese side after the information we sent? They are very sensitive to the issue of raising so seriously, now we would consider Nepal's position in mind when making further decisions. Instead, (with India) concluded the faster of this subject, and that, they said that if it would be easier to separate the Trileritorial points. Why does

China have had my own statement in five years?

was called and contradicting what is done. So I am in the beginning, just as India and China, this understanding of India is unexpected for Nepal.

you have led to the Ministry of Foreign Ministry. How many historic, political, socio-economic evidence do Limpia Bahara and Kalapoli area belong to Nepal, with us?

I had to re-resolve the fact that Lamporak, Lippoluck and Kalapan area should be presented in Nepal. They have also prepared reports and prepared a report by working. It is in the foreign medium.

was a spoke for the first time in March. The front of the east side and the border of the West is clearly mentioned. But from Koshi, Terai Bandi-terrain was lost. Sixuly Shali Real Interest in December of that year became the treaty of it. He also included the terrain from the Savior Saptari to the Terai.

then received Banke, Bardiya, Kailali, Kailali, Kailali, Kailali, Kailali, Kailali, Kailali, Kailali, and Kanchanpur as a return of the new country in 1860. It made our map more prosperous. Similarly, under 1875, another complement has been complementary to complete the Kochush area of ​​Dang. Land has been paid while setting shrawn negligence in the Mahakali. Kanchanpur's land owned Indian by paying an Indian ownership in Nepal to another. Therefore, there is no control of a saguli treaty between Nepal and India and India.

is the second, map of map. Various maps have been published for 1866 to 1866. Every map has been expelled by British-India who has been expelled by Britis / India, the Grampion Mohal has said to Lampodra. Then they are encroached.

third, V.S. Voter list has been collected for parliamentary general election of 2015. Even for the 2030s, the oil there is paid to the land there is paid in the mount of Baitadi and Dodel Batern. We have many questions.

is many branches in the Mahakali. However, international treaties and practices have given three bases that separate the origin (the source of the river). What is the first, the longest branch? What is the second, the second-in-deepest and the flow of water? Third, what is the river with the highest forest? Standing there, the zeal can distinguish the river from Lamporah is the main river. There is no doubt that all these facts are of the western border in Western Border Lampodhra and there.

is not in control of Lampyodhra, Lipule, and Kalapani region. How long will this situation last? When will we control our control? How is it

raises the question of how India wants to make the relationship with her neighbors. He is the largest country in South Asia. Is regional power. There seems to be aspiration to become the world power in the future. The country growing in the world is moving forward should be 'resurrected' the relationship with the neighborhood.

South Asia seems to have problems somewhere in his relationship with him. The problem with Pakistan can be understood. India-Pakistan divides the division of 1947 and is the dobs of it. Otherwise, there is no reason for Maldives or Sri Lanka. India had a decisive role in the construction of Bangladesh. There is no reason to be a good relationship. & Nbsp;

Nepal has historic and multimeanimal relationship with Nepal. Relationships of social, cultural, religious, and public-populated public has strong. The world is rarely opened between the countries. India does not need to invest in the properly he has protected that border. Nepal has contributed a lot on its behalf for development and security of India.

has no reason for Nepal's relationship with Nepal in the background of all this. There is no reason for no reason to understand that it should not be addressed just the subject matter. If we had only India's dispute, we could not know that we would not know the problem properly. But there seems to be trying to ignore the initiative of solving the issue from the sensitivity in neighboring Talks somewhere, not to take a generosity about neighborhoods from talks. India should change the nature by India. By doing so, the relationship with all neighbors and especially Nepal.

Nepal has no competition with India. There is no hostility. If we want to proceed as a good neighbor, it is possible to move forward in the same way. India does not think that India has been benefiting. The strongest basis of friendship is faith and harmony. The incident stumbles that it is like now (India-China consensus). Is India 'redee' for that to say that. Let us exercise active mechanism, we told the facts and evidence to speak. Let's sit down if strong evidence is with them. We have complete faith, they do not have such a fact and proof with them. That is why they also think they are trying to avoid negotiations.

is once the subject of disputes such as the present. We show activation by giving it priority for a few months. We are silent without concluding. Rearely reaches when he rises again. Why don't we consider a need for necessary to look for a solution by constantly dialogues and diplomatic initiatives?

is especially important to solve such problems, especially if the mechanism would have been completed. Similarly, by the Prime Minister of Nepal and India, the prime minister from Nepal and India have acknowledged, the relationship between two countries is essential to the twenty-stairs. Newly updates & Nbsp; What are the work done for that, & Nbsp; UPG) of a group of precious people in two countries for suggestions on it.

Nepal-India relationship is also multiplexic and complex in many respects. However, the epilepsy reported in 2018. If I had understood the report and took the report gradually, many problems would not come from, and many old problems were solved. There is no weakness from Nepal. & NBSP;

because we have asked for a secretary stone mechanism. Similarly, Nepal has played a 'Proactive' role in making EPG, activate, and preparing its report. We have been trying for a long time to hand over the report. Secretary Treasure Mechanism & NBSP; Even though I am not active, I had the opportunity to 'cocco' of the fifth and sixth meeting.

in Nepal had a sixth meeting in January 2021 in Delhi, 2021, 2021, on the January of Dilhi, in Dilhi. In conclusion, it does not seem to be decreased on behalf of Nepal. There is a comment that after returning to Nepal, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal Dahal's visit and presented two matters in the wrong way.

first, journalist asked the question about EPG report. He said that the Indian friends did not appear to be priced. Second, he brought the subject of land instead of the land. Which was very flawed.

because how to use land can be discussed in a long way. The first is the ownership. As Nepal said was ready to be determined not to restore it or not, it was not a suitable expression. Otherwise everyone has raised Nepal's question seriously. But India is not looking forward to the discussion. Even though

Prachanda does not dump EPG while traveling to India, KP Sharma Oli is now going to India visiting some more weekly. Does he pick up?

picks out. We aim to the three issues for the development of relationships. First, there should be no subject in any subject among two friends. The problem is not solved by hiding. Must be openly discussion among your friends. One should say your question savage. The solution may not immediately know, but another friend should know that, what is my friend's position? Second, the problem should be solved as soon as possible through diplomacy.

is not what is worting we can while you don't have. If you are walking on a long journey, you have to drain the stone to the shoes. Otherwise, so therefore keeps difficult. By crossing the construction of Nepal and India, we have passed the long background to the construction of Nepal. Will have to move forward together for a long time. But if the stone is bowled inside the shoe, it becomes a wood. We don't want that.

Third, friendship, friendship, the friendship, and the problems for solving discussions should be moved. Talking to the partner, we should not have to overshadowed partnerships while raising problems and raise problems. Bites should be increased in parallel manner. Therefore, the Prime Minister openly talks openly about the overall dimensions of two countries during the visit. According to Sher Bahadur Duwa, Prati Legera, Oli, Lumphiucracy and Lippolura Sharma, and Limpani, Lippani, and Kalapani area in BRAK, Pradhan Bahadur, Lippani and Kalapani area were the problem. This issue also includes this issue at this time. When he is putting it upon this a stand?

is also visible to UML and KP Sharma of Sharma, the position of Oli. I believe, because of the KP Sharma Oli, this issue has now received the current height. National consensus was retired. We were able to preach the rights of constitutional, legal and technologies on that land. Therefore, the Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli does not have to doubt the subject effectively.

KP Sharma Alley maybe the map of the parliament, as the Prime Minister, issue of Parliament?

is brought to the discussion table connected to Nepal and India's connection with Nepal and India's relationship. A closer look at how to resolve and strengthen the scope of solving and cooperating, fellowship, friendship and partnership.

Prime Minister is going to visit the visit to China. There is said to meet with the high level leaders of India and China. So how much is the opportunity to disagree with the leader of India's consent to both countries? Manufacture of it?

's visit to China is for a multi-help organization, a multilateral pan. So we do not raise twasty questions in a multilateral ground. But when it comes to two scale meetings, it is raised.

other news related to this subject & nbsp;

will continue to be damaged, Kalapani issue? Understand in seven facts, the story-breaddodhai is again 8 times in relation to India 8 times in relation to the

Border, all unanswered