Experts in diplomacy and border affairs have suggested that diplomatic efforts and pressure should be continued to resolve the border dispute with India.

They say that Nepal's side is strong in the border dispute as there is ample evidence that Limpiyadhura, Lipulek and Kalapani areas are Nepalese territory. Therefore, they say that the border dispute should be raised continuously, not seasonally.

The speakers of the program on 'Nepal-China-India Relations: Problems and Expectations' organized by Tank Prasad Acharya Memorial Foundation in Lalitpur on Tuesday emphasized that Nepal should collect more historical documents and hold talks with India. Preksha Shah, head of the Central Department of International Relations and Diplomacy of Tribhuvan University, said that any conflict does not only bring problems, it also brings solutions, so initiatives should be taken in the direction of solutions. Conflict is not only bad. It also seeks solutions," she said. "The issue of border disputes with India is not new. The pace of diplomatic efforts should be increased to resolve that issue. He suggested that Nepal should take advantage of the current situation where there are positive talks and agreements and discussions between India and China by trying to resolve the border dispute.

Associate Professor Leela Nyichayin, who is an expert in international affairs, said that the issue of borders is only raised during special occasions like festivals and fairs, so this issue is overshadowed. The issue of border has only become seasonal. That too, when someone else does something about this matter, we will speak only then," she said. It should be worked on continuously. Diplomatic initiatives should be taken.' She mentioned that a solution can be found by having a joint team of scientists from Nepal-India and China study the dispute over the headwaters of the Kali River. Another speaker of the

program, former administrator Suryanath Upadhyay, said that disputes cannot be resolved by getting emotional or speaking and insulting others, and said that the aspect of 'documentation and negotiation' should be strengthened.

The then Sushil Koirala-led government formed a task force under the leadership of Upadhyay to study the border of Lipulek and Susta region which is yet to be resolved with India. He expressed his displeasure that the government did not even discuss the report given by the working group under his leadership. "Reports are prepared by looking for documents after hard work, but they are not even studied," he said, "There is a tendency to hide documents and not open them." It does not flow up. This is a big problem.

In 2077, the KP Sharma Oli-led government formed a committee under the leadership of Bishnuraj Upreti to study the border dispute with India. In the program, Upreti also expressed complaints like Upadhyaya. "We have analyzed the evidence and submitted a report," he said, "and the state had to look at it." He said that it is his experience that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is very weak in making historical documents and documents available for study. He also raised questions about the 'negotiation' ability of foreign affairs.

Toyanath Baral, the former Director General of Survey Department commented that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not been able to do 'border diplomacy'. He said that by comparing the evidence of both India and Nepal, a conclusion can be reached while presenting the claim that Nepal is strong in terms of evidence. However, for that, he said, an environment for sitting at the table should be created first.

Former Ambassador to China Rajeshwar Acharya said that the argument that China agreed to do business with India through Lipulekh Pass due to ignorance or lack of information is not credible. "China is interested in Nepal, they were aware of this even when I was the ambassador," he said. The current foreign minister of China, Wang Yi, has been active for 30 years, so he knows more about this matter.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, during his visit to India in the first week of August, India and China agreed to reopen border trade through the Lipulek Pass. The agreement between the two countries is being opposed in Nepal. During his visit to China, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, in his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, expressed his objection to the agreement between India and China to trade through there, saying that Lipulek is Nepal's land.

Similarly, former foreign minister Kamal Thapa commented that Nepal's credibility with its neighbors has decreased in the global political environment. He said that since history, Nepal has been losing opportunities time and again. Thapa says that Nepal has lost the opportunity to resolve the border, even though the Indian check post was removed from the border area of ​​China in 1969, when the Indian army was not removed from Kalapani or when the estuary of the Mahakali was not closed in 1996 when the Mahakali Treaty was signed with India. "We should try to resolve the border dispute in a very sensitive manner, not in an aggressive way," he said, "It is not necessary to come in a hurry and do big things." There are border disputes all over the world. It takes time to resolve. However, the relationship should not be spoiled in the same name.'

Former Foreign Minister Pradeep Gyawali said that Nepal made a mistake when the map was released in 2032. "However, saying so does not weaken our claim," he said, "We have discussed this matter many times. Prime Minister Oli has clearly sided with Nepal in the meeting with the Chinese President. He said that it is a matter of concern that China is not paying attention to it even though it has been repeatedly told and given information. In 2015, China agreed to conduct bilateral trade with India. He didn't know at that time, that thing could be accepted, but since then it has been said time and time again. "Lipulek is the land of Nepal," he said, "now it cannot be said that China does not know." Journalist Kanakamani Dixit emphasized that successful diplomacy should be attempted without following the "glamour" of the government, political party or leader. According to Dixit, Nepal should keep the issue clear with both parties about the problem of the agreement between India and China.