Prime Minister Balendra Shah's statement on the Nepal-India border in the House of Representatives on Sunday has been drawn into controversy. While answering questions raised by lawmakers about Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani, he stated that Nepal has also encroached on Indian land in many places. Prime Minister Shah's statement has been criticized and opposed both inside and outside the parliament. 

'You may be surprised by one thing, I also came to know only after becoming the Prime Minister the other day that not only India has encroached on Nepal's land, but Nepal has also encroached on many Indian lands,' Prime Minister Shah said in the parliament. A sharp reaction has begun regarding the Prime Minister's statement. Opposition lawmakers have even demanded that his statement be removed from the parliament's records. Diplomats and experts on border affairs have said that Nepal has not encroached on Indian land as the Prime Minister expressed in the parliament. 

According to an aide of Shah, a few weeks ago, the Prime Minister's Chief Advisor Kumar Byanjankar met with British Ambassador Rob Fenn and discussed how Britain can help on the issue of the Kalapani region.    Prime Minister Shah's statement came in the context of the Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani areas of Nepal that India has encroached on. India has been claiming that these lands in Nepal are its own. Prime Minister Shah informed the Parliament that the government has already sent a diplomatic note to Delhi and Beijing regarding the territory of Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani as Nepalese territory. 

'We have spoken not only to India and China but also to the British government. Since the problem they are leaving British India is still happening to us, we believe that England should also be concerned about it. I would like to inform you that all these matters will be resolved through table talk and diplomatic means,' Prime Minister Shah told the Parliament.

According to an aide of Shah, a few weeks ago, the Prime Minister's Chief Advisor Kumar Byanjankar met with British Ambassador Rob Fenn and discussed how Britain can help on the issue of the Kalapani region. 

The dispute over the border, including Kalapani, is believed to have started after the Sugauli Treaty of 1816. According to Nepali border experts, based on the Sugauli Treaty and historical maps prepared by the then British India Survey Department in 1819, 1827, 1834, 1835, 1837, 1846, 1850, 1856, 1860 and 1879, the 372 square kilometer area including Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani belongs to Nepal. According to Shah's aide, Byanjanakar had argued that since Britain was also a party to the Sugauli Treaty, Britain might have evidence and maps that would help resolve the dispute. 'The historical evidence and maps with Britain can help resolve the dispute with India and China,' the aide said. 'The discussions with the British ambassador are part of an effort to permanently resolve the border dispute with India.'

According to the aide, Fenn had indicated that Britain did not want to interfere as this was a bilateral issue between Nepal and India. But Byanjanakar had argued that Britain should support Nepal's efforts as the dispute is a historical legacy of the Sugauli Treaty. The Lipulekh-Limpiyadhura-Kalapani region, which covers an area of ​​about 372 square kilometers, east of the Mahakali River (Sharda River in India), has been under Indian control since the 1962 Sino-Indian War. According to sources in the Prime Minister's Office, after Shah became Prime Minister, he was briefed on the work being done by the Nepal-India Border Working Group (BWG). The BWG carries out technical work including construction, maintenance, rehabilitation of border pillars, and management of ten-gaja areas. However, disputed areas like Susta and Kalapani do not fall under its purview.

Minister Shah was also briefed by ministers and officials on issues related to land tenure and property ownership across the border. Deepa Dahal, the Prime Minister's press and research expert, also confirmed that Shah had discussed the issue with border experts. "He has consulted experts extensively," Dahal said. According to the joint border survey conducted in 2007, about 1,200 hectares of Nepali land is in use by Indian citizens and 1,250 hectares of Indian land is in use by the Nepali side, says Toya Baral, former director general of the Survey Department. “In 2007, we finalized 182 sets of border maps using GPS technology, excluding Susta and Kalapani,” Baral said. “In the process, it was found that citizens of both countries were occupying land across the border.”

Baral led the Nepali team in the preparation of the Nepal-India border map prepared in 2007. According to him, the problems related to cross-border cultivation, use and occupation have not been resolved yet. “The BWG is working to resolve these issues,” he said, “but Nepal has not encroached on Indian land. The Prime Minister’s statement is not technically correct.” According to Baral, the BWG is currently studying how much land is being occupied across the border by citizens of both countries. ‘Susta and Kalapani are different issues,’ he said, ‘Susta is an issue of Indian encroachment, while Kalapani is basically a territorial dispute.’ 

Recently, after India announced that it would conduct the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra through Nepali territory, the Lipulekh dispute, which has long been a sensitive issue in Nepal-India relations, came to the fore. Following India’s announcement, Nepal had even sent a diplomatic note to both its neighbors, India and China, on May 3. ‘India’s response was that both countries should form a team comprising historians, surveyors and geographers and find a solution through dialogue,’ Shah said on Sunday.

According to Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, the then Director General of the Survey Department, in 1988, Nepal and India had reached an agreement in principle to determine the border based on the principle of a permanent border and the border river. Shrestha also said that Nepal had never encroached on Indian territory. “However, in some places there is a situation of cross-border land tenure, where locals are using cross-border land for farming and other purposes,” he said. “In some places, Indians are using Nepali farmers’ land, while in others, Nepalis are using it. This is called cross-border use.”

Regarding the government raising the border issue with the UK, Shrestha said, “It is not publicly known that the Nepal government has formally discussed the Nepal-India border dispute with the UK.” Shrestha said that if such a discussion has taken place with the Prime Minister, it should be taken positively. “The Prime Minister has really held such a discussion, it should be considered a positive step,” he said. “Areas such as Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani have been under Indian control for 64 years. If the UK mediates at the Prime Minister’s request and India agrees to it, it will be an important and positive achievement.”

According to another Director General of the Survey Department, disputes have arisen in areas including Susta because rivers and small streams are considered the basis of the border. ‘We considered rivers and small streams as the border, which led to border disputes between Nepal and India in Susta and some other areas.’ According to him, border demarcation has become complicated due to changes in the course of rivers, erosion, new flows, and interpretations of historical maps to suit one’s own tastes. The Susta dispute is a prime example of this. Whereas the change in the course of the Gandak (Narayani) river has further complicated the border dispute.

Opposition leaders, former diplomats, and former officers of the Survey Department have urged the Prime Minister to clarify his statement further. ‘The Prime Minister of the country should think a dozen times before speaking,’ Nepali Congress Vice President Bishwaprakash Sharma wrote in X, ‘Restraint and maturity are even more important in sensitive diplomatic issues.’ Sharma also questioned the RSP’s view on the Prime Minister’s statement. ‘Is the government’s vote the vote of the chief or the vote of the individual? What is the view of the NCP?’ He asked, ‘Have we encroached on the border or are we being encroached upon and are we about to be further divided?’

Former Nepali Ambassador to India Nilambar Acharya also refuted the Prime Minister’s statement and said that Nepal has not encroached on Indian land. ‘Around 97 percent of the border issues between Nepal and India have been resolved,’ he said, ‘As the Prime Minister said, Nepal has not encroached on Indian land anywhere.’ According to Acharya, problems have been seen in some places when border pillars disappear. ‘In some places, Indians are farming on Nepali land, while in others, Nepalis are farming on the Indian side,’ he said, ‘However, this cannot be said to be Nepal’s encroachment on Indian land. These problems are more of a border issue than a border dispute. However, it is not clear in what context the Prime Minister said that Nepal has encroached on Indian land.’

It is not clear whether the Prime Minister, when using the word ‘encroached’, was referring to land tenure across the border or not. The issue of cross-border land tenure in the Nepal-India border area is an old problem. Where citizens from both sides have been cultivating and consuming land across the border. An old survey had shown that Nepalis were cultivating on Indian land in 274 places. Of these, 43 places were in Ilam, Jhapa, Morang and Sunsari, 211 places in eight districts of Madhesh Province, one in Banke and 19 in Kanchanpur.

It is one thing to say that there is a border dispute in some areas. But Nepal has neither encroached nor occupied Indian land. Nepal is adamant on the principle that it should not violate the border of its neighbors. - Former Foreign Minister Kamal Thapa  Similarly, it had shown that Indians were cultivating and consuming Nepali land in 668 places. These places were in Ilam, Jhapa, Morang, Sunsari, Saptari, Siraha, Dhanusha, Mahottari, Sarlahi, Rautahat, Bara, Parsa, Rupandehi, Bardiya and Kanchanpur districts. In addition, it was revealed that there was encroachment from the Indian side in 15 places. Some of these border-related problems were of a nature that could be resolved at the local level.

The statement came from Prime Minister Shah a day before Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) President Ravi Lamichhane left for India. President Lamichhane is leaving for Delhi on Monday for a five-day visit to India. During the visit, Lamichhane is scheduled to meet high-ranking officials including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

Former Foreign Minister Kamal Thapa has commented that the Prime Minister's statement is inappropriate when India itself has not accused Nepal of violating the border to date. 'It is one thing to say that there is a border dispute in some areas. But Nepal has neither encroached on nor occupied Indian land. Nepal is adamant on the principle that it should not violate the border of its neighbors,' former Foreign Minister Thapa wrote in X, 'If the Prime Minister is convinced that Nepal has violated the border of India, then it should be made clear to the people with evidence, the place where it is, the mistake should be corrected immediately and the land should be returned to India with respect. However, in my opinion, the Prime Minister's statement is exaggerated and wrong.' Former Foreign Minister Thapa said that it is very sad that the Prime Minister made a light and offensive statement that Nepal has also encroached on India's border at a time when there is a nationwide debate and concern about India's encroachment on Limpiyadhura, Kalapani, Lipulekh and Susta areas.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement on Sunday evening, trying to clarify the Prime Minister's statement. 'The issue that the Honorable Prime Minister mentioned in Parliament is basically related to the encroachment of the Das Gaja area and cross-border occupation, i.e. land tenure rights across the border,' the ministry said. 'Due to the adoption of the principle of fixed border in the river border area while determining the Nepal-India border, there is a situation of cross-border occupation and citizens of one country are farming and living on land falling within the territory of the other country.'