India Nepal Relations Essay Definition

The Union of India and the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal initiated their relationship with the 1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship and accompanying secret letters that defined security relations between the two countries, and an agreement governing both bilateral trade and trade transiting Indian territory. The 1950 treaty and letters exchanged between the then Indian government and Rana rulers of Nepal, stated that "neither government shall tolerate any threat to the security of the other by a foreign aggressor" and obligated both sides "to inform each other of any serious friction or misunderstanding with any neighboring state likely to cause any breach in the friendly relations subsisting between the two governments." These accords cemented a "special relationship" between India and Nepal. The treaty also granted Nepalese, the same economic and educational opportunities as Indian citizens in India, while accounting for preferential treatment to Indian citizens and businesses compared to other nationalities in Nepal. The Indo-Nepal border is open; Nepalese and Indian nationals may move freely across the border without passports or visas and may live and work in either country. However, Indians aren't allowed to own land-properties or work in government institutions in Nepal, while Nepalese nationals in India are allowed to work in Indian government institutions (except in some states) and some civil services (the IFS, IAS, and IPS).[1] After years of dissatisfaction by the Nepalese government, India in 2014, agreed to revise and adjust the treaty to the reflect the current realities.[2] However, the modality of adjustment hasn't been made clear by either side.

Despite the close linguistic, marital, religious, and, cultural ties, at people to people level between Indians and Nepalese, since late 2015, political issues and border disputes have strained relations between the two countries with anti-Indian sentiment growing among-st the government and people of Nepal.[3] Further because of border disputes between the two countries, a boundary agreement hasn't yet been ratified by either government.

Independent political history[edit]


The foundation of friendship between India and Nepal was laid with Indo-Nepalese friendship treaty in 1950. In the 1950s, the Rana rulers of Nepal welcomed close relations with India, fearing a China-backed communist overthrow of their (Rana) autocratic regime. Rana rule in Nepal however collapsed within 3 months of signing the 1950 Indo-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship, only to be replaced by the only pro-Indian party of the time – Nepali Congress. As the number of Indians living and working in Nepal's Terai region increased and the involvement of India in Nepal's politics deepened in the 1960s and after, so too did Nepal's discomfort with the special relationship. India's influence over Nepal increased throughout the 1950s. The Nepalese Citizenship Act of 1952 allowed Indians to immigrate to Nepal and acquire Nepalese citizenship with ease—a source of huge resentment in Nepal (This policy was not changed until 1962 when several restrictive clauses were added to the Nepalese constitution).[4] Also in 1952, an Indian military mission was established in Nepal, which consisted of a Major General and 20 other Indian army personnel (later extended to 197 in total).[4] At the same time, Nepal's Royal family's dissatisfaction with India's growing influence began to emerge, and overtures to China were initiated by Nepal as a counterweight to India.[4] Further the Nepalese government, as a deliberate attempt to show pro-USA tilt in Nepalese foreign policy, established diplomatic ties with the state of Israel in June 1, 1960,[5] while the Indian government supported Palestine and remained pro-USSR throughout the cold war.

Following the 1962 Sino-Indian border war, the relationship between Kathmandu and New Delhi thawed significantly. India suspended its support to India-based Nepalese opposition forces (opposing the dissolution of democratic government by King Mahendra) which India had been doing in violation of 1950's PFT, which clearly stated 'not to allow any country's soil to be used against the other'. The defeat of Indian forces in 1962 provided Nepal with the breathing space and Nepal extracted several concessions in trade. In exchange, through a secret accord concluded in 1965, similar to an arrangement that had been suspended in 1963, India won a monopoly on arms sales to Nepal and thus preventing the possibility of China from supplying any arms to Nepalese Armed forces.[6]

In 1969 relations again became stressful as Nepal challenged the existing mutual security arrangement and asked that the Indian security checkposts and liaison group be withdrawn. Resentment also was expressed against the 1950s TPF. India withdrew its military check-posts and liaison group consisting of 23 military personnel in 1970 from Nepal, although the treaty was not abrogated.[6][7]

Tensions came to a head in the mid-1970s, when Nepal pressed for substantial changes in the trade and transit treaty and openly criticised Sikkim's 1975 annexation by India. In 1975 King Birendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev against the backdrop of Indian annexation of Nepal's close neighbor 'The Kingdom of Sikkim' proposed Nepal to be recognized internationally as a 'Zone of Peace' where military competition would be off limits. Nepal's proposal immediately received support from Pakistan and China, but not from India.[4] In New Delhi's view, if the king's proposal did not contradict the 1950 treaty that the-then Indian government had signed with the Rana rulers of Nepal, it was unnecessary; if it was a repudiation of the special relationship, it represented a possible threat to India's security and could not be endorsed. In 1984 Nepal repeated the proposal, but there was no reaction from India. Nepal continually promoted the proposal in international forums and by 1990 it had won the support of 112 countries including the USA, the UK, and France.[8]


In 1978 India agreed to separate trade and transit treaties, satisfying a long-term Nepalese demand. However, much to the annoyance of Nepalese Royal Palace and in continued violation of the 1950s PFT, India consistently allowed the opposition parties of Nepal to use Indian soil to launch agitation against the Nepalese government and refused to endorse Nepal as a Zone of Peace.

In 1988, when the two treaties were up for renewal, Nepal refused to accommodate India's wishes for a single trade and transit treaty stating that 'it violates the principle of freedom to trade'. Thereafter, both India and Nepal took a hard-line position that led to a serious crisis in India–Nepal relations. Nepalese leaders asserted the position that as per the UN charter, transit privileges were "a fundamental and a permanent right of a land-locked country" and thus India's demand for a single treaty was unacceptable.[9] So, after two extensions, the two treaties expired on 23 March 1989, resulting in a virtual Indian economic blockade of Nepal that lasted until late April 1990.[10] As time passed Indian economic sanctions over Nepal steadily widened. For example, preferential customs and transit duties on Nepalese goods entering or passing through India (whether imports or exports) were discontinued. Thereafter India let agreements relating to oil processing and warehouse space in Calcutta for goods destined to Nepal expire. Aside from these sanctions, India cancelled all trade credits it had previously extended to Nepal on a routine basis.[11]

To withstand the renewed Indian pressure, Nepal undertook a major diplomatic initiative to present its case on trade and transit matters to the world community.[12] The relationship with India was further strained in 1989 when Nepal decoupled its rupee from the Indian rupee which previously had circulated freely in Nepal. India retaliated by denying port facilities in Calcutta to Nepal, thereby preventing delivery of oil supplies from Singapore and other sources.[11] In historian Enayetur Rahim's view, "the economic consequences of the dispute... were enormous. Nepal's GDP growth rate plummeted from 9.7% in 1988 to 1.5% in 1989.[12] This had a lot to do with the decreased availability of goods. Shortly after the imposition of sanctions, Nepal experienced serious deficiencies of important goods such as coal, fuel, oil, medicine and spare parts.[11] Nepal also suffered economically from higher tariffs, the closure of border points and the tense political atmosphere. From one of the most thriving economies in Asia, Nepal was now quickly finding itself in the league of World's poorest nation." Although economic issues were a major factor in the two countries' confrontation, Indian dissatisfaction with Nepal's decision to impose work permits over Indians living in Nepal and Nepal government's attempt to acquire Chinese weaponry in 1988 played an important role.[10] India linked security with economic relations and insisted on reviewing India–Nepal relations as a whole. After failing to receive support from wider international community, Nepalese government backed down from its position to avoid the worsening economic conditions. Indian government, with the help of Nepalese opposition parties operating from India, managed to bring a change in Nepal's political system, in which the king was forced to institute a parliamentary democracy. The new government, led by pro-India parties, sought quick restoration of amicable relations with India.


The special security relationship between New Delhi and Kathmandu was re-established during the June 1990 New Delhi meeting of Nepal's prime minister Krishna Prasad Bhattarai and Indian prime minister V.P. Singh, after India ended its 13-month-long economic blockade of Nepal. During the December 1991 visit to India by Nepalese prime minister Girija Prasad Koirala, the two countries signed new, separate trade and transit treaties and other economic agreements designed to accord Nepal additional economic benefits.

Indian-Nepali relations appeared to be undergoing still more reassessment when Nepal's prime minister Man Mohan Adhikary visited New Delhi in April 1995 and insisted on a major review of the 1950 peace and friendship treaty which Nepal believed was enabling an ongoing demographic shift in Nepal's Terai region. In the face of benign statements by his Indian hosts relating to the treaty, Adhikary sought greater economic independence for his landlocked nation while simultaneously striving to improve ties with China.

In June 1990, a joint Kathmandu-New Delhi communique was issued pending the finalisation of a comprehensive arrangement covering all aspects of bilateral relations, restoring trade relations, reopening transit routes for Nepal's imports, and formalising respect of each other's security concerns.[13] Essentially, the communiqué announced the restoration of the status quo ante and the reopening of all border points, and Nepal agreed to various concessions regarding India's commercial privileges. Kathmandu also announced that lower cost was the decisive factor in its purchasing arms and personnel carriers from China and that Nepal was advising China to withhold delivery of the last shipment.[11]


In 2005, after King Gyanendra took over, Nepalese relations with India soured. However, even after the restoration of democracy, in 2008, Prachanda, the Prime Minister of Nepal, visited India, in September 2008 only after visiting China, breaking the long held tradition of Nepalese PM making India as their first port-of-call. When in India, he spoke about a new dawn, in the bilateral relations, between the two countries. He said, "I am going back to Nepal as a satisfied person. I will tell Nepali citizens back home that a new era has dawned. Time has come to effect a revolutionary change in bilateral relations. On behalf of the new government, I assure you that we are committed to make a fresh start."

In 2006, the newly formed democratic parliament of Nepal passed the controversial citizenship bill[14] that led to distribution of Nepalese citizenship to nearly 4 million stateless immigrants in Nepal's Terai by virtue of naturalisation.[15] While the Indian government welcomed the reformed citizenship law, certain section of Nepalese people expressed deep concerns regarding the new citizenship act and feared that the new citizenship law might be a threat to Nepalese sovereignty. The citizenship bill passed by the Nepalese parliament in 2006 was the same bill that was rejected by Late King Birendra in 2000[16] before he along with his entire family was massacred. Indian government formally expressed sorrow at the death of Late King Birendra of Nepal.

In 2008, Indo-Nepal ties got a further boost with an agreement to resume water talks after a 4-year hiatus.[17][18] The Nepalese Water Resources Secretary Shanker Prasad Koirala said the Nepal-India Joint Committee on Water Resources meet decided to start the reconstruction of the breached Koshi embankment after the water level went down.[19] During the Nepal PM's visit to New Delhi in September the two Prime Ministers expressed satisfaction at the age-old close, cordial and extensive relationships between their states and expressed their support and co-operation to further consolidate the relationship.

The two issued a 22-point statement highlighting the need to review, adjust and update the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship, amongst other agreements. India would also provide a credit line of up to $15 million to Nepal to ensure uninterrupted supplies of petroleum products, as well as lift bans on the export of rice, wheat, maize, sugar and sucrose for quantities agreed to with Nepal. India would also provide $2 million as immediate flood relief.
In return, Nepal will take measures for the "promotion of investor friendly, enabling business environment to encourage Indian investments in Nepal."


In 2010 India extended a Line of credit worth US$50 million & 80,000 tonnes of foodgrains. Furthermore, a three-tier mechanism at the level of ministerial, secretary and technical levels will be built to push forward discussions on the development of water resources between the two sides.[20] Politically, India acknowledged a willingness to promote efforts towards peace in Nepal. Indian External affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee promised the Nepali Prime MinisterPrachanda that he would "extend all possible help for peace and development."[21]

However, in recent years, the increasing dominance of Maoism in Nepal's domestic politics,[22] along with the strengthening economic and political influence of the People's Republic of China[23][24][25] has caused the Nepalese government to gradually distance its ties with India, though Nepal still does support India at the UN. Prime Minister of IndiaNarendra Modi visited Nepal in August 2014, marking the first official visit by an Indian prime minister in 17 years. During his visit, Indian government agreed to provide Nepal with USD 1 billion as concessional line of credit for various development purposes and a HIT formula, but he insisted that Indian immigrants in Nepal don't pose a threat to Nepal's sovereignty and therefore open border between Nepal and India should be a bridge and not a barrier.[26][27] Nepal and India signed an important deal on 25 November 2014 as per which India will build a 900 MW hydropower plant at a cost of another USD 1 billion.[28] An amount of US$250 million has been granted to Nepal as a part of the agreements signed on 22 February 2016 for post-earthquake reconstruction.[29]

A perpetual issue for many people of Nepali origin; the birthplace of Gautama Buddha has long been a cultural and social issue devoid from the political landscape of both Nepal and India.[30] However, since the souring of relations between the two countries, the issue has been used to undermine relations between the two countries both politically and socially. The two-day-long International Buddhist conference in Kathmandu which ran from May 19–20, 2016 marked Vesak and the 2,560th birthday of the Buddha was also used to promote the Buddha's birthplace which lies in modern-day Nepal.[31] The decision of the Nepal Culture Ministry to change the theme, "Preservation and Development of Buddhist Heritage of Nepal" with the sub-theme "Lumbini – Birthplace of Buddha" under the name "Lumbini – Fountainhead of Buddhism" was met with criticism from India which subsequently boycotted the conference due to this and on the back of China's supposed monetary involvement in the conference.[32] Nepali Prime Minister, K.P. Oli told the media that the conference, "should help us make clear to the world that Buddha was born in Nepal and that Buddhist philosophy is the product of Nepal".[33]

In early March 2017, the fatal shooting of a Nepali man who was protesting Indian-occupation on disputed territory between India and Nepal sparked protests in the capital Kathmandu, Nepal. Indian troops had previously prevented Nepal from completing a culvert in the disputed area which ultimately led to protests. It was considered rare for India to retaliate with gunfire.[34]

Border disputes[edit]

The current border between Nepal and India exists as a legacy of British India. The present border between Nepal and India was set after the former's defeat at the hands of British in 1814 which led to the Treaty of Sugauli with Nepal losing the territories of Darjeeling to the East and Kumaon and Garhwal up to Sutlej river in the West. Mechi river was set to be the Eastern border between British India and Nepal whereas Mahakali river was set to be the Western border. However, lack of clarity in defining the exact tributaries and point of origin of the rivers has led to border disputes.

The Territorial disputes of India and Nepal include Kalapani 400 km2 at India-Nepal-China tri-junction in Western Nepal and Susta 140 km2 in Southern Nepal. Nepal claims that the river to the west of Kalapani is the main Kali river hence the area should belong to Nepal.[35][36] But India claims that the river to the west of Kalapani is not the main Kali river, and, therefore the border there should be based on the ridge lines of the mountains Om Parvat to the east of the river. The river borders the Nepalese zone of Mahakali and the Indian state of Uttarakhand. The Sugauli Treaty signed by Nepal and British India on 4 March 1816[37] locates the Kali River as Nepal's western boundary with India. Subsequent maps drawn by British surveyors show the source of the boundary river at different places. This discrepancy in locating the source of the river led to boundary disputes between India and Nepal, with each country producing maps supporting their own claims. Indian government, however, from 1962 onward, forwarded the argument that border should be based on the ridge lines of the mountain Om Parvat. The Kali River runs through an area that includes a disputed area of about 400 km² around the source of the river although the exact size of the disputed area varies from source to source. The dispute intensified in 1997 as the Nepali parliament considered a treaty on hydro-electric development of the river. India and Nepal differ as to which stream constitutes the source of the river. Nepal has reportedly tabled an 1856 map from the British India Office to support its position.[37] Kalapani has been controlled by India's Indo-Tibetan border security forces since the Sino-Indian War with China in 1962.[38] In 2015, the Nepalese parliament objected an agreement between India and China to trade through Lipulekh Pass, a mountainous pass in the disputed Kalapani area, stating that the agreement between India and China to trade through Kalapani violates Nepal's sovereign rights over the territory.[39] Nepal has called for the withdrawal of the Indian border forces from Kalapani area.[35]

As the first step for demarcating Indo-Nepal border, survey teams from both countries located and identified missing pillars along the border, and, an agreement was reached to construct new pillars in some places. According to the Nepalese government estimates, of the 8000 boundary pillars along the border, 1,240 pillars are missing, 2,500 require restoration, and, 400 more need to be constructed.[40] The survey teams conducted survey of the border pillars based on the strip maps prepared by the Joint Technical Level Nepal-India Boundary Committee (JTLNIBC). The JTLNIBC was set up in 1981 to demarcate the India-Nepal border and after years of surveying, deliberations and extensions, the Committee had delineated 98 per cent of the India-Nepal boundary, excluding Kalapani and Susta, on 182 strip maps which was finally submitted in 2007 for ratification by both the countries. Unfortunately neither country ratified the maps. Nepal maintained that it cannot ratify the maps without the resolution of outstanding boundary disputes, i.e. Kalapani and Susta. India, on the other hand, awaited Nepal’s ratification while at the same time urging it to endorse the maps as a confidence building measure for solving the Kalapani and Susta disputes. In absence of a ratification, the process of completely demarcating the India-Nepal boundary could not be undertaken.[40]

Border crossings[edit]

Main articles: Designated border crossings of India and Borders of India

Integrated check posts with immigration and customs facilities are:[41]


Nepal’s trade deficit with India has surged in recent years with continuously rising imports and sluggish exports. Indo-Nepal trade continues to remain massively in India's favor. For the fiscal year 2010–11 (July 16 – July 15), the official bilateral trade between the two nations was US$4.21 billion, while the unofficial trade between the two countries is also estimated to be about the same. Unofficial trade between the two countries, however, has flourished over the recent decades. Open border between the two countries has meant that madheshi immigrants living along the Indo-Nepal border trade unofficially to avoid paying importation tax in Nepal. Records from Nepalese 'Bhansar Karyalaya' show that Nepal’s import from India amounted to US$3.62 billion and exports to India was US$599.7 million in 2010–11. In the first six months of fiscal year 2011–12, Nepal’s total trade with India was about US$1.93 billion; Nepal’s exports to India were about US$284.8 million; and imports from India were about US$1.64 billion.[42]

Nepal’s main imports from India are petroleum products (28.6%), motor vehicles and spare parts (7.8%), M. S. billet (7%), medicines (3.7%), other machinery and spares (3.4%), coldrolled sheet in coil (3.1%), electrical equipment (2.7%), hotrolled sheet in coil (2%), M. S. wires, roads, coils and bars (1.9%), cement (1.5%), agriculture equipment and parts (1.2%), chemical fertilizer (1.1%), chemicals (1.1%) and thread (1%). Nepal’s export basket to India mainly comprises jute goods (9.2%), zinc sheet (8.9%), textiles (8.6%), threads (7.7%), polyester yarn (6%), juice (5.4%), catechue (4.4%), Cardamom (4.4%), wire (3.7%), tooth paste (2.2%) and M. S. Pipe (2.1%).[42]

Human trafficking[edit]

Human trafficking in Nepal is a serious concern. An estimated 100,000–200,000 Nepalese in India are believed to have been trafficked.[43][44] Sex trafficking is particularly rampant within Nepal and to India, with as many as 5,000–10,000 women and girls trafficked to India alone each year.[43] The seriousness of trafficking of Nepalese girls to India was highlighted by CNN Freedom Project's documentary: Nepal's Stolen Children.[45]Maiti Nepal has rescued more than 12,000 stolen Nepalese children from sex trafficking since 1993.[45]

Violation of norms by Indian forces[edit]

On 9 March 2017, Indian border security personnel gunned down a Nepali national named Govinda Gautam at Punarbas-8 of Kanchanpur district entering 800 metres inside Nepalese border.[46] On 2 June 2017, Indian Police entered western hill district Doti without informing Nepal Police and abducted a Nepali national. Later the Indian Police personnel including a DSP were detained for a day.[47]

2015 Madhesi crisis and Nepal[edit]

Main article: 2015 Nepal fuel crisis

Nepal promulgated its new Constitution in 2015 but the Madheshis, the Janajatis and the Tharus, who are considered as the marginalized groups felt they were being left out in the new constitution. These groups, Madheshi in particular, then blockaded the border points. The Nepalese government accused India of deliberately worsening the embargo by not allowing vehicles to pass from check-points where no protests were held, questioning 'How could a handful of protesters possibly block the 1100 km long Indo-Nepal border?'. Indian government however denied all allegations of any involvement in the blockade.[48]

The Madhesi parties after Madhesh andolan accepted two provinces in Terai instead of one. But there was heavy disagreement over three districts in the east (Sunsari, Morang and Jhapa) and two in the west (Kanchanpur and Kailali) among the top parties. Excluding Sunsari takes away the key border town of Biratnagar and the Kosi basin while Kailali has a large Tharu population but not a majority, which it shares with neighboring Bardiya. Madheshi people of these districts want these districts to be included in the Madhesh pradesh. However, these sentiments are not apparent over all of the people of the aforementioned districts. Jhapa, for example has a majority of Nepalese Brahmins and Nepalese Kshtiryas,[49] who are staunchly against being included in the Madhes state. Madheshi parties have demanded that districts in Terai, which don't have majority of Madheshi immigrants nor indigenous Tharus, to be included in Madhesh pradesh. All of the other major parties are opposed to this. During the India-backed madhesh andolan, 11 policeman including a 2 year old child of a policeman were killed by Madheshi immigrant protesters. Since then anti-Indian sentiment has massively spread over the rest of Nepal.

The other issue pertains to defining electoral constituencies. The 2015 Constitution reduces the weight-age given to proportional representation. Terai constitutes 51 per cent of the Nepal's population, but according to calculations, it would have got only 75 out of a total of 165 seats under the first past the post system, instead of 83, as per its population. The notion of fixing electoral constituencies after taking into account ‘population and geography’ was intended to ensure that the sparsely populated trans-Himalayan districts are not left out of the democratic process. The outgoing government had worked out a compromise safeguarding the interests of six mountain districts while raising the number of Terai constituencies to 81. The new provisions however has meant that district in Mid-western hill region are likely to be seriously under-represented in the new parliament, despite people their being more marginalized and discriminated than the Madheshi immigrants of Terai. Under the new provision, the districts of hills will have their total number of constituents decreased by 20% that previous constitution had ensured.[citation needed]

Citizenship has long been an emotive issue among the Madhesi immigrants as they always marry Indians from the northern districts of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh and spouses of Nepali citizens become ‘naturalized Nepali citizens’. However, there is a provision regarding the offspring of such marriages. Children of a Nepali male marrying a foreigner are ‘Nepalis by descent” whereas if a Nepali woman marries a foreigner, their children are ‘naturalized Nepalis’ which bars them from important and powerful constitutional positions. This is an issue that has been taken up by women’s groups on the grounds that it violates the basic principle of equality guaranteed by the Constitution. However, in Hindu tradition, unlike in the western societies, it is common for the wife to move to the husbands's house but not vice versa. Many real Nepalese deeply fear the long term effect of allowing 'Nepalese by descent' provision to children born to non-Nepali father, as it would mean people who were neither born in Nepal nor have lived a day of their life in Nepal would be able to contest elections and hold high offices. While it is one of the main demands of madheshi immigrants, many Nepalese remain deeply skeptical about the real motive behind such a demand by Indian immigrant madheshis.

See also[edit]


  1. ^Rakesh Sood. "A new beginning with Nepal". The Hindu. 
  2. ^"Sushma Swaraj describes her first Nepal visit as 'very successful'". News18. 2014-07-27. Retrieved 2017-05-25. 
  3. ^IANS (30 September 2015). "Anti-India sentiment in Nepal not good for both nations: Envoy". 
  4. ^ abcd"Nepal – India". Retrieved 17 April 2017. 
  5. ^
  6. ^ ab"Nepal – FOREIGN POLICY". 
  7. ^
  8. ^
  9. ^"Barricades go up as two important India-Nepal treaties expire : NEIGHBOURS – India Today". 
  10. ^ ab"Nepal's Economy Is Gasping as India, a Huge Neighbor, Squeezes It Hard". The New York Times. 11 April 1989. 
  11. ^ abcd"Nepal – India". 
  12. ^ ab"Economic Statecraft and Foreign Policy". 
  13. ^
  14. ^
  15. ^"The Kathmandu Post :: Papers please". 
  16. ^"RIGHTS-NEPAL: Citizenship Law Divides Nation". 
  17. ^India-Nepal water talks resume after four yearsArchived 29 September 2008 at the Wayback Machine.
  18. ^Maxwell, Daniel M. "Exchanging Power: Prospects of Nepal-India Co-operation for Hydropower Development". SSRN. SSRN 2193796. 
  19. ^"India, Nepal agree to start work on Koshi embankment". The Hindu. Chennai, India. 1 October 2008. Archived from the original on 3 November 2012. 
  20. ^"India, Nepal to consolidate mutual ties_English_Xinhua". 
  21. ^[1][dead link]
  22. ^The rise of Maoists in Nepali politics: from ‘people’s war’ to democratic politicsEast Asia Forum
  23. ^Why China's influence on Nepal worries IndiaBBC
  24. ^Benoît Hopquin. "China's Nepalese friendship road leads to the heart of India's market". the Guardian. 
  25. ^As China Squeezes Nepal, Tibetan Escape Route NarrowsTIME
  26. ^"Modi to address Nepal parliament, pray at Pashupatinath Temple". IANS. 25 July 2014. Retrieved 27 July 2014. 
  27. ^"PM Narendra Modi announces $1 billion credit to Nepal". 
  28. ^"India, Nepal sign $1 billion hydropower deal". 
  29. ^"Fully satisfied with outcome of talks with Narendra Modi: Nepal PM KP Sharma Oli", The Economic Times, 22 February 2016 
  30. ^Thapaliya, Rajan (19 May 2016). "Misunderstandings About Buddha And One Million Signatures". Retrieved 17 April 2017. 
  31. ^India, Press Trust of (19 May 2016). "International Buddhist conference begins in Nepal". Retrieved 17 April 2017 – via Business Standard. 
  32. ^"Buddha in a diplomatic jam: Nepal-China take on India over Buddhist heritage". Retrieved 17 April 2017. 
  33. ^Online., Herald Malaysia. "Buddha is Nepali: a world conference to clarify the origins of Buddhism". Retrieved 17 April 2017. 
  34. ^Sharma, Bhadra (10 March 2017). "Unrest Flares at Nepal-India Border After Fatal Shooting of Nepali". Retrieved 17 April 2017 – via 
  35. ^ ab"Defining Himalayan borders an uphill battle". 
  36. ^"The World Factbook". 
  37. ^ ab"International Boundary Consultants". 
  38. ^Territorial disputes of India and Nepal
  39. ^
  40. ^ ab"Settling border disputes with Nepal and Bangladesh". 
  41. ^ICP of India
  42. ^ ab"Indian Embassy – Embassy of India Kathmandu Nepal". 
  43. ^ abJoffres, C; Mills, E; Joffres, M; Khanna, T; Walia, H; Grund, D (2008). "Sexual slavery without borders: trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation in India". Int J Equity Health. 7: 22. doi:10.1186/1475-9276-7-22. PMC 2569945. PMID 18817576. 
  44. ^Mukherji KK, Muherjee S. Girls and women in prostitution in India. Department of Women and Child Development, New Delhi, India; 2007.
  45. ^ ab""Nepal's Stolen Children" Premieres on June 26". 
  46. ^
  47. ^
  48. ^"UN: Nepal blockade puts millions of children at risk – BBC News". BBC News. Retrieved 2015-12-25. 
  49. ^

External links[edit]

My visit to India, which begins today, has great historical significance.

Nepal is passing through a major political transition. We fought against feudal autocracy and monarchy, and for overall socio-economic transformation, for almost 60 years. At times, our movement was peaceful, and at times, violent. But the consistent goal was to abolish feudal autocracy and monarchy, and democratise the state and society. Ultimately, the major political parties — which included the Maoists and traditional parliamentary parties — reached an agreement in 2006 to overthrow the monarchy and institutionalise democracy through the Constituent Assembly (CA).

Peace, constitution and India

We succeeded in abolishing the monarchy, and ushering in a new democratic era in Nepal. We are now in the process of institutionalising achievements through the CA, accompanied by socio-economic transformation, and federal restructuring of the state. According to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), signed in November 2006, we are now trying to complete the specific task of army integration and other aspects of the peace process. We are also trying to complete the process of writing the Constitution through the CA. Only after wrapping up this entire process will these gains be institutionalised, and we will enter into a new era of democracy, change and development in Nepal.

The role of India in this process is crucial. Nepal and India share a very unique relationship. Nepal is sandwiched between two huge states of India and China. But we are virtually India-locked, as we have an open border on three sides. Most of our socio-economic interactions take place with India. Two-thirds of our annual trade is with India, while only 10 per cent is with China. Given this historic tilt towards India, our bilateral relationship is unique. When you have more interaction, you have more problems and more friction. At times, there are misgivings and misunderstandings on various issues — some are genuine, while others are born out of scepticism.

India played a positive role in the peace process in Nepal, and during our transition towards democracy. My visit, at this juncture when we are at the last stage of completing the peace process, assumes special significance. While the peace process is basically conceptualised and led by Nepali political forces, the goodwill of international forces, particularly our neighbours, is very important for its success.

Security and development

An important bilateral issue between Nepal and India is related to politics and security. Nepal virtually lies in the southern lap of the Himalayas, and shares borders with two huge states of Asia. This geopolitical reality has to be taken into account. Naturally, there would be political and security concerns of our neighbours which Nepal is committed to observe keeping in mind mutual interests. Nepal will not allow its soil to be used against the security interests of any of its neighbours. Another key issue is economic development and development of resources. In the present day world, the economy of every country is interlinked with that of others, especially neighbours. If we have to prosper, we can only prosper if we cooperate with each other. Poverty and underdevelopment in the neighbourhood will have a fallout, and hamper your own development.

India and China are developing at a fast pace. Nepal, lying between two fast-growing economies, cannot remain backward and under-developed. We will seek the cooperation of both our neighbours, especially India.

We have to find areas of economic co-operation for mutual benefit of India and Nepal. One major field is the exploitation of water resources for mutual benefit. The next is drawing in Indian investment to Nepal — we are committed to creating a conducive environment for investors and providing them security. The trade balance between our two countries has been quite skewed. Our trade deficit with India is quite huge. The import-export ratio is about 7:1, which is not sustainable. That is another area where we have to deepen our economic cooperation.

Personally, I have had the opportunity to get my education in India, and my area of interest has been economic development. I will try to utilise my relations developed over the years to enhance bilateral relations, especially designed towards maximising economic benefits for both sides.

If Nepal can develop faster, it can become a development partner for India. For India also, a more developed Nepal will be a better guarantee of its security as only with development, peace, and stability, there can be security. Security concerns cannot be treated in isolation, but must be viewed in totality. Security and economic development must be seen together.

Trust and goodwill

The visit to India is basically directed towards building a better understanding between the two countries and two peoples. In that sense, it is a goodwill visit.

My personal thrust would be to have a very free and frank discussion with my counterparts so that we can upgrade the relationship according to contemporary needs. The relations and agreements institutionalised in the 20th century may not be enough to meet the needs of the 21st century. Hence, the emphasis would be to develop our relations further, clear misgivings and misunderstandings that we have against each other, and sort out the problems left by history. When the subcontinent was colonised by the British, they left behind a legacy which has created friction among the nations of South Asia. We have to overcome that, and develop mutual relations in the changed time and context. Instead of harping on old disputes, Nepal would like to look forward, and create an atmosphere of cooperation.

There are certain political issues, which would need more discussions. We can engage on it freely and frankly, but they can be postponed for the future. The major thing is to build trust between our two countries, two governments, and two peoples. Once there is trust, and we are sensitive and empathise with each other, even the most difficult issues can be resolved amicably.

A new era

To reiterate, instead of pushing any specific agenda, I want to talk about all the issues in a friendly spirit, with the aim of conveying and understanding bilateral concerns. This will also be an opportunity to interact with those outside government, especially civil society, media, and intelligentsia. Given my long association with Delhi, I have several personal acquaintances there and look forward to renewing those relationships.

It is my strong conviction that my current visit to New Delhi will usher in a new era in our bilateral relations. Nepal is in the last phase of completing its peace process, and is about to enter a new phase of peace and development. Our new bilateral relationship, which will be based on a strong development dimension, can bring about peace and prosperity.

My dream is to have an inclusive democracy, sustainable peace and prosperity in this part of the world. Nepal will try to contribute its best to foster that relation among all the countries of South Asia. Nepal-India relations can be developed as a model of cooperation between neighbours. I am quite confident that after this visit, traditional misgivings between the different actors in Nepal and India will substantially be cleared, and a foundation for better partnership for development in the 21st century would be laid.

( H.E Dr. Baburam Bhattarai is the Prime Minister of Nepal. He arrives in New Delhi today, on his first bilateral visit after taking office.)

One thought on “India Nepal Relations Essay Definition

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *