Astha Pandey/VOIWORLD
India categorically dismissed Nepal’s recent assertion over sovereignty of the Lipulekh region, describing the claim as “not justified “ as it lacks historical evidence and justification.
This response is the latest episode, where two countries have bilateral treaties, with clearly defined borders rooted in colonial-era arrangements.
The dispute centers on Lipulekh, at the India-Nepal-China trijunction makes it strategically vital for security, trade, and pilgrimage routes to Mount Kailash.
The border disagreement traces back to the Sugauli Treaty of 1816 between Nepal and the British East India Company. That treaty designated the Kali River as the western border of Nepal but it did not specify the river’s precise source of origin or included any detailed maps for reference.
Nepal asserts that the Kali River’s origin is at Limpiyadhura therefore, areas such as Limpiyadhura, Kalapani, and Lipulekh rightfully belong to Nepal. This stance draws on a selection of old maps and historic records supporting Nepal’s territorial view.
India argues that the river begins further southeast, meaning the disputed region falls within its established borders. Indian authorities emphasize their historic and current administrative presence in the area, as well as trade with China through Lipulekh dating back to the 1950s.
In 2015, India and China agreed to expand trade via the Lipulekh Pass, Nepal raised objections. Later in 2020, Nepal released a new political map approved by parliament, officially incorporating Limpiyadhura, Kalapani, and Lipulekh as Nepalese territory.
The border issue has created diplomatic tensions in recent weeks, though both sides have indicated a willingness to engage in discussions to resolve differences peacefully. Analysts note that the Lipulekh region is strategically important due to its proximity to China and its role in regional trade routes.
The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) categorically rejected Nepal’s claim, pointing out any border claim should be grounded in established facts and mutual understanding.
India reaffirms its long-standing administration and infrastructure development in the Lipulekh region, while it is open to diplomatic discussions.
The Lipulekh dispute highlights the challenges of interpreting colonial-era treaties in South Asia. India rejects Nepal’s claim based on historical precedent, while Nepal cites alternative interpretations and national sentiment, showing that boundary issues remain sensitive despite close ties.
