Nepal foreign minister Shishir Khanal’s visit to New Delhi has signalled a significant reset in India-Nepal relations at a time when both countries are seeking to move beyond irritants that have periodically strained ties in recent years.
During meetings with external affairs minister S. Jaishankar and national security advisor Ajit Doval, Khanal stressed that Kathmandu carries “no old baggage” and wants to build a future-oriented partnership with India based on economic growth, connectivity, energy cooperation and people-to-people ties.
Jaishankar described India-Nepal ties as a “very special relationship” and called for a decisive shift towards deeper cooperation. The emphasis during the visit remained firmly on practical areas, such as cross-border connectivity, power trade, digital economy initiatives, investment, remittances, healthcare and infrastructure projects, reflecting a shared recognition that economic interdependence offers the strongest foundation for the next phase of bilateral relations.
The visit comes against the backdrop of the longstanding India-Nepal boundary dispute centred on the Kalapani-Lipulekh-Limpiyadhura region in the western Himalayas. The dispute stems from differing interpretations of the 1816 Treaty of Sugauli, particularly regarding the origin of the Kali river that defines the boundary between the two countries.
Nepal bases its claim on historical maps and identifies Limpiyadhura as the river’s source while India exercises effective administrative and military control over the region, citing historical records and longstanding presence, especially since 1962.
The issue gained renewed prominence in 2020 when Nepal issued a new political map incorporating Kalapani, Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura and later constitutionalised the changes. India has consistently maintained that the move was unilateral and does not alter ground realities.
Adding a new dimension to the debate is Nepal’s changing political landscape. In March, Balendra Shah, popularly known as Balen, assumed office as prime minister following a wave of youth-driven political mobilisation and elections that brought a younger, reform-oriented leadership to power in Kathmandu. The new administration has sought to balance nationalist sentiments at home with pragmatic engagement with India.
Fresh tensions emerged in April and May after India resumed a new season of the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra through Lipulekh Pass in Uttarakhand. Nepal strongly protested the move, reiterating its territorial claims and objecting to activities undertaken without its consent. Kathmandu also conveyed its concerns through diplomatic channels to India as well as China, which facilitates the Yatra to Lake Mansarovar and Mount Kailash in the Tibet Autonomous Region.
The boundary debate intensified when Shah told Nepal’s parliament that after assuming office he realised that “not only has India encroached on Nepali territory, but Nepal has also encroached on Indian territory in many places”. He called for a fact-based study of the issue and suggested obtaining British-era maps from the United Kingdom and historical records from China to better understand the boundary question.
The remarks marked a departure from Nepal’s conventional position, which has largely focused on alleged Indian encroachment. They triggered immediate criticism from Opposition parties, which questioned the implications of the statement for Nepal’s territorial claims. Subsequently, Nepal’s foreign ministry clarified that the prime minister was referring to technical and local-level issues, such as farming across no-man’s land, local occupations and changes in river courses, rather than formal territorial claims.
India responded by reiterating that boundary issues should be resolved through established bilateral mechanisms and firmly rejected any suggestion of third-party involvement. The external affairs ministry maintained that unilateral cartographic changes cannot alter the status of disputed areas and underscored the importance of direct dialogue.
Despite differences over the boundary issue, both sides have continued to signal commitment to engagement. During Khanal’s visit, discussions on border matters remained secondary to broader cooperation. Official readouts highlighted progress in economic and developmental initiatives while acknowledging the role of joint technical mechanisms in addressing outstanding boundary concerns.
Khanal also emphasised that Nepal does not seek to internationalise the dispute and believes all differences can be addressed through bilateral channels. Kathmandu has called for the revival of dormant bilateral mechanisms and more frequent high-level political engagement, indicating a preference for development-focused cooperation over contentious political narratives.
However, one issue that remains unresolved is Nepal’s participation in India’s Agniveer military recruitment scheme. Recruitment of Nepalese citizens into the Indian Army has remained stalled since August 2022, with Kathmandu maintaining that the Agniveer model is not covered under the 1947 Tripartite Agreement signed by India, Nepal and the United Kingdom.
Nepal is the only foreign country whose nationals serve in the Indian Army. Nearly 40,000 Gorkha soldiers currently serve in seven Gorkha regiments, with Nepalese and Indian Gorkhas working side by side. The regiments have earned a distinguished record in combat and have produced numerous gallantry award winners, including recipients of the Param Vir Chakra. They have also produced some of India’s most respected military leaders, including Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw, General Dalbir Singh Suhag and General Bipin Rawat.
The tradition dates back to the Anglo-Nepalese War of 1814-16 when East India Company commander Sir David Ochterlony recognised the fighting abilities of Gorkha soldiers and inducted them into the colonial army. Following India’s independence, the 1947 Tripartite Agreement divided the existing Gorkha regiments between the Indian and British armies.
Ranjit Rae, former Indian ambassador to Nepal, said the only major dispute on the boundary relates to Narsahi, Susta and the limited territory of Kalapani. “We do not accept that Lipulekh and Limpiyadhura are disputed territories. These areas have been unilaterally included in Nepalese maps and confirmed through a constitutional amendment. This issue has been revived more than 200 years after the British East India Company categorically rejected these claims in 1817, a year after the Sugauli Treaty was signed in 1816,” Rae said.
Rae added that disputes between friendly neighbours have to be resolved through negotiations and based on clear evidence. “As the new leadership of Nepal has reiterated, they do not carry the historical baggage and prejudices of the past; this is the appropriate time for foreign secretary-level discussions to begin,” he said.
However, on Agniveer, Rae emphasised on flexibility to do everything possible to retain the 200-year-old tradition with Nepal. “We should offer the same post-retirement opportunities to Nepalese recruits as we do to our own. It is important to hold bilateral discussions with Nepal on this matter,” he said.
Analysts believe that while candid political statements may occasionally complicate negotiations, they are unlikely to undermine the fundamentally close economic, cultural and people-to-people ties between India and Nepal. Both governments continue to prioritise dialogue, practical cooperation and development-oriented engagement even as the core boundary dispute awaits a mutually acceptable resolution.
Subscribe to India Today Magazine
– Ends