New Delhi: A day after India and China agreed to resume border trade at three points, Nepal formally objected claiming that they were “integral part” of the country, while India countered that such claims are “neither justified nor based on historical facts and evidence”.

On August 19, India and China had released a slew of decisions reached during Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi’s meeting with National Security Adviser Ajit Doval and external affairs minister S. Jaishankar.

One of them was that the Asian giants “agreed to the re-opening of border trade through the three designated trading points, namely Lipulekh Pass, Shipki La Pass and Nathu La Pass”.

A day later, the Nepali foreign ministry issued a statement that the country’s official map, which incorporates the three areas east of the Mahakali river, has already been included in its constitution. It said Nepal has consistently urged India “not to undertake any activities such as road construction/expansion or border trade in that area” and noted that the position had also been conveyed to China.

The ministry added that Nepal remained committed to settling the boundary question with India “through diplomatic means, based on historical treaties and agreements, facts, maps, and evidence,” while pointing to the importance of maintaining close and friendly ties between the two neighbours.

Nepal’s objection comes in the middle of the two neighbours preparing for the upcoming visit of Nepali prime minister Krishna Prasad Oli to India next month, which had been seen as a way to reset bilateral ties.

New Delhi's response

Responding to Kathmandu’s remarks, MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said New Delhi’s position on Lipulekh had been “consistent and clear.” He noted that border trade through the pass began in 1954 and has “been going on for decades,” though it was interrupted in recent years due to COVID-19 and “other developments”. The latter was a reference to the four-year-old military standoff between Indian and Chinese troops in eastern Ladakh that ended in October 2024. “Both sides have now agreed to resume it,” he said.

Jaiswal stressed that territorial claims made by Nepal were unfounded. “Our position remains that such claims are neither justified nor based on historical facts and evidence. Any unilateral artificial enlargement of territorial claims is untenable,” he said.

He added that India remained open to “constructive interaction with Nepal on resolving agreed outstanding boundary issues through dialogue and diplomacy.”

Lipulekh: Maps and protests

The Lipulekh Pass, which lies on the India-China border, has become a recurring source of dispute between New Delhi and Kathmandu only in the past decade.

Nepal first strongly objected in 2015, when India and China agreed to expand border trade through Lipulekh during prime minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Beijing. Kathmandu protested that it had not been consulted despite its claim over the territory.

Nepal again registered a protest in November 2019, when India published a new political map to show the bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir into two new Union Territories. The map showed Kalapani and Lipulekh as part of Indian territory.

In May 2020, the inauguration of a road link to Kailash-Manasarovar via Lipulekh sparked further anger in Nepal, which described the move as an “unilateral act”. Oli, who was prime minister at the time as well, responded by issuing a revised map incorporating Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani into Nepal’s official territory, a decision later endorsed by its Parliament and enshrined in the Constitution. India called the new political map an “unjustified cartographic assertion” which will “not be accepted”.

In recent years, the issue has been further complicated for Nepal by China’s position. Beijing has not only backed trade arrangements with India through Lipulekh, in 2023, it issued a map that showed the area within Indian territory, prompting Kathmandu to call on China to respect its own constitutional map.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.