Featured Nepal has twice asked India for talks on border, other than Kalapani and Susta, but it has not responded, officials say

[undercover JIX]

Nepal has twice asked India for talks on border, other than Kalapani and Susta, but it has not responded, officials say
Boundary Working Group was formed in 2014 and has been meeting every year since. Discontinuity of meetings could lead to complexities, experts say.

Anil Giri
Published at : November 10, 2020
Updated at : November 10, 2020 08:08
Kathmandu
Despite Nepal’s repeated calls to India to hold this year’s meeting of the Boundary Working Group, New Delhi has not responded, although the latest high level visit of the Indian army chief Manoj Mukund Naravane indicated that bilateral ties are heading towards normalcy.
The Boundary Working Group, a mechanism formed in 2014, has been meeting every year since its inception and is mandated to resolve boundary issues except those related to Kalapani and Susta, the two most controversial border flash points.
Officials familiar with the issue told the Post that Nepal proposed holding a meeting in October. But as there was no response from New Delhi, it has now proposed the end of November as an alternative date.
“We proposed two dates to India to hold the meeting of BWG, but we are yet to get a response. We have been waiting since August for the confirmation of dates,” an official of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told the Post on the condition of anonymity.
The meeting generally takes place in August every year.
Officials from the Ministry of Land Management, Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation, Department of Survey under it and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs take part in the meeting.
But the Ministry of Land Management is unaware of the progress regarding the dates of the talks, according to ministry spokesman Janak Raj Joshi.
“Maybe the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Department of Survey might know about it,” Joshi told the Post.
The Boundary Working Group is mandated to seek an amicable technical solution to unsettled boundary rows, including addressing border encroachment problems, reinstating missing border pillars and repairing damaged ones and clearing the no man’s land between Nepal and India, among other things.
During the same meeting in 2014, the two foreign secretaries of Nepal and India were also told to take technical inputs from BWG to resolve the boundary dispute in Kalapani and Susta.
Nepal and India have a long standing boundary dispute in Susta area in Nawalparasi district and Kalapani area in the far west which was acknowledged by both sides during the visit of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Nepal in 2014. The boundary dispute in Kalapani is well known but border dispute in Susta surfaced after Narayani River changed its course. After the river changed its course, the land that was left by the river was claimed by locals from both sides. Susta is surrounded by Indian territory on three sides, the north, south, and east, with the Naryani River to the west.
It was agreed then that issues related to the two flashpoints would be left to foreign secretaries of the two countries to handle.
Experts say any discontinuity of the group’s meeting may hold up outstanding issues and more problems could arise in the field in future.
“Any discontinuity in BWG meeting may create a void as there was earlier and if both sides fail to work in the border, it may create more complexities in the border area,” said former secretary and director general of Department of Survey Krishna BC.
After a joint technical team prepared 182-sheets of strip maps of Nepal and India in 2007 and until the formation of the Border Working Group in 2014, there had been no technical work on Nepal-India border.
“But after the formation of the BWG, a lot of progress in the field has been made,” said BC.
A ruling party leader who follows Nepal-India relations told the Post that besides boundary issues, India seems to be ready to hold other meetings.
“As conflict within the ruling party has taken a central stage, the Indian establishment may be waiting for political stability in Nepal before holding meetings related to the border issues,” said the central committee member on condition of anonymity. “When there was similar kind of internal dispute inside the party between June-August India was not keen to talk on border issues.”
One reason, according to the official of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, India has been reluctant to hold talks is because of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.
“In informal talks the Indian side has expressed reservation over the methodology of holding meetings in the height of pandemic,” said the foreign ministry official. “But we have not had anything in writing.”
There is no meaning of holding a virtual meeting as both sides need to sit together and showcase maps and work in the field across the Nepal India border, the official said.
“We offered to sit in the meeting but we failed to propose how to conduct field survey and work on either side of border in the height of the pandemic,” the official who is in touch with Indian officials said, “We also could not offer how how to hold a meeting where 12-14 officials from each side present and later needed to dispatch four different teams in the field in the midst of pandemic.”
Nepal has to table the agenda since it is hosting the meeting, but we did not offer that in detail to the Indian side, a senior foreign ministry official said.
The Boundary Working Group is also tasked with providing inputs to the foreign secretary level mechanism to resolve Susta and Kalapani issues and therefore its meeting in near future holds significance.
The meeting usually convenes around August so that both sides can dispatch respective survey teams along the border from November to April or May.
“This is our in-built system so this year too, until April, technicians from both sides were in the field before Covid-19 pandemic spread on both sides and Nepal shut down its international border,” the official said.
According to the Department of Survey, the upcoming meeting will review the work carried out in the last one year and assign the task for the coming years. But it is unaware when the meeting will be held.
“We are not familiar with the latest development on BWG,” Damodar Dhakal, spokesperson at Department of Survey, told the Post.
The group has so far had six meetings. In the last meeting held in August last year in Dehradun, India, both sides had agreed to advance boundary-related work with the use of modern technology, including international border navigation and global navigation satellite system network, continuous operating reference system , high resolution satellite imagery and drone survey.
The fifth meeting of the group held in Kathmandu in 2018 had revised the deadline to resolve all issues other than Kalapani and Susta as it was impossible to clear the boundary work by 2022, a date fixed during the fourth meeting in 2017.
“The absence in talks regarding border issues between 2007 and 2014 between had resulted in some coldness in relations and we should not invite such a situation again,” said BC the former secretary. “Therefore any discontinuity in border talks is not good. If we continue to work on the border, it will also send a positive message to the people and will ultimately contribute in strengthening the people to people relations.”

Nepal has twice asked India for talks on border, other than Kalapani and Susta, but it has not responded, officials say

Boundary Working Group was formed in 2014 and has been meeting every year since. Discontinuity of meetings could lead to complexities, experts say.

kathmandupost.com

 

[beijingwalker]

Nepal has twice asked India for talks on border, other than Kalapani and Susta, but it has not responded, officials say
Boundary Working Group was formed in 2014 and has been meeting every year since. Discontinuity of meetings could lead to complexities, experts say.

Updated at : November 10, 2020 08:08

Despite Nepal’s repeated calls to India to hold this year’s meeting of the Boundary Working Group, New Delhi has not responded, although the latest high level visit of the Indian army chief Manoj Mukund Naravane indicated that bilateral ties are heading towards normalcy.

The Boundary Working Group, a mechanism formed in 2014, has been meeting every year since its inception and is mandated to resolve boundary issues except those related to Kalapani and Susta, the two most controversial border flash points.

Officials familiar with the issue told the Post that Nepal proposed holding a meeting in October. But as there was no response from New Delhi, it has now proposed the end of November as an alternative date.

“We proposed two dates to India to hold the meeting of BWG, but we are yet to get a response. We have been waiting since August for the confirmation of dates,” an official of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told the Post on the condition of anonymity.

The meeting generally takes place in August every year.

Officials from the Ministry of Land Management, Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation, Department of Survey under it and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs take part in the meeting.

But the Ministry of Land Management is unaware of the progress regarding the dates of the talks, according to ministry spokesman Janak Raj Joshi.

“Maybe the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Department of Survey might know about it,” Joshi told the Post.

The Boundary Working Group is mandated to seek an amicable technical solution to unsettled boundary rows, including addressing border encroachment problems, reinstating missing border pillars and repairing damaged ones and clearing the no man’s land between Nepal and India, among other things.

During the same meeting in 2014, the two foreign secretaries of Nepal and India were also told to take technical inputs from BWG to resolve the boundary dispute in Kalapani and Susta.

Nepal and India have a long standing boundary dispute in Susta area in Nawalparasi district and Kalapani area in the far west which was acknowledged by both sides during the visit of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to Nepal in 2014. The boundary dispute in Kalapani is well known but border dispute in Susta surfaced after Narayani River changed its course. After the river changed its course, the land that was left by the river was claimed by locals from both sides. Susta is surrounded by Indian territory on three sides, the north, south, and east, with the Naryani River to the west.

It was agreed then that issues related to the two flashpoints would be left to foreign secretaries of the two countries to handle.

Experts say any discontinuity of the group’s meeting may hold up outstanding issues and more problems could arise in the field in future.

“Any discontinuity in BWG meeting may create a void as there was earlier and if both sides fail to work in the border, it may create more complexities in the border area,” said former secretary and director general of Department of Survey Krishna BC.

After a joint technical team prepared 182-sheets of strip maps of Nepal and India in 2007 and until the formation of the Border Working Group in 2014, there had been no technical work on Nepal-India border.

“But after the formation of the BWG, a lot of progress in the field has been made,” said BC.

A ruling party leader who follows Nepal-India relations told the Post that besides boundary issues, India seems to be ready to hold other meetings.

“As conflict within the ruling party has taken a central stage, the Indian establishment may be waiting for political stability in Nepal before holding meetings related to the border issues,” said the central committee member on condition of anonymity. “When there was similar kind of internal dispute inside the party between June-August India was not keen to talk on border issues.”

One reason, according to the official of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, India has been reluctant to hold talks is because of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.

“In informal talks the Indian side has expressed reservation over the methodology of holding meetings in the height of pandemic,” said the foreign ministry official. “But we have not had anything in writing.”

There is no meaning of holding a virtual meeting as both sides need to sit together and showcase maps and work in the field across the Nepal India border, the official said.

“We offered to sit in the meeting but we failed to propose how to conduct field survey and work on either side of border in the height of the pandemic,” the official who is in touch with Indian officials said, “We also could not offer how how to hold a meeting where 12-14 officials from each side present and later needed to dispatch four different teams in the field in the midst of pandemic.”

Nepal has to table the agenda since it is hosting the meeting, but we did not offer that in detail to the Indian side, a senior foreign ministry official said.

The Boundary Working Group is also tasked with providing inputs to the foreign secretary level mechanism to resolve Susta and Kalapani issues and therefore its meeting in near future holds significance.

The meeting usually convenes around August so that both sides can dispatch respective survey teams along the border from November to April or May.

“This is our in-built system so this year too, until April, technicians from both sides were in the field before Covid-19 pandemic spread on both sides and Nepal shut down its international border,” the official said.

According to the Department of Survey, the upcoming meeting will review the work carried out in the last one year and assign the task for the coming years. But it is unaware when the meeting will be held.

“We are not familiar with the latest development on BWG,” Damodar Dhakal, spokesperson at Department of Survey, told the Post.

The group has so far had six meetings. In the last meeting held in August last year in Dehradun, India, both sides had agreed to advance boundary-related work with the use of modern technology, including international border navigation and global navigation satellite system network, continuous operating reference system , high resolution satellite imagery and drone survey.

The fifth meeting of the group held in Kathmandu in 2018 had revised the deadline to resolve all issues other than Kalapani and Susta as it was impossible to clear the boundary work by 2022, a date fixed during the fourth meeting in 2017.

“The absence in talks regarding border issues between 2007 and 2014 between had resulted in some coldness in relations and we should not invite such a situation again,” said BC the former secretary. “Therefore any discontinuity in border talks is not good. If we continue to work on the border, it will also send a positive message to the people and will ultimately contribute in strengthening the people to people relations.”

Nepal has twice asked India for talks on border, other than Kalapani and Susta, but it has not responded, officials say

Boundary Working Group was formed in 2014 and has been meeting every year since. Discontinuity of meetings could lead to complexities, experts say.

kathmandupost.com

 

[Protest_again]

Timely shot in the arm for India-Nepal ties

The civilisational closeness between India and Nepal has many positives but comes with its own challenges. A critical one is identity politics with anti-India positioning by the political leaders. Playing of the China card vis-a-vis India has also been part of the Nepali political playbook. With a large proportion of its population overseas, Nepal has seen globalisation giving rise to a feeling of expanded options, especially beyond India, its biggest economic and societal partner.

Posted: Nov 10, 2020 06:26 AM Updated: 16 hours ago

BILATERAL BOOST: Army Chief General Naravane’s visit to Nepal has shown that both countries are interested in finding a way to resume regular exchanges.
Manjeev Puri
Former Ambassador to Nepal

ARMY Chief General Manoj Mukund Naravane’s recent visit to Nepal was the first formal high-level tour from India to the neighbouring country in nearly a year. While the Covid-19 pandemic played a role in this prolonged ‘social distancing’, political actions by Nepal in the foregone months had contributed to the ‘chill’.
India-Nepal ties are characterised by a roti-beti relationship and institutional bonds, including an open border. Of special value are the linkages between the Indian Army and the Nepal Army, which is a key national institution in Nepal. The visit of the Army Chief was part of the long-standing and customary friendship between the Indian and Nepal armies and allowed for renewing these strong bonds.
India-Nepal Army ties are epitomised by a unique tradition of conferment of the honorary rank of General to each other’s Chiefs. All Indian Army Chiefs have been so honoured except General JJ Singh, whose tenure coincided with turbulent times in Nepal and the abolition of monarchy. General Naravane received his insignias from the President of Nepal during the visit.

He also called on Nepal’s Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, who is also the country’s Defence Minister. Furthermore, he addressed the Nepal Army Command and Staff College and did the ceremonial honours by laying a wreath at Bir Smarak.

Cooperation between the two armies encompasses nearly all facets of military activity. Indian equipment is widely in use in the Nepal Army with further assistance being provided in its modernisation efforts. Indian training facilities are regularly made available to the Nepalis along with holding of joint military exercises, assistance in times of disasters, participating in adventure activities and hosting bilateral visits. Officers from the Nepal Army attend training courses in Indian Army institutions. including the prestigious NDC course which was also attended some years back by the present Chief of the Nepal Army, General Purna Chandra Thapa. The Indo-Nepal battalion-level joint military exercise Surya Kiran is conducted alternately in India and Nepal. The 14th Surya Kiran exercise was held in December 2019 in Nepal.

During his visit, General Naravane gifted medical equipment for two field hospitals of the Nepali Army. The equipment included X-ray machines, computed radiography systems, ICU ventilators, video endoscopy units, anaesthesia machines, laboratory equipment and ambulances. He also gifted additional ventilators to the Nepal Army as Covid-related assistance. Earlier in July, the Indian Army had provided ventilators to the Nepal Army. Since the pandemic started, the Government of India has provided about 25 tonnes of essential medicines, medical supplies and equipment.

Another unique feature of the India-Nepal defence cooperation are the Gorkha regiments of the Indian Army that are raised also by recruitment from Nepal. Currently, about 32,000 Gorkha soldiers from Nepal are serving in the Indian Army. Moreover, an estimated 2 lakh veterans of the Indian Army are settled in Nepal and receive their pensions from the Indian embassy in Kathmandu and its two pension paying offices in Pokhara and Dharan. There are also 22 District Soldier Boards in Nepal which cater to the welfare needs of ex-Gorkha soldiers and their families. Interestingly, Nepalis serve as officers in the Indian Army going through the same recruitment process as is the case for Indian citizens. A most interesting case in recent years is that of a Nepali family where one brother rose to the rank of Lieutenant General in the Nepal Army while another served as Major General in the Indian Army.

The civilisational closeness between India and Nepal has many positives but also comes with its own challenges. A critical one is identity politics in Nepal with anti-India positioning being resorted to by political leaders of all persuasions. Playing of the China card vis-a-vis India has also been part of the Nepali political playbook. In recent years, with a large proportion of its population overseas (and not just in India), Nepal has benefitted from huge remittance inflows and experienced globalisation giving rise to a feeling of expanded options, especially beyond India, by far the biggest economic and societal partner of Nepal.

In 2018, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and the Nepal Communist Party came to power riding the crest of shrill nationalism with a clear anti-India undertone. However, as 2020 unfolded and the world grappled with Covid, factional coalition dharmas within the party started coming apart and whipping up anti-India sentiment, as usual, became the stratagem of choice for the Prime Minister to hold on to his position.This manifested itself in the release of a new map of Nepal that egregiously included Indian territories in Uttarakhand. Adding fuel to the fire were verbal articulations in Nepal at the highest-level targeting India.

All in all, Nepalese actions could only be interpreted as pokes in the eye for India. They were also alienating their best friends, the people of India. At the government level, there was little option but to allow some ‘cooling’. However, in the past few months, since August 15, when the Nepali PM called Prime Minister Modi and offered good wishes on India’s Independence Day and followed it up with a Dasehra greeting, with a card showing a map of Nepal without the recently claimed territories, the augury appears positive.

Nepal’s gesture to invite the Indian Army Chief and India’s decision to accept the invitation indicate mutual interest in finding a way to resume regular exchanges. In the extant circumstances, the visit of the Army Chief was bound to and did receive an unusual level of media attention in both countries (as did an informal visit by the R&AW Chief last month). It is good that the visit has been widely welcomed in Nepal. Hopefully, it will pave the way for more frequent higher-level engagements between India and Nepal soon. India-Nepal ties are such that there should be no distancing between the two countries.

 

[vi-va]

Frankly speaking, the Kingdom of Sikkim is the first target, Bhutan is the next one in India's plan. Nepal is the third.

Kingdom of Sikkim is too weak to protect herself.

While Bhutan is a little better, as long as China deterrence exist, India will hesitate. The very existence of Bhutan depends on China's deterrence. Even though, Bhutan relies on India for energy import.

India cut Nepal energy right after catastrophe - 2015_Nepal_earthquake. So what India want from Nepal?

India want to control all those smaller countries, and exhaust Pakistan. After that India will turn their gun against Bangladesh.

What India want is hegemony in Indian subcontinent. So called Chanakya military doctrine(Actually Chanakya played no role in 99.9% India history). India also inherited British geopolitical strategy, which is take advantage of others as long as they can.

The funny part is, India media 24*7 play victim cards for domestic consumption. That's why almost no India politicians can be rational.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Frankly speaking, the Kingdom of Sikkim is the first target, Bhutan is the next one in India's plan. Nepal is the third.

Kingdom of Sikkim is too weak to protect herself.

While Bhutan is a little better, as long as China deterrence exist, India will hesitate. The very existence of Bhutan depends on China's deterrence. Even though, Bhutan relies on India for energy import.

India cut Nepal energy right after catastrophe - 2015_Nepal_earthquake. So what India want from Nepal?

India want to control all those smaller countries, and exhaust Pakistan. After that India will turn their gun against Bangladesh.

What India want is hegemony in Indian subcontinent. So called Chanakya military doctrine(Actually Chanakya played no role in 99.9% India history). India also inherited British geopolitical strategy, which is take advantage of others as long as they can.

The funny part is, India media 24*7 play victim cards for domestic consumption. That's why almost no India politicians can be rational.

India cares about close ties with Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand and Singapore.

Bangladesh, like Pakistan, is firmly in Chinese camp.

 

[vi-va]

India cares about close ties with Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand and Singapore.

Bangladesh, like Pakistan, is firmly in Chinese camp.

India cut Nepal energy right after catastrophe - 2015_Nepal_earthquake. So what India want from Nepal?

No matter India care or not, India is incapable of doing anything significant. India has little trade with Pakistan and Bangladesh, little trade with ASEAN.
The so called ties with other countries just some hot air.
Oh, India just quit from RCEP.
Lame duck is lame duck.

 

[rott]

@vi-va, I have a feeling we will not do a thing even if India wants to absorb Bhutan. But this won't be the same with Nepal. Nepal will ask for Chinese assistance.

 

[vi-va]

@vi-va, I have a feeling we will not do a thing even if India wants to absorb Bhutan. But this won't be the same with Nepal. Nepal will ask for Chinese assistance.

We will definitely push India back off and we have the capability and strong will. Here is my analysis.

1. Bhutan is Buddhism instead of Hinduism. Bhutan is a buffer on the border which benefit us a lot because the buffer is on the other side of Himalayas.
2. If China sit still and just watch, we can get something from India in return, but it will cost us an arm and leg for the long run.
3. Once India absorbed Bhutan, China will have to deploy more troops along the South Tibet border.
4. Yadong(亚东) will be surrounded by 3 fronts. We will lose Yadong sooner or later(favor India Militarily).
5. Yadong(亚东) is the only place China reached out across the Himalayas on India side.
6. Northeast of India is yellow race, divided by chicken neck. Once India get into turmoil in future, Northeast will be one of the place separated from India. Yadong is the place to cut.
7. Last but not least. Other countries in Indian subcontinent are watching. If China sit still and just watch, they will obey India no matter what because there is no other country to balance India. India will gain hegemon in subcontinent. We can't let this happen.

China is the balancer of India in subcontinent. Other countries bet on us. Such as Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives, of course our strongest and time honored strategic ally - Pakistan.

China has no appetite to appease India. We must stand taller and speaker louder than India, keep the pressure on India.

Modi can boast 56" chest, but his achievement will be very limited. India's social problem is structural, can't compete with China at all. India need Chairman Mao, but India soil can NOT produce Chairman Mao in 1000 years.

India is lame duck. We will beat India back to where they come from, and defend Bhutan independence no matter the cost.

 

[Nityam]

The Five Fingers of Tibet (Chinese: 西藏的五指) is a Chinese foreign policy attributed to Mao Zedong that considers Tibet to be China's right hand palm, with five fingers on its periphery: Ladakh, Nepal, Sikkim, Bhutan, and Arunachal Pradesh, and that it is China's responsibility to "liberate" these regions.

Five Fingers of Tibet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

.