Nepal-India Open Border: Prospects, Problems and Challenges


The Evolution of Nepal's International Boundary with China and India

Like most of the countries of the world, the existence of Nepal had been recognised even before the international boundaries had been fully and finally established. Mention of Nepal is found in the ancient history of both China and India. The Nepal-China boundary is as old as the history of the two countries, but in contrast to the very ancient cultural, social, political and economic relation, Nepal-India boundary has a comparatively recent origin and its present boundary demarcation and delimitation took place after the Anglo-Nepal War of 1814-16. In contrast to Nepal's boundary with India on three sides: west, south and east, the boundary between Nepal and China lies in the north only. However,. demarcation of Nepal China boundary had been problem in the past, because more than 90 percent of the frontiers run through high altitudes with rocks and snow, glaciers and ice fields which are entirely uninhabited. Both the countries had and have respected the existing traditional and customary boundary line and lived in amity. There existed no remarkable and noticeable territorial dispute between Nepal and China. The few territorial disputes that existed were on rival claims for the settlements of Kimathanka in the Sankhuwasabha and Taplejung districts, the area adjoining the border of Rasuwa, and Nara Nagla of Humla district with origin of dispute dating back to 1815, 1818 and 1834 respectively (Nepali, 1964:1).:These disputes were resolved by the Nepal-China Joint Boundary Commission on October 5, 1961.

The ruggedness of the Nepal-China boundary is clearly revealed by its length which is 1415 kilometres, while Nepal-India boundary which runs along three sides of Nepal is only 1580 kilometers, 165 kilometers longer than Nepal-China boundary. The 1415 kilometre length of the Nepal China boundary is based on measurement on the maps. If the actual measurement is made on the ground along the slopes and ridges of the mountains, the length of the boundary will be more than that indicated by the measurement in the maps. As for Nepal India boundary is concerned, the mountainous portions of the boundary lie in Sikkim State and Darjeeling district of West Bengal State in the east, while rest of the boundary runs along the plains in the south and along the Mahakali River in the west.

Delineation of Nepal China Boundary and Problem and Solution of Demarcation

The border areas between Nepal and China represent one of the least known areas of the world. The first regular survey of entire Nepal was conducted by the Survey of India in 1926-27 and that resulted in the actual demarcation of Nepal-India boundary with 10 yard no-man's land on either side of the land boundary. However, the demarcation of Nepal-China boundary was made through a survey from a much lower altitude. The topographical survey of 1956-58, which covered the whole area of Nepal, was also conducted by the Survey of India. But this survey also could not properly delineate the boundary between Nepal and China because of the lack of proper and sophisticated instruments and equipment as well as the trained personnel to conduct survey in the high altitudes and rugged terrain. Because of the strategic importance of the Himalayas and boundary dispute between India and China as early as 1950, when India insisted on Mc Mahon line as Sino-Indian boundary while China, rejected it (See annex 4 and Foreign Language Press, 1973:1-33). India did not provide topographical maps for a large section of the Nepal Himalayas as the aerial photographs of these regions had been damaged. When the boundary talk between Nepal and China was initiated for the March 21, 1960 Boundary Agreement, its basis was the maps submitted by both countries. However, these maps were not based on proper surveys. The boundaries were drawn on sketch maps, or represented simply by a boundary line on plain paper or cloth. In order to solve the dispute resulting from such unscientific maps, the Joint Boundary Commission was constituted to survey the entire length of Nepal-China boundary as well as to resolve the territorial dispute through on-the-spot visit and assessment of the problem.

The acceptance of traditional customary boundary by both sides was the major reason behind arriving at a border agreement as early as October 5, 1961. When Nepal and China established friendly relations for the first time on January 17, 1958, which was several years after the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, and also several years after the installation of democracy in Nepal in 1951. In the Agreement to Maintain Friendly Relations between the People's Republic of China and the Kingdom of Nepal and on trade between the Tibetan Autonomous Region of China and Nepal specially accepted the customary movement of people and goods along the border (Foreign Language Press, 1960:1-6).

It is to be noted that the survey for the delineation of the Nepal-China boundary in 1960-61 had to be carried out with several constraints. Firstly, the survey had to be carried out from lower altitude and there was no aerial survey. Secondly, the instruments and equipment for the survey, manpower as well as proper training for high altitude survey was completely lacking. Moreover, in the absence of on-the-spot survey of high altitude areas, the drawing of the boundary line through the survey was done by recording actual location of important peaks and then drawing boundary line tentatively between the two surveyed peaks. This is the main reason behind the change in position and alignment of Nepal-China boundary between 1961 and 1982 as well as change in the total length of boundary between 1961 and 1982. A glance at the maps of 1961 and 1982 show a major change in Humla and Mustang. The 1982 boundary maps had been prepared through ground survey on higher altitude than in 1961 and was supported by aerial survey and satellite imageries. As compared to 1961, the length of Nepal-China boundary in 1982 increased to 303 kilometres and the area has increased by 1.876 sq. km. for Nepal.

The Nepal-China border extends along the whole length of northern border of Nepal and the starting and ending point of Nepal-China boundary is the tri-junction of the boundary between Nepal, China and India. However, because of the Sino-Indian boundary dispute as well as Nepal-India dispute over the Kalapani on the source of the Mahakali River, the demarcation started 5 kilometers ahead of the tri-junction in the west and 5 kilometres behind the tri-junction in the east. There is no man-made boundary demarcation on land as indicated in the boundary treaty maps except the boundary pillars. Along the whole length of the Nepal China boundary, there are 79 boundary pillars only as against more than 1000 boundary pillars along Nepal India border with 10 yards no-man land no either side of the Nepal India boundary. Under the protocol signed and exchanged between Nepal and China on January 20,1963, the contracting parties agreed to maintain and adopt necessary measures to prevent the removal, damage or destruction of boundary pillars as far as possible, to prevent the boundary rivers from changing their course and to make a joint inspection of the entire boundary every five years. Accordingly, in 1979 a new agreement was signed between two countries after detailed mapping and demarcation of the boundary.

The Entry and Exit Points along the Nepal China Boundary

The Nepal-China border is almost marked by absence of settlement on either side. The number of settlements along the proximity of border is 10 in Nepal and 18 in China. The border settlements in Nepal are located in the districts of Humla, Rasuwa, Sindhupalchok, Dolakha and Sankhuwasabha, and the settlement on the other side of these districts also are located on Chinese side. Gorkha district has no border settlement, but has two settlements across its border with China.

One notable feature of Nepal-China boundary is the complete absence of border check posts, except at the Kodari border. Most of the border check posts are located at a distance of more than one day's walk from the actual border on either side. The movement of the border people living within a distance of 30 kilometres on either side of the border has been regulated with the provision of multiple entry permits. However, this provision has not been able to serve the need and purpose of the border people who wish to seek trade or visit relatives on the other side. Most of the places intended for visit for trade and social relations lie far ahead of the limit of 30 kilometres. In order to tackle this problem, the Agreement on Trade, Intercourse and Related Questions between Nepal and Tibetan Autonomous region of China was concluded on 2nd May 1966, and renewed for the third time on 2nd May 1986. In the revised agreement, it was emphasised on identifying area of movement and fixing of the exact settlements rather than the 30-kilometre distance on either side. However, the survey for the identification of the specified locations of movement for the border people has not yet been initiated.

It is to be noted that in 7 November 1950, on the basis of the letter from India's ambassador to China, India's Home Minister Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in his letter to Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru stated that Chinese Government has declined to accept the boundary treaty entered between India and Tibet in 1914, and the McMahon line demarcated as the boundary between India and China in the North Eastern Frontier of India between Bhutan and Burma (Day, 1982:252-56 and also see Appendix IV). He emphasised the need of controlling the bordering countries like Nepal, Sikkim and Bhutan as well as the India's northern areas bordering China. The main purpose of India's motive behind imposing Nepal of the 1950 treaty has been guided by this concern. On the basis of this motive, during the period of Prime Minister Matrika Prasad Koirala, India sent Military mission and the Indian army were posted in the Nepal China border check-posts, which were removed during the period of Prime Minister Kirtinidhi Bista.

The Delineation and Demarcation of Nepal India Boundary

Prior to the establishment of the domination of India by the British East India Company, both Nepal and India were divided into petty kingdoms and principalities. As such there exist very little information regarding the extent of border between Nepal and India as well as the border disputes. The British East India Company had already started the colonisation, expansion and consolidation of Indian states and principalities through invasion, and was intending to invade Nepal after the death of King Prithvinarayan Shah. The plea for invading Nepal was their false claim over the control of Butawal, which in reality belonged to Nepal. The Anglo-Nepal War of 1814 and the subsequent treaty of peace signed between Nepal and the East India Company on December 8, 1816 resulted in the delimitation and delineation of Nepal-India border. The Mahakali River formed the western boundary, while the Mechi formed the boundary in the east along with the ridges in the Darjeeling hills and Sikkim. Accordingly, Nepal has to forsake the areas lying to the west of the Mahakali River and the areas lying to the east of the Mechi River along with the return of the territory of the Rajah of Sikkim occupied by Nepal. The East India Company delineated and demarcated the southern boundary on its own. But for the Tarai region lying between the Mahakali River and the Arrah Nala, which was ceded to the British India in 1816, no demarcation was made. Moreover as almost entire western Tarai was covered with dense forests and at the same time there was no physical basis to discern the northern limit of Tarai. Nepal and India had a dispute over this ill-defined and ill-demarcated boundary. Prime Minister Jung Bahadur spent the last two decades of his rule in solving these problems. In his lifetime he settled all the problems affecting the boundary between Nepal and India, because he was apprehensive that in the future they might lead to friction between the two states (Husain, 1970:108). Drawing a straight line between the two pillars was made for the demarcation of the border in the forest areas, while demarcation in the cultivated land was made on the basis of village boundaries on the principle of mutual give and take The major disputes and problems arose in the case of river boundary due to the erratic changes in the river courses in the Tarai region. In recognition of assistance of Nepalese army in quelling the 1857 mutiny in Lucknow, and for retroceding the western Tarai to Nepal, which was ceded to India by the Treaty of 1816, in February 1860 the Boundary Commissions of the two Governments met in North Oudh at Bhagura Tal to start their work to survey and demarcate the boundary. After the completion of the survey and demarcation, the King of Nepal and the British Resident signed a formal treaty on November 1, 1860. Even after that, the dispute over the river boundary between Mondia Ghat to Bunbasa along the Mahakali (Sharada) river arose immediately after the treaty and was resolved in December 1864. Nepal made the claim over the Dudhawa Range up to the foot of the hills, while the British insisted on watershed of the Range forming the boundary and the area along the Southern slopes of the watershed belonging to India. The agreement endorsing the claim of Nepal was ratified on June 7, 1875 (Tyagi, 1974:88-98). For the Nepalese territory of 2800 acres ceded to India for the construction of the Sharada Barrage in the early 1900s, a total of 4000 acres in Taratal area to the south of Bardia district was given to Nepal. Later on the survey and review of the territory ceded to India by Nepal revealed that an excess of 31 acres had gone to India. India had agreed to compensate that area, but has not yet been materialised.

The actual scientific demarcation of Nepal-India boundary started during the topographical survey of entire Nepal carried out by the Survey of India in 1926-27. As the survey was carried out from the lower altitudes in the mountain areas in the north, it failed to delineate the Nepal-China boundary in the north. This survey produced topographical maps for entire Nepal indicating Nepal-India boundary and the location and number of each boundary pillar along with topographical details of the Indian side in the maps as well. The scale of the topographical maps was 1 inch to 4 miles. The topographical survey of 1955-58 conducted again by the Survey of India providing more detailed survey of Nepal both through aerial and ground surveys and resulted in the publication of maps to the scale of 1 inch to a mile. This map also indicated the boundary line and boundary pillars with their respective numbers. However, the Indian territory across Nepal-India boundary was left blank. One notable fact about the topographical maps of Nepal and Bhutan is that the Surveyor General of both was Brigadier General Gambir Singh and in the case of the topographical maps of Bhutan, the details across the India Bhutan border on both sides has been shown.

Under the Sugauli Treaty, Nepal withdrew from all the territory it had occupied in Sikkim and Nepal had no formal treaty with Sikkim regarding Nepal Sikkim boundary. The British East India Company under the Treaty of Titaliya on 10 February 1871 with the Government of Sikkim restored the territory ceded by Nepal. A Sunnud dated 7 April 1817 regarding the granting of the territory to the Rajah of Sikkim stated:

"The honourable East India Company, in consideration of the services performed by the Hill tribes under the control of the Rajah of Sikkim, and of the attachment shown to him to the interest of the British Government, grants to the Sikkimputtee Rajah, his heirs and successors all that portion of low land situated eastward of the Meitchie River, and westward of the Maha Nuddee, formerly Possessed by the Rajah of Nepaul, but ceded to the Honourable East India Company by the Treaty of Segoulee, to be held by the Sikkimputtee Rajah as a feudatory, or as acknowledging the supremacy of the British Government over the said lands, subject to the following conditions."

Moreover, there has not been any formal treaty between Nepal and India after the independence of India, and even after the annexation of Sikkim with India in 1975. It is to be noted that Nepal has not yet formally recognised the annexation of Sikkim by India.and at the same time India has not sought recognition from Nepal.

Before the independence of India, there existed a system of regular survey and supervision of Nepal India boundary jointly conducted by officials of the both countries every year to oversee and find out any case of encroachment in the boundary, ill-defined boundary, missing and broken as well as displaced boundary pillars with the objective to fix and place them in their original position. Accordingly, Nepal has been assigned to look after the pillars having odd number and India to look after having even number. After the independence of India, there was no joint boundary survey until the formation of Joint Boundary Commission in 1981 with the composition of six boundary survey teams. The delay in the formation of joint boundary commission resulted in several cases of boundary dispute, which has not yet been fully resolved, because the activities of the commission going on in a very slow pace. There is provision of two meetings of the Joint Boundary Commission every year. Up to 1999, 18 years has been elapsed since the formation of the Commission in 1981 and accordingly, there should have been 36 meetings, but so far only 22 meetings had beesn convened (Shrestha, 2000:168). Boundary survey of almost all the districts bordering India has been completed except for Darchula, Dadeldhura and Kanchanpur as well as the border with Sikkim state of India. Moreover, there have been several cases of encroachment and tampering with the boundary markers and damage, destruction and removal of boundary pillars in the areas already surveyed by the joint boundary teams. As a result there exist several cases of boundary disputes and resulting claims and counter claims. There are said to have 8 disputed areas along the Nepal India border with a total of six along the rivers of the Mahakali, the Narayani/Gandak (Susta) and the Mechi and the other two are in Pasupatinagar and Thori. There are several areas along the Nepal India border where no man land have been encroached on both sides.. According to Mr. Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, the ex-Director General of the Department of Survey of Nepal, there are 53 disputed and encroached areas along the Nepal India boundary. However, the All Nepal Free Student Union affiliated with the Nepal Communist Party (Marxist and Leninist) indicated 61 disputed areas along the Nepal India boundary. Out of the 26 districts of Nepal bordering India, the map indicated 22 districts having encroachment(problem) and the only 4 remaining districts indicating no boundary problem are Baitadi, Bara, Mahottari and Dhanusha. The map also indicated boundary problems in the districts bordering Sikkim State of India.

The Nepal India Open Border

Before the signing of the Sugauli Treaty between Nepal and India and subsequent demarcation of the Nepal India boundary, there existed free and unrestricted movement of people of Nepal and India across the border. It was almost impossible to control and regulate the movement of people along more than 1400 kilometres long border. Nevertheless, there existed main thoroughfare for social relations, cultural exchanges (pilgrimages, festivities, fairs, etc.) and trade and commerce and they constituted the major road junctions and places for levying customs duties. Nepal-India border is unique in the world in the sense that people of both the countries can cross it from any point despite the existence of border check posts at several locations. The number of check posts meant for carrying out bilateral trade are 22 and however, only six transit points out of them, the movement of nationals of third countries who require entry and exit visa permitted to cross the border. As the whole length of the border except the check posts, is not patrolled by police or paramilitary or military forces of either country, illegal movement of goods and people is a common feature on both sides of the India-Nepal border.

It is not known how the system of free movement of people on either side of the border continued even after the delineation and demarcation of Nepal-India border after 1816. Prior to the 1814 war, movement of people of both countries was allowed, but they were not allowed to purchase land and settle in the Tarai. Nevertheless, Nepal has been the land of shelter for the refugees fleeing due to the fear from powerful enemies. The Lichhavis, the Mallas and the Shakyas who existed before the birth of the Buddha, took refugee in the Tarai and the Valleys of the Himalayas when their lands were occupied by Ajatasatru. Similarly, during the Muslim invasions of India, the Mallas and the Shahs were said to have taken refugee in Nepal. The growing domination of the British East India Company in India prompted the rulers of Nepal to restrict the movement of Indians into Nepal. Moreover, the Tarai could not be brought under cultivation through immigrants from India, because they were neither permitted to purchase land nor entitled to have tenancy rights. Thus the large tracts of the Tarai were covered by dense forests and infested with malaria. The cattle herders of adjoining Indian territories of Champaran and other districts used to graze cattle annually for four months (October to January) by paying duty. Duty was levied on buffaloes and the cows were exemp ted from the levy (Kirkpatrick, 1801:83). Similarly, the agreement on Dudhawa Range specially preserved the right of the Indian nationals to come to the hills for banks (a type of grass) by paying revenue. Prior to 1789, the Nepal Government established bazaars on the border of Nepal and India for regulating trade and decided that trade could be conducted at these points only. This hampered the freedom of trade, as the British (Indian) merchants had to cross the Nepalese in the bazaars, and return with whatever they could not sell. Anyone entering Nepal particularly the Kathmandu Valley and other places in the Tarai in general, prior to the restoration of Oudh Tarai to Nepal in 1860, had to get rahadani or visa from the district governor. This was relaxed during the festival of Shivaratri and after the festival the combing up operation to expel all those who had come to attend the festival. This system continued even after the insttallation of democracy in 1951 until the opening of the Tribhuvan Rajpath in late 1950s.

The Treaty of 1860 and the Nepal India Open Border

In recognition of the supply of Nepalese army at the disposal of the British East India Company to quell the Sepoy Mutiny, the Treaty of 1 November 1860 signed between India and Nepal restored the territory ceded to India by by the 1816 Treaty of Suguali. Prime Minister Jung Bahadur tried to develop the Far Western Tarai restored to Nepal by the British as his family property. In order to develop it he made provision in the first legal code of the country formulated during his time, in which the foreigners were entitled to purchase and sell land in the Tarai. He even invited the businessmen, traders and the landlords from India.. This led to the large scale immigration of the Indian into the Tarai for reclamation of forests for agriculture and for trade and commerce. In the eastern Tarai Yadav community exploited this opportunity and their significant number is the instance in point. There were also some of them settling over these places before that. Moreover, in the historical past after the draining away of the Kathmandu Valley lake, some of the cow herders from the south settled in Nepal and said to have established the Gopalbanshi Dynasty. Before the conquest of the Kathmandu Valley by King Prithvinarayan Shah, the culture and economy of the Valley was so rich that it not only attracted people from outside, but it also assumed the role of melting pot, wherein the in-migrants to the valley coming both from the south and north adopted the Newari culture and language.

The British Government kept the Nepal-India border open primarily for two purposes. The first was to maintain unrestricted migration of the Nepalese hill people to India and to secure them for recruitment in the Indian army. The recruitment of the Nepalese in British army was very difficult up to the period of Prime Minister Ranodip Singh, because Nepal Government was in principle against the recruitment of its people in a foreign army. The clandestine and secret operations adopted by the British to get Nepalese hill people in the Indian army were disliked by the Nepalese government who took strong measures to discourage it. Some of the Gorkhas serving in Indian army on their return home on leave were even put to death and property of those serving the Indian army was confiscated (Mojumdar, 1973:42-3). Sensing the harassment, meted to families of the Gorkhas in the Indian army by the Nepalese government and to make the recruitment easier, the British Government encouraged migration of the Gorkhas from Nepal with their families and established Gorkha settlements in the hills of India, such as Bhagsu, Bakloh, Almora, Darjeeling, Deharadun, Shillong, etc.(H.M.S.O, 1965:61) It was only during the period of Prime Minister Bir Shumsher that the Nepalese government freely allowed enlistment of Nepalese in the Indian army (Kansakar, 1982::77-124).

The second important factor for maintaining open border by the British was to have easy and free access of British and Indian manufactured goods into Nepal as well as to Tibet wherein Nepal was the only easy and accessible route from India before the discovery of Chumbi Valley route from Sikkim.. Moreover, the British wanted to have secure and easy supply of raw materials from Nepal into India such as timber and forest produce, herbs and medicinal plants, hides and skins, etc.

Treaty of Friendship between Great Britain and Nepal 1923 and the Development of the Tarai The large scale involvement of men from the hills of Nepal in the World War I led to the shortage of able-bodied youths particularly the Magars and the Gurungs and resulting drastic decline in agriculture activities and shortage of foddgrains in the hills. More than 200,000 Nepalese took part in the war with a casualty of 20,000 men or one in every 10. In recognition of this assistance the Britihs government gave Nepal an annual gift of Rs. 100,000 in perpetuity and the amount was increased to Rs. 200,000 after the World War II (Mansergh and Moon, 1976:62).Most of those who were retired and released from war duty after the war, instead of coming back to Nepal stayed in India where they could get employment in police and para-military services, security services in factories, offices as well as domestic servants in Indian cities where they were in great demand for their honesty, loyalty and hardwork. In recognition of the contribution of Nepal in the World War I, the Treaty of Friendship between Great Britain and Nepal signed at Kathmandu on 21 December 1923 recognised Nepal as a sovereign independent country. and this treaty erased from the mind the apprehension of invasion by the British. In order to meet the food grains need of the country and to resettle the landless, Prime Minister Chandra Shumsher initiated the development of the Tarai. The clearing of the forests in the Tarai provided agricultural lands on the one hand and on the other hand, the fell down sal tree provided much needed timber for the slippers in the expansion of the Indian railways. Due to the fear of malaria and unbearable heat of the Tarai, the hill people reluctant to move to the Tarai and the programme rather benefited the immigrants from India. Moreover, the development programmes of the Tarai during the period of Chandra Shumsher like railways from Amlrkhganj to Raxaul and Janakpur to Jayanagar, Chandra canal etc attracted more immigrants from India.

Industrialisation and Development in the Tarai

There has been significant contribution of the Indian technical and skill immigrants in the industrialisation of the Tarai. During the period of Prime Minister Juddha Shumsher, lot of industries was established in Biratnagar, Birganj and other areas of the Tarai in the process of industrialisation in the Tarai. The industries established were jute, cotton and textile, matches, plywood and bobbin, pulses. rice, flour, oil, etc. The skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled labour for these industries came from India. Those living in the Tarai had enough land to till for livelihood were not in the need of employment outside agriculture, while people from the hill areas, who lacked technical and industrial skills were reluctant to move down to the hot, humid and malarial Tarai and were more attracted to migrate to India for employment. Thus employment opportunities generated by industrialisation in the Tarai benefited and attracted the Indian immigrants. This trend is still continuing. After the Great Earthquake of 1934, new modern township of New Road was created with new buildings and shopping lines and local businessmen of Kathmandu and from India were invited to open up shops. The Marwaris and the other Indian business communities established shops in New Road and Indrachok, while the original inhabitants displaced as a result of the creation of New road were resettled in Naya Bazar, the are between Paknajol and Balaju.

The Nepal India Treaty of 1950 and the Open Border

The Nepal India Treaty of 1950 which was signed in July 31 agreed to grant, on a reciprocal basis, to the nationals of one country in the territories of the other the same privileges the matter of residence, ownership of property, participation in trade and commerce, movement and other privileges of a similar nature was the major turning point in the movement of the Indians into Nepal and was further reinforced by the Nepal India open border. However, it was not materialised until the installation of democracy in February 1951, which replaced the oligarchic Rana regime within three and half months of the signing of the treaty. It is said that the evolution of incidents in Kashmir, Nizam State of Hydrabad and the Indian states and territories bordering China, during his assuming of the portfolio of Home Minister, Sardar Patel strongly pleaded and persuaded Prime Minister Nehru to impose some sort of control over Nepal and the result was the Treaty of 1950 and the reflection of it is clearly revealed by his letter to Nehru (See appendix). It is to be noted that the Rana government assisted Indian Government by sending Nepalese troops, when India has to face problems in Hydrabad during independence and in Kashmir in 1948..

Evolution of Major Events due to Nepal India Open Border after the Installation of Democracy in 1951

As per the agreement between the Nepali Congress and the Rana regime, Mohun Shamsher who as the Prime Minister of Nepal signed the 1950 treaty became the Prime Minister after the installation of democracy in Nepal. The democracy installed in the country actually implemented the spirit of the 1950 treaty. The movement of Indians into Nepal was not only relaxed, on the basis they started purchasing land, and settled to engage in trade and commerce and different occupations. The economic and employment opportunities created in the establishment and development of industry, trade, education and health capitalised by the Indian immigrants by the virtue of their capital, enterpreneurship, skill and technology which the people of the hills as well as those of the Tarai lacked. Those from the hills preferred to emigrate to India and Malaya for employment in army and other services rather than to move to the hot, humid and malarial Tarai to compete with the skilled migrants from India.

After the complete control over Tibet by China, Nepal witnessed large influx of about 16,000 Tibetan refugees who were rehabilitated in the camps established in Jawalakhel in Lalitpur, Pokhara, Mustang, Solukhumbu, Baglung, etc. As these refugees were rehabilitated by the International Red Cross and the UN High Commission for the Refugees and were involved in their traditional wool and carpet industries, which provided income for their livelihood, their impact on Nepalese economy was hardly felt. The transfer of technology provided by the Tibetan refugees in the carpet industry became boon for Nepal and carpet industry has been established as the largest export and foreign exchange earning industry of Nepal.

Status of Open Border during Panchayat Period

The Nepalese who migrated in Burma via Assam during British rule in India in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were settling in Burma and were engaged in agriculture, dairy farming and trade and Business. In 1964 when Burma (Myanmar) enforced the Burmese Citizenship Act and. Those Nepalese who opted for Burmese citizenship stayed in Burma and those who wanted to retain Nepalese citizenship returned to Nepal. As the returning refugees were not allowed to take only limited property, Nepal Government had to take responsibility to resettle them in Nepal. Under the Israeli experts, the government established Nepal Resettlement Company to launch the first land resettlement in Nawalpur to the west of Chitawan across the Narayani river with the objective of resettling the landless, the natural disaster victims and Nepalese returning from Burma and from North Eastern states of India.(Kansakar, 1979:65). There was also influx of domiciled Nepalese from North Eastern states of India, who fled from the wrath of the native people who launched agitation against the foreigners and also the Indians from outside that region (Kansakar, 1984:65). In the mean time the government launched Land Reform programme with the imposition of ceiling on maximum holdings so as to secure excess land above ceiling to distribute among the landless in the country. As the land reform was launched in the different districts of the country at different stages and it provided the big landlords to make necessary arrangement to adjust their lands among their families and relatives. Thus the excess land stipulated to derive from land reform was far below the estimation made by the government. Moreover, landlords started evicting the tenants from their land by hook or crook to avoid conferring tenancy right. The government could not meet the demand of the people aspiring for land under resettlement programme and the result was the reckless deforestation of the Tarai forests by the migrants from the hills who started moving to the Tarai after the eradication of malaria. Moreover, after the enactment of land reform programme, the landlords started tilling their land by immigrant labour from India, because foreigners were neither entitled purchase land nor do they were entitled to have tenancy rights. This led to the large scale influx of migrant labourers from India and with the passage of time they became eligible to get Nepalese citizenship. Over the time, the Tarai witness large-scale influx of population from within hill and the mountain areas of Nepal as well as from India. In order to meet the demand of labour and services in different sector s and population of the Tarai, further influx of immigrants with different skills took place from India.

Land Reform and Open Border

As already noted the big landlords were able the dislodge tenants to avoid conferring tenancy rights under the Land Reform Act. As a result a large number of low caste and untouchables like Mushahar, Dom, Chamar, Bantar, Tatma, Dhobi, etc. were deprived of the tenancy rights and were compelled to work as agriculture labour in the lands of the landlord with a provision of hutment in the land of the landlords. They became landless with no land and housing property of their own. As a result they were deprived of the Nepali citizenship certificate for which property ownership of land or house is essential. However, their name has been enrolled in the voter list. Political parties have raised issues, particularly by Nepal Sadbhabana Party regarding the need of conferring citizenship certificate in the Tarai for 4 million Nepalese in the Tarai. It is not known the exact number of Nepalese who have not got citizenship certificate. Most of the commissions constituted to investigate the issue of citizenship have come up with ad hoc figures without any details regarding the name, address and age of those who have not yet got Nepalese citizenship. However, none of the political parties has launched campaign to collect and prepare the list of the genuine Nepalese who have not yet got citizenship certificate. The landless of the Tarai like Mushahar, Dom, Chamar, Bantar, Tatma, Dhobi, etc. have been deprived of the several benefits due to them as Nepali citizen is entitled to have and despite being the landless they have neither being able to get land under resettlement programme nor could buy land. It is alleged that the political leaders and government officials are interested in securing Nepali citizenship certificate to the Indians who could afford to spend money. There are reports and complaints that foreigners ineligible for Nepali citizenship have also acquired citizenship by means of false declaration or fraud or undue influence, malpractice and corruption (New Era, June 2000:7.69). Moreover, the big landlords could avoid the ceiling on land under Land Reform Act by converting their land for commercial farming like horticulture farm and tea plantation. For running these commercial farms they could not get Nepalese labour force who could easily secure land under land resettlement programme or by illegally clearing government forests. So the commercial farms and tea plantations had to secure migrant labour from India. Thus agricultural and industrial development in the Tarai as well as in the service sectors attracted migrant workers from India.

Open Border and the Bhutanese Refugees

Nepal and Bhutan is separated by a wide stretch of Indian territory. As for Bhutan and India there is no open border. However, because of the open border between Nepal and India they could easily enter into Nepal via Indian territory. In reality, the first place of asylum for the Bhutanese refugees is India. Under international convention, it is the responsibility of India to settle them in India by establishing refugee camps, but India drove them into Nepal. The Bhutanese refugees represent different Nepalese ethnic and caste groups, but does not mean that they have directly migrated to Bhutan from Nepal. Lots of them have migrated from different parts of eastern and north-eastern India as well. Nearly 100,000 Bhutanese refugees are resettled in the camps in Jhapa and Moran districts. Though they are put in the enclosed camps with barbed wire fencing, their movements outside is not restricted and also able to cross the barbed wire fencing easily. This has resulted in affecting the natural, social and economic environment of the surrounding areas, because they are engaged in illegal cutting of the trees in the government forests, engaged in business and work as cheap labour thereby affecting the business and employment of the local community. It is also alleged that a lot of Bhutanese refugees have been able to secure Nepalese citizenship through illegal means. Moreover, a lot of the Indians of Nepalese origin have also migrated to Bhutan and naturally large number of them must be Indians. It is not known when the Bhutanese refugee problem will be solved.

Prospects, Problems and Challenges Emerging from Nepal India Open Border

None of the treaties between Nepal and India ever mentioned about the procedures for the regulation of the Nepal-India border. The trade agreement has specified the agreed routes for mutual trade. But there is no agreement regarding the movement of the people and the agreed routes for movement of people of both countries along the border. As for the trade there are 22 agreed transit and customs posts along the Nepal-India border. The concept of open border between Nepal and India has still remained and enigma. Besides these there are several sub-customs posts. It is alleged that if it is possible to have illegal movement of people and goods in collaboration with personnel deputed in those posts, there is no denying of the fact it is not unusual from the practical point of view to have illegal smuggling of goods, trafficking of girls for selling in the brothels in Indian cities, trafficking in narcotic drugs, arms and ammunition and movement of criminals and terrorists. In principle both Nepal and India have positively agreed to control such illegal activities along the border, but there is a lack of effective effort practical approach. So far as the matter of smuggling from Nepal to India is concerned, Mr. Sriman Narayan, former Indian Ambassador to Nepal had remarkedthat because of the craze of foreign goods in India and the import of cheap Chinese goods, smuggling by the Indians, to the Indians and for the Indians (Sriman Narayan, 1970:84). Inder Malhotra has remarked," Nepal's economic needs should be treated with maximum understanding and generosity even if India has to suffer losses here and there, provided no grave damage is done to the Indian economy. India's unwillingness to adopt such attitude has been due to the diversion of import and export between Nepal and India in which a particularly unsavoury group of Indian businessmen in Nepal have been the main promoter aw well as beneficiaries of the various rackets. If allowed unchecked, the activities of these ugly Indians may do incalculable damage to Indo-Nepal relations" (Malhotra, 1970:6). Since the start of Nepal's foreign trade with the third countries in the 19660s, Indian business and industrial entrepreneurs started pouring into Nepal to secure benefit from the provision of foreign trade. Because of the high demand for foreign manufactured goods in India on the one hand and the restriction in the import of foreign good from abroad as well as very high import duties. Nepal became safe haven for the Indian business community to import foreign goods which a have high demand in India and to smuggle them to India. . In the process of Industrialisation in Nepal, the Indians came in the fore front for investment to derive the benefits provided for the supply of foreign exchanges to import machinery and raw materials, excise and tax exemption and foreign exchange bonus for the export of goods manufactured in Nepal. However, government's attempt to develop industries got setback, because most of the Indian industrialists indulged in misappropriation of foreign exchange by importing second grade machinery and import of excessive raw materials to sell them in India. The recent incidents of the import of Indian carpets and garments into Nepal and re-export to third country as Nepal's own products has been rendering incalculable damage to the carpet and garment industries of Nepal. It will not be exaggeration to state that this is due to the existence of massive corruption in the government bureaucracy, ad hoc decision related to policies and rules, and lack of monitoring and evaluation. Moreover, there is no denial of the fact that the customs on both side of the border are involved in corrupt practices.

The Main Transit Points along the Nepal India Border

The agreed routes for Mutual Trade along Nepal-India border are as following.

Pashupati Nagar / Sukhia Pokhari Kakerbhitta / Naxalbari Bhadrapur / Galgalia Birat Nagar / Jogbani Setobandhe / Bhimnagar Rajbiraj / Kunauli Siraha / Janakpur / Jayanagar Jaleswar / Birtamod (Sursand) Malangwa / Sonabarsa Gaur / Bairgania Birgunj / Raxaul

Bhairahawa / Nautanwa Taulihawe / Khunwa Krishnangar / Barhni Koilabas / Jarwa Nepalgunj / Nepalgunj Road Rajapur / Katerniyaghat Prithvipur / Sati (Kailali) / Tikonia Dhangadhi / Gauriphanta Mahendra Nagar / Banbasa Mahakali / Jhulaghat (Pithoragarh) Darchula/Dharchula

Immigration Points

The immigration points along the Indo Nepal border for the entry and exit for the nationals of the third countries are :

1. Banbasa
2. Dhangadhi
3. Nepalganj
4. Bhairahawa (Sunauli)
5. Birhanj
6. Kakarbhita

The immigration points along the Nepal China border are only two. They are Kodari with road connections from Kathmandu and Nara Nagla in Humla with mule track from Simikot The border check post of Nara Nagla, however, lies several kilometres south inside Humla As for the immigration points along Nepal India border, they are connected by road. Tribhuvan international airport in Kathmandu is the only immigration point for the foreign nationals coming by air.

Socio-Cultural Implications of the Open Border

Socio-cultural similarities on either side of the international border is a universal phenomenon and this is more pronounced in the case of Nepal-India border, because it has been enhanced by open border with no restrictions on the movement of people on either side. In the same way social and cultural similarities exist along the Nepal China boundary as well, it is more so in the case of Nepal India border where people have more easy access and interaction. The ethnic and the linguistic similarities exist along the Nepal-India border both in the south plains and hills in the east and west. The open border has naturally promoted social and cultural interaction among the nationals of both sides through matrimonial relationship as well.

The role of the religious places of pilgrimage of both the Hindus and the Buddhists in both the countries have been responsible for strengthening the social and cultural bonds between the two countries. Nepal being the abode of Pashupatinath, birthplace of Sita and Buddha, Nepal has been the holiest place for the Hindus and the Buddhists. The regular visit of pilgrims from India to the holiest places like Lumbini, Janakpur, Kathmandu Valley, Muktinath, Swargadwari, Barahakshetra, etc. have contributed in enhancing and strengthening the cultural relations between the two countries. Likewise, Nepalese pilgrims visit the holiest Hindu places of Kedarnath, Kashi, Gaya, Jagannath, Hariidwar, Allahabad and holiest Buddhist places like Buddhagaya, Rajgir, Sarnath, Nalanda, Kushinagar . The visit of the pilgrims of both countries to the places to tourist attraction as well as to the cities have contributed in strengthening the mutual understanding, trade relation, cultural relation and friendship.

When health infrastructures in Nepal were not developed, a large number of people from the Tarai as well as from the hills used to go to hospitals in India across the border. During the last few decades, Nepal has been able to develop health facilities in the country, particularly in the Tarai, with the establishment of regional, zonal and district hospitals with modern medical facilities. This has resulted in the large-scale flow of patients from India into these hospitals. One noteworthy development of medical facilities in the Tarai has been the opening of the modern eye hospitals and opthalmology units in zonal and regional hospitals. These facilities have resulted in the large scale inflow of eye patients from the bordering states of India because of quality and cheap services. A medical institution that has attracted a large number of cancer patients from India is the cancer hospital in Bharatpur with ultra modern cancer treatment facilities. The flow of Nepalese cancer patients to Mumbai is still continuing. Another important development in the medical sector is the opening of a number of medical colleges in Nepal. There are 10 medical colleges in Nepal, most of them in the private sector. Three medical colleges are located in Kathmandu, one in Pokhara and 6 in the Tarai: Dharan, Birgunj, Bharatpur, Bhairahawa, Nepalganj and Chisapani. These medical colleges have attracted a large number of Indians including non-resident Indians seeking medical education and also patients seeking medical services in these hospitals. The flow of Nepalese students seeking medical education in India is also continuing.

The historical legacy of ancient civilisation existed along entire length of Nepal-India border has been relegated to historical ruins and archaeological remains. How, the ancient civilisations of Mithila, Birat, Koshala, Shakyas, etc., in the Tarai region perished has still remained an engima. It has been postulated that bad drainage system converted the ancient towns and villages into malarial places and people deserted them and they were reverted into natural state of dense forest infested with wild animals and above all malaria. The Tharus, Kumhals, Dhimals, Rajbanshis, Dunwars, Mushaars, etc., are considered to be the ancient people of these civilisations. They were malaria immune ethnic groups living in the isolated patches of the dense forests in the Tarai in the Inner Tarai in the past. The migrants from India and from hill and mountain areas of Nepal squeezed them and were gradually displace from their tradition tribal lands and most of them were relegated to the status of marginal and landless peasants. The existence of Kamaiya or bonded labour among the Tharus numbering some 8000 families is the instance in point. The Kamaiya system has been abolished in the country recently without any arrangement for the rehabilitation of the freed Kamaiyas.

The open border has benefited economically to the nationals inhabiting on both side of the border. Those engaged in agriculture have been economically benefited through the sale and purchase of agriculture and livestock products in hat bazaars taking place in different places daily on either side. The increasing urbanisation and growth of towns in the Tarai and along the border inside Nepal has resulted in large inflow of goods from Indian side into Nepal and will continue because the districts of Indian stated bordering Nepal have been overlooked as compared to other districts, on the contrary the Nepalese districts on the other side of the border, that is the Tarai has been the main region of Nepal with large scale investment in different sector of the economy because it represent the most productive and economically potential area of Nepal. The open border provided employment to the people on both sides in the transport activities as well.

Migration into Tarai prior to1860 was constrained by restriction on purchases of land by the Indian nationals in Nepal. When the western Tarai was restored to Nepal in 1860, the legal codes formulated by Prime Minister Jung Bahadur made provision for the allotment of land to the Indian nationals through sale and purchase so as to appropriate income from the restored territory for himself, his families and favourites. This resulted in the large-scale migration of the Indian people from the adjoining border areas of India. Similarly Prime Minister Chandra Shumsher also initiated reclamation of the forest areas of the Tarai for agricultural on the advice of J.V. Collier, an Indian Forest Officer. Collier himself became a contractor to clear the forest in Kailali district by extending railway line up to Godawari near the Siwalik foothills. Collier cleared the forest so rapidly that it alarmed the Government of Nepal who had to cancel the contract. It may also be noted that the sal forest of Nepal. Tarai provided the timber for much needed railway sleepers for the expansion of the Indian railways. Forests also provided the largest source of revenue to the government, even after the installation of democracy in 1951. The reclamation of the Tarai not only attracted the immigrants from India but also the hill people who were employed in government services in the Tarai. They purchased land in the Tarai and became Zamindar, the big landlords.

The installation of democracy in 1951 marked the unrestricted movement of the hill people in the Tarai as well as from India. It was further accelerated by malaria eradication programme launched in the Tarai in the late 1950s. This brought about a drastic change in the regional redistribution of population in Nepal. Malaria eradication programme was accompanied by land resettlement programmes for diverse target groups, such as landless people mostly from the hills; political sufferers; Gurkha ex-servicemen both of Nepalese, Indian and British armies; victims of natural disaster; Nepalese refugee from Burma; Tibetan refugees, and so on. The Tarai, which accounted for only 35.2 percent of the total population of Nepal in 1952/54 had 46.7 percent of the total population of Nepal in 1991 (Table 1)



The trend of population growth in the Tarai has been highest since 1961. It has been estimated that in the coming 2001 census, the Tarai only with 23.1 percent of the total land area of the country will have more than 50 percent of total population of Nepal.

The density of population in the adjoining districts of India is higher than in the adjoining areas of Nepal. However, development activities in the Tarai districts of Nepal have been responsible for migration of Indians into the Tarai. The division of Bihar state with the detachment of mineral wealth rich and industrial belt going to Jharkhand and the creation of Uttrakhand with the detachment of fertile Ganga plain in Uttar Pradesh might inevitably aggravate further the poverty of the districts of Bihar and Uttarkhand bordering Nepal and might increase immigration of Indians into Nepal. In view of the dearth of different skills among the Nepalese, the skilled manpower required for different development service activities are coming from India and the process of replacing these migrant workers by Nepalese have been taking place very slowly due to strong comptetion from the most skilled migrant workers on the one hand and the lack of government policy and programmes to train Nepalese in these skills on the other hand. The failure of the country's education programme to produce manpower with different technical skills has resulted in the production of educated mass with limited demand base in the country's economy. The large number of unemployed educated youth in the country is creating serious social, economic and political problems for the family, society and the nation. There is no denying fo the fact that the emerging Maoist problem of the country is related to this reality.

The socio-cultural aspect of migration involving migration of family members, kith and kin, relatives, local communities, exists in the case of Indian migrants into Nepal Tarai from across the adjoining districts of India.

One of the important socio-cultural aspects of migration on either side of the Nepal-India border is marriage migration. Usually age and sex selectivity of migration is characterised by predominance of able-bodied males. But in the case of migration on either side of the Nepal-India border, it is characterised by predominance of females over males. The 1991 census of Nepal revealed 378, 692 Indian born population in the Tarai, of which only 93,345 persons or 24.7 percent were males and 285, 347 persons or 75.3 percent were females. The available figure of Nepal born population in four States of Bihar, Sikkim, U.P. and West Bengal according to 1981 census of India recorded higher proportion of females in Bihar (39.0 %) Sikkim (52.7 %) and U.P. (56.5 %), while West Bengal had only 41.1 percent. In India as a whole the proportion of Nepal born females constituted 52.3 percent of the total. While in Nepal the India born females constituted 71.9 percent of the total. The India born population in Nepal accounted for 2.4 percent of the total population of Nepal, while the Nepal born population in India constituted 0.07 percent only. In the Tarai districts, India born population represented 4.4 percent of the total population of Tarai. In the States of Bihar, West Bengal and U.P., Nepal born population accounted for 0.21, 0.001 and 0.09 percent respectively, while it was 6.84 percent of the total population in Sikkim. This clearly indicates the pronounces impact of India born population in Nepal compared to that of Nepal born population in India.

The communal disturbances in India have a direct bearing upon increase in the magnitude of India immigrants into the Tarai. The sudden spurt in the increase of Muslim population in Nepal between 1981 and 1991 is a clear-cut instance. The Muslim population increased from 399,197 persons in 1981 to 653,218 persons in 1991, which means an increase of 38.9 percent over a decade 96.7 percent of the Muslim population is confined to the Tarai and they constitute 7.32 percent of the total population of the Tarai. The sudden increase in Muslim population must be attributed to the growth of garment industry in Nepal to a greater extent and in other activities to a certain extent, because Muslim community possesses diverse occupational skills that other communities usually lack. Similarly, since 1984 the number of Sikh immigrants into Nepal has considerably increased. At present, there are six Gurudwaras in Nepal, they are in Kathmandu, Lalitpur, Birganj, Nepalganj, Butwal and Dhangadhi of which the latter four are in the Tarai.

The development of agriculture, industry, commerce transportation and other related activities in the Nepal Tarai has been attracting Indian immigrants from across the border. The very high growth of population in the Tarai has resulted in a growing demand for employment within the Tarai region itself. The population living on either side of the Nepal-India border is overwhelmingly dependent on agriculture and they used to get seasonal employment in the agricultural sector in Punjab. After the increase in the disturbances in Punjab, migration of population to this region virtually stopped. The ever-increasing immigrants from across the border into the Tarai has displaced the local population from their employment opportunities and they are migrating to the urban areas of the hill particularly the Kathmandu Valley and also in the urban areas of the Tarai. It is a universal phenomenon that migrants are hard working people and they can devote more time to their work because they are free from the day to day obligations of their families and society. This has indeed resulted into a hatred among the local people towards the immigrants as they find it difficult to compete with the outsiders. The eagerness of the immigrants to secure citizenship certificate by hook or by crook has rather delayed the process of distribution of citizenship certificates to the bonafied population according to the constitutional provisions. Large-scale migration of the outsides in North-eastern India, Kashmir and Punjab has actually displaced migrants settling in these areas for generations, in the wake of the movement for 'sons of the soil'. There is every danger of this situation cropping up in Nepal as well, if efforts are not made to regulate migration. The driving away of Indians of Nepalese origin from North-eastern states of India is a glaring instance. Nepal-India migration in the real sense represents the mutual exchange of poverty rather than prosperity.

The most serious and adverse impact of open and uncontrolled Nepal-India border has been in the form of growing and anti-social and lawless activities. The ever increasing crimes on the border, has been a major concern for both the governments along the border since early nineteenth century, and the Treaty of 1855 was aimed at controlling these problems. However, the policy of open border has rather, enhanced such activities. The unrestricted border has indeed been responsible for all sorts of criminal, anti-social and illegal activities such as robbery, theft, murder, smuggling of goods to evade custom duties, narcotic drugs trafficking, trafficking of girls, arms smuggling, smuggling of archaeological arts and artefacts and manuscripts, etc. Since 1980s, Nepal-India border has developed into a thorough passage for the to and from movement of the terrorists. In view of the growing terrorism in Uttar Pradesh Tarai border in Nepal, Members of the Lok Sabha demanded for the sealing of the Nepal India border. When Nepali political leaders and intellectuals raised their voice for controlling and regulating the movement of people across the border, their counterparts in India termed the Nepalese concern as and anti-Indian stand.

The use of muscle men for booth capturing and for electoral manipulations on either side of the border during the election on either side is also not uncommon. The complete sealing of the major entry points to control such practices a day or two before elections has not been so effective as there are no provisions for patrolling along the border. It has been alleged that criminal elements has been harboured and provided protection by some of the political leaders and influential persons on either side of the border. This sort of activities also exists along the Nepal-China border. It is alleged that some of the influential political leaders on the Nepalese side in collaboration with the border customs officials are involved in smuggling of the Tibetans to the monasteries in Kathmandu and for which they are paid handsome amount. The Tibetans illegally crossing the Nepal-China border are handed over by the Home Ministry to the UNHCHR representative in Kathmandu, who handover them to the office of the Dalai Lama in India. It is said that the Tibetan in the rural areas intended to have their children for monk and nunhood on account of their cultural tradition or for monetary gain smuggled into Nepal as refugees. Nepalese professing Tibetan Buddhism and living along the Nepal-China border also get their children admitted in the monasteries in Kathmandu or in the monasteries run by the Dalai Lama. In most of the religions and religious institutions in which the manpower need to run temples, monasteries, churches, mosques, etc. are facing the problem of getting men and women from the urban and developed rural areas because of their access to education, awareness and modern amenities and way of life. So these religious institutions attracting people from the backward and poor rural areas. The monk and nuns in numerous Tibetan Buddhist monasteries in the Kathmandu Valley and in other parts of the country are the instance in point. Similar situation exists in Sanskrit Pathshalas and Vedic Pathashalas and also in the religious Islamic madrshas in the country.

The trafficking of the Nepalese girls to India for sale in the brothels of Indian cities and towns in the earlier period resulted in the import and widespread of sexually transmitted diseases in the rural areas of Nepal. For the last two decades, Nepalese girls working in the brothels as prostitutes are sent back to Nepal when HIV/AIDS is detected in them and on their return to Nepal they are spreading HIV/AIDS in Nepal. As India represents the country with largest number of HIV/AIDS infected population the probability of spread of HIV/AIDS in Nepal is very high.

In the recent time there has been sudden spurt in crimes such as theft, robbery, kidnapping and murder on both side of the border as well as increase in the terrorist activities on the Indian side and open border has provided safe passage to the criminals and terrorists. The incursion of Indian police inside Nepal without permission in search of criminals fled into Nepal has hurt the sentiments of the Nepalese and has rather generated hatred against India. There has been a number of intrusions/hot pursuits by Indian police- Manebhanjyang in December 1987, Delhi police raid in March 1994 and several other incidents near Nepalganj, Bhairahawa and Birganj, 90 per cent of these cases are of Indian origin (Mehata, 2001:21). The incursion of Indian police without permission of the Nepalese authorities in connection with manhunt in Baneswaor, Kathmandu is still fresh in the mind of the Nepalese. Such news of unauthorised and occasional incursions by the Indian police are publishes by the news media. Such blatant violation of the international law and code of conduct need to be avoided.

The recent deployment of the Nepalese army in the border customs checkposts needs serious reconsideration because of its sensitive nature and role in the national defence It has demoralised the customs personnel, and police already working in these checkposts are indirectly branded as corrupt. There is no guarantee that army personnel also might not follow the suit of corrupt customs personnel and police deployed in the border check-posts. The deployment of army in the border customs check-posts might cause unforeseen and unwarranted incidents. The recent sad incident along the disputed India -Bangladesh border is a glaring example of how hostility may arise between the two friendly countries. Considering the unresolved boundary demarcation along Nepal-India border, such army deployment needs serious consideration. Recently, clash between the local Indian and the Nepalese people regarding the Nepal-India border occurred in Kakarbhitta in the Mechi River.

There is a general feeling in Nepal that the Indian leaders and diplomatic personnel have a tendency to look upon Nepal with suspicion and distrust, particularly regarding Nepal's relations with China and Pakistan. This attitude reminds one of the British colonial legacy. During the exile of King Rana Bahadur Shah to Benares, the British East India Company became successful in exploiting the situation by entering into a treaty with the Nepalese King in 1801. One of the clauses of the treaty states, "The principals and officers of both Governments will cordially consider the friends and enemies of either State to be the friends and enemies of the other; and this consideration must ever remain permanent and in force, from generation to generation". (Aitchison, 1863:196). Though the treaty was abrogated by the treaty of 1804, most of the Indian leaders and diplomatic personnel as well as news media have not given up this colonial legacy from their mind. Regarding the purchase of arms and ammunitions by Nepal from other countries, Nepal was required to have permission to import them via Indian territories from the Government of India. This preconditions envisaged by the British (Husain, 1970:170-9) was followed by the independent Government of India as it was incorporated in the letter of exchange of 1950 treaty. According to the 1965 Nepal-India Agreement on Arms Assistance, Nepal's response was rather lukewarm, because it was having arms assistance and purchase from other countries. In view of Nepal's confrontation against the rebel Khampas among the Tibetan refugees in Nepal who made forays in Chinese territories from across the Nepal-China border and the need for training the Nepalese army in modern weaponry and warfare so as to make them competent enough to work in the UN Peacekeeping Force, importation of arms, ammunition and vehicles by Nepal in 1989 became a pretext for India to impose economic blockade on Nepal which, however, hurt the Indian traders and businessmen rather than the Nepalese majority of whom live in the rural areas. During the 1950 -51 revolution against the Rana regime, the Nepali Congress had to purchase arms from Burma because of India's unwillingness. After the installation of democracy, during the period of Prime Minister Matrika Prasad Koirala, those arms and ammunition in the hand of the Mukti Sena (who were posted in Nepal as para-military force) were destroyed in Khumaltar, Lalitpur under the supervision and presence of the Chief of the Indian Military Mission in Nepal. During this period Indian military checkposts were established along the important border posts along the Nepal-China border.

The attitude of Indian politicians and news media to view with suspicion any assistance Nepal gets from China and the debate in both Houses of Indian Parliament on Kathmandu-Kodari Highway linking Kathmandu with Lhasa and terming them as "military road capable of moving tanks" bear ample testimony to this fact. However, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had to say, "China is a neighbour of Nepal and naturally they would like to remain friendly with China also. But I do not think it is in no way interference with the very close friendship and close cultural link which we have with them" (Bhasin, ed., 1970:116). When the Chinese constructed a ring road around Kathmandu and Lalitpur, some Indian papers carried the news that the road is wide enough to land jet fighters. Frequent strains in relations between Nepal and India at the government level are not due to political, geographical, economic or cultural reasons, but due to the amateurish handling of some of the issues by Indian politicians (Sharma, 1970:2). Recently the statement of Mr. K. R. Malkani of the Bharatiya Janata Party questioning the sovereignty and independence of Nepal and the statement of Mr. Thakerey. President of Shiva Sena in favour of Indian military intervention following the Royal Palace massacre are instances in point to hurt the sentiments of Nepalese and the friendly relations between Nepal and India. Indian news media are also responsible for spreading false news. The exaggerated and false news telecast through Indian televisions relating to the incidents and disturbances in Kathmandu in the aftermath of the Royal Palace massacre have been largely responsible for the drastic decline in the tourist flow from India and other countries. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of India who aspireed for and established cordial relations between Nepal and India, while addressing a press conference in New Delhi on 18 January 1961, had said, "Broadly speaking, our relations depend not really on any person's goodwill, on Nepal's goodwill, on that government or this government……………They depend on geography and history, which cannot be easily done away with" (Bhasin, 1970:55). The concept of territory and boundary is imbedded in the animal kingdom and mankind cannot be an exception. Many wars and battles have been fought over territorial and boundary dispute and are still continuing in the absence of mutual rapprochement over the demarcation of boundary between the two States. One must not forget the Nehru-Zhou-en Lai concept of Hindi_Chini Bhai Bhai turning into Sino-Indian war of 1962 over the border dispute. .So Nepal and India must not overlook the issue of undefined border between the two countries. It is quite disheartening to note that both countries have not been able to resolve the boundary issue even during time span of two decades since the formation of a Joint Boundary Commission in 1981. The recent understanding reached between the two governments during the meeting between Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Prime Minister Girija Prasad Koirala to complete the boundary demarcation within three years is praiseworthy. However, seriousness and an action plan required for its completion are still lacking.

An uncontrolled and open border, as stated earlier, constitutes the breeding ground for anti-social, criminal and illegal activities. Regulation of the Nepal-India border had become urgent. In both Nepal and India, voter's identify card has become compulsory for the voters, and this will facilitate, to some extent, the task of regulating the movement of population on either side of the Nepal-India border. The need for both Nepal and India to provide employment to their citizens in their respective territories has become urgent in view of the growing xenophobia against immigrant workers. There is no denying the fact that Maoist insurgency in Nepal is basically related to the problem of growing unemployment. The unrestricted flow of migrant workers might further aggravate this problem. Similarly, India must have faced the same problem to a certain extent due to the migrant workers from Nepal. Both Nepal and India must realise the urgency of exploring an effective and pragmatic mechanism for the benefit of both countries and people. Therefore, keeping in view the welfare and development of people of the two countries, there is an urgent need to check and regulate the free as well as illegal movement of people and goods across the unpatrolled open border through intensive research, joint reviews and fruitful dialogues on diverse aspects of Nepal-India open border so that Nepal-India friendship can be further strengthened.

References:

Aitchison C. U. (1863): A Collection of Treaties, Engagements and Sanads Relating to India and Neighbouring Countries, Calcutta, Bengal Printing Press.

Day, Alan J. (1982), Border and Territorial Disputes, Essex, Longman Group Limited.

Foreign Language Press (1973), Premier Chou En-Lai's Letter to the Leaders of Asian and African Countries on the Sino-Indian Boundary Question (November 15, 1962), Peking, Foreign Language Press.

Foreign Language Press (1960)), New Development in Friendly Relations Between China and Nepal, Peking, Foreign Language Press.

H.M.S.O. (1965), Nepal and the Gurkhas, London.

Husain, Asad (1970), British India's Relations with the Kingdom of Nepal 1857-47

London, George Allen and Unwin.

Kansakar, Vidya Bir Singh (2001) "Nepal India Open Border: Problems and Challenges," keynote paper presented at the Seminar on Nepal India Open Border: Pros and Cons,organised by Institute of Foreign Affairs, Kathmandu and sponsored by Frederik Ebert Stiftung, held in Nepalganj (19 April 2001), Biratnagar (3 May 2001) and Birganj (17 May 2001).

Kansakar, Vidya Bir Singh (2001) "Nepal India Open Border: Nature, Pattern and Socio-cultural Implications," in India and Nepal: Aspects of Interdependent Relations, edited by Ramakant and B. C. Upreti, Delhi, Kalinga Publications (pp. 1-14).

Kansakar, Vidya Bir Singh (1997), "Nepal-India Relations: Aspects of Environment", India- Nepal Co-operation; Broadening Measures, Edited by Jayanta Kumar Ray, Calcutta: K P Bagchi & Company, 1997.

Kansakar, Vidya Bir Singh (April 1984), "Indo-Nepal Migration: Problems and Prospects," Contribution to Nepalese Studies, Vol. 11, No. 2, Kathmandu, CNAS (pp, 49-70).

Kansakar, Vidya Bir Singh (1979), Effectiveness of Planned Resettlement Programme in Nepal, Vol. I : Text, Kathmandu, CEDA.

Kirkpatrick, William (1801) An Account of the Kingdom of Nepaul (Being the substance of the Observations made during mission to the Country in the year 1793), London, W. Miller.

Malhotra, Inder (1970), "India-Nepal Relations: Delhi's Diplomacy on Trial", The Statesman, 12 June.

Mansergh, Nicholas and Moon, Panderal, eds.(1976), "Letter of Field Marshall Wavell to Mr. Patrick-Lawrence, the Viceroy House, New Delhi, 12 August 1945," in India: The Transfer of Power 1942-47, Vol. VI, Document No. 20,London Her Majesty's Stationary Office.

Mehata, Ashok K. (2001), " Problem of Terrorism and Other Illegal Activities on Indo-Nepal Border: Issues in Effective Border Management," in India and Nepal: Aspects of Interdependent Relations, edited by Ramakant and B. C. Upreti, Delhi, Kalinga Publications (pp. 1-14).

Nepali, Chittaranjan(1964) Nepal-China Boundary Treaty in Nepali, Kathmandu, Department of Publicity, Ministry of Panchayat, His Majesty's Government of Nepal.

New Era (June 2000), Migration Policy in Nepal: Review and Recommendations, Research Report submitted to Ministry of Population, Singh Durbar Kathmandu.

Ramakant and B. C. Upreti, eds. (2001), India and Nepal: Aspects of Interdependent Relations, Delhi, Kalinga Publications.

Ray, Jayanta Kumar, ed. (1997), India-Nepal Cooperation: Broadening Measures, Calcutta, KP Bagchi & Company.

Shah, Rishikesh (1995), New Directions in Nepal India relations, Delhi, Niral Publication. Shrestha, Buddhi Narayan (2000), Boundary of Nepal (in Nepali), Kathmandu, Bhumichitra. (Mapping) Co. P. Ltd

Sriman Narayan (1970), Nepal and India: An Exercise in Open Diplomacy, Bombay, Popular Prakashan.

Tyagi, Sushila (1974), Indo-Nepalese Relations 1858-1914, Delhi, D.K. Publishing House.

APPENDIX I

Text of the Tripartite Agreement Between the Government of the United Kingdom, the Government of Dominion of India and the Government of Nepal Memorandum of Agreement

At a meeting held at Kathmandu on 1st May 1947 between representatives of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom, the Government of India and Government of Nepal, His Highness the Prime Minister and Supreme Commander-in-Chief of Nepal stated that he welcome the proposals to maintain the Gurkha connection with the armies of the United Kingdom and India on the following basis "If the terms and conditions at the final stage do not prove detrimental to the interest or dignity of the Nepalese Government, my Government will be happy to maintain connections with both armies, provided men of the Gurkha regiments are willing so to serve (if they will not be looked upon as distinctly mercenary)."

1. Discussions have taken place in Delhi between representatives of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and of the Government of the Dominion of India and the points of agreement are embodied in the Memorandum dated 7th November 1947 a copy of which forms Annexture I of this document. Necessary financial adjustment between the two Governments are still under consideration.
   
   
2. Further discussions between the representatives of the three Governments have taken place at Kathmandu during which the Government of Nepal have not forward certain pertinent observation on the memorandum of agreement referred to in the preceeding paragraphs which are set out in Annexture II. In regard to these points, the representatives of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and of the Government of the Dominion of India has replied as follows:
   
   
   1. Location of the Recruiting Depots
      The use of the existing depots at Gorakhpur and Ghum has been sought by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom for a temporary period only pending establishment their own depots in Nepal. The wishes of the Government of Nepal have been noted and arrangements for the establishment in India of the Recruiting Depots required to meet the needs of the Gurkha units of the British Army will be settled between the United Kingdom and Indian Governments.
      
      
   2. Desire of the Government of Nepal that the total number of Gurkha Units to be employed in the Armies of the United Kingdom and of India shall be limited and brought down to the peace-time strength of 20 Battalions out of which 8 Battalions will be allotted to the British Army. The representatives of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and of the Government of Dominion of the India have taken note of the wishes of the Government of Nepal.
      
      The representative of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom has explained that the long term planning of the British Post-War Army has preceeded on the assumption that the Government of Nepal would be prepared to furnish sufficient men to establish the equivalent of and Infantry Division in South-East Asia and he has received an assurance from the Government of Nepal that final decision on the question of recruitment of Gurkhas in excess of 8 Battalions at peace-time strength shaldl be left open until Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom have had an opportunity of considering the view of the existing political situation in India.
      
      
   3. Arrangement for the import of foreign currency belonging to the Gurkha units of the 8 Batalions serving overseas.
      
      It is noted that the Government of the Dominion of India has agreed to afford all normal facilities in regards to the import of foreign currency belonging to these men (Annexture I, Item 10). Aa reply to the specific points raised in this connection will be sent to the Government of Nepal in due course.
   
   
   
3. The Government of Nepal being generally satisfied in regards to the terms and taking note of the agreement dated 7th November 1947 reached between Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and of the Government of Dominion of India hereby signify their agreement to the employment of Gurkha troops in the armies of the United Kingdom and of India.
4. In addition to the observations referred to above the Government of Nepal have put forward certain suggestions connected with the employment of Gurkhas in the armies of the United Kingdom and of India. These suggestions are contained in Annexture II of this document and the views of the two Governments thereon will be communicated to the Government of Nepal in due course.
5. Note has been taken of the desire of Her Majesty's Government in United Kingdom that prompt action be taken to ascertain the wishes of the personnel of the 8 Battalions concerned as to whether they desire to be transferred for service under the United Kingdom Government. With this objective in view a questionnaire and a memorandum embodying terms and conditions of service have been prepared by the representatives of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom. These documents are acceptable to the Governments of India and Nepal. They will be issued to the personnel of the 8 units concerned as soon as possible. In accordance with the wishes of the Government of Nepal as well as those of the Government of India it is agreed that their representative will be present with the 8 units while the referendum is being taken.
6. The representatives of the three government desire to place on record that their deliberations have been conducted in a atmosphere of cordiality and goodwill and are confident that the friendly relations which have existed in the past will be further cemented as a result of the arrangement which have been agreed for the continued employment of Gurkha soldiers in the armies of the United Kingdom and of India.
7. Signed in Triplicate at Kathmandu this 9th day of November 1947.

| back to content |