The Pulse | Diplomacy | South Asia

Why Did Nepali PM Balendra Shah Call on UK to ‘Take an Interest’ in an India-Nepal Dispute?

The controversial comment was made on the eve of ruling party chief Ravi Lamichhane’s visit to India.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the leader of Nepal’s ruling Rastriya Swatantra Party, Rabi Lamichhane, at a meeting during the latter’s visit to New Delhi, India, June 3, 2026.

On June 2, India firmly rejected Nepali Prime Minister Balendra Shah’s call for the United Kingdom to mediate the India-Nepal border dispute.

“It should be clear to all concerned that there is no role for any third parties in a bilateral matter between India and Nepal,” Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson of India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), said at a weekly media briefing in New Delhi. India and Nepal have bilateral mechanisms to deal with border issues, he said.

The MEA statement came two days after Shah told Nepal’s parliament that his government had “spoken not only with India and China but also with the U.K. government” regarding the territorial dispute. “Our view is that the U.K. should also take an interest, as the issue dates back to the period when British India left the region,” the Kathmandu Post quoted Shah as saying.

India and Nepal share a 1,880 km-long open border. As Jaiswal noted at the briefing, “close to 98 percent of the India-Nepal boundary has been demarcated.” The changing course of rivers has resulted in some “unresolved segments” along the border, he said, adding that “there are cases of cross-border occupation and encroachment of no-man’s land in demarcated segments of the boundary which are currently being mapped jointly.”

The Lipulekh-Kalapani-Limpiyadhura area is among the areas that remain disputed.

The roots of the dispute can be traced back to the Sugauli Treaty of 1816, signed between Nepal and British India. While declaring the Mahakali River as the border between the two countries, the treaty did not define where the river originates. No map was attached to the treaty either. India cites revenue records dating back to the 1830s to justify its claims over the territory.

The Lipulekh-Kalapani-Limpiyadhura area is highly strategic. It is at the China-India-Nepal-trijunction. India controls the area; since the 1962 Sino-Indian border war, Indian soldiers have been deployed at Kalapani.

The territorial dispute has repeatedly erupted to the fore in recent years. In 2020, when India inaugurated a road through the Lipulekh Pass to Kailash Mansarovar, a major Hindu pilgrimage site in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China, Nepal hit back. It turned to maps to assert and consolidate its claims. The K.P. Sharma Oli government, widely seen to be pro-China, unveiled a political map depicting Kalapani, Lipulekh, and Limpiyadhura as part of Nepali territory.

A furious India described the new Nepali map as a “unilateral act.” The MEA said that the map was “not based on historical facts and evidence. It is contrary to the bilateral understanding to resolve the outstanding boundary issues through diplomatic dialogue. Such artificial enlargement of territorial claims will not be accepted by India.”

Nepal was not intimidated. It dug in its heels thereafter. The new map was endorsed by parliament, a step that Oli described as a “milestone towards reclaiming Nepal’s land,” and was also incorporated in the Nepali constitution via an amendment bill. Currency notes issued since 2025 carry an image of the new map.

Meanwhile, India and China, which are otherwise locked in a competition for influence in Nepal, have........

© The Diplomat