By P.R. Pradhan

There is a popular saying: “It does not matter whether two elephants are fighting or mating, the grass gets crushed in either case.” For Nepal, a small country sandwiched between two rising giants—India and China—this proverb is a harsh reality. Whether the two neighbors engage in conflict or cooperation, Nepal often ends up bearing the consequences.

The global power balance is rapidly shifting, especially after U.S. President Donald Trump assumed office for the second time. Amid this changing landscape, India and China have been attempting to normalize their strained relations. Recently, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited India and signed an agreement that, among other things, proposed cross-border trade through the Lipulekh Pass. The problem, however, is that Lipulekh is Nepali territory, illegally occupied by India.

The origin of the Mahakali River—known in India as the Kali River—is Limpiyadhura. Historical evidence clearly shows that Limpiyadhura is the source of the river. According to the 1816 Sugauli Treaty between Nepal and the British East India Company, the Mahakali River and all lands to its east were recognized as belonging to Nepal. By this treaty, Kalapani, Lipulekh, and Limpiyadhura are indisputably Nepali territories.

However, India has artificially developed another small river and claimed it the origin of the Kali River. Using this false claim, it has been occupying Nepal’s land for decades. In 2015, when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited China, a similar agreement on Lipulekh was signed. At that time, then Prime Minister Sushil Koirala protested and sent diplomatic notes to both India and China. India ignored Nepal’s letter, while China responded by asking for supporting documents to validate Nepal’s claim. In the meantime, India unilaterally built a motorable road through the disputed area, and the Nepali leadership failed to strongly object.

In 2019, India escalated matters further by publishing a new political map that incorporated Nepali territory. In response, Nepal’s Parliament unanimously amended the constitution to publish an updated map including Kalapani, Lipulekh, and Limpiyadhura. Unfortunately, Nepal did not take the critical next step of formally informing the United Nations, neighboring countries, and other diplomatic partners. This hesitation reflected the psychology of many Nepali leaders: fear of displeasing India. Their silence only emboldened India to continue exploiting Nepal’s weaknesses.

If Nepal truly wishes to return its land, its leaders must shed hesitation and speak firmly, backed by historical documents and international laws. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs should actively inform the international community of Nepal’s stance, while engaging both India and China in formal discussions.

India has consistently refused to acknowledge Nepal’s claims. Therefore, Nepal must also diplomatically engage China, reminding Beijing of the boundary protocol signed on October 5, 1961, between King Mahendra and Chinese President Liu Shaoqi. That agreement clearly recognized Limpiyadhura as the tri-junction of Nepal, India, and China, thereby affirming Nepal’s sovereignty over Kalapani, Lipulekh, and Limpiyadhura.

India’s refusal to resolve disputes—whether over Kalapani or Susta—reveals its ill intentions. By bullying a small neighbor, it pressures Nepal into accepting strip maps unilaterally prepared by India, which could cost Nepal significant territory from Mechi in the east to Mahakali in the west.

First and foremost, all Nepalis must unite behind a single-point national agenda: protecting every inch of Nepal’s sovereign land. Political parties should set aside rivalries and agree on this non-negotiable principle.

At the same time, Nepal must strengthen itself economically and militarily. We cannot safeguard sovereignty while playing the role of a beggar. Our leaders must abandon the culture of seeking personal favors from foreign countries—be it scholarships for their children or donations of cattle and dogs. Nepal can manage such needs independently.

What the country requires is a decisive break from a dependency mindset. Harnessing our abundant natural resources, boosting economic productivity, and building trust with both neighbors are essential. If India continues to undermine Nepal’s interests, then strengthening ties with China becomes imperative. However, the wiser path is to maintain balanced and equidistant relations with both India and China, treating them equally rather than leaning toward one while alienating the other.

Nepal stands at a critical crossroads. Unless its leaders abandon timidity, end corruption-driven compromises, and embrace national unity, the country risks losing more territory and dignity. Protecting sovereignty demands strong diplomacy, internal consensus, and economic empowerment. Nepal may be small in size, but with courage, unity, and clarity, it can preserve its rightful place between the two elephants.