India and Nepal have a 1,751-kilometer border, with the Indian states of Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Sikkim, and West Bengal sharing a border with Nepal. Apart from geographical proximity, the two countries allow immense trade and have no restrictions on the movement of citizens and merchandise without visas. This open border and free movement policy was legally instituted in the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship. Let’s see how this 75-year-old treaty ensures peace and special relations between India and Nepal.
The Foundations of Friendship: The 1950 Treaty
India and Nepal entered the Treaty of Peace and Friendship on 31 July 1950, which constitutes the pillar of their bilateral relationship. The treaty embodies values of peace, friendship, and sovereignty of the two countries, as well as mutual non-interference within the territories of each country.
The Rationale Behind Open Borders
India’s no-visa border policy is the result of centuries-long religious, cultural, and kinship relationships between India and Nepal. Nepal is greatly dependent on India for business and employment, with thousands of Nepalis employed in India and Indians doing business in Nepal. Nepal acts as a buffer state for India, a friendly neighbour between India and China.
Under this treaty, Nepal has to consult India whenever it procures weapons from any nation except India. The treaty also gives both countries the right of “national treatment” against each other, a provision which is extended to industrial and economic progress. This entitles citizens of both nations the right to property, trade, residence, and movement in each other’s country. For example, a Nepali national can own property in India, and vice versa. An Indian national can stay anywhere in Nepal, and a Nepali national has analogous rights to stay in India under national treatment.
Nepal’s Calls For Treaty Revision
The 1950 treaty has been asked to be revised several times. Nepal first complained that the treaty was signed with an unpopular Rana ruler, accusing India of taking advantage of the situation. Some factions within Nepal even contended that the way the treaty was signed indicated that India considered Nepal a subordinate state and not an equal.
Nepal has repeatedly protested Articles 2, 6, and 7 of the agreement.
Article 2 prescribed that both governments shall notify each other about any grave friction or misunderstanding with any bordering state that may likely disturb the friendly relations between both governments. Nepal construed this to imply that it has to first notify India prior to initiating new relations or negotiations with a third nation (such as China, Pakistan, USA, etc.). Nepal perceived this as a limitation on its independent foreign policy.
Articles 6 and 7 provide nationals of India and Nepal with equal rights in the other’s country in respect to economic endeavour, employment, domicile, and ownership of property. In 1994, the UML won on an anti-India platform. Ever since, the sloganeering against India as well as the claims that the 1950 treaty unduly benefits India have become a political party’s favoured strategy.
The 1988 Arms Import Incident
Nepal writes that in 1988, while importing arms from China, India viewed this as a breach of the 1950 treaty and unilaterally placed restrictions at the transit points between India and Nepal. This embargo was very damaging to Nepal, affecting business and provoking serious economic and security issues.
Nepal argued that importing Chinese arms was not against Article 5, which is directly related to the import of arms from or through Indian territory. Since the 1988 imports were both from and not through India, Nepal claimed it was not obligated to notify or consult India. Nevertheless, India shut down Nepal’s transit routes for 17 months, underscoring the intricacy of the treaty.
ALSO READ | Who Is Kulman Ghising? Man Who Once Resolved Nepal’s Power Crisis, Now In Interim PM Race