Submit your Article

In the middle of the stunning trans-Himalayan terrain, in the Urai pass, there is a less-known but potentially vibrant route that offers a fresh perspective on the relationship between Nepal, China and India. The U-shaped edge in the northwestern corner visible in the map of Nepal, precisely in Bajhang district, above the 4,000 meters, is not so widely known and thus has become a neglected route. This ancient route near Kailash Mansarovar is rightly positioned to connect the holy sites in China and India. Its importance can be gauged by the fact that Urai pass is strategically placed to connect and rejuvenate religious-cultural significance, much deeper than the often talked-about economic integration in the region that is fragile and geopolitically sensitive.  

In his book Spy on the Roof of the World, Sydney Wignall has elaborated deeply on the use of Urai pass for a very long time by explorers, pilgrims and traders. He has also described Urai pass as a geostrategic location, given the prospect of connectivity it possesses. Even today, for those seeking spiritual visits to holy sites like Mount Kailash and Mansarovar Lake, it is considered a potential gateway that could alter how regional trade and religious tourism operate. A similar understanding has been shared by Hanna Rauber in her work Life and Trade of the Bhote Khampa in Far West Nepal, who has particularly stressed the business and livelihood aspect. 

If revisited and reopened, the Urai pass could soon provide millions of people access to spiritual, cultural and financial possibilities. It will link the Tibetan highlands and beyond with the largely populated plains of northern India, home to tens of millions of Hindus, Buddhists and Bon followers. 

Shiva Raj Malla Shrestha, in his academic article Ancient Nepal (2001), published by the Department of Archaeology, has stated that ancient works, such as Skanda Puran, also clearly depict the importance of Urai Pass, then known as Uru Parvat. It is believed that the Urus and other pre-Vedic clans took this route to facilitate interaction between humans, ideas and commodities in the Himalayas. It was formerly employed by pilgrims as well as merchants; hence, it was crucial in connecting Tibet with northern India and Western Nepal. Urai pass therefore occupies a strategic position in the Himalayas and has potential for trans-Himalayan linkages and promoting religious-cultural, and economic interactions. 

Moreover, the business prospect can be gauged from the fact that Fürer-Haimendorf, in his work Himalayan Traders: Life in Highland Nepal (1975), has portrayed Urai pass as a critical corridor in the trans-Himalayan trade network, linking the remote Bajhang district with Tibet. It facilitated the exchange of goods such as salt, wool, grains and spices between Tibet and Nepal.

Mount Kailash and Mansarovar Lake have been religiously and spiritually significant for many years, especially for Hindus, Buddhists, Jains and Bon followers. People have long endured rugged terrains and severe weather since they feel the gods reside in these holy sites. Moreover, it is widely believed that not just the destination but also the path taken by holy spirits is known to be divine and pure, thus further amplifying the value of this route. Hence, mapping this route in itself holds a greater significance. For this, all the major points in this route should be studied and the route needs to be made adventurous yet safe for pilgrims and tourists from across the globe.   

Thought to be the earthly forms of Mount Meru, a sacred mountain in Hindu, Jain and Buddhist views, many religious people visit Mount Kailash and Mansarovar.

The Urai pass might provide Indian pilgrims—especially those from the states of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh—with a fresh approach to reach these holy sites. Long ago, visits to Kailash and Mansarovar were connected with the dull and time-consuming paths through Nepal and Uttarakhand. Utilizing the Urai pass and other infrastructure enhancements, the distance could be shortened, and pilgrim access to these holy sites would be safer and more accessible.

The populous northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, home to more than 200m people, can reap benefits with the opening of this pass. The state is near the Urai Pass, which might result in a direct trade route between Tibet and the northern plains opening itself. This could lead to more business and religious travels. The turnaround of people on a large scale during Mahakumbh in Uttar Pradesh shows the unlimited possibility Urai pass might unlock for Nepal, China and India. 

For an extended period, remote Himalayan villages have been cut off from the economic centers of India and its northern neighbors. Using this pass could have more than one motive. Opening this path would mark the beginning of a fresh era of pilgrimage, and reaching their spiritual goals would be simpler and safer for people.

Opening this pass would open more opportunities for people in South Asia and beyond to collaborate and connect. 

For this, Nepal needs to take diplomatic steps to bring China and India together, excavate the route from anthropological and historical perspective, and work toward developing it as a top cultural-religious tourist destination.

A federal judge on Monday questioned whether the Trump administration ignored his orders to turn around planes carrying deportees to El Salvador, a possible violation of the decision he’d issued minutes before, Associated Press reported.

District Judge James E. Boasberg was incredulous over the administration’s contentions that his verbal directions did not count, that only his written order needed to be followed, that it couldn’t apply to flights that had left the U.S. and that the administration could not answer his questions about the deportations due to national security issues.

“That’s one heck of a stretch, I think,” Boasberg replied, noting that the administration knew as the planes were departing that he was about to decide whether to briefly halt deportations being made under a rarely used 18th century law invoked by Trump about an hour earlier.

“I’m just asking how you think my equitable powers do not attach to a plane that has departed the U.S., even if it’s in international airspace,” Boasberg added at another point.

Deputy Associate Attorney General Abhishek Kambli contended that only Boasberg’s short written order, issued about 45 minutes after he made the verbal demand, counted. It did not contain any demands to reverse planes, and Kambli added that it was too late to redirect two planes that had left the U.S. by that time.

“These are sensitive, operational tasks of national security,” Kambli said.

The hearing over what Boasberg called the “possible defiance” of his court order marked the latest step in a high-stakes legal fight that began when President Donald Trump invoked the 1798 wartime law to remove immigrants over the weekend. It was also an escalation in the battle over whether the Trump administration is flouting court orders that have blocked some of his aggressive moves in the opening weeks of his second term, according to the Associated Press.

“There’s been a lot of talk about constitutional crisis, people throw that word around. I think we’re getting very close to it,” warned Lee Gelernt of the ACLU, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, during the Monday hearing. After the hearing, Gelernt said the ACLU would ask Boasberg to order all improperly deported people returned to the United States.

Boasberg said he’d record the proceedings and additional demands in writing. “I will memorialize this in a written order since apparently my oral orders don’t seem to carry much weight,” Boasberg said.

On Saturday night, Boasberg ordered the administration not to deport anyone in its custody through the newly-invoked Alien Enemies Act, which has only been used three times before in U.S. history, all during congressionally declared wars. Trump issued a proclamation that the law was newly in effect due to what he claimed was an invasion by the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, Associated Press reported.

Nabaraj Subedi, a Panchayat-era leader who also is the coordinator of the recently-formed Joint People’s Movement Committee for the restoration of the monarchy, announced that he will no longer remain a general member of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP). Eighty-six years old Subedi, who is regarded as a close ally of former King Gyanendra Shah, made this statement during a press conference following a gathering of pro-monarchy supporters in Kathmandu on Monday.

“I will no longer be a general member of the RPP starting today. I am working toward bringing back the monarchy,” Subedi declared. He stressed that political parties should work together to run the state effectively. Subedi elaborated that the ‘New Understanding’ is a concept where the monarchy would serve as a symbol of national peace, stability, social harmony, religion, culture, tradition, sovereignty and territorial integrity. He called the political parties to address this proposal promptly, warning that neglecting it would not be in line with Nepal’s past movements for change.

In a statement, Subedi emphasized that if pro-monarchy agendas were misunderstood or misinterpreted, it would come at a high cost. His demands include the restoration of the constitutional monarchy, re-establishment of the Hindu kingdom, the abolition of federalism, anti-corruption measures and good governance.

Drawing from the recent developments in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Syria, Subedi expressed concern that suppressing the voices of the people could lead to undesirable circumstances, as seen in those countries.  “We want to reiterate that we are proponents of peace and non-violence. We desire a monarchy based on the supremacy of the people. However, if our peaceful stance is seen as a weakness and our agendas are misinterpreted, resulting in major political parties retaliating, the consequences could be severe,” the statement warned.

Subedi’s ‘New Understanding’ envisions a peaceful transition through a constitutional monarchy that upholds national unity and integrity.

However, the effort to unite former monarchists under a single banner has not made much headway with intense disagreements among them over who should lead the movement. After the former King proposed the leadership of Subedi for the restoration of the monarchy, RPP leadership, the fifth largest party in the Parliament, indicated its rejection. In a central executive committee meeting called by RPP Chair Rajendra Lingden on Sunday, the majority of senior party leaders opposed the 86-year-old Subedi, whom the former king had endorsed.

King Prithvi Narayan Shah, the founder of modern Nepal, once stated, ‘Nepal is a yam between two boulders.’ This statement has become an evergreen mantra for understanding and managing Nepal’s foreign affairs. According to him, the ‘two boulders’ are India and China, and Nepal’s strategy has always been the ‘strategy for survival,’ as rightly pointed out by Leo E Rose. In realpolitik, all strategies are inherited within the geography of the country—‘Geography is the mother of strategy’. Secondly, geography stands as the most prime factor in implementing the foreign policy of any state because, in most cases, it is ‘fixed’.

Within Nepal, the sentiment of the people has always been a fear of two dynamics: the fear of foreign intervention and natural disasters/earthquakes. To elaborate further, Nepal shares close ties with India in many aspects, from geography to politics, economy, and culture. People in Nepal often find themselves in a forced position to balance ‘sovereignty and integration’ with India. At the same time, China is no longer an ‘inactive’ force in global politics and has an interest in South Asia. That ‘interest’ is sometimes ‘hard’ too. As a Nepali, the fear of being caught in the ‘radar’ of these giants, including the impact of extra-regional powers like the US, can’t be ignored. Nepal resides in an earthquake-prone area, and the foundation of every development must focus on earthquake resilience. These two ‘fears’ have been haunting Nepal and its people for quite a long time.

Power centers have a ‘natural’ interest in the country located between two giants with a comparatively low level of governance efficiency and societal development, allowing foreign aid  ‘projects’ to flourish, thanks to an unfavorable investment climate that curtails FDI in the country.

Nepal-India development partnership

Since the 1990s, India’s foreign aid to Nepal has been largely guided by the Gujral Doctrine. The doctrine states that, “India does not ask for reciprocity with its neighbors like Nepal, Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Maldives and Sri Lanka. Instead, it gives and accommodates what can be given in good faith and trust.” However, as a neighbor, India has not effectively translated these narratives with its smaller neighbors, resulting in tensions from time to time.

When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi assumed power in 2014, he endorsed the Neighborhood First policy, making five trips to Nepal—unprecedented in the past 17 years for any Indian Prime Minister. These visits symbolized strong ties and demonstrated a commitment to collaborating with Nepal based on its development needs. Since May 2014, there have been 17 exchanges at the level of Head of State/Head of Government. Aligned with the ‘Neighborhood First’ policy, Indian Prime Minister Modi has visited Nepal five times, and the Nepali Prime Minister visited India eight times since Jan 2015.

Since 1954, after the establishment of the Indian Aid Mission in Nepal, India has supported Nepal in the development of major infrastructure projects, including the construction of Tribhuvan International Airport, water supply systems and hospitals.

After India’s economic blockade in 2015, India has been actively involved in the development of connectivity with Nepal through construction of Integrated Check Posts and Railways in Nepal. To facilitate the construction of two broad-gauge cross-border railway links—Jayanagar-Bardibas and Jogbani-Biratnagar—financial and technical assistance was provided to Nepal. Furthermore, MOUs were signed to conduct the Final Location Survey for the proposed broad-gauge line between Raxaul and Kathmandu in October 2021. The Draft Detailed Project Report resulting from this Final Location Survey was submitted to Nepal in July 2023 for review and consideration. In FY 2020-21, India provided a grant of $10.93m, a loan of $60m, and $1.38m as Technical Assistance.

India’s shift

The year 2015 marks India’s shift away from engagement in politically sensitive issues with Nepal (in most cases), replacing it with a focus on development agendas. Additionally, India’s grassroots engagement has been facilitated through High Impact Community Development Projects (HICDPs). In Jan 2024, the cap of each project under HICDPs was increased to Rs 200m. Due to India’s intense engagement in Nepal’s political affairs since 1950, HICDPs have been at the center of debate in Nepal, with concerns about India's alleged intervention at the grassroots level to promote its vested interests.

Challenges

Despite such collaborative efforts, Nepal’s trade deficit with India has been steadily increasing. In 2015-16, Nepal’s trade deficit with India stood at $3,581m, with exports amounting to $419m and imports reaching $4,000m. By 2021-22, Nepal’s exports to India had increased to $1,330m, while imports surged to $9,580m, resulting in a trade deficit of $8,250m. In May 2024/25, Nepal’s trade deficit with India reached $9.63bn. This growing trade deficit is primarily due to Nepal’s heavy reliance on Indian petroleum products, vehicles and consumer goods, while Nepal’s exports, mainly agricultural products, struggle to compete in the Indian market.

In April 2022, both countries released a ‘Joint Vision Statement on Power Sector Cooperation’ to enhance power cooperation. However, within Nepal’s political circles, many Nepalis perceive this vision statement as India’s attempt to control Nepal’s water resources while discouraging investment from other foreign players. This perception has been reinforced by India’s consistent reluctance, both in actions and statements, to purchase electricity generated through Chinese capital or contractors in Nepal.

Way forward

Concluding all of the above, India has been focusing on connectivity issues between Nepal and India after India’s economic blockade in 2015, moving away from hardcore political issues. The increasing connectivity with India will help Nepal unlock new potentials, but due to Nepal’s own internal limitations and turbulence, this has resulted in a deeper economic dependency on India rather than interdependence.

India’s involvement at the grassroots level, aimed at empowering local communities through foreign aid and accounting for 35 percent of FDI stock, undeniably highlights its significance in Nepal. Furthermore, Nepal’s geographical positioning—surrounded by India on three sides—places it in a ‘locked’ relationship with India. The interplay between geographical proximity and distinct national identity has led to numerous fluctuations in their political dynamics since the 1950s.

From Nepal’s side, there is a growing perception that India is accelerating its connectivity development projects in Nepal at a time when Nepal is overwhelmed by multiple development commitments from China. Whether India is responding only after Chinese pledges to Nepal or if this is merely a coincidence remains a matter of debate. However, the narrative in Indian media and public discourse about Nepal shifting toward a pro-China stance is a fabricated attempt to undermine bilateral relations between Nepal and India.

Summing up, Nepal and India should move ahead by taking into account each other’s security sensitivities resulting from the open border.