Submit your Article

Deeply ingrained historical, cultural, and geographical links define the civilizational relationship between India and Nepal. Formally expressed via the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship, this bilateral engagement has provided an unmatched degree of permeability between two sovereign governments, enabling the free flow of people and products across an open border spanning 1,770 kilometres. Notwithstanding these apparently tight connections, the relationship has been characterized by occasional conflict, mutual misunderstanding, and diplomatic congestion. Although physical closeness and cultural familiarity should ideally promote smooth collaboration, in practice, India-Nepal ties are nevertheless delicate and vulnerable to both internal political changes and regional forces. This article aims to investigate alternative answers based on existing frameworks and empirical observations as well as to grasp the structural and dependent elements causing these obstructions.

The territorial dispute over Kalapani, Limpiyadhura, and Lipulekh is among the most delicate and persistent causes of disagreements. When India published an updated political map including the disputed areas in 2019, this problem became much more severe. Nepal responded with its map and a constitutional change, thereby supporting its assertions. In Nepal, this move stoked nationalistic fervor and turned into a gathering place for claiming historical identity and sovereignty. It shows how closely conflicts over territory—especially in post-colonial states—are related to issues of nationhood and historical recognition rather than just legal or administrative ones.

This escalation also emphasizes the more significant trend in nationalist politics affecting bilateral ties. Domestically, political players in both India and Nepal have been turning more and more to foreign policy issues to inspire popular support. In Nepal, criticism of India often finds prosperous footing in nationalist narratives that show India as an obstructive force. Although these stories are not necessarily based on reality, their resonance comes from past grievances and the more extensive background of imbalance. In India, however, there is a tendency in strategic circles to see Nepal’s actions as either reactive or shaped by outside players. When free from diplomatic communication, such opinions may harden policy stances and limit the area for compromise.

Another significant bottleneck in the relationship is Nepal’s evolving engagement with China. China has significantly expanded its presence in Nepal during the last ten years by means of diplomatic outreach, economic support, and infrastructural projects. Seeing a chance to diversify its economic alliances and lessen reliance on India, Nepal has accepted China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Nevertheless, it did not bore much fruit to Nepal. In New Delhi, where worries about Chinese intrusion in the Himalayan area have developed, this realignment has not gone unseen. From Kathmandu's vantage point, interacting with China is a hedging and strategic autonomy-boosting tactic. It aims to strike a balance between two big powers, thereby preventing too much reliance on one.

This captures the dynamics of small-state conduct in international relations, especially the idea of ‘soft balancing’, in which smaller governments try to increase their autonomy by including many partners without open conflict. Nepal’s China outreach also shows an effort to change its growth story, presenting itself not only as a dependent neighbour but also as a growing transit centre between India and China. This change for India calls for a review of its strategic posture. India would be better off improving its attractiveness with dependable infrastructure delivery, open project management, and culturally sensitive diplomacy with Kathmandu.

India has shown both technical know-how and readiness to co-develop responses in water resource cooperation. The great hydropower potential of Nepal offers the area transforming prospects. India has funded significant hydropower projects such as Arun III and Upper Karnali, therefore offering not just financial help but also grid connection and market access. Some cooperative ventures have delays that result not from a lack of purpose but rather from the complexities of transboundary water management. In renegotiating agreements, India has shown willingness and flexibility to guarantee that Nepali issues are resolved and profits are fairly distributed. 

The bilateral dynamic is powerfully shaped by ethnic politics as well, especially in connection to the Madhesi community in Nepal’s Tarai area. Historically excluded from Nepal’s political mainstream, the Madhesis have significant cultural and family links to those living in northern regions of India. Their demands for linguistic rights, federal reorganisation, and proportional representation have set off periodic outbreaks of internal strife. The complexity results from these internal issues permeating bilateral relations. While India views itself as supporting democratic values and minority rights, Nepal has seen India’s comments of support for Madhesi’s inclusion as an intervention in domestic affairs. This sensitive problem emphasises how foreign policy and home politics interact. After the civil war, state-building initiatives in Nepal have required a reconsideration of citizenship, identity, and representation. Cross-border ethnic connections can result in hopes of moral or diplomatic assistance in India. Handling these calls for great care. India needs to stress quiet diplomacy and people-to-person interaction in this case.

With these stacked difficulties, which paths may be followed for a more steady and cooperative relationship? First, bilateral communication has to be institutionalised right now. Although ad hoc conferences and high-level visits are valuable, they cannot replace organised systems of participation. Joint Commissions’ regular meetings, strategic conversations between foreign secretaries, and the rebirth of bilateral working groups on trade, water, and energy can help to provide continuity and lower misperceptions. Scholarly research on international regimes emphasises how crucial ongoing engagement is to building confidence and lowering diplomatic transaction costs.

Second, economic interconnection has to be extended and strengthened beyond conventional industries. In recent years, India has made admirable progress in building cross-border rail connections, starting a petroleum pipeline from Motihari to Amlekhgunj, and setting integrated checkpoints. Other areas like digital infrastructure, educational exchanges, and tourism should have these ideas expanded and duplicated. Economic cooperation should be considered as a vehicle for the empowerment of Nepal’s development aspirations as much as a tool for influence. Here, theories of complicated interdependence are informative, stressing the variety of channels and the role non-state players play in maintaining peaceful interactions.

Cooperation on water resources calls for a paradigmatic change. Pursues of joint development should centre on environmental sustainability, equality, and openness. Project agreements and bilateral treaties have to be negotiated inclusively with local populations and interested parties. Establishing dispute-resolution systems and cooperative environmental assessment agencies would also help to build confidence. Other areas, including the Mekong basin, where transboundary cooperation is controlled by multi-stakeholder systems balancing growth with sustainability, might provide lessons as well.

Ultimately, structural inequalities, changing geopolitical alignments, and deeply ingrained political sensitivity restrict India-Nepal relations, even if they have traditionally been close and profoundly nuanced. Though they are not insurmountable, the obstacles in the way of collaboration call for a change in institutional involvement, policy instruments, and attitude. Mutual respect, strategic empathy, and an awareness of Nepal’s sovereign goals will form the foundation of a forward-looking, sustainable cooperation. Through cooperative development, inclusive diplomacy, and long-term trust-building, India and Nepal can overcome regular difficulties and create a robust and future-oriented alliance.

Nepal and the United Kingdom—then represented by the British East India Company—established diplomatic relations in 1816, marking the beginning of Nepal’s formal international diplomacy. Since then, from the 19th to the 21st century, Nepal has expanded its diplomatic ties to 183 countries. Additionally, Nepal is a member of major multilateral institutions like the United Nations, as well as regional organizations such as SAARC and BIMSTEC.

Nepal also played a notable role in the Non-Aligned Movement during the Cold War. However, it is unfortunate that Nepal continues to primarily focus on its two large neighbors—India and China—and global powers like the United States. While Kathmandu has reached out to establish diplomatic relations with many other nations, such relations remain symbolic if they are limited to signed agreements without meaningful cooperation or engagement.

Nepal has the potential to enhance its diplomatic outreach and diversify its foreign policy for the benefit of the nation and its people—but it has seldom done so. For instance, although Nepal and Thailand established diplomatic relations on 30 Nov 1959, there were no high-level visits exchanged between the two countries for decades.

In the first week of April, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli made the first official visit by a Nepali prime minister to Thailand, coinciding with the 6th BIMSTEC Summit. The visit served two purposes: to mark the first high-level Nepali visit to Thailand and to participate in the regional summit.

Prime Minister Oli was warmly received at Suvarnabhumi Airport by Thai officials. He later met with Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra, where both leaders discussed strengthening bilateral relations. They emphasized enhancing cooperation in trade, tourism, investment, connectivity, and people-to-people ties. The two leaders also agreed to deepen collaboration at bilateral, regional, and multilateral levels.

During the visit, the two prime ministers witnessed the signing of significant Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) in cultural and tourism cooperation. Additionally, private sector representatives from both countries signed six MoUs to boost collaboration in areas such as trade, agriculture, health, and education.

Interestingly, Nepal is the birthplace of Gautam Buddha, while over 90 percent of Thai people practice Buddhism. Thailand is also one of the top destinations for Nepali tourists. Yet, despite these strong cultural and religious links, the two countries have largely overlooked each other in the past. Notably, while Nepal previously enjoyed visa-on-arrival facilities in Thailand, today, ordinary Nepali citizens are required to obtain visas in advance.

Geographically, Nepal and Thailand are relatively close—Nepal being a South Asian country and Thailand part of Southeast Asia—yet their bilateral relations have remained modest. Despite both countries joining BIMSTEC, a regional organization connecting South and Southeast Asia, interactions at the highest levels have been limited. Prime Minister Oli’s visit and his invitation to the Thai Prime Minister for a return visit signal a renewed effort to change that. A forthcoming visit from the Thai leader would mark another important milestone.

As two medium-sized powers with deep cultural and tourism ties, Nepal and Thailand should work more closely together—not only bilaterally but also in regional and global forums—as pledged by their prime ministers.

In today’s world of multipolarity, ongoing wars, climate challenges, and shifting alliances, it is essential for Nepal and Thailand to support one another. Overdependence on a few powerful nations can leave smaller countries vulnerable. Nepal, with diplomatic ties to 183 nations, must think more strategically. It should prioritize and diversify its international engagements—across economy, trade, culture, tourism, and more—to effectively serve its national interests.

Panday is a foreign affairs journalist based in Kathmandu

Nepal is grappling with a severe environmental and public health crisis linked to growing plastic pollution and poor waste management practices. The problem has come into sharper focus in recent weeks as air quality deteriorated dramatically across the country.

According to the Air Quality Index (AQI) data from April 2025, Kathmandu’s AQI crossed 250—classified as very unhealthy. A visible haze over the valley, largely attributed to vehicle pollution, wildfire, dust and open burning of waste, especially plastics, in urban and semi-urban areas impacted the public. Many social media users reported eye burning problems and difficulties in breathing. 

“With limited landfill space and ineffective plastic waste collection, many local governments resort to open dumping or burning of plastic, releasing toxic pollutants into the atmosphere,” says Ujjwal Upadhyay, an environmental expert.

This burning is not just an environmental hazard—it’s a public health emergency. Scientific research now confirms that microplastics are being inhaled, absorbed into the bloodstream, and accumulating in human organs—including the brain.

A startling investigative article by NBC News on Sept 2024, citing a study published in JAMA Network, reported that researchers in Brazil had discovered microplastics in the olfactory bulbs of deceased human subjects. The olfactory bulb, located just above the nasal cavity, is directly connected to the brain. Scientists suspect that airborne microplastics are entering the body through the nose and accumulating in this region, raising alarm about potential neurological effects.

A separate study conducted at Cukurova University in Turkey found that microplastics could constitute up to 0.5 percent of the human brain’s total weight. These revelations underline the urgency of addressing airborne microplastic pollution.

According to the World Bank’s 2020 estimates, Nepal generates around 60,000 metric tons of plastic waste annually, of which approximately 20,000 metric tons end up in rivers. With many landfill sites located near waterways, heavy rainfall or improper dumping leads to significant plastic leakage into rivers, eventually flowing into the Ganges in India and further into the Bay of Bengal, polluting marine ecosystems.

Plastic, once hailed as a “wonder material” for its durability and low cost, is now proving to be an environmental curse. “It is non-degradable, breaks into microplastics over time, and is now found in drinking water, food, air, and even in salt,” says Upadhyay, who is also a team lead at Project CAP (Collaborative Approach for Preventing Plastic Leakages in Rivers). “A study by Dungel and Maharjan, published in Heliyon, found 80 to 1,040 microplastic particles per kilogram of salt sold in Nepal.”

“Completely banning plastic may be impractical, but immediate steps can be taken to phase out single-use plastics and strengthen plastic waste management,” he says. “Recycling, public awareness campaigns and behavioral change are key to reducing plastic pollution. Waste management systems must be modernized with support for circular economy models, turning plastic waste into reusable raw materials.”

According to Upadhyay, sanitation workers—often the backbone of waste collection—must be supported with proper safety gear, training and fair compensation. “Scaling up recycling infrastructure and connecting informal waste pickers to plastic recovery supply chains can contribute to both environmental protection and economic upliftment.”

“There is a high chance of rainfall on Wednesday, which might clear the pollution, and everyone will forget about it,” says Upadhyay. “But that should not be the case—every stakeholder must treat this as an emergency and take action.”

Mithila is a land of legends, vibrant culture, and an unbroken cycle of fairs and festivals that weave through the year like a colorful tapestry. These celebrations are not mere events but a way of life—expressing joy, sorrow, hope, and resilience. They mark the changing seasons, infusing meaning into everyday existence while strengthening the bonds of community.

Among these festivals, Rama Navami stands out, heralding the arrival of spring and celebrating the birth of Lord Rama. Observed on the ninth day of the bright lunar fortnight (Shukla Paksha) in the month of Chaitra (April), it is marked by grand fairs, devotional songs, and fervent worship.

According to ancient lore, King Dashrath of Ayodhya—a prosperous and benevolent ruler—was childless despite having three devoted queens. Distressed, he performed a sacred yagna (fire ritual) upon Lord Vishnu’s advice. Pleased by his devotion, the gods bestowed upon him a bowl of kheer (rice pudding). Another version narrates that the fire god Agni himself emerged from the yagna and presented the divine dessert.

Dashrath distributed the kheer among his queens: Kaushalya, Kaikeyi, and Sumitra. In time, Kaushalya gave birth to Rama, Kaikeyi to Bharat, and Sumitra to the twins Lakshman and Shatrughan. Thus, Rama, the divine prince and embodiment of virtue, was born.

On Rama Navami, devotees fast, chant Rama’s name, and recite sacred texts like Tulsidas’s Ramcharitmanas in the Tarai-Madhes region and Bhanubhakta’s Ramayan in Nepal’s hills and Kathmandu Valley. Temples dedicated to Rama resonate with hymns, and the faithful immerse themselves in prayer, seeking blessings and solace.

The life of Rama has been immortalized in countless versions across languages and cultures. Valmiki’s Ramayan, the original Sanskrit epic, chronicles his journey through seven kandas (episodes), from his childhood (Bal Kand) to his final years (Uttar Kand).

Inspired by Valmiki, poets like Bhanubhakta (Nepali), Tulsidas (Hindi), and Chanda Jha (Maithili) retold the epic in their own tongues, each adding unique literary brilliance. Beyond South Asia, Rama’s story thrives—Thailand’s Ramakien, Indonesia’s Kakawin Ramayana, and other adaptations testify to his enduring legacy.

Rama is revered not just as a god but as the perfect human—an obedient son, a devoted husband, and a just ruler. His birth anniversary, Rama Navami, transcends borders, uniting devotees in Nepal, India, and beyond.

It is said that hearing Rama’s tale purifies the soul, and chanting his name alleviates suffering. Thus, this festival is not merely a ritual but a reaffirmation of faith, virtue, and the timeless wisdom of the Ramayan.