Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri has completed his two-day official visit to Nepal, during which he held extensive talks with top leaders of major parties, representatives of fringe parties, government officials, and the army chief.
While in Kathmandu, Misri met with Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, President Ramchandra Paudel and Foreign Minister Arzu Rana Deuba. He also interacted with Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba, CPN (Maoist Center) Chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal and other senior leaders. Bilateral talks were also held with his Nepali counterpart Amrit Kumar Rai, though both sides have kept the details undisclosed.
Misri’s trip comes ahead of Prime Minister Oli’s planned visit to India, marking the first such high-level exchange in four months. The timing follows a brief but deadly war between India and Pakistan, US President Donald Trump’s tariff measures against India and other shifting regional dynamics. For much of the past year, New Delhi had appeared hesitant to extend an invitation to Oli. However, PM Oli and Modi met on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly last year and on the sidelines of the BIMSTEC meeting this year which means there has been constant communication between two sides.
The upcoming visit suggests a thaw in what has been a turbulent relationship between Oli and New Delhi over the past decade. His trip is expected to focus on longstanding issues, particularly the implementation of earlier agreements. Among the priorities is the stalled Pancheshwor Multipurpose Project, where efforts are underway to resolve remaining disputes.
From 2015 to 2022, Nepal-India relations were shaped by five major factors: the 2015 blockade, the map row, the still-unimplemented Eminent Persons Group (EPG) report, China’s growing influence and debates over reviving SAARC. A decade later, only the “China factor” remains a prominent feature in bilateral diplomacy; the other issues have largely faded. In the same period, several temporary irritants, mostly border-related, hampered normalization of ties.
Yet, another quiet trend was taking root: development projects began reaching completion on schedule, India’s overt support to Madhes-based parties waned and economic cooperation advanced despite political mistrust. In recent years, energy cooperation, connectivity projects and regular political and bureaucratic exchanges have helped sustain a more cordial partnership.
Meanwhile, Nepali leaders have softened their positions on the map row and the EPG report. Today, the three major forces—Nepali Congress, CPN (Maoist Center), and Madhes-based parties—have all set aside these contentious agendas. Only CPN-UML raises them, and even then, only half-heartedly. Oli remains consistent, however, in asserting that Lord Ram was born in Nepal, a claim that continues to irritate India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party. On the boundary dispute, both governments appear to share an understanding to address the issue quietly through established bilateral mechanisms rather than public confrontation. As for SAARC, the prospect of revival has receded further since the India-China clashes in May this year.
Still, despite the delay in Oli’s visit, Nepal-India engagement has intensified. Cabinet ministers from both sides have been exchanging visits, political delegations between Kathmandu and New Delhi have grown more frequent and meetings of long-dormant bilateral mechanisms have resumed, showing tangible progress. The “China factor” remains central, with India frequently raising concerns about Beijing’s influence in Nepal in the context of its own security interests.
Regional dynamics have also nudged the two countries closer. During the India–Pakistan war of May 7–9, Nepal issued two statements condemning terrorism, implicitly siding with India. Indian Ambassador Naveen Srivastava personally met Prime Minister Oli to convey New Delhi’s appreciation. Since coming to power in 2014, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has prioritized neighboring countries in India’s foreign policy. Though critics argue these efforts have fallen short, the Modi government continues to push forward with economic and development packages as the backbone of its neighborhood engagement.
Defense cooperation, once strained, is also seeing renewed momentum. During Misri’s visit, India handed over light strike vehicles, critical care medical equipment and military animals to the Nepali Army. The Indian readout described this as reflecting “the close relationship between the two armies and our robust defense cooperation.”
Collaboration between the two armies has grown in recent months, even as India closely monitors Nepal’s growing ties with the US and Chinese militaries.
Institutional mechanisms have also restarted. After a six-year hiatus, the Nepal-India Boundary Working Group met in New Delhi on July 28–29 for its seventh session. While contentious issues remain unresolved, the two sides agreed on updated modalities for inspecting and maintaining boundary pillars, finalized a three-year work plan, and committed to using advanced technologies for boundary management.
Progress has also been noted in legal and development cooperation. Negotiations continue on a revised extradition treaty and a mutual legal assistance agreement in criminal matters. Small-scale development projects under the High Impact Community Development scheme are advancing steadily. Integrated Check Posts (ICPs), first agreed upon in 2005, have also moved forward. Three of the five ICPs were completed and operationalized in 2018, 2020, and 2024, with work underway on the remaining two.
“During the various engagements, both sides noted with satisfaction the concrete progress in recent years in diverse areas of bilateral cooperation, including physical connectivity, digital connectivity, defence and security and energy cooperation,” said the press release issued by Indian Embassy in Nepal.
“Nepal is a priority partner of India under its Neighbourhood First policy. The Foreign Secretary’s visit continued the tradition of regular high-level exchanges between the two countries and helped in advancing our bilateral ties further.”
