04/06/2026
B***n Shah: "Not only has India encroached Nepali territory, but Nepal has also encroached Indian territory in many places."
MEA India: "Close to 98% of the boundary demarcated, there are cases of cross-border occupation & No-Man's land encroachment."
B***n Shah: "We spoke to both India & China. These issues originated during British India times, so United Kingdom should also have interest in the matter."
MEA India: "It should be clear to all that no role for any third party in a matter between India & Nepal."
Some praised the statement as a bold, revolutionary move to invite the UK and China into the conflict to aggressively mediate the border dispute. This narrative misinterprets both international law and the PM's actual diplomatic scope. Shah wasn't calling for a third-party tribunal, he was physically seeking historical 1827 and 1834 colonial maps from London archives to act as legal evidence for Nepal during future bilateral talks. Furthermore, the MEA India's swift response firmly reiterated that international mediation is completely off the table, signaling that any attempt to aggressively externalize the dispute only delays actual bilateral progress.
And Some aggressively claimed that B***n Shah compromised Nepal's national sovereignty by admitting to Nepal encroaching on Indian territory framing it as a betrayal of Nepal's claims over Kalapani or Lipulekh. This is false. As both Nepal's Foreign Ministry and India's MEA subsequently clarified that Shah was referring to the highly specific issue of cross-border occupation in river-border areas (like the shifting Gandak River) where changing river paths have historically caused farmers both sides to accidentally cultivate land belonging to the other country. It was an admission of a localized agrarian reality not a concession of sovereign geopolitical territory.
