Nepal – India Open Border:

Problems and Prospects

Nepal – India Open Border:

Problems and Prospects

Lok Raj Baral

Uddhab P. Pyakurel

Vij Books India Pvt Ltd

New Delhi (India)

Published by

Vij Books India Pvt Ltd

(Publishers, Distributors & Importers)

2/19, Ansari Road Delhi – 110 002

Phones: 91-11-43596460, 91-11-47340674

Fax: 91-11-47340674

e-mail: vijbooks@rediffmail.com

Copyright © 2015, Authors

ISBN  : 978-93-84464-86-8 (Hardback)

ISBN  : 978-93-84464-92-9 (ebook)

All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted or utilised in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Application for such permission should be addressed to the publisher.

The views expressed in the book are of the author and not necessarily those of the publishers.

Supported by B.P. Koirala India-Nepal Foundation
2015

Contents

Acknowledgements

A Field-based study on Nepal-India open border arrangement was long over due. When this idea was raised with the former Indian ambassador to Nepal, Shri Jayant Prasad, he promptly accepted it and went into action during the B.P. Koirala India-Nepal Foundation (BPKF) Meeting in March 2011. Yet, the project was delayed to execute due to various reasons. We are happy that the study is complete within a stipulated period of fourteen months, two more months than the term fixed by the BPKF Board. Its main reason of delay was the availability of time of Researcher, coordinator and Advisers. Since it is entirely a field-based study, visits to the field needed suitable season.

According to the original plan, two researchers, one from India and one from Nepal, were supposed to work in the project but due to his own prior commitments and job conditions, Dr. Vinod K. Bhardwaj of Jaipur, could not spare his time. Dr. Uddhab P. Pyakurel, a Nepali scholar, who teaches Political Sociology at Kathmandu University and the coordinator Professor Lok Raj Baral had to work as a full timer. Both of them have visited the field freeing themselves from their regular engagement as teacher (Uddhab), and executive head of Nepal Centre for Contemporary Studies (NCCS). Other scholars who were involved for field works were Dr. Indra Adhikari, Prof. Binaya K. Kushiyait and Bijay Raj Pant.

Ambassador of India to Nepal, Jayant Prasad, Co-Chairperson of BPKF (now retired) in particular, deserves special thanks for his interest and quick action he took for providing fund to the execution of project as well as in accepting the names of advisors and research team. His successor Ranjit Rae continued the cooperative spirit by encouraging us to hold discussion events in Patna, Lucknow and New Delhi in addition to the five meetings held in Kakarbhitta, Birgunj, Kathmandu, Bhairahawa and Mahendranagar in Nepal. We are grateful to him for taking quick decision and action. The then Acting Nepali Ambassador, K.N. Adhikari, who acted as Co-Chairman of BPKF, and the members of Board, have cooperated by gladly supporting the proposal during the BPKF Board meeting.

The Deputy Chief of Mission, Mr. Jaideep Majumdar and Mr. Abhay Kumar, (First Secretary Press, Information and Culture) of the Embassy of India deserve thanks for their cooperation. In fact, Abhay Kumar has cooperated with the team by taking quick action for releasing fund when needed. Mr. Pankaj Mallik who handled the BPKF as local staff deserves thanks for his cooperation. The two Advisors, Former Director General of SSB (India), R.K. Shukla, and former Home Secretary of Nepal, Umesh P. Mainali, have encouraged the team by accepting our request to be advisers. The suggestions made by them during our first meeting in November 2012 were valuable. While making comments on the draft of the report, Mr. Shukla provided many inputs into the subject. The report is enriched with his suggestions. We are grateful to him for taking time to come to Kathmandu for our last meeting. Ishwor Kharel and Uttam Hachhethu of NCCS deserve appreciation for their role as local logistic managers. Finally, credit goes to all the respondents, especially the SSB (India) and the APF (Nepal) personnel, local administrators of both sides, journalists and civil society members we met and discussed during the field visits.

Chapter I : Background

“Geography still counts. It counts in a strategic and tactical military sense, a political sense, and culturally defined territorial sense, and it counts in terms of the spatial distribution of resources, peoples, and physical systems”¹ .This statement is aptly correct in the context of India - Nepal Relations. Nepal’s overall relations with India have been more or less determined by geographical location of the country as it faces India (South Asia) with all commonalities of the countries of the Indian subcontinent. Now this region is called South Asia and the countries of the region are integral geographical parts. Among these countries, Nepal has not only unique relationship in multiple senses as geography has destined the two countries to be together.

Going back to history, from time immemorial, both migrants and indigenous peoples inhabited the lands belonging to the northern Gangetic plain and hills. Kathmandu valley, ruled by the Newars for centuries, had its distinct cultural heritage and identity with which the King of Gorkha was infatuated. Coming as he did from a small poor hilly principality, Prithvi Narayan shah’s expansion began with the ambition of becoming a king of a big empire. As his empire building expedition went on becoming successful, he and his successors extended and expanded the territories in the East and West. After conquering the Kathmandu valley fully in 1768–69, he established himself as “builder of modern Nepal”. By the time Prithvi Narayan Shah died, the Gorkhali Empire was “comprised the whole of the eastern and central Tarai, inner Tarai, the whole of Kathmandu valley, and the eastern hill region up to the Tista river bordering Sikkim, with the state of Jajarkot in the north-west as a vassal”.²

However, Nepal’s international boundary was officially delineated only in the eighteenth century. The empire building expedition started by King Prithvinarayan Shah of Gorkha of Western Nepal and continued by his successors came to a halt after the defeat in the Anglo-Nepal war of 1815. The Treaty of Sugauli, signed in 1815 and ratified in 1816, that accepts the dictated terms of the victor, could provide Nepal with a stable international border. Some territories were ceded in 1860 after the then Prime Minister, Jang Bahadur Rana (Kunwar), established himself as credible and reliable ruler. In fact, Jang had appeased the British by taking part in quelling the Sepoy Mutiny in 1857. The mutiny, started with the aim of overthrowing the British rule, failed. It not only provided a temporary relief to the British design but also helped stabilize the Raj without any resistance. Soon thereafter, the British rulers fixed the boundary by erecting pillars in the Eastern and the Southern borders, while the Western border was divided by the Kali (Mahakali) river.

In fact, relations between India and Nepal have been close since ancient times stemming from geographical location and common ethnic, linguistic and cultural identities that overlap the two countries. Such overarching, deep and complex relations have many things to do with the border which itself is unique and unparallel in the world. In other words, the open border regime that has been in existence from time immemorial has become the most distinguishing feature of India-Nepal relations.

With this background, a research has been conducted by forming a joint research team comprising members from Nepal and India. The study, which was supported by B.P. Koirala Nepal-India Foundation, had the following objectives.

Objective of Study

Though the overall objective of the study was to understand the positive/ negative dimensions of its contribution in national, regional and spatial development, the following were the specific objectives of the study.

•    To analyze the open boarder provisions through realistic approach in changing context.

•    To minimize the present controversies through facts.

•    To document the perceptions of the real beneficiaries of the provisions.

•    To explore the gaps in effective border management.

•    To recommend some measures in order to manage border in a better manner.

Methodology

The team has done intense fieldwork of one year (from December 2012 to October 2013) in the bordering areas in order to collect data. Interview (the list of interviewees is available in annex) of various stakeholders of the border (security apparatus deployed in the border, governmental and non-governmental organizations working in the border, civil society members of the bordering areas, users of the border for their livelihood, users of the border for the transit purpose), and observation were the techniques applied by team to collect primary data, whereas published and unpublished reports, articles, news reports, books, blogs, etc. were the sources of secondary data.

1   Saul Bernard Cohen, Geopolitics: The Geography of International Relations (Noida, India: Pentagon Press, Indian edn, 0), p.2

2   Mahesh C. Regimi, Imperial Gorkha (Delhi: Adroit publishers,1999), p.4

Chapter II : Nepal–India Open Border - Genesis And Dynamics

Nepal had no fixed boundary before the signing of the Sugauli Treaty. However, psychological division seemed to work to establish political identity of both. A lot of criminal activities used to take place along the Nepal-India border before the Anglo-British war and the “criminals found a ready shelter in the territory on the other side of the border”. It has been noted that “with the establishment of the Residency the prevention of the border crimes became one of the chief duties of the Resident. Unfortunately this problem had never been tackled on a formal basis, nor did the Peace Treaty (1815-16) contain any clause relating to it”¹.

Bilateral disputes that often arose along the border of states like Tirhut, Sarun and Bettiah were settled through the good offices of British Magistrate. Since many bordering states were not directly under the British rule, they often picked up border quarrels with Nepal. However, when the British Raj was already established, “the British boundary was comparatively straight and well marked by a series of pillars closely constructed, but Oudh frontier was ‘sinuous to the last degree’ having disconnected hills. On such a border of three hundred and fifty miles there were only six spots defined by pillars. The Treaty of Sagauli was also vague on this point. It defined the boundary by the mention of ‘fist continuous line of hills, but it was well known that hills had ‘no continuity’. Only after disputes were raised by either party, pillars were constructed². B.H. Hodgson, then British Resident, seemed to be concerned about the border disputes occurring between Oudh and Nepal and used to draw attention of the Nepal Darbar for the reconstruction and addition of pillars. Although Nepal always agreed to solve the boundary dispute, “it refused to bear even half of the expense involved in regular inspection”³.

The fallout of the defeat of the Gorkhalis in the Anglo-Gorkha war had both negative and positive consequences. Positively, after a brief spell of political instability precipitated by the court rivals and family feuds, Nepal could steer a stable course after the advent of Rana rule in 1846. Though it was family oligarchy exclusively monopolized by the Rana family members, it consolidated whatever gains Nepal could save in the Sugauli Treaty. If the British Raj could be relieved of Nepal’s ambition of expansion, the latter was much assured of stability and territorial integrity as determined by the provisions of the Treaty. Since China was already a declining power, Nepal and British-India developed close relations by undertaking various measures including the demarcation of international boundary as well as making themselves as friends. Although the conclusion of the Treaty and loss of territory was a major setback to Nepal, the Treaty of Sugauli had recognized Nepal’s independence and sovereignty. The Nepali king had signed the Treaty by virtue of being sovereign despite the defeat in the war. Under Article III of the Treaty, “certain territories were ceded by Nepal”. It is said: The cession of territory by agreement under a peace treaty has never involved or indicated a loss of sovereignty or independence otherwise than in relation to the ceded territories. If the treaties were the case, there would be few States which could be held independent and sovereign in the present time”⁴. Losing war was one thing, maintaining sovereignty was another.

As a sovereign country, Nepal agreed to cede its territories conquered by it during the War. So “while giving away the right over Sikkim and other territories in Mechi river in the East and Kali river in the West, Nepal’s king had used the prerogative of a sovereign”⁵. However, the practice of open border didn’t come from the Treaty as both the peoples of Nepal and India had only psychological considerations of being different. While going over to India, Nepalis felt that they were in Muglan as the word Muglan , the land of Mugal. The white pillars (Jange pillars) reminded the peoples that they were entering into the foreign land. Above all, such feelings are the blood, vein and arteries of the nation state. Physical borders are only outward forms of national identity. Rishikesh Shaha writes:

“By the beginning of the 19^th century the expansion of the Gorkhas in the hills was running parallel to that of the British in the northern and eastern parts of India, and they had evolved a common land frontier extending along a distance of at least 700 miles. The frontiers nowhere in Asia had ever been demarcated and the problem of frontiers was at its worst in India during those uncertain times when the British advances from Bengal were creating a stir in the entire region”⁶.

The significance of open border was also admitted during the negotiations for retaining the Gorkha troops in the Indian Army after partition in 1947. The memorandum of Agreement between the Government of the Dominion of India and H.M. Government in the United Kingdom has stated in article 5 that “The Gorkha Officers, recruits, soldiers, ex-soldiers and pensioners, shall be permitted to travel freely between Nepal and an Indian port on their lawful occasions”⁷. Nepalese willing to join the British and Indian armies made use of the open border and travelled to different recruitment centres established in Ghoom, Darjeeling, and Gorakhpur. The very word Lahure (those serving the then British army) has its origin in Lahore (now in Pakistan).

It is assumed that the British rulers in India might have kept an open border between Nepal and India due to some of these reasons:

•    To facilitate the Nepalese from the hilly regions to join the British army;

•    To make smooth flow of British and Indian consumer goods into Nepal (economic purpose);

•    To ensure free movement of timber, boulder, fire-woods herbs, hides and skin and various other raw materials ; and

•    To continue the common cultural and civilization links between the people of Tarai and the northern plains of India⁸. This picture is now modified as all the Nepalese belonging to the hills and the Tarai have some kinds of cultural and other links with the peoples of India. The new recruits are primarily from the hill ethnic groups.

Many of the foregoing reasons are still valid. However, In Nepal today, the issue of recruitment into Indian Army has been politicized by some groups and individuals taking such an arrangement as an insult to the independent nation. Demands for ending the recruitment into foreign armies are raised even today with a committee formed by the Constituent Assembly itself seeking its abrogation. But such opinion do not go unchallenged by those who have served the foreign armies and are benefitted after their retirement and by others who want to join the Indian Army in the future. Since there is no alternative employment opportunity in the country, it is imperative for all to continue this arrangement. For India, apart from being involved in wars with other countries (non-Hindu countries), the Gorkha troops have been used as a neutral force during the grave internal crisis particularly when security situation tries to go out of hand due to inter-communal and inter-ethnic conflicts in India. In the wake of the assassination of Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi in November 1984 by her two Sikh bodyguards, for example, the Gorkha troops played a key role in Delhi to contain engulfing sectarian conflict. Now open border regime is not only a political reality, but it has cultural, demographic and historical attributes that continue even today. So far the political boundary is concerned, the two countries are separated by both semblance of demarcation pillars, tributaries, rivers and by the mental makeup that both are independent, sovereign nations with their distinct characteristics. Yet, the political demarcation does not obstruct the people to people relations despite their own legal and administrative systems for dealing with the Nepalis in India and Indians in Nepal.

As stated elsewhere, Nepal and India maintained a very unique relation which is sometimes referred to as ‘special relations’ too. It can be argued that some common grounds can be found in other parts of the world, but the Indo-Nepali model is found nowhere. Here are some identified features of India-Nepal border:

1.    It is open border as the peoples of two countries can use the border without passport, visa and other documents except those who travel by planes. However, some areas have been declared “restricted” where no foreigners including Nepalis can visit. In the past, Restricted Area Permit was needed if one wished to visit those areas in India.. Since it took a long time to obtain such permits, people used informal ways to travel. Nepalis going to Northeast India, for example, used such methods and sometimes were harassed or even deported by the Indian police.

2.    It is a composite border of plain land, high hills, rivers, forests and gorges. India is on three sides, East, West and North-South. The Himalayas work as a natural barrier between Nepal and China. The original natural boundary position in the North is somewhat changed after the construction of motorable roads linking the Tibet Autonomous Region of China with Nepal. Such man-made access has changed the strategic dimension. So the Himalayas no longer stand as a natural boundary. Demand for connectivity and interactions between China, Nepal and India may further open the border. China has already constructed railways up to Sighatse in near the Kerung-Rasuwagadi along the Nepal-China border.

3.    The southern border is a composite of plain land, rivers and forests. Interestingly, all Nepalese rivers flow north–south. Geography aids the natural and religious links between the two countries. Thus, rivers and the mountains including the High Himalayas have created a kind of common civilization of India and Nepal.

•    Generally, no registration is needed in the border.

•    It is difficult to establish one’s own identity while using the border within India and Nepal.

4.    Open border is regarded as a “safety-valve” for Nepal. Millions of Nepalis have been employed in India. Nepal too provides similar opportunity to Indian workers, traders and others but, given the size of India and economic capacity to absorb as many Nepalis as possible, it is considered as less problematic. However, in certain parts of India, notably in the Northeastern states, Nepalis are also not taken kindly by the local people and are forced to face deportation.

     Commonalities of language, culture, physical features (especially between the Tarai people of Nepal and northern Indians) make the open border regime more people friendly. It sometimes creates problems of national identity and national sovereignty when unscrupulous elements try to exploit the free border for self interests. Border is also used for criminal activities as it is used as a conduit for terrorists of all sorts and nationalities. It has been reported frequently in the press that criminals, armed gangs, fake currency dealers, smugglers, drug and women traffickers have been using the open borders. Now India has deployed Seema Surakshya Bal (SSB) on the entire Nepal-India borders. In about to four kilometer gap, the Indian armed posts have been established for the following reasons:

     Stop smuggling, movement of contraband /illegal goods, import or export without clearing custom duties

     Peace keeping, internal security and prevention of criminals from using the border

     Security of custom check points, border areas and border pillars, and prevention of trans-border crimes

     Prevention of girls trafficking

     Prevention of transaction of arms and amenities

     Prevention of transaction of fake currencies

5.     Nepal too has given border duty to the Armed Police Force but due to lack of resources, it has established posts between 15-25 kilometer and even more gap.

6.     It is not porous border but it can be called open border for a variety of reasons: unrestricted movement of peoples of India and Nepal; for more or less equal treatment meted out to Nepalis in India and Indians in Nepal; for continuing historical relations in political, social, economic and other fields. Although the traditional relations as determined by geography cannot alone work as obstacle to the dynamics of international relations whose impacts on the internal and bilateral relations are no less significant, Nepal’s dependency syndrome and lack of economic progress and capacity to employ its own people have not changed the pattern of bilateral relations. Nevertheless, with the changing international and regional context, Nepal-India relations seem to be evolving.

The following two aspects of Nepal-India open border have played a crucial role in remaining one of the lively aspects of Nepal-India relations.

2.1 Human Movement

Human movement is one of the major aspects of each and every international border. Due to the unique nature of the border, which provides immense economic and social opportunity, the number of peoples crossing the border for various activities both in Nepal and India is very high on daily basis. It is said that the livelihood of millions of people, living in both sides of the border, depends on that movement. It is reported that over 361 million people are living across the border in the neighbouring Indian states of Sikkim, West Bengal, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Due to dense habitat in both sides of the border, from morning to evening, till the closure of the activities, flocks of people pass every day making Nepal- India border one of the most dynamic and economically and socially vibrant borders of the world⁹. Since socio-cultural similarities on either side of the international border are one of the universal phenomenons, these are more pronounced in the case of Nepal-India border. According to a Nepali scholar:

“Nepal-India border is unique in the world in the sense that people of both the countries can cross it from any point, despite the existence of border check posts at several locations. The number of check posts meant for carrying out bilateral trade is 22. However, only at six transit points out of them, the movement is permitted to nationals of third countries, who require entry and exit visa to cross the border¹⁰”

While observing cross border movement of peoples across India- Nepal border, people use this particular border on daily basis basically for some of the reasons given identified below.

2.2 Health

Most of Nepalese of different regions, especially of the border areas, go to Indian cities for medical treatment. Indians also come to Nepal for treatment in hospitals in Nepal as good facilities are provided in the Nepal Tarai hospitals in recent years. These facilities have resulted in greater inflow of eye patients from the bordering states of India because of quality and cheap services. Also hospitals like Bharatpur medical college has attracted a large number of cancer patients from India. It is equally true in the case of Nepalese. It has been observed that more than 70 percent cancer patients visit Rajiv Gandhi Cancer hospital in New Delhi. Other quality hospitals are no less attractive for the Nepalese.

2.3 Business and Livelihood

People of both the countries are involved in small and medium sized enterprises like shops across the border, whereas both Indian and Nepali laborers are actively involved in construction, agriculture, factories, and other household affairs. Tanga drivers, shops, loaders, manual workers and many other kinds of job-seekers use the open border. The Indian market provides cheaper and better quality products, encouraging the Nepalese for using such markets for daily purchases. In fact, Nepali people have been highly dependent on the Indian market across the border for their day-to-day livelihood. Most of the border markets of India are sustained only because of Nepali consumers. Even though it is not known when the open border between Nepal and India was initiated, the system of free movement of people on either side of the border started since the state formation of both sides. Indians too come to Nepalese side for entertainment purpose as very many Bars and Restaurants including Casinos are available in the bordering cities of Nepal. The open border and its own historical and contemporary significance for both countries is very important in understanding Flow of skilled labourers from India and unskilled manpower from Nepal is also a common feature.

2.4. Education

It is difficult to trace exactly when Nepali students started going to India for education. However, it is said that India has been an educational hub for the Nepalese ever since the Gurukul system of education started. The trend accelerated with the advancement in the education system after the initiation of formal education some 200 years ago. The flow of Nepali students to the neighbouring country kept on rising since the days of the Rana regime when education used to be the exclusive prerogative of the ruling elite and then beneficiaries. Today, those who could afford send their children to various places in India. There are many popular destinations such as Darjeeling, Kurseong, Kalimpong, Nainital, Dehradun and Mussorie for school education. Other big cities are increasingly becoming attractive for higher studies. It is said that some 500,000 students are studying in Indian schools¹¹, and it is being continued due to schools in Nepal which could not deliver the “quality education compared to those in the neighbouring country”. Adoption of tight visa rules for students in The United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, India is a proximate destination for Nepal. And people make a choice as India is affordable for middle class people. Similar cultures of both the countries are identified as other factors making India as a secure destination for Nepalese children’s higher education¹². Apart from these general trends, many Indian students are now taking their education in medical science in the bordering cities of Nepal. Today, there are 20 medical colleges, and many of them are located in Nepal’s Tarai. These medical colleges have attracted a large number of Indian students seeking medical education and also patients seeking medical services in these hospitals. The attraction towards study of medicine in Nepal is also due to the cost involved apart from the quality of education.

2.5 Transit

Nepalese travelling to third countries through India have also increased the frequency of movement across the border. Though the number of people travelling through different points is diverse, a good number of Nepalese citizens cross the border point for transit purpose. According to a report¹³, 400 to 500 migrant workers are flying to Gulf countries on a daily basis from Indian airports. It is claimed that around 100 to 150 Nepali workers fly to third countries through Lucknow and Delhi alone. Though avoiding unnecessary hassles at the Nepali airport is one of the major reasons for this choice, lack of embassies of the destination countries in Nepal, flying costs, legal hassles and the lack of a proper monitoring mechanism are other reasons for Nepalis travelling overland to India. “It is mostly people working in India and those living near the Indian border who are travelling through Indian airports. As we do not have the embassies of any of the destination countries, except Malaysia, workers find it easier to obtain visas and leave from India,”¹⁴

The entry and exit of nationals from the third countries is another cause of the frequency of movement across the border. There are six immigration points (Banbasa, Dhangadhi, Nepalganj, Bhairahawa (Sunauli), Birganj and Kakarvitta) along the Indo Nepal border for the entry and exit of nationals from third countries, and thousands of third country tourists take these routes while travelling to both the countries.

2.6 Family Relations

Large numbers of families across the border are tied through marital relations. So apart from the very specific reasons for movement, people generally go across the border to see their families, friends and relatives.

2.7 Migration (seasonal and permanent)

Open border facilitated -migration (seasonal and permanent) seems to be the driving force for human movement in the border. Studies (Thieme 2006:1) state that there could be 1.3 to 3 million Nepalese working in India. This figure is higher now as Nepalese have reached almost all places, particularly town and cities. During insurgency period (1996-2005) and forced by natural calamities and lack of employment, Nepalese go to India for immediate redemption. In other words, there is huge number of cross border migration between Nepal and India. The following causes are identified for such migration.

2.8 To avoid conflict

Avoiding conflict in home or destination country is one of the major causes of Nepal-India migration. The number of people crossing over the border to India through certain border checkpoints shot up to 2,000 per day during the conflict period¹⁵. From the Nepalganj sector alone, the number of people crossing over the border from Nepal to India was 300 to 400 per day in November-December 2002, which shot up unprecedentedly to 1,200 during the same period in 2003¹⁶. During the conflict period 24,000 people from the Rajapur areas of the Bardiya district had left their villages en masse to settle in the Baharaich and nearby areas across the border in India¹⁷.

According to a recent report, some 25 per cent workers in the construction sector in Nepal are Indian, whereas Indian shares more than 75 per cent in ornament business. Also, it is estimated that 40-50 per cent Indian workers are in tailoring and garment industries, and the similar portion of Indians are working in Nepal as street venders. The report reveals that some 50 thousand workers from Rajasthan are living in Nepal in order to work on marble and tile area. It has been identified that out of all labourers who all the way come to Nepal for job, only 10 per cent have brought their family members together with them. Also of those workers, some 20 per cent Indians are living in Nepal for more than 20 years while working, whereas some 40 per cent are living in Nepal for 5 years and the rest are mobile labourers who often go and come¹⁸. Since the big numbers of Indian laborers working in Nepal are quite mobile, it obviously helps to make Nepal-India border busy. Also, those who live longer in Nepal while working, invite their family members and friends in Nepal not only for family affairs but also for pilgrimage visits, trekking, etc.

1   Ramakant, Indo-Nepalese Relations,1816 to 1877 ( Delhi: S.Chand & Co., 1968),p.92.

2   Ibid, p. 96.

3   Foreign Political Consultation [PC.] May 28,1830-No 19 as cited in Ramakant, ibid,p.97.

4   See Avtar Singh Bhasin, ed., Nepal’s Relations with India and China: Documents 19471992, vol.1 (Delhi: Siba Exim Pvt. Ltd. 1994),p.7.

5   Perceval Landon, Nepal (London: Constable, 1928), p.101.

6   Rishikesh Shaha, Modern Nepal: A Political History, 1769-1955, Vol.1, (Delhi: Manohar,1990), p.115.

7   See The Text in S.D. Muni, India And Nepal: A Changing Relationship (Delhi: Konark Publishers, 1992), p.183.

8   See Buddhi Narayan Shrestha, Nepalko Seema ( Boundary of Nepal) ( Kathmandu: Bhumichitra (Mapping) Co.pvt. Limited, 2000 , p. 278

9   See, http://www.spotlightnepal.com/News/Article/The-Border-Life, accessed by authors on September1, 2013.

10  Vidya Bir Singh Kansakar “Nepal-India Open Border: Prospects, Problems and Challenges,” available in http://www.nepaldemocracy.org/documents/treaties_ agreements/nep_india_open_border.htm, accessed by authors on September1, 2013.

11  See, http://www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_ id=60148, accessed by authors on September1, 2013.

12  http://www.ekantipur.com/2013/06/13/national/india-the-most-preferred-destination-for-nepali-students/373181.html

13  Roshan Sedhai, “Worries as more migrant workers leaving via India”, The Kathmandu Post, September 11, 2012.

14  Kumud Khanal, as cited in The Kathmandu Post, Ibid.

15  for details, see www.ipsnews.co.th/writingpeace/features/nepal.html; see also Hari Bansa Jha, “Economics of Conflict and Peace with focus on Nepal” , a paper submitted to a seminar “New Dynamics of Development: Challenges and Prospects” organized by Centre for Economic and Technical Studies (CETS) In cooperation with Friedrich- Ebert-Stiftung (FES), 12 & 13 November 2008.

16  Save the Children – Norway, “A Study on Impacts of Armed Conflict Pushing Girls and Women into Sexual Abuse and Sex Trade” (Kathmandu, 2005)

17  Bishnu Raj Upreti, “Environmental Stress and Armed Conflict: A Study on Effects of Maoist Insurgency on Environmental Sanitation and Health of Internally Displaced Persons of Urban Areas of Kathmandu City ofNepal” (paper submitted to International Conference on Health and Environmental Research Challenges in Urban Poor Settlement,