Prime Minister Balendra Shah called for diplomatic dialogue to resolve border disputes between Nepal and India during his first address to the House of Representatives.
This proposal represents a shift toward multilateralism in regional diplomacy. By inviting external powers to the negotiating table, Nepal aims to break a long-standing deadlock over territorial boundaries and prevent further escalation of tensions.
Speaking in the Parliament in Kathmandu, Shah proposed a framework involving four nations [1]. He said that the United Kingdom and China should join Nepal and India in these negotiations to ensure a peaceful settlement of the outstanding disagreements [1].
Shah assumed office in late March 2024 [1]. His address on June 1, 2024, emphasized the need for diplomatic engagement to maintain regional stability. The prime minister said that the involvement of international partners could provide a balanced approach to the sensitive border issues.
Reports on the event vary regarding the political atmosphere. Some accounts state Shah addressed the House of Representatives on June 1, 2024, while other reports indicate he avoided the session, which led to political tensions.
India's reaction to the proposal remains mixed. Some reports indicate India is open to dialogue, while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a clarification suggesting concern over remarks regarding Nepal encroaching on Indian territory.
Despite these contradictions, the prime minister's core objective remains the peaceful resolution of border issues through structured, multilateral talks. The proposal to include the UK and China marks a departure from traditional bilateral negotiations between the two neighbors.
“Nepal seeks four-nation talks with India, China, and UK to resolve border disputes.”
The push for a four-nation summit suggests that Nepal no longer views bilateral talks with India as sufficient to resolve its territorial claims. By bringing in China—a major regional power—and the UK—a traditional diplomatic actor—Nepal is attempting to internationalize the dispute to gain leverage or neutral mediation. However, the conflicting reports on Shah's parliamentary attendance and India's cautious response indicate that domestic political instability and diplomatic friction may hinder the implementation of this multilateral strategy.
