On August 2, violent confrontations broke out in the contested region of Susta, reigniting an old territorial disagreement between Nepal and India. The clash involved Nepali villagers and Indian border security personnel, with the latter accused of entering Nepali soil in Nawalparasi West. They reportedly dismantled an embankment being built by local residents to safeguard against flooding. The situation escalated to the point that Nepal’s Armed Police Force had to intervene to restore order and prevent further violence.
A history of border tensions
This latest incident is not an isolated event. Just months earlier, in June 2025, Indian Border Security Force members were said to have entered a construction site in Susta Municipality-5 and forced workers to halt an embankment project. Local communities in this part of Nepal have been working on such projects to combat seasonal floods, but these efforts are repeatedly obstructed by the unclear boundary and conflicting territorial claims.
India’s Ministry of External Affairs has yet to provide an official response to the recent clash. According to sources from Nepal’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, however, the Nepali Embassy in New Delhi raised the issue with the MEA immediately following the incident. India has maintained that any construction on disputed land violates the so-called status quo, a principle both countries have historically agreed to uphold.
Complicated by geography and shifting boundaries
The Susta region is among the most sensitive parts of the India-Nepal border. Unlike most areas where boundary markers are clearly defined, this 24-km stretch lacks boundary pillars, making it even more prone to conflict. Instead, the border relies on natural features such as rivers and trees to determine the line. The Gandak (or Narayani) river is a crucial marker here, but its course has changed over time. The 1816 Treaty of Sugauli, which established the river's midstream as the boundary, further muddies the situation, as shifting riverbanks now challenge the original agreement.
This issue has roots in broader historical tensions. In 2020, Nepal revised its political map to include the contested Kalapani-Limpiyadhura-Lipulekh region as part of its sovereign territory, a move that India firmly rejected. Earlier, New Delhi had also rejected Nepal’s claim to these areas, which it considered part of the Indian state of Uttarakhand. More recently, in May 2025, Nepal protested the resumption of the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra and border trade through the Lipulekh Pass, which lies in the disputed area. India dismissed Nepal’s objections as 'unjustified,' calling its territorial claims an 'untenable' expansion.
Stalemate in diplomatic negotiations
In 2014, both India and Nepal agreed to resolve the border dispute through a formal mechanism involving the Boundary Working Group (BWG) and discussions between foreign secretaries. The BWG, responsible for technical matters like building boundary pillars and maintaining existing markers, has met multiple times. The most recent BWG meeting was in July 2025. Despite this, no meeting at the foreign secretary level has taken place in over a decade, a key gap in the resolution process.
Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri visited Nepal in August 2025, but no official statements mentioned the border issue as a topic of discussion. Similarly, when Nepali Foreign Minister Shisir Khanal visited India earlier in June, press releases from both the Nepal Embassy in Delhi and India’s MEA provided no indication that the dispute was even broached.
Despite these diplomatic roadblocks, India-Nepal relations have largely remained stable. Strong operational coordination between security forces, robust economic ties, and shared cultural heritage have prevented border disputes from turning into major crises. The border, which stretches 1,800 kilometers, is mostly open and only minimally fortified, in stark contrast to India’s heavily guarded borders with Pakistan and China.
While the Susta and Kalapani disputes have proven especially difficult to resolve, it is clear that the two countries have managed to keep these issues from derailing broader bilateral cooperation. The special relationship between India and Nepal is underscored by this open border, which symbolizes the deep historical and cultural connections. Yet, it also remains a potential source of ongoing friction, particularly in regions like Susta where geography and history create persistent uncertainty.
While progress in resolving these disputes has been limited, both countries have so far avoided major diplomatic confrontations. The lack of high-level engagement remains a concern, but ongoing cooperation in other areas ensures that even in sensitive zones, the relationship remains broadly resilient.