India and the United Kingdom launched the Critical Minerals Global Supply Chain Observatory (GSCO) to strengthen cooperation in critical minerals, clean energy, and resilient supply chains.
Key Highlights
Observatory launched: Critical Minerals Global Supply Chain Observatory (GSCO).
Objective: Monitor and analyse global critical mineral supply chains using data-driven systems.
Aim:
Expand cooperation in:
Critical minerals
Technology sharing
Clean energy transition
Supply chain resilience
Jointly operated by:
Technology Innovation in Exploration and Mining Foundation (TEXMiN)
Indian Institute of Technology (ISM) Dhanbad
University of Cambridge
First announced during:
Visit of Keir Starmer to India in October 2025.
Indian side:
Union Mines Minister G. Kishan Reddy highlighted the role of the initiative in strengthening global supply chains.
Other areas discussed during India-U.K. talks:
Trade
Defence
AI
Climate cooperation
Technology
Education
People-to-people ties
External Affairs Minister: S. Jaishankar held discussions with U.K. Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper.
What are Critical Minerals?
Critical minerals are minerals essential for:
Clean energy technologies
Electronics
Defence manufacturing
Electric vehicles
Renewable energy systems
Examples: Lithium, Cobalt, Nickel, Graphite, and Rare Earth elements
Importance: Supply disruptions can affect economic and national security.
[2025] Consider the following statements: I. India has joined the Minerals Security Partnership as a member. II. India is a resource-rich country in all the 30 critical minerals that it has identified. III. The Parliament in 2023 has amended the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 empowering the Central Government to exclusively auction mining lease and composite license for certain critical minerals. Which of the statements given above are correct?
The Office of the United States Trade Representative proposed a 12.5% tariff on imports from India and several other countries for allegedly failing to effectively enforce prohibitions on goods produced using forced labour.
Key Highlights
Proposed tariff: 12.5% on imports from 54 countries including India.
Investigation launched under: Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act, 1974.
The proposal is: Not final yet.
Public hearings scheduled for: July 7, 2026.
What is Section 301 of the U.S. Trade Act?
Section 301 empowers the U.S. government to:
Investigate unfair trade practices by foreign countries.
Impose:
Tariffs
Trade restrictions if practices are seen as harmful to U.S. commerce.
Reason for the Investigation
The U.S. alleged that some countries:
Failed to effectively prevent imports of goods produced using: Forced labour.
India’s Response
The Ministry of Commerce and Industry stated that:
India remains engaged with the U.S. regarding:
Section 301 proceedings
Interim trade agreement negotiations.
Timeline of Key Events
March 2026: USTR launched investigations.
June 2026: U.S. trade delegation visited India.
June 22: Deadline for hearing participation requests.
July 6: Deadline for written submissions.
July 7: Public hearings.
Sectors Likely to be Impacted
Labour intensive sectors may face major impact:
Textiles
Garments
Leather products
Carpets
Brassware
What is Forced Labour?
According to international labour standards:
Forced labour refers to work extracted under threat, coercion or without voluntary consent.
[2018] International Labour Organization’s Conventions 138 and 182 are related to –
A Child labour
B Adaptation of agricultural practices to global climate change
NPCI International Payments Limited and ACLEDA Bank Plc. launched cross border UPI payments in Cambodia through KHQR, Cambodia’s national QR code system.
Key Highlights
Indian travellers can now use:
Unified Payments Interface (UPI) for QR based payments in Cambodia.
Is a real time digital payment system developed in India.
Operated by: National Payments Corporation of India.
Enables: Instant bank to bank transfers using mobile applications.
What is NIPL?
NPCI International Payments Limited (NIPL):
International arm of NPCI.
Responsible for:
Expanding UPI and RuPay globally.
About KHQR
Cambodia’s national QR code standard.
Operates through:
Bakong payment system.
Managed by:
National Bank of Cambodia.
Features of the Partnership
Phase 1
Indian travellers in Cambodia can:
Scan KHQR codes and make payments.
Covers:
More than 4.5 million Cambodian merchants.
Future Phase
Cambodian citizens visiting India will also be able to:
Use Cambodian banking apps to scan UPI QR codes in India.
Benefits of the Initiative
For Travellers
Reduces need for:
Currency exchange
Carrying cash.
Enables:
Seamless digital transactions.
For Merchants
Access to Indian tourists.
Faster and secure payments.
Lower cash handling costs.
Importance of UPI Internationalisation
Promotes: India’s digital public infrastructure globally.
Strengthens: FinTech diplomacy.
Supports: Cross-border digital payments and trade.
Countries Accepting UPI
UPI is currently accepted in Singapore, United Arab Emirates, France, Mauritius, Nepal, Bhutan, Qatar, Sri Lanka, and Cambodia.
Legal Status of NPCI
Company Status: Registered as a Non-Profit Company under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013.
Ownership: Owned and operated by a consortium of major banks in India.
Regulatory Oversight: It is regulated and supervised by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007.
[2025] Consider the following countries: I. United Arab Emirates II. France III. Germany IV. Singapore V. Bangladesh How many countries amongst the above are there other than India where international merchant payments are accepted under UPI?
PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2017]‘China is using its economic relations and positive trade surplus as tools to develop potential military power status in Asia’. In the light of this statement, discuss its impact on India as her neighbour.Linkage: The PYQ focuses on China’s broader strategy of converting economic, diplomatic, and strategic influence into regional power projection. The article reflects China’s broader strategy of using its growing power to strengthen territorial claims and strategic leverage along the India-China border, particularly through the “Early Harvest” proposal.
Mentor’s Comment
India and China have resumed discussions on boundary settlement through the Special Representatives (SR) mechanism after years of tensions following the 2020 Galwan crisis. The significance lies in the reported revival of the idea of an “early harvest” settlement in the Sikkim sector, a proposal first discussed in 2005.
What is the Indo-China border?
The India-China border is defined by a 3,488-kilometre-long frontier known as the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
Three Sectors of the LAC
The un-demarcated border is geopolitically divided into three operational sectors:
Western Sector: Covers Ladakh. It features key flashpoints like the Galwan Valley, Pangong Tso, and the Depsang Plains, directly adjacent to the Chinese-controlled Aksai Chin wasteland.
Central Sector: Runs across the peaceful, less contested states of Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
Eastern Sector: Spans Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. It historically follows the McMahon Line, which India recognizes but China disputes by claiming Arunachal Pradesh as “South Tibet“.
How Have India-China Boundary Negotiations Evolved?
Phase 1: Historical Boundary Legacy
1890 Anglo-Chinese Convention
Defined the Sikkim-Tibet boundary.
Mentioned Mount Gipmochi as the starting point.
Introduced the watershed principle.
Phase 2: Military Confrontation
1967 Nathu La and Cho La Clashes
Major armed confrontations after the 1962 war.
Demonstrated unresolved border disputes.
Phase 3: Confidence-Building Era
1993 Agreement on Peace and Tranquillity
First major agreement to maintain stability along the LAC.
1996 CBM Agreement: Military confidence-building measures.
2005 Political Parameters and Guiding Principles: Created framework for final boundary settlement. Envisaged:
Political settlement first.
Delimitation later.
Demarcation afterwards.
Phase 4: Emergence of the Early Harvest Idea
2005-2010s
Discussions emerged on resolving easier sectors first.
Sikkim identified as a possible candidate.
India remained cautious about abandoning the package-settlement approach.
Phase 5: Doklam and Strategic Distrust
2017 Doklam Standoff
China attempted road construction near the tri-junction.
India intervened.
Highlighted strategic importance of Sikkim-Doklam region.
Phase 6: Breakdown of Trust
2020 Galwan Clash
First combat fatalities in decades.
India linked broader bilateral relations to peace on the LAC.
Phase 7: Renewed Negotiations
May 2025: Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC) discussed steps toward boundary delimitation.
August 2025
24th Special Representatives Meeting.
Agreement to establish an Expert Group.
China referred to “demarcation” and negotiations in favourable sectors.
Phase 8: Current Debate
China’s Preference: Sector-wise or “Early Harvest” settlement.
India’s Preference
Comprehensive package settlement.
Peace and tranquillity on the LAC as a precondition.
Protection of interests in Eastern Ladakh, Arunachal Pradesh, and the Doklam tri-junction.
How Do Recent India-China Boundary Talks Indicate a Revival of the “Early Harvest” Approach?
The Early Harvest Proposal refers to the idea of resolving those sectors of the India-China boundary where agreement is relatively easier, while leaving the more contentious sectors for later negotiations. Under this approach:
India and China would first settle the Sikkim sector, where differences are comparatively limited.
More difficult disputes such as Eastern Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh would be postponed.
China would obtain a formal settlement in one sector while negotiations continue indefinitely elsewhere.
Why Does the Revival of the “Early Harvest” Proposal Matter?
Special Representatives Dialogue: India and China held the 24th round of SR talks in August 2025, reviving discussions on boundary settlement.
Expert Group Formation: Both sides agreed to establish an Expert Group to examine boundary delimitation in India-China border areas.
Chinese Terminology Shift: China used the term “demarcation” and referred to launching negotiations in sectors where conditions are favourable.
Strategic Concern: Sector-wise settlements could enable China to secure gains in less disputed regions while retaining leverage in contentious sectors.
Diplomatic Significance: Marks the return of political-level boundary negotiations after prolonged military tensions.
What Is the Historical Basis of the Sikkim Boundary Dispute?
Nathu La Clashes (1967): Heavy casualties occurred on both sides despite Sikkim’s eventual accession to India.
Convention of 1890: The Anglo-Chinese Convention identified Mount Gipmochi as the starting point of the Sikkim-Tibet boundary.
Watershed Principle: The convention specified that the boundary follows the mountain ridge separating watersheds.
Tri-Junction Dispute: India and Bhutan maintain that the tri-junction lies near Batang La, about 6.5 km north of Gipmochi.
Strategic Geography: The dispute directly affects the location of the India-China-Bhutan tri-junction.
Why Is the Tri-Junction Location Strategically Important?
Jampheri/Zompelri Ridge: Controls approaches overlooking the Siliguri Corridor.
Siliguri Corridor Security: The narrow corridor connects mainland India with the Northeast.
Chinese Objective: A favourable tri-junction location would provide China greater strategic depth in the Chumbi Valley.
Military Leverage: Enhanced access could improve Chinese observation and operational capabilities.
Territorial Implications: A revised boundary could indirectly legitimise Chinese claims over nearby areas.
How Does the Doklam Experience Influence India’s Position?
Chinese Consolidation: Since the 2017 Doklam standoff, China has strengthened military infrastructure in western Bhutan.
Road Construction: Expansion of roads and permanent facilities has altered ground realities.
Pressure on Bhutan: Increased Chinese presence creates incentives for Bhutan to negotiate on China’s terms.
Indian Concerns: Any settlement affecting the tri-junction could have direct consequences for India’s security.
Strategic Lesson: Temporary stand-offs do not necessarily prevent long-term territorial consolidation.
Why Does India Link Boundary Settlement With Peace Along the LAC?
Galwan Legacy: The 2020 clashes fundamentally altered trust levels in bilateral relations.
LAC Stability Principle: India maintains that broader normalization depends on peace and tranquillity along the border.
Military Buildup: Large-scale troop deployments remain in several sectors.
Confidence Deficit: Repeated violations of prior understandings have weakened confidence in incremental agreements.
Negotiation Framework: India seeks restoration of stability before pursuing major political settlements.
How Has China Altered Ground Realities Along the Border?
Infrastructure Expansion: Construction of roads, airfields, logistics hubs, and border villages.
Military Consolidation: Increased troop presence and deployment capabilities along sensitive sectors.
Administrative Assertion: Renaming locations in Arunachal Pradesh seeks to reinforce territorial claims.
Border Villages Programme: Expansion of settlements near the LAC strengthens administrative presence.
Strategic Messaging: Combines military, political, and infrastructural measures to reinforce claims.
What Was the Significance of the 2005 Agreement?
Political Parameters Agreement (2005): Established principles for resolving the boundary issue.
Two-Step Process: Envisaged political settlement first, followed by delimitation and demarcation.
Package Settlement Concept: Favoured an overall settlement rather than sector-wise resolution.
Mutual Safeguards: Recognized the need to protect strategic interests of both sides.
Framework Relevance: Continues to provide the most comprehensive basis for negotiations.
Should India Accept a Sector-Wise Settlement?
Arguments in Favour
Incremental Progress: Resolves less contentious sectors.
Confidence Building: May improve bilateral atmosphere.
Diplomatic Momentum: Prevents complete stagnation of negotiations.
Administrative Clarity: Reduces ambiguity in settled regions.
Arguments Against
Loss of Leverage: Settled sectors can no longer be bargaining instruments.
Strategic Risk: May strengthen Chinese positions elsewhere.
Historical Precedent: Past agreements have not always prevented new tensions.
Asymmetrical Benefits: China could secure gains while retaining flexibility in contentious sectors.
What Principles Should Guide India’s Negotiating Strategy?
Comprehensive Settlement: Prioritises holistic resolution over isolated agreements.
LAC Stability: Makes peace and tranquillity a precondition for progress.
Strategic Reciprocity: Ensures mutual concessions rather than unilateral compromises.
Protection of Core Interests: Safeguards Arunachal Pradesh, Eastern Ladakh, and Siliguri Corridor security.
Ground Verification: Links agreements with verifiable implementation.
Conclusion
India’s challenge is not merely to settle a boundary segment but to secure a durable and equitable border framework. Any settlement must preserve strategic interests, maintain stability along the LAC, and avoid creating incentives for future coercion. A comprehensive settlement rooted in the 2005 framework, supported by verifiable peace on the ground, remains more consistent with India’s long-term security and diplomatic objectives than a narrowly defined “early harvest” approach.
PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2022] How will I2U2 (India, Israel, UAE and USA) grouping transform India’s position in global politics?Linkage: The question focuses on emerging minilateral partnerships involving India, Israel and Gulf countries, which form the geopolitical foundation of IMEC. IMEC is the economic and connectivity manifestation of the same India-Middle East strategic architecture represented by I2U2.
Mentor’s Comment
The recent Iran-Israel conflict has renewed attention on the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC) by exposing the vulnerability of global trade routes such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez Canal. While the conflict strengthens the strategic case for alternative connectivity corridors like IMEC, it has simultaneously delayed the project’s implementation due to growing instability across West Asia.
What is India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC)?
It is a planned multimodal transport and infrastructure network designed to connect India, the Arabian Gulf, and Europe.
Formalised via a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed at the G20 Summit in New Delhi, the initiative aims to create a highly efficient ship-to-rail transit system.
It acts as a transparent, sustainable, and debt-free alternative to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) while significantly reducing the global reliance on traditional maritime chokepoints like the Suez Canal.
How Has the Iran-Israel Conflict Exposed the Vulnerability of Existing Global Trade Routes?
Military Vulnerability: The conflict challenged assumptions regarding technological and military superiority as guarantees of strategic success.
Aircraft Losses: Reports indicate that 42 U.S. aircraft were reportedly lost or damaged during “Operation Epic Fury.”
Missile Defence Stress: More than half of the inventories of Patriot, THAAD and Terminal High Altitude Area Defence interceptors were reportedly expended.
Asymmetric Warfare: Iranian missile and drone capabilities imposed substantial costs on technologically superior adversaries.
Trade Route Fragility: The conflict highlighted how disruptions in strategic chokepoints can generate global economic consequences.
Hormuz Significance: Nearly 20 million barrels of crude oil move through the Strait of Hormuz every day.
Global Share: The strait carries roughly one-third of global seaborne oil supplies.
India’s Exposure: India imports around 88% of its crude oil requirements, making it highly vulnerable to disruptions.
Economic Impact: Even temporary blockades can increase freight costs, insurance premiums, and energy prices globally.
Why Has IMEC Gained Strategic Importance After the Conflict?
Connectivity Diversification: Provides alternatives to vulnerable maritime chokepoints.
Supply Chain Resilience: Reduces excessive dependence on the Suez Canal and Strait of Hormuz.
Strategic Redundancy: Creates multiple transportation pathways during geopolitical crises.
Economic Security: Enhances reliability of trade flows between India, West Asia and Europe.
Geopolitical Necessity: Demonstrates the need for trade corridors that avoid conflict-prone regions.
Regional Integration: Links major production centres, consumption markets and logistics hubs.
What is the Structure and Design of IMEC?
Eastern Corridor
India-UAE Linkage: Connects India to West Asia through maritime routes linked with the UAE.
Gateway Function: Serves as the entry point of the corridor into the Arabian Peninsula.
Central Corridor
Transit Route: Passes through UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel.
Haifa Terminus: Ends at the Israeli port of Haifa on the Mediterranean coast.
Multimodal Connectivity: Integrates ports, railways, logistics facilities and customs infrastructure.
Western Corridor
European Connection: Links Haifa to European ports through Mediterranean maritime routes.
Market Access: Facilitates faster movement of goods into European markets.
Infrastructure Components
Rail Networks: Ensures seamless cargo movement across West Asia.
Ports and Logistics: Strengthens multimodal transport efficiency.
Energy Corridors: Supports electricity transmission and hydrogen trade.
Digital Connectivity: Includes high-speed data cables and digital infrastructure.
Green Transition: Integrates renewable energy and green hydrogen networks.
How Does IMEC Compare with Other Connectivity Corridors?
International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC)
Route Objective: Connects India with Russia and Europe through Iran.
Strategic Purpose: Reduces dependence on the Suez Canal.
Geographic Advantage: Provides shorter transit times to Eurasian markets.
Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
Chinese Connectivity Model: Links Asia, Africa and Europe through infrastructure projects.
Land Connectivity: Seeks alternatives to maritime chokepoints.
Strategic Competition: Represents China’s connectivity vision, while IMEC serves as an alternative architecture.
IMEC Distinction
Multidimensional Design: Integrates trade, energy, digital and logistics connectivity.
West Asian Focus: Traverses economically significant regions of the Arabian Peninsula.
India-Europe Orientation: Establishes a dedicated connectivity route linking India with Europe.
How Has the Conflict Delayed the Execution of IMEC?
Gaza War Impact: The October 2023 Gaza conflict stalled implementation soon after IMEC’s announcement.
Haifa Disruptions: The corridor’s Mediterranean endpoint became directly affected by regional instability.
Strategic Adaptability: Allows route modifications during crises.
What Role Can India Play in Advancing IMEC?
Connectivity Leadership: Positions India as a major architect of transcontinental connectivity.
Diplomatic Balancing: Maintains strong relations with Saudi Arabia, UAE, Israel and Europe simultaneously.
Economic Integration: Expands trade access to Europe and West Asia.
Strategic Autonomy: Diversifies supply chains beyond traditional routes.
Infrastructure Cooperation: Encourages investments in logistics, digital and energy networks.
India-Europe Engagement: Strengthened by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Europe visit in May 2026 and growing India-Europe connectivity cooperation.
Conclusion
The Iran-Israel conflict has reinforced the strategic necessity of IMEC by exposing the vulnerabilities of existing trade routes and energy chokepoints. At the same time, it has highlighted that connectivity projects cannot succeed through infrastructure alone; they require sustained political stability, regional cooperation and strategic trust. The future success of IMEC will depend on its ability to balance commercial objectives with the geopolitical realities of West Asia.
PYQ Relevance[UPSC 2019] “The time has come for India and Japan to build a strong contemporary relationship, one involving global and strategic partnership that will have a great significance for Asia and the world as a whole.” Comment.Linkage: The PYQ tests understanding of how bilateral relations evolve into comprehensive strategic partnerships driven by economic, geopolitical, technological, and security considerations. Similar to India-Japan ties, the India-Canada relationship is moving beyond traditional diplomacy towards a broader partnership
Mentor’s Comment
India-Canada relations are back in focus following Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s visit to India in February 2026, his first visit to India since assuming office, and the revival of discussions on the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA). The visit marks a significant attempt by both countries to reset ties after a period of diplomatic tensions.
Why Is the Revival of India-Canada Relations Significant at This Juncture?
Diplomatic Re-engagement: Marks a shift from recent diplomatic strains towards structured economic and strategic engagement.
CEPA Revival: Restarts negotiations on the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement after prolonged uncertainty.
Trade Ambition: Targets bilateral trade of $50 billion by 2030, signalling renewed economic confidence.
Strategic Timing: Occurs amid global supply-chain diversification, geopolitical realignments, and Indo-Pacific competition.
Economic Complementarity: Connects Canada’s resource-rich economy with India’s rapidly growing manufacturing and consumption base.
How Do India and Canada Complement Each Other Economically?
Economic Synergies
Market Access: India provides one of the world’s largest consumer markets and expanding middle-class demand.
Resource Endowment: Canada possesses substantial reserves of critical minerals, uranium, clean energy resources, and agricultural commodities.
Manufacturing Potential: India offers large-scale manufacturing capacity and skilled human resources.
Investment Opportunities: Facilitates two-way investments across technology, healthcare, infrastructure, and advanced manufacturing.
Strategic Complementarity
Critical Minerals: Supports India’s energy transition and semiconductor ambitions through reliable mineral supplies.
Clean Energy Cooperation: Strengthens collaboration in renewable energy and decarbonisation initiatives.
Supply-Chain Resilience: Reduces dependence on concentrated supply networks.
Why Is the Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) Central to the Relationship?
Trade Liberalisation
Market Integration: Reduces tariff and non-tariff barriers.
Investment Facilitation: Improves investor confidence and regulatory predictability.
Business Mobility: Enhances movement of professionals and service providers.
Export Expansion: Creates opportunities in manufacturing, agriculture, pharmaceuticals, and services.
Strategic Outcomes
Economic Diversification: Helps both economies reduce dependence on traditional trading partners.
Commercial Confidence: Converts political goodwill into measurable economic outcomes.
Institutional Framework: Provides long-term predictability for businesses and investors.
What Role Do Investments Play in Strengthening Bilateral Relations?
Indian Investments in Canada
Technology Sector: Expands innovation partnerships and digital collaboration.
Life Sciences: Supports pharmaceutical and biotechnology cooperation.
Manufacturing: Generates employment and deepens industrial linkages.
Canadian Investments in India
Infrastructure Financing: Supports large-scale development projects.
Clean Energy Projects: Facilitates green transition initiatives.
Financial Services: Expands capital availability for growth sectors.
Digital Ventures: Supports innovation and startup ecosystems.
Economic Impact
Employment Generation: Creates jobs in both economies.
Capital Formation: Enhances productive investment flows.
Commercial Trust: Strengthens long-term business confidence.
How Does the Indian Diaspora Function as a Strategic Bridge Between the Two Countries?
Human Connectivity
Population Linkages: Serves as a living bridge connecting societies and economies.
Academic Contributions: Strengthens educational and research cooperation.
Entrepreneurship: Expands innovation and business networks.
Soft Power Benefits
Cultural Exchange: Promotes mutual understanding and societal engagement.
Knowledge Transfer: Facilitates technology diffusion and professional collaboration.
Investment Networks: Encourages bilateral investment and business partnerships.
Strategic Significance
People-to-People Ties: Provides resilience to bilateral relations during political challenges.
Trust Building: Enhances societal confidence and institutional cooperation.
Why Are Critical Minerals and Clean Energy Emerging as Key Pillars of Cooperation?
Energy Transition
Lithium and Rare Minerals: Supports battery manufacturing and electric mobility.
Uranium Cooperation: Assists India’s long-term energy security strategy.
Regulatory Differences: Creates barriers for investors and businesses.
Strategic Challenges
Geopolitical Divergences: May occasionally affect policy alignment.
Competing Priorities: Can reduce momentum in bilateral initiatives.
Conclusion
India and Canada possess strong economic complementarities, democratic values, technological capabilities, and people-to-people connections. The renewed effort to revive CEPA, deepen critical mineral cooperation, expand investment flows, and strengthen Indo-Pacific engagement reflects a pragmatic recognition of mutual interests. Sustained trust-building and institutional cooperation can transform the relationship into a major strategic and economic partnership of the coming decade.
Nepal Prime Minister Balendra Shah stated in Parliament that Nepal has also “encroached upon Indian territory in many places,” triggering political controversy in Nepal.
Key Highlights
The statement was made while discussing the disputed:
Kalapani
Lipulekh
Limpiyadhura regions.
Opposition lawmakers in Nepal demanded clarification and removal of the remarks from parliamentary records.
India-Nepal Border Dispute
Main disputed areas:
Kalapani: A strategic Himalayan region near the India-Nepal-China trijunction.
Lipulekh Pass: Important trade and Kailash Mansarovar pilgrimage route.
Limpiyadhura: Claimed by Nepal as part of its territory.
Background of the Dispute
The dispute intensified after:
India released a new political map in 2019.
Nepal amended its Constitution in 2020 to include the disputed regions in its official map.
Nepal bases its claims mainly on interpretations of the: Treaty of Sugauli (1816).
What is Dasgaja?
“Dasgaja” refers to the no man’s land along the India-Nepal border.
Nepal’s Foreign Ministry later clarified that the PM’s remarks referred mainly to:
Cross border occupation
Technical boundary irregularities in riverine areas.
Treaty of Sugauli (1816)
Signed between the East India Company and the Kingdom of Nepal.
Signed after the Anglo-Nepal War.
Importance: Forms the basis of the present India-Nepal boundary disputes.
India’s Position
India maintains that:
Lipulekh lies within Indian territory.
It is a historic trade and pilgrimage route.
India supports resolving disputes through diplomatic dialogue.
[2020] Consider the following statements:
1. The value of Indo-Sri Lanka trade has consistently increased in the last decade
2. “Textile and textile articles” constitute an important item of trade between India and Bangladesh.
3. In the last five years, Nepal has been the largest trading partner of India in South Asia.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
As per the Human Development Index given by UNDP, which one of the following sequences of South Asian countries is correct, in the order of higher to lower development?
