Why Nepal is objecting to Kailash Mansarovar Yatra via Lipulekh Pass

Nepal has objected to the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra via Lipulekh Pass, saying the route crosses territory it claims. The dispute traces back to the 1816 Treaty of Sugauli and competing claims over the Kali river's origin, making a religious journey part of a larger geopolitical contest.

In Short

• Nepal objects to Mansarovar Yatra route via Lipulekh citing territorial claim
• Dispute stems from Treaty of Sugauli and Kali river origin disagreement
• India calls Nepal claim artificial and cites decades old route usage

The road winds up through Uttarakhand's high mountains, past army posts and prayer flags, before opening into a stark, wind-cut pass that leads towards Tibet. For decades, this route through Lipulekh has quietly carried Indian pilgrims on the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra.

Now, it carries something else -- a dispute.

As India and China prepare to facilitate the 2026 yatra through the pass, Nepal has formally objected, saying the route cuts through territory it claims as its own. What looks like a religious journey has once again turned into a diplomatic flashpoint.

A BORDER DRAWN IN 1816 THAT STILL SHAPES TODAY

To understand why this keeps happening, you have to go back to the Treaty of Sugauli.

Signed in 1816 after the Anglo-Nepalese War, the treaty fixed Nepal's western boundary along the Kali river. That single line, however, came with an unresolved question that continues to haunt maps even today. Where exactly does the Kali river begin?

Kathmandu's position is clear. It argues that the river originates at Limpiyadhura, further northwest than the point identified by India near Lipukhola (close to Lipulekh).

Nepali scholars argue that historical maps from the 19th century show the Kali river originating at Limpiyadhura, and that later cartographic changes gradually shifted the boundary eastward.

If Nepal’s stand is accepted, then Limpiyadhura, Kalapani, and Lipulekh all fall within Nepal's territory.

India maintains a different reading. It rejects the above interpretation and maintains that their position aligns with historical usage and administrative control. It places the river's origin near Lipukhola (close to Lipulekh), which brings the same stretch under Indian control.

That disagreement is not just cartographic. It shifts control over a strategically sensitive tri-junction where India, Nepal, and China meet.

NEPAL'S CLAIM AND WHY THE YATRA IS NOW PART OF IT

Nepal's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has reiterated that Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh, and Kalapani are integral parts of Nepal. It has "taken note" of the planned Mansarovar Yatra through the pass and formally conveyed to both India and China that the route lies in territory it claims.

This is not a new objection. Kathmandu says it has repeatedly urged India in the past not to carry out activities in the area, whether road construction, trade, or now pilgrimage routes.

But the yatra brings something extra -- visibility.

When India and China organise and announce a structured pilgrimage route through Lipulekh, it creates an impression that the territory is settled and firmly outside Nepal's jurisdiction. For Kathmandu, that normalises the status quo and weakens its negotiating position.

There is also the trilateral discomfort. Nepal has pointed out that it was not consulted before the route was finalised, even though it claims the land. In a region where sovereignty is closely tied to participation, being excluded matters.

Domestic politics sharpens the response. After Nepal's 2020 constitutional map included Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh, and Kalapani, any perceived silence on these issues becomes politically costly.

So the objection is not really about stopping pilgrims. It is about refusing to concede the larger geopolitical story.

INDIA'S RESPONSE AND THE LONG-STANDING ROUTE ARGUMENT

India has firmly rejected Nepal's position, calling it a unilateral and artificial enlargement of claims.

New Delhi's argument rests on continuity. It points out that the Lipulekh Pass has been used as a route for the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra since 1954, with Indian pilgrims travelling through this corridor for decades.

From India's perspective, the current plan is not a new assertion but a continuation of an established practice.

It has also reiterated that all outstanding boundary issues with Nepal should be resolved through bilateral dialogue, but not on the basis of what it sees as revised interpretations of historical agreements.

A TRIANGLE THAT MAKES EVERYTHING MORE COMPLEX

The Lipulekh dispute is not just a bilateral issue. It sits at the intersection of India, Nepal, and China.

For India, the pass is a strategic access point to Tibet and an established pilgrimage route. For Nepal, it is a question of sovereignty rooted in the Treaty of Sugauli. For China, coordination with India on routes and access adds another layer to an already sensitive border landscape.

That is why even a pilgrimage becomes political here.

As long as India and Nepal disagree on where the Kali river begins, every activity in the region risks turning into a flashpoint. Roads, trade routes, and now religious journeys all end up carrying the weight of an unresolved boundary.

And so Lipulekh returns, again and again, not as a new conflict, but as an old one finding new ways to surface.

- Ends