法尼德拉·尼泊尔：尼泊尔与印度是“凑合着过”，最大问题是对边境的蚕食

编者按：大尼泊尔民族主义阵线（The Greater Nepal Nationalist Front）是2001年在加德满都成立、得到尼泊尔政府承认的一个非政府组织。其成立宗旨是收复尼泊尔根据不平等条约割让给印度的土地。近日，该组织创始人、主席法尼德拉·尼泊尔接受观察者网邀请，就读者感兴趣的问题做了书面回答。以下为整理后的文字稿，仅供读者参考，不代表观察者网立场。

【文/法尼德拉·尼泊尔，翻译/鲸生】

**观察者网：**您对于1816年的《苏高利条约》及尼泊尔-印度边境争议问题的主张是？

**尼泊尔：**尼泊尔与英国东印度公司之间爆发战争后，双方于1816年3月4日签署了《苏高利条约》。根据该条约，尼泊尔从其原有的324250平方公里领土中割让了177069平方公里，领土面积缩减至147516平方公里。该条约签订前，尼泊尔的疆域东起布拉马普特拉河，西至拉维河，北抵喜马拉雅山脉，南达恒河。

条约签订后，尼泊尔的边界被限定为：东至梅奇河，西至马哈卡利河，北至喜马拉雅山脉，南至特莱平原的狭长地带。该条约所丧失的土地，在英国殖民统治下一直持续到1947年8月。虽然印度和巴基斯坦根据1947年7月18日的《印度独立法案》成立，令这片土地在法理上获得独立，但它从未被归还给尼泊尔。

尽管1950年签署的《尼印和平友好条约》（第1条和第8条）废除了《苏高利条约》，但该领土仍未归还。

事实上，“大尼泊尔民族主义阵线”组织成立的宗旨就是从印度手上收复这177069平方公里的领土，包括向尼泊尔公众宣讲其历史经纬，并施压尼泊尔政府正式提出这个问题。我们的理由是：既然该条约是与英国签订，而非印度，那么印度占据该土地就是非法且不公正的。

关于尼泊尔同印度的关系问题，其实，两国之间是一种“凑合着过”的关系——根源在于“邻国无法选择”的观念。虽然两国民间关系保持热络，但政府层面的关系常常紧张。印度的行为举止经常透露出优越感，无视主权平等原则。它干涉尼泊尔的政治和内部事务，仿佛这是其理所当然的权利。

尼印两国间最大的问题在于对边界的蚕食。自1950年起，印度就殖民了大尼泊尔的部分领土，并篡改了《苏高利条约》划定的边界。印度方面已经摧毁、移除和重置了数百个界桩。

1816年，尼泊尔与英国东印度公司签署的《苏高利条约》划定了现代尼泊尔的领土边界，但尼、印两国围绕卡利河起源的不同解释为日后的领土主张分歧埋下导火索。 资料图

**观察者网：**您如何看待今年4月发生在印控克什米尔的帕哈尔加姆袭击事件？您认为导致接下来印巴冲突爆发的根源原因是什么？

**尼泊尔：**印度与巴基斯坦冲突的根源问题在于克什米尔。尽管历史上的印巴分治基于宗教人口分布（穆斯林占多数的地区归巴基斯坦，印度教徒占多数的地区归印度），但印度却因穆斯林占多数的克什米尔问题屡次攻击巴基斯坦。在最近的一次帕哈尔加姆事件后的攻击中，印度旨在夺取巴控克什米尔。然而，中国的军事援助帮助了巴基斯坦，导致印度战略失败并受挫。

今年4月份发生在克什米尔帕哈尔加姆的事件是恐怖分子所为，但印度声称巴基斯坦是其“幕后黑手”，这仅仅是一面之词。巴基斯坦本身就是一个饱受恐怖主义之害的国家。

我本人于2019年在日内瓦亲眼目睹了印度参与组织反巴基斯坦活动，特别是针对俾路支省持续进行的恐怖活动。在那里，有人分发资金，煽动反对巴基斯坦统一、支持俾路支独立的口号。

在帕哈尔加姆事件中，印度试图以狭隘的印度教政治作为挡箭牌。恐怖主义不分宗教，但印度却试图将帕哈尔加姆袭击者的穆斯林身份作为证据，将整个巴基斯坦国家描绘成本质上就是恐怖主义的——印度的不良居心昭然若揭。

按照尼泊尔的理解，印度对巴基斯坦怀有偏见态度。它向国际社会宣扬的“巴基斯坦庇护恐怖分子”的说辞，不过是一厢情愿的宣传。印度似乎认为，抹黑巴基斯坦的形象，就能治愈其过去败于巴基斯坦的创伤。然而，这种想法是自欺欺人的，因为在帕哈尔加姆事件的背景下，全世界似乎并没有多少国家选择站在印度这一边。

甚至有印度知识分子提出，帕哈尔加姆袭击是印度自己策划的。尽管印度有能力迅速抓获恐怖分子，但袭击者仍下落不明，这加剧了人们的怀疑：该事件背后得到了国家支持，目的是在国际上抹黑巴基斯坦。

观察者网：****您认为这一轮印巴冲突对南亚地缘政治格局有什么影响？考虑到印度向全球派出代表团宣传其话语叙事，尼泊尔国内的民众是如何看待并解读这场冲突的？

**尼泊尔：**印度在帕哈尔加姆事件后对巴基斯坦采取的军事行动以失败告终。所谓的事后宣称胜利，不过是欲盖弥彰的徒劳之举。倘若印度在那场冲突中获胜，它必会强势谋求主宰南亚地区。但现实结果是，印度只能独自舔舐伤口，该地区也因此免于遭受印度的军事侵略。

尼泊尔-印度间的主要边界问题是卡拉帕尼。根据《苏高利条约》，卡拉帕尼地区属于尼泊尔，但印度于2019年11月2日将其纳入其政治版图，标志着首次印度官方蚕食尼泊尔土地的行为。印度自1962年起就在该地部署军队，并拒绝谈判。因此，尼泊尔应考虑邀请中国或英国政府进行调解。苏斯塔地区存在类似问题，印度在那里侵占了40000公顷尼泊尔土地。

图中深紫色区域为尼泊尔主张、印度强占的卡拉帕尼地区，为回应印度在当地修建公路，尼泊尔政府于2020年、2024年分别在新版官方地图、新版纸币中将其包含在本国领土内。 制图：微博账号@1002什么

**观察者网：**您在写给印度驻尼泊尔大使的公开信中写道，印度同时对巴基斯坦和尼泊尔开展了“水资源恐怖主义”活动，请介绍一下您了解的情况。

**尼泊尔：**帕哈尔加姆事件后，印度单方面截断印度河水流，违反了《西姆拉协定》。这是一次针对巴基斯坦的惩罚性和不人道的行为，而巴方据称与该事件毫无关联。将水资源用作武器，是一种“水资源恐怖主义”，导致数百万巴基斯坦普通平民遭受苦难。

印度同样在剥削尼泊尔的水资源，使用了超过80%，而尼泊尔大部分地区仍干旱缺水。印度修建水坝并分流源自尼泊尔的水源。1956年的《根德格协议》禁止任何降低根德格运河上游水位的项目，但印度无视了这一条款。印度还干涉尼泊尔的水电项目，以服务于其自身利益。尼泊尔农民对这种水资源的剥削日益不满，他们视之为印度的“水资源恐怖主义”。

**观察者网：**如您介绍，尼印两国在民间社会层面有深厚的联系，但两国关系中却体现出种种不平等与不和谐。这是为什么？

**尼泊尔：**值得称赞的是，尼泊尔与印度的民间关系并未受到政治紧张局势的影响。这些文化、宗教和教育领域的联系由来已久。然而，印度政府持续阻碍尼泊尔的实体与经济发展。自1950年以来，印度的政策一直是让尼泊尔陷入经济疲弱、政治不稳。这服务了两个目的：一是阻止《苏高利条约》中被从尼泊尔割走的领土上的人民渴望回归尼泊尔；二是维持尼泊尔青年向印度军队的兵员供应。尽管印度多次对尼实施经济封锁，但印度公民却常常向尼泊尔民众展现人道主义支持。因此，“打倒印度扩张主义！”的口号源于真实的怨愤。

**观察者网：**自特朗普政府关闭美国国际开发署之后，该机构于2022年同尼泊尔政府签署的价值5亿美元的“千禧年挑战公司”（MCC）相关项目面临不确定性。这些项目目前处于什么什么状态？您认为中国提供的发展援助项目给尼泊尔国内带来了哪些影响？存在哪些内部或外部的阻力？

**尼泊尔：**美国援助项目（如USAID和MCC）的中止不会阻碍尼泊尔的发展。这些项目长期以来被怀疑包含有隐藏议程：阻挠中国援助，并利用尼泊尔的领土损害中国主权。在世界主要大国里，中国在尼泊尔人民中享有最高的信任度。自1950年代以来，中国对尼泊尔发展的贡献有目共睹。然而，由于来自印度和美国的压力，尼泊尔政府常常对公开接受中国援助犹豫不决。

中国前驻尼泊尔大使李德标曾在北京的一次午餐会上对我说：“中国政府愿意给尼泊尔提供如此多的援助，多到你们数都数不清，但贵国的政府总是说，‘再等等看’。你们在担心什么？”

事实上，印度和西方将中国与尼泊尔的经济往来视为威胁。中尼过境运输协定的签署也让印度感到极度不安。他们试图阻止中国在尼泊尔的存在，以便于开展反华行动。只要尼泊尔仍然由亲印度的领导层执政，这种（反华）空间就会持续存在，这是一个值得尼泊尔和中国共同关切的问题。

原文：

Q1. Greater Nepal Nationalist Front

The Greater Nepal Nationalist Front was established in 2001 in Kathmandu. It is a government-recognized non-governmental organization in Nepal. As a non-political and independent body, it stands above all political parties in the country. People from any political background may join, but they cannot use the organization to fulfill personal or party-political goals.

The organization was formed with the objective of reclaiming the 177,069 square kilometers of land lost to India under the Treaty of Sugauli (March 4, 1816). It aims to inform the general public about the extent of land lost under this treaty and to pressure the government into raising the issue officially.

Q2. The Treaty of Sugauli

Following the war between Nepal and the British East India Company, the Treaty of Sugauli was signed on March 4, 1816. Under this treaty, Nepal ceded 177,069 sq. km of its original 324,250 sq. km territory and was reduced to 147,516 sq. km.

Before the treaty, Nepal’s borders stretched from the Brahmaputra River in the east to the Ravi River in the west, the Himalayas in the north, and the Ganges in the south. After the treaty, Nepal’s borders were confined to the Mechi River in the east, the Mahakali River in the west, the Himalayas in the north, and a narrow strip of the Terai in the south.

The land lost through the treaty remained under British colonial rule until August 1947. Though India and Pakistan were created under the Indian Independence Act of July 18, 1947, and the land technically became independent, it was never returned to Nepal. Even though the 1950 Nepal-India Peace and Friendship Treaty (Articles 1 and 8) annulled the Sugauli Treaty, the territory was not returned. The Greater Nepal Nationalist Front continues to demand its return, arguing that since the treaty was with Britain, not India, India’s retention of the land is illegal and unjust.

Nepal-India Relations

The relationship between Nepal and India is one of compulsion — rooted in the belief that neighbors cannot be changed. While people-to-people relations remain warm, government-level relations are often strained.

India often behaves with a sense of superiority, disregarding the principle of equal sovereignty. It interferes in Nepal’s political and internal matters as though it is entitled to do so. The biggest issue between the two countries lies in border encroachment. India has colonized parts of Greater Nepal and tampered with the boundary defined by the Sugauli Treaty since 1950. It has destroyed, removed, and relocated hundreds of border pillars.

The root cause of the India-Pakistan conflict is Kashmir. Though the partition was based on religious demographics — Muslim-majority areas to Pakistan, Hindu-majority to India — India has repeatedly attacked Pakistan over Kashmir, which is Muslim-majority. In the recent attack following the Pahalgam incident, India aimed to capture Pakistan-administered Kashmir. However, China’s military support helped Pakistan, leading to India’s strategic failure and frustration.

Q3. Pahalgam Incident 

The incident that occurred in Pahalgam, Kashmir last April was the act of terrorists, but India’s claim that Pakistan was behind it is merely an allegation. Pakistan itself is a country suffering from terrorism. I personally witnessed India’s involvement in anti-Pakistan activities in Geneva in 2019, particularly in terrorist activities ongoing in Balochistan. There, money was distributed to provoke slogans against Pakistan’s integrity in favor of an independent Balochistan.

In the Pahalgam incident, India has tried to use narrow politics based on Hinduism as its shield. Terrorism has no religion, yet India attempted to portray the Muslim identity of the Pahalgam attackers as evidence that the entire Muslim nation of Pakistan is terrorist in nature—an ill intention that is evident to all. According to the Nepali understanding, India harbors a prejudiced attitude towards Pakistan. Its narrative to the international community—that Pakistan harbors terrorists—is nothing more than stubborn propaganda. India seems to believe that tarnishing Pakistan’s image is the remedy for its own wounds from past defeats against Pakistan. However, this belief is self-indulgent, as the rest of the world appears to side with Pakistan in the context of the Pahalgam incident.

Q4. Pahalgam Incident and Indo-Pak Conflict

India’s military action against Pakistan after the Pahalgam incident ended in defeat. Claiming victory afterward was a futile attempt to mask failure. Had India won, it would have aggressively tried to dominate South Asia. But instead, India was left nursing its wounds, and the region was saved from Indian military aggression.

The major Nepal-India border issue is Kalapani. According to the Sugauli Treaty, Kalapani belongs to Nepal, but India included it in its political map on November 2, 2019, marking the first official encroachment. India has deployed troops there since 1962 and refuses to negotiate. Therefore, Nepal should consider inviting China or Britain to mediate. A similar issue exists in Susta, where India has encroached on 40,000 hectares of Nepali land.

Indian intellectuals have suggested that the Pahalgam attack was orchestrated by India itself. Despite India’s capability to catch terrorists quickly, the attackers remain untraced, reinforcing suspicions that the incident was state-sponsored to defame Pakistan internationally.

Q5. Indus River Water Crisis and Indian Water Terror

After the Pahalgam incident, India unilaterally halted the flow of water from the Indus River, violating the Shimla Agreement. This was a punitive and inhumane act against Pakistan for an incident it allegedly had no role in. Using water as a weapon is a form of “hydro-terrorism,” with millions of ordinary Pakistanis suffering as a result.

India has similarly exploited Nepal’s water resources, using over 80% while much of Nepal remains arid. India builds dams and diverts water from Nepal. The 1956 Gandak Agreement prohibits projects that lower the water level above the Gandak canal, but India ignores this provision. India also interferes in Nepal’s hydropower projects to serve its own interests. Nepali farmers are increasingly dissatisfied with this water exploitation, which they see as Indian water terror.

Q6. People-to-People vs. Government Relations

It is commendable that the people-to-people relationship between Nepal and India has remained unaffected by political tensions. These ties cultural, religious, and educational have been longstanding. However, India’s government consistently hinders Nepal’s physical and economic development. Since 1950, India’s policy has been to keep Nepal economically weak and politically unstable.

This serves two purposes: to prevent people from the lost territories under the Sugauli Treaty from desiring reintegration with Nepal, and to maintain the supply of Nepali youths to the Indian Army. Despite repeated blockades by India, Indian citizens have often shown humanitarian support toward Nepal. The chant “Down with Indian expansionism!” is thus rooted in real grievances.

Q7. U.S. Aid and Nepal-China Relations

The suspension of American aid projects like USAID and MCC will not halt Nepal’s development. These projects have long been suspected of having hidden agendas to block Chinese aid and use Nepali territory against China’s sovereignty.

Among major world powers, China enjoys the highest trust among Nepali people. China’s contribution to Nepal’s development since the 1950s is well recognized. However, due to Indo-American pressure, the Nepali government has often hesitated to openly accept Chinese aid. Former Chinese Ambassador to Nepal, Li Tie Piao, once told the speaker during a lunch meeting in Beijing:

“The Chinese government wants to give Nepal so much aid that you won’t be able to count the amount, but your government keeps saying ‘wait.’ What are you afraid of?”

India and the West view China’s economic engagement with Nepal as a threat. “The Nepal-China transit treaty has also caused India a burning sense of unease.” They attempt to prevent Chinese presence in Nepal to facilitate anti-China operations. As long as Nepal remains governed by pro-India leadership, such space will continue to exist an issue of concern for both Nepal and China.

本文系观察者网独家稿件，文章内容纯属作者个人观点，不代表平台观点，未经授权，不得转载，否则将追究法律责任。关注观察者网微信guanchacn，每日阅读趣味文章。