法尼德拉·尼泊爾：尼泊爾與印度是“湊合著過(guò)”，最大問(wèn)題是對(duì)邊境的蠶食

作者 :中華軍事 2025-06-18 09:10:27 圍觀 : 次評(píng)論

編者按：大尼泊爾民族主義陣線（The Greater Nepal NationalistFront）是2001年在加德滿都成立、得到尼泊爾政府承認(rèn)的一個(gè)非政府組織。其成立宗旨是收復(fù)尼泊爾根據(jù)不平等條約割讓給印度的土地。近日，該組織創(chuàng)始人、主席法尼德拉·尼泊爾接受東方軍事邀請(qǐng)，就讀者感興趣的問(wèn)題做了書面回答。以下為整理后的文字稿，僅供讀者參考，不代表東方軍事立場(chǎng)。

【文/法尼德拉·尼泊爾，翻譯/鯨生】

東方軍事：您對(duì)于1816年的《蘇高利條約》及尼泊爾-印度邊境爭(zhēng)議問(wèn)題的主張是？

尼泊爾：尼泊爾與英國(guó)東印度公司之間爆發(fā)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)后，雙方于1816年3月4日簽署了《蘇高利條約》。根據(jù)該條約，尼泊爾從其原有的324250平方公里領(lǐng)土中割讓了177069平方公里，領(lǐng)土面積縮減至147516平方公里。該條約簽訂前，尼泊爾的疆域東起布拉馬普特拉河，西至拉維河，北抵喜馬拉雅山脈，南達(dá)恒河。

條約簽訂后，尼泊爾的邊界被限定為：東至梅奇河，西至馬哈卡利河，北至喜馬拉雅山脈，南至特萊平原的狹長(zhǎng)地帶。該條約所喪失的土地，在英國(guó)殖民統(tǒng)治下一直持續(xù)到1947年8月。雖然印度和巴基斯坦根據(jù)1947年7月18日的《印度獨(dú)立法案》成立，令這片土地在法理上獲得獨(dú)立，但它從未被歸還給尼泊爾。

盡管1950年簽署的《尼印和平友好條約》（第1條和第8條）廢除了《蘇高利條約》，但該領(lǐng)土仍未歸還。

事實(shí)上，“大尼泊爾民族主義陣線”組織成立的宗旨就是從印度手上收復(fù)這177069平方公里的領(lǐng)土，包括向尼泊爾公眾宣講其歷史經(jīng)緯，并施壓尼泊爾政府正式提出這個(gè)問(wèn)題。我們的理由是：既然該條約是與英國(guó)簽訂，而非印度，那么印度占據(jù)該土地就是非法且不公正的。

關(guān)于尼泊爾同印度的關(guān)系問(wèn)題，其實(shí)，兩國(guó)之間是一種“湊合著過(guò)”的關(guān)系——根源在于“鄰國(guó)無(wú)法選擇”的觀念。雖然兩國(guó)民間關(guān)系保持熱絡(luò)，但政府層面的關(guān)系常常緊張。印度的行為舉止經(jīng)常透露出優(yōu)越感，無(wú)視主權(quán)平等原則。它干涉尼泊爾的政治和內(nèi)部事務(wù)，仿佛這是其理所當(dāng)然的權(quán)利。

尼印兩國(guó)間最大的問(wèn)題在于對(duì)邊界的蠶食。自1950年起，印度就殖民了大尼泊爾的部分領(lǐng)土，并篡改了《蘇高利條約》劃定的邊界。印度方面已經(jīng)摧毀、移除和重置了數(shù)百個(gè)界樁。

1816年，尼泊爾與英國(guó)東印度公司簽署的《蘇高利條約》劃定了現(xiàn)代尼泊爾的領(lǐng)土邊界，但尼、印兩國(guó)圍繞卡利河起源的不同解釋為日后的領(lǐng)土主張分歧埋下導(dǎo)火索。資料圖

東方軍事：您如何看待今年4月發(fā)生在印控克什米爾的帕哈爾加姆襲擊事件？您認(rèn)為導(dǎo)致接下來(lái)印巴沖突爆發(fā)的根源原因是什么？

尼泊爾：印度與巴基斯坦沖突的根源問(wèn)題在于克什米爾。盡管歷史上的印巴分治基于宗教人口分布（穆斯林占多數(shù)的地區(qū)歸巴基斯坦，印度教徒占多數(shù)的地區(qū)歸印度），但印度卻因穆斯林占多數(shù)的克什米爾問(wèn)題屢次攻擊巴基斯坦。在最近的一次帕哈爾加姆事件后的攻擊中，印度旨在奪取巴控克什米爾。然而，中國(guó)的軍事援助幫助了巴基斯坦，導(dǎo)致印度戰(zhàn)略失敗并受挫。

今年4月份發(fā)生在克什米爾帕哈爾加姆的事件是恐怖分子所為，但印度聲稱巴基斯坦是其“幕后黑手”，這僅僅是一面之詞。巴基斯坦本身就是一個(gè)飽受恐怖主義之害的國(guó)家。

我本人于2019年在日內(nèi)瓦親眼目睹了印度參與組織反巴基斯坦活動(dòng)，特別是針對(duì)俾路支省持續(xù)進(jìn)行的恐怖活動(dòng)。在那里，有人分發(fā)資金，煽動(dòng)反對(duì)巴基斯坦統(tǒng)一、支持俾路支獨(dú)立的口號(hào)。

在帕哈爾加姆事件中，印度試圖以狹隘的印度教政治作為擋箭牌。恐怖主義不分宗教，但印度卻試圖將帕哈爾加姆襲擊者的穆斯林身份作為證據(jù)，將整個(gè)巴基斯坦國(guó)家描繪成本質(zhì)上就是恐怖主義的——印度的不良居心昭然若揭。

按照尼泊爾的理解，印度對(duì)巴基斯坦懷有偏見態(tài)度。它向國(guó)際社會(huì)宣揚(yáng)的“巴基斯坦庇護(hù)恐怖分子”的說(shuō)辭，不過(guò)是一廂情愿的宣傳。印度似乎認(rèn)為，抹黑巴基斯坦的形象，就能治愈其過(guò)去敗于巴基斯坦的創(chuàng)傷。然而，這種想法是自欺欺人的，因?yàn)樵谂凉柤幽肥录谋尘跋拢澜缢坪醪](méi)有多少國(guó)家選擇站在印度這一邊。

甚至有印度知識(shí)分子提出，帕哈爾加姆襲擊是印度自己策劃的。盡管印度有能力迅速抓獲恐怖分子，但襲擊者仍下落不明，這加劇了人們的懷疑：該事件背后得到了國(guó)家支持，目的是在國(guó)際上抹黑巴基斯坦。

東方軍事：您認(rèn)為這一輪印巴沖突對(duì)南亞地緣政治格局有什么影響？考慮到印度向全球派出代表團(tuán)宣傳其話語(yǔ)敘事，尼泊爾國(guó)內(nèi)的民眾是如何看待并解讀這場(chǎng)沖突的？

尼泊爾：印度在帕哈爾加姆事件后對(duì)巴基斯坦采取的軍事行動(dòng)以失敗告終。所謂的事后宣稱勝利，不過(guò)是欲蓋彌彰的徒勞之舉。倘若印度在那場(chǎng)沖突中獲勝，它必會(huì)強(qiáng)勢(shì)謀求主宰南亞地區(qū)。但現(xiàn)實(shí)結(jié)果是，印度只能獨(dú)自舔舐傷口，該地區(qū)也因此免于遭受印度的軍事侵略。

尼泊爾-印度間的主要邊界問(wèn)題是卡拉帕尼。根據(jù)《蘇高利條約》，卡拉帕尼地區(qū)屬于尼泊爾，但印度于2019年11月2日將其納入其政治版圖，標(biāo)志著首次印度官方蠶食尼泊爾土地的行為。印度自1962年起就在該地部署軍隊(duì)，并拒絕談判。因此，尼泊爾應(yīng)考慮邀請(qǐng)中國(guó)或英國(guó)政府進(jìn)行調(diào)解。蘇斯塔地區(qū)存在類似問(wèn)題，印度在那里侵占了40000公頃尼泊爾土地。

圖中深紫色區(qū)域?yàn)槟岵礌栔鲝垺⒂《葟?qiáng)占的卡拉帕尼地區(qū)，為回應(yīng)印度在當(dāng)?shù)匦藿ü罚岵礌栒?020年、2024年分別在新版官方地圖、新版紙幣中將其包含在本國(guó)領(lǐng)土內(nèi)。制圖：微博賬號(hào)@1002什么

東方軍事：您在寫給印度駐尼泊爾大使的公開信中寫道，印度同時(shí)對(duì)巴基斯坦和尼泊爾開展了“水資源恐怖主義”活動(dòng)，請(qǐng)介紹一下您了解的情況。

尼泊爾：帕哈爾加姆事件后，印度單方面截?cái)嘤《群铀鳎`反了《西姆拉協(xié)定》。這是一次針對(duì)巴基斯坦的懲罰性和不人道的行為，而巴方據(jù)稱與該事件毫無(wú)關(guān)聯(lián)。將水資源用作武器，是一種“水資源恐怖主義”，導(dǎo)致數(shù)百萬(wàn)巴基斯坦普通平民遭受苦難。

印度同樣在剝削尼泊爾的水資源，使用了超過(guò)80%，而尼泊爾大部分地區(qū)仍干旱缺水。印度修建水壩并分流源自尼泊爾的水源。1956年的《根德格協(xié)議》禁止任何降低根德格運(yùn)河上游水位的項(xiàng)目，但印度無(wú)視了這一條款。印度還干涉尼泊爾的水電項(xiàng)目，以服務(wù)于其自身利益。尼泊爾農(nóng)民對(duì)這種水資源的剝削日益不滿，他們視之為印度的“水資源恐怖主義”。

東方軍事：如您介紹，尼印兩國(guó)在民間社會(huì)層面有深厚的聯(lián)系，但兩國(guó)關(guān)系中卻體現(xiàn)出種種不平等與不和諧。這是為什么？

尼泊爾：值得稱贊的是，尼泊爾與印度的民間關(guān)系并未受到政治緊張局勢(shì)的影響。這些文化、宗教和教育領(lǐng)域的聯(lián)系由來(lái)已久。然而，印度政府持續(xù)阻礙尼泊爾的實(shí)體與經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展。自1950年以來(lái)，印度的政策一直是讓尼泊爾陷入經(jīng)濟(jì)疲弱、政治不穩(wěn)。這服務(wù)了兩個(gè)目的：一是阻止《蘇高利條約》中被從尼泊爾割走的領(lǐng)土上的人民渴望回歸尼泊爾；二是維持尼泊爾青年向印度軍隊(duì)的兵員供應(yīng)。盡管印度多次對(duì)尼實(shí)施經(jīng)濟(jì)封鎖，但印度公民卻常常向尼泊爾民眾展現(xiàn)人道主義支持。因此，“打倒印度擴(kuò)張主義！”的口號(hào)源于真實(shí)的怨憤。

東方軍事：自特朗普政府關(guān)閉美國(guó)國(guó)際開發(fā)署之后，該機(jī)構(gòu)于2022年同尼泊爾政府簽署的價(jià)值5億美元的“千禧年挑戰(zhàn)公司”（MCC）相關(guān)項(xiàng)目面臨不確定性。這些項(xiàng)目目前處于什么什么狀態(tài)？您認(rèn)為中國(guó)提供的發(fā)展援助項(xiàng)目給尼泊爾國(guó)內(nèi)帶來(lái)了哪些影響？存在哪些內(nèi)部或外部的阻力？

尼泊爾：美國(guó)援助項(xiàng)目（如USAID和MCC）的中止不會(huì)阻礙尼泊爾的發(fā)展。這些項(xiàng)目長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)被懷疑包含有隱藏議程：阻撓中國(guó)援助，并利用尼泊爾的領(lǐng)土損害中國(guó)主權(quán)。在世界主要大國(guó)里，中國(guó)在尼泊爾人民中享有最高的信任度。自1950年代以來(lái)，中國(guó)對(duì)尼泊爾發(fā)展的貢獻(xiàn)有目共睹。然而，由于來(lái)自印度和美國(guó)的壓力，尼泊爾政府常常對(duì)公開接受中國(guó)援助猶豫不決。

中國(guó)前駐尼泊爾大使李德標(biāo)曾在北京的一次午餐會(huì)上對(duì)我說(shuō)：“中國(guó)政府愿意給尼泊爾提供如此多的援助，多到你們數(shù)都數(shù)不清，但貴國(guó)的政府總是說(shuō)，‘再等等看’。你們?cè)趽?dān)心什么？”

事實(shí)上，印度和西方將中國(guó)與尼泊爾的經(jīng)濟(jì)往來(lái)視為威脅。中尼過(guò)境運(yùn)輸協(xié)定的簽署也讓印度感到極度不安。他們?cè)噲D阻止中國(guó)在尼泊爾的存在，以便于開展反華行動(dòng)。只要尼泊爾仍然由親印度的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層執(zhí)政，這種（反華）空間就會(huì)持續(xù)存在，這是一個(gè)值得尼泊爾和中國(guó)共同關(guān)切的問(wèn)題。

1 2 下一頁(yè) 余下全文

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.

本文系東方軍事獨(dú)家稿件，文章內(nèi)容純屬作者個(gè)人觀點(diǎn)，不代表平臺(tái)觀點(diǎn)，轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處，否則將追究法律責(zé)任。關(guān)注東方軍事微信guanchacn，每日閱讀趣味文章。

首頁(yè) 上一頁(yè) 1 2 余下全文

編者按：大尼泊爾民族主義陣線（The Greater Nepal NationalistFront）是2001年在加德滿都成立、得到尼泊爾政府承認(rèn)的一個(gè)非政府組織。其成立宗旨是收復(fù)尼泊爾根據(jù)不平等條約割讓給印度的土地。近日，該組織創(chuàng)始人、主席法尼德拉·尼泊爾接受東方軍事邀請(qǐng)，就讀者感興趣的問(wèn)題做了書面回答。以下為整理后的文字稿，僅供讀者參考，不代表東方軍事立場(chǎng)。

【文/法尼德拉·尼泊爾，翻譯/鯨生】

東方軍事：您對(duì)于1816年的《蘇高利條約》及尼泊爾-印度邊境爭(zhēng)議問(wèn)題的主張是？

盡管1950年簽署的《尼印和平友好條約》（第1條和第8條）廢除了《蘇高利條約》，但該領(lǐng)土仍未歸還。

東方軍事：您如何看待今年4月發(fā)生在印控克什米爾的帕哈爾加姆襲擊事件？您認(rèn)為導(dǎo)致接下來(lái)印巴沖突爆發(fā)的根源原因是什么？