Fencing on Nepal-India Border

‘नेपाल भारत सीमानामा छेकबार गर्नुपर्छ’

सीमाविद भन्छन्- विवाद सुल्झाउन पाँच वर्ष लाग्छ

 

२०७१ साउन १५ गते १६:५० मा प्रकाशित

१५ साउन, काठमाडौं ।

 

नेपाल र भारतवीचको खुल्ला सीमानालाई नियमन गर्नका लागि सुरुमा परिचयपत्रको व्यवस्था गर्नुपर्ने र विस्तारै छेकबार गर्नुपर्ने सीमाविद बुद्धिनारायण श्रेष्ठको सुझाव छ ।

नेपाल र भारतवीच भइरहेको सीमा विवादबारे नापी विभागका पूर्वमहानिर्देशकसमेत रहेका श्रेष्ठले अनलाइनखबर बहसमा यस्तो दृष्टिकोण अघि सारेका छन् । बहसमा सहभागी कांग्रेस र एमाओवादीका नेतालेसमेत नेपाल-भारत खुल्ला सीमानामा नियमनको खाँचो औंल्याएका छन् ।

अनलाइनखबर- नेपाल-भारत सीमानामा कालापानी र सुस्ता लगायतका केही स्थानबाहेक सबै ठाउँको नक्शांकन भइसकेको छ, अब दुई देशले हस्ताक्षर गर्नुपर्छ भन्ने भारतीय पक्षको दबावलाई तपाई कसरी लिनुहुन्छ ?

 

श्रेष्ठ-    नेपाल र भारतवीच १ हजार ८ सय ८० किलोमिटर सीमानामा कालापानी र सुस्ताबाहेक ९७ प्रतिशत नक्शांकनको काम भइसकेको छ । १ सय ८२ थान नक्शा बनेका छन् । भारतले यी नक्शाहरुमा दुबै देशका अधिकारीहरुले हस्ताक्षर गर्नुपर्छ भनेर जोड गरिराखेको छ ।

 

हस्ताक्षर गर्न हुने हो कि नहुने हो ? अन्तरराष्ट्रिय मान्यताले के भन्छ भने सम्पूर्ण काम सम्पन्न गरेपछिमात्रै हस्ताक्षर गर्नुपर्छ । खुशीको कुराचाहिँ के छ भने भारतीय विदेशमन्त्री आउनुभयो र दुबै देशका परराष्ट्रमन्त्री स्तरको बैठपछि बोर्डर वर्किङ ग्रुप गठन गरिएको छ । त्यसले तुरुन्तै काम सम्पन्न गर्ने भनेको छ । सुष्मा स्वराजले के भन्नुभएको छ भनेदेखि नेपालको एक इन्ची जमीन पनि भारतलाई चाहिएको छैन, यसका निम्ति तुरुन्त सीमांकनको काम सुरु गर्नुपर्छ । यो धेरै नै राम्रो कुरो हो ।

 

अनलाइनखबर- भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री नरेन्द्र मोदी नेपाल आउँदा सीमासम्बन्धी विवाद टुंगिएर नक्शामा हस्ताक्षर गर्ने स्थिति बन्ला त ?

श्रेष्ठ- सीमांकन गर्ने काम सन् १९८१ देखि २००७ सम्म भयो । २६ वर्ष काम गर्दाखेरि ९७ प्रतिशतमात्रै काम सम्पन्न भएको छ । बाँकी तीन प्रतिशत भनेको कालापानी, लिम्पियाधुरा, सुस्ता, टनकपुर, सन्दकपुरदेखि लिएर ६० हजार ६ सय ५२ हेक्टर जमीनमा विवाद छ । मैले ७१ ठाउँमा त्यस्तो समस्या देखेको छु । त्यसमा पनि सबै भन्दा पहिलो सीमा अतिक्रमणका कुराहरु छन् । कालापानी लिम्पियाधुरा अतिक्रमण भयो । १९६२ मा भारत र चीनको वीचमा तनाव भयो, यसमा कालापानीलाई भारतले संवेदनशील ठाउँका रुपमा लियो ।

 

अनलाइनखबर- भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री नेपाल आएका बेला यो कालापानी, लिम्पियाधुरा, सुस्ता लगायतका समस्याबारे केही छलफल वा कुनै सहमति हुन्छजस्तो लाग्छ तपाईलाई ?

 

श्रेष्ठ- वर्किङ ग्रुपलाई तत्काल काम गर्ने भनिसकियो । सुष्मा स्वराजले तुरुन्त सुरु गर्नुपर्छ भन्नुभएको छ । नेपालको नापी विभाग र भारतको सर्वे विभाग काम अघि बढाउन तयार भएका छन् । यहाँ कुरा आएको छ, तीन प्रतिशतको । यो भनेको टुक्राटुक्री ठाउँहरु छन् । मेरो बुझाइमा यो नयाँ वर्किङ गु्रप गठन भइसकेपछि अब पुराना नक्शा र तथ्यांकहरुका आधारमा निर्णय गर्नुपर्छ । कालापानीको विवाद भनेको कालीको मुहान कुन हो भन्ने हो । पुरानो तथ्यांक हेर्दा त्यो कता पर्छ भन्ने स्वतः प्रमाणित हुन्छ । कालीको मुहान निर्धारण गर्दाखेरि पुराना नक्शाका आधारमा गर्नुपर्छ ।

 
अहिले जुन १८२ थान नक्शा बनेका छन्, यसमा शुद्ध सीमांकन भएको छैन । क्रस होल्डिङ अकुपेशन यसमा सबैभन्दा ठूलो समस्या छ । बलियो किसानले कमजोर किसानको जमीन मिच्ने । भारतका किसान बलिया छन्, किनभने उनीहरुका पछाडि एसएसबीका जवान छन् । नेपालीले केही बोल्यो भने ड्याङ्ग ठोकिदिन्छन् ।
सुस्तामा हेर्नोस्, गोपाल गुरुङहरुले बोले भने उनीहरुको घरमै आउँछन् । त्यहीँ एसएसबीका जवान छन् । यो समस्या समाधान गर्ने हो भने मैले आफ्नो कितावमा लेखेको ७१ ठाउँको सीमा समस्या मध्ये ९५ प्रतिशत आफैं समाधान हुन्छ ।

 

अनलाइनखबर- मानिसहरुको चासो यो छ कि नरेन्द्र मोदीकै भ्रमणमा नेपाल भारत सीमा नक्शाबारे हस्ताक्षर हुन्छ कि हुँदैन ?

 

श्रेष्ठ- काम सुरु हुन्छ । यो ज्वाइन्ट वर्किङ गु्रपले धमाधम काम गर्ने हो समस्या समाधान गर्न कम्तिमा पाँच वर्ष लाग्न सक्छ । त्यो कमिटीले नक्शा गल्ती बनाइएको छ भने त्यसलाई सुधार्नुपर्छ । भत्केको बिग्रेको जमीन छ भने पुनःस्थापना गर्नुपर्छ ।

 

अनलाइनखबर- पूर्वजलस्रोतमन्त्री लक्ष्मण घिमिरेज्यूलाई प्रश्न- तपाईको पार्टी नेपाली कांग्रेसले सीमानाको विषयमा अलि कम बोल्ने गरेेको हो ? नेपाल भारतवीच सीमा समस्या छ कि छैन ?

 

घिमिरे- सीमा समस्या छ, त्यसलाई स्वीकार नगर्ने कुरै छैन । जबरजस्ती उताका किसान यता आउने, कतिपय ठाउँमा हाम्राले पनि गरिरहेका होलान् । यसको समाधान गर्नुपर्छ । समाधान हुन सक्छ ।

जहाँसम्म महाकालीको सिरानको कुरा छ, पुराना नक्शार दस्ताबेज हेरेरै त्यो टुंगो लगाउनुपर्छ । यो दुई देशको सीमानामा समस्या रहिरहनु      अत्यन्तै दुःखदायी कुरा हो । त्यसमा पनि सानो मुलुक र ठूलो मुलुकमा यस्तो हुनु झन् अत्यन्तै दुःखदायी कुरा हो ।
अहिले नयाँ शिराबाट काम सुरु भएको छ, यसलाई ढीलासुस्ती गर्न भएन । बुद्धिनारायणजीले भनिहाल्नुभो, काम थालियो भने ५ वर्ष लाग्छ । सक्रियातापूर्वक गरियो भने ३ वर्षमा सकिएला । तर, काम गर्नुपर्यो ।

 
एकचोटि सीमाना निश्चित भएर सीमा स्तम्भ गाडिसकेपछि त्यसलाई कसैले आएर भत्काउँदैमा त्यो समाप्त हुने होइन । कसैले भत्काएर नेपाल उता लग्यो या भारत यता ल्यायो भनेर हुने वाला छैन । नेपाल र भारत जहाँ खुल्ला सीमाना छ, यसमा जतिसक्दो चाँडो सीमा समस्या समाधान गर्नुपर्छ ।

 

अनलाइनखबर- एमाओवादी नेता लीलामणि पोख्रेललाई प्रश्न- विगत संविधानसभामा राष्ट्रिय हितको संरक्षण समितिले सीमानामा पर्खाल लगाउनुपर्छ भन्ने प्रस्ताव ल्याएको थियो नि ?

 

पोखरेल- पर्खाल लाउनुभन्दा पनि अहिलेलाई हाम्रो पोलिसी के हो त भन्दाखेरि संसारमा दुईदेश वीच खुल्ला आवत-जावत गर्ने प्रचलन संसारमा काँही पनि छैन । भारतको डोमिनेशनमा रहेको भूटान र भारतको वीचमा पनि यस्तो छैन । त्यहाँ पनि आउने-जानेहरुको रेगुलेसन सिस्टम छ । अनुमतिपत्र छ । दुईदेशको सीमाबारे बुद्धिनारायणजीले धेरै भनिसक्नुभयो । हामीले धेरै भोगेका छौं । हामीले मेचीकाली अभियान पनि चलायौं । हाम्रो पार्टीले विवाद भएका ठाउँमा गएर सीमा निरीक्षण अभियान पनि चलायो ।

 

तर, अब दुई देशवीचको सीमालाई निश्चित गर्नुपर्छ । थुप्रै ठाउँहरुमा निश्चिय पनि अतिक्रमण भएको छ । त्यो अतिक्रमण भएको फिर्ता हुनुपर्छ । अर्को, दुईदेशवीचको सीमालाई पहिलो चरणमा रेगुलेसन गरौं । दोस्रो चरणमा आवागमनका निम्ति अनुमति पत्रको व्यवस्था गरौं । तेस्रो चरणमा भीसा सिस्टम शुरु गरौं । सार्वभौम मुलुक हुन्. भने भिसा सिस्टममा जानै पर्छ ।

यसले सामाजिक सम्बन्धमा केही दख्खल लाग्न सक्छ । तराईमा रोटीका कुरा पनि छन् । तर, अलग-अलग मुलुक भैसकेपछि हिजो जर्मन दुईभागमा बाँडिदाखेरि एउटै परिवार पनि टुक्रिएको थियो । अहिले कोरियामा एउटै परिवार टुक्रिएको छ । त्यसका लागि मिलन कार्यक्रमहरु गर्न सकिन्छ । त्यसकारण अलग-अलग राष्ट्र भइसकेपछि सीमा नियमन गर्नु हुँदैन भन्नु उपयुक्त हुँदैन । त्यसकारण पहिले नियमनबाट जाऔं । नियमन गरिसकेपछि अनुमतिपत्रको व्यवस्था गरौं । त्यसपछि भिसाको व्यवस्था गरौं ।

 

 

अनलाइनखबर -यो प्रस्तावमा लक्षण घिमिरेजी पनि सहमत हुनुहुन्छ ?

 

घिमिरे – उहाँ अलि अगाडि नै जानु भो । जानु पनि पर्यो । अलिकति विचारधारा पनि अगाडि नै भएको हुनाले । तर म के भन्छु भने भारतले बेलाबखत हामीसँग भनिरहने के हो भने उनीहरुको सुरक्षा चासो । हाम्रो पनि सुरक्षा चासोको कुरा छ । इण्डियालाई होला मुम्बईमा गएर बम पड्काउला, हाम्रो त गाउँमा आएर लुटपाट हुनु पनि सुरक्षा सरोकारको विषय हो । हाम्रो पनि त्यत्तिकै सुरक्षा चासो छ । तसर्थ यसलाई रेगुलेसन गर्नुपर्ने अवस्थामा त आइसक्यो । छिद्रहरु छन् भने त्यसलाई रोक्नका लागि रेगुलेसन हुनुपर्छ ।

 

सुरुमा नागरिकता देखाएर आवत-जावत गर्ने व्यवस्था पनि गर्न सकिएला, के गरेर हुन्छ, यसलाई नियमन गर्नुपर्ने आवयश्कता छ । यो भारतको हितमा पनि छ र हाम्रो हितमा पनि । भारतले त आतंककारीहरु छिरे भनेर बढी नै चिन्ता गरिरहेको हुनाले यसमा उहाँहरुले पनि हेर्नुपर्यो । त्यसैले सीमानालाई नियमन गर्ने कार्य सुरु गर्दा बेसै हुन्छ ।

 

अनलाइनखबर – बुद्धिनारायणज्यू, सीमाविदको हैसियतले भन्नुपर्दा नेपाल-भारतको खुल्ला सीमानालाई कसरी रेगुलेसन गर्न सकिन्छ ? कसरी नियमन गर्नुपर्छ ?

 

श्रेष्ठ- नेपाल भारत सीमानाको नियमन सुरु भइसकेको छ । भारतले नेपालको सीमानामा ४५ हजार सशस्त्र सुरक्षा बल तैनाथ गरेको छ । नेपालले सीमानामा ५ हजार ३ सय सशस्त्र प्रहरी खटाएको छ । यो एकप्रकारको पहिलो चरणको रेगुलेसन नै हो । सुनौली नाकामा नेपालीहरु आए भने भारतीय सुरक्षा फौजले यसो हेरेर ५ जनालाई जान दिन्छ । नागरिकता नभए रोक्छ, सोधीखोजी र झारझूर पारेर अनिमात्रै जान दिन्छ । यो एउटा रेगुलेसनको स्टेप हो ।
सन् १९९९ मा इण्डियन एयरलाइन्सको विमान नेपालबाट दिल्ली जाने क्रममा अपहरणकारीले कान्दहारमा पुर्याए । यो घटनाले विमानस्थलमा रेगुलेसन शुरु भइसक्यो ।
अब जमीनमा पनि रेगुलेसन गर्न सकिन्छ । अहिले सीसीटीभीको जमाना छ । पहिलो चरणमा सीसीटीभी जडान गुर्नपर्छ । अहिले रुखको हाँगामा सीसीटीभी जडान गरिएको छ, त्यसको प्रयोजन मलाई थाहा छैन । त्यो सीसीटीभीलाई रुखको हाँगाबाट निकालेर एउटा लामो कोरिडोर बनाउनुपर्छ । त्यहाँ सीसीटीभी राख्ने र भित्रबाट निगरानी गर्ने । गाडीमा चढेका यात्रुहरु पनि त्यही लामो कोरीडोरबाट सीमा पार गर्ने । उनीहरुलाई भित्रैबाट हेर्ने । शंका लाग्यो भने यता आउनोस् त भनेर अरुलाई दख्खल नपारी समात्ने । यस्तो मेकानिज्म बनाउनुपर्छ । यसो गर्दा आतंककारीहरु आउन-जान पाउँदैनन् ।

पर्खाल लगाउने कुरा आयो । तर, दोस्रो स्टेप परिचय पत्र हो । सेक्युरिटीले परिचयपत्र हेर्छ र फटाफट स्क्यानिङ गर्छ । अर्को स्टेप चाँहि भारत र नेपाल असल छिमेकी हुन् भने १५/२० वर्षपछि सीमानामा फेन्सिङ (छेकबार) गर्नुपर्छ । तर, फेन्सिङ गर्दाखेरि चाँहि नेपाल र भारतको ३६० स्थानमा आवत-जावत गर्ने सुविधा हुनुपर्छ ।
अन्त्यमा, म के भन्छु भने नेपाली कांग्रेसले पनि सीमानाको बकाइदा कुरा उठाएको छ । गिरिजाबाबुले प्रधानमन्त्री भएका बेलामा भन्नुभएको छ, कालापानी हाम्रै हो ।

– See more at: http://www.onlinekhabar.com/2014/07/174861/#sthash.l2AAJQJh.dpuf

Border Issue on Priority

Buddhi Narayan Shrestha

प्राथमिकतामा सीमा मामिला

कालापानी, सुस्ताजस्ता समस्याबारे गहिरो अध्ययन गरी प्राविधिक समितिलाई निर्देशन दिन

दुवै देशमा उच्चस्तरको ट्रयाक-टु विज्ञ टोली गठन गर्नु सान्दर्भिक हुन सक्छ।

महाशक्तिका रूपमा उदीयमान भारतका प्रधानमन्त्री नरेन्द्र दामोदरदास मोदीको साउन १८ मा हुने नेपालको औपचारिक भ्रमणको पूर्वाधार मिलाउन दुवै देशका परराष्ट्रमन्त्रीले नेतृत्व गरेको नेपाल-भारत संयुक्त आयोगको बैठक साउन १० गते काठमाडौंमा सफलतापूर्वक सम्पन्न भएको छ। बैठकपछि नेपालका परराष्ट्रमन्त्री महेन्द्रबहादुर पाण्डे र भारतका विदेशमन्त्री सुष्मा स्वराजबीच २६ बुँदे सहमतिपत्रमा हस्ताक्षर भई संयुक्त प्रेस विज्ञप्ति जारी गरिएको छ।

संयुक्त विज्ञप्तिअनुसार छलफलका क्रममा पाँचवटा विषयगत क्षेत्र निर्धारण गरी विभिन्न ५२ एजेन्डा बैठकमा प्रस्तुत गरिएको थियो। यस्ता विषयगत क्षेत्रमध्ये नेपाल-भारत सीमा मामिलालाई प्राथमिकता दिइएको छ। यद्यपि राजनीतिक, आर्थिक सहयोग तथा पूर्वाधार, व्यापार तथा पारवहन, ऊर्जा तथा जलस्रोत र संस्कृति, शिक्षा एवं मिडिया पनि विषयगत क्षेत्रभित्र परेका छन्। बैठकले नेपाल-भारत सीमा कार्यदललाई क्षेत्रगत काम चाँडोभन्दा चाँडो प्रारम्भ गर्न निर्देशन दिएको छ। संयुक्त बैठकको निर्णय भएलगत्तै कार्य सुरु गरिहालिने बुँदा भएकाले सीमा मामिलालाई दुवै देशले महत्त्वपूर्ण तत्त्वको रूपमा लिएको बुझ्न सकिन्छ।

बैठकमा नेपाली पक्षबाट कालापानी, सुस्तालगायतका विवादास्पद सीमा नक्सांकनका विषयमा कुरा उठाउँदा भारतीय पक्षले कालापानी र सुस्ता सीमा विवादलाई जटिल भएको धारणा व्यक्त गरेको कुरा सञ्चारमाध्यममा आएको थियो। तर यो समस्या सम्बन्धमा भारतीय विदेशमन्त्री सुष्मा स्वराजले नेपालको एक इन्च भूमि पनि लिने भारतको नियत नभएको धारणा राखेकी थिइन्। त्यसपछि कार्यदललाई तत्काल स्थलगत काम थाल्न निर्देशन दिइएको थियो।

यहाँ जिज्ञासा उत्पन्न हुन्छ, सीमा मामिलालाई किन प्राथमिकता दिइयो? यसको जबाफ हुन सक्छ, सीमा मामिला निकै संवेदनशील विषयवस्तुसँग गाँसिएको छ। जस्तो- सीमांकन, सीमा व्यवस्थापन, सुरक्षा चासो, सपुर्दगी सन्धि, सन् १९५० को सन्धि आदि। नेपाल-भारतबीचको बाँकी सीमांकन सम्बन्धमा नवगठित सीमा कार्यदलले खासगरी पाँच बुँदामा विशेष ध्यान पुर्‍याउनुपर्ने देखिन्छ।

प्रथमतः कालापानी, सुस्ताजस्ता बाँकी क्षेत्रको रेखांकनलाई प्राथमिकताको सूचीमा पार्नुपर्छ। दोस्रो, तयारी १ सय ८२ थान स्टि्रप म्याप (सीमा नक्सा) यथार्थ छन्, छैनन्- जाँचबुझ गर्नुपर्छ।तेस्रो, यी नक्सा र नयाँ नक्सांकनको काम समाप्त भएपछि सीमा प्रोटोकल तयार पार्नुपर्छ। सीमा नक्सालाई पूरक सामग्रीका रूपमा संलग्न गरी संयुक्त हस्ताक्षरका लागि प्रोटोकल तयार गरिनुपर्छ। चौथो, लोप भएका र गरिएका कतिपय सीमा खम्बा पुनः स्थापना गर्ने तथा मर्मत गर्ने काम हुनुपर्छ। पाँचौं, कतिपय स्थानमा स्पष्ट नभएका दसगजा क्षेत्र छुट्याउनुपर्छ।

सीमा नक्सा तयार पार्नका लागि बाँकी तीन प्रतिशत सीमारेखाको अंकन गर्न नेपाल-भारत संयुक्त प्राविधिकस्तरीय सीमा समिति (नापी विभागको महानिर्देशक र भारतीय सर्भेयर जनरलको नेतृत्वमा) गठन गर्न दुई देशबीच साउन ३ गते नै कूटनीतिक पत्रचार आदान-प्रदान भइसकेको छ। सात वर्षअघि विघटन गरिएको संयुक्त सीमा समिति पुनः गठन गर्न लागिएको खुसीको कुरा हो। दार्चुलाको कालापानी-लिम्पियाधुरा तथा नवलपरासीको सुस्ताजस्ता बाँकी रहेको क्षेत्रको काम यथाशक्य चाँडो पूरा गरी शतप्रतिशत सीमांकन सम्पन्न गरिनु दुवै देशको मर्यादाको कुरा हो। कालापानी समस्याबारे पुराना नक्सा, ऐतिहासिक दस्ताबेज, कागजातअनुसार महाकाली नदीको मुहान यकिन गरी सधैंका लागि मुद्दाको छिनोफानो गरिनुपर्छ। सुगौली सन्धिअनुसार नेपालको पश्चिमी सीमा पूरै काली नदी हो।

सुस्ता सीमा अतिक्रमणबारे आधिकारिक नक्सा दस्ताबेज नभेटिए दुवै देशले दावा-विरोध गरेको समुचा क्षेत्रको संयुक्त नक्सांकन तयार गर्नु समस्या समाधानको उपाय हो। एउटै टेबलमा बसी नक्साउपर आपसी छलफल गरेर सन् १८१६ मा सुगौली सन्धि गरिएका समय नारायणी नदी बगेको धार पहिचान गर्दै नदीको दायाँ-बायाँ जंगे खम्बा ठोकी समस्या निराकरण गरिनु प्राविधिक दृष्टिकोणले उपयुक्त हुन सक्छ।

जहाँसम्म ९७ प्रतिशत सीमांकन भई १ सय ८२ थान तयारी सीमा नक्सामा हस्ताक्षर गर्ने कुरो छ, माथि उल्लिखित ३ प्रतिशतको काम पनि सम्पन्न गरी एकैपटक हस्ताक्षर गर्नु अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय मान्यता तथा अभ्यास अनुकूल हुन जान्छ। किस्ताबन्दीमा हस्ताक्षर गर्ने प्रावधान अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय सिद्धान्तमा रहेको पाइँदैन। तयारी सीमा नक्साको कतिपय ‘रेड लाइन’ सीमारेखा यथार्थपरक छैन भन्ने कुरो उठेकाले त्यस्ता शंकास्पद सेक्टरको पुरानो आधार नक्सा र जमिन सीमा भिडाई गल्ती रेखा खिचिएको भेटिए सुधार संशोधन गर्ने अधिकार संयुक्त सीमा समितिलाई प्रदान गरिनुपर्छ। संयुक्त सीमा टोलीले २६ वर्ष रेखांकनको काम गर्दा दुवै देशका सीमावर्ती स्थानीय बासिन्दालाई जमिनमा सीमा नदेखाएका कारणले अन्तरसीमा जोतकमोत दखल भई सीमा अतिक्रमण हुन पुगेको छ। अब यस्तो गल्ती गरिनु हुँदैन।

नेपाल-भारत सीमा नक्सामा ८ हजार ८ सय ५३ सीमा खम्बा चित्रण गरिएका छन्। तीमध्ये ३ हजार २ सय ७७ खम्बा जमिनमा स्थापना गरिएकै छैनन्। स्थापना भएका ५ हजार ५ सय ७६ खम्बामध्ये पनि ४ सय ९९ खोलाले बगाएको, २ सय २ जमिनमा लोप गरिएको, १ सय ८९ जीर्ण अवस्थामा रहेको र ६ सय ८४ खम्बा साधारण मर्मतसम्भार गर्नुपर्ने कुरा तथ्यांकले बताउँछ। लोप भएका र बगाएका सीमा खम्बा पुनः स्थापना गर्ने र जीर्ण खम्बा मर्मत गर्ने काम संयुक्त टोलीलाई दिइनुपर्छ। दुवै सीमावर्ती दसगजा क्षेत्रको अतिक्रमण हटाई सफा राख्ने अधिकार संयुक्त टोलीलाई प्रदान गरिनुपर्छ। सशस्त्र प्रहरी बलको तथ्यांकअनुसार भारततर्फबाट ६० स्थानमा र नेपालतर्फबाट ४२ स्थानमा दसगजा मिचिएको छ। एउटै गाउँबस्ती दुई देशतर्फ परेको खण्डमा पनि दसगजा चिन्ह अंकन गरिनु वैज्ञानिक हुन आउँछ।

कालापानी, सुस्ताजस्ता समस्याबारे गहिरो अध्ययन गरी प्राविधिक समितिलाई निर्देशन दिन दुवै देशमा उच्चस्तरको ट्रयाक-टु विज्ञ टोली गठन गर्नु सान्दर्भिक हुन सक्छ। नेपाली विज्ञ भारतका प्रबुद्ध वर्गसँग सिधै टेलिफोन वार्ता गर्न सक्ने हैसियतको हुनु फलदायी हुन जान्छ। स्मरणीय छ, भारतको विदेश तथा सामरिक नीति कस्तो हुनुपर्छ भनी केहीअघि दिल्लीले आठजना प्रबुद्ध विज्ञहरू राखेर एउटा अध्ययन गराएको थियो। यस्तो अभ्यास नेपालमा विभिन्न विषयमा गरिनुपर्छ। यद्यपि, हालै सम्पन्न संयुक्त बैठकमा हालसम्मका सन्धि, सम्झौता अध्ययन, समीक्षा एवं पुनरोवलोकन गरी प्रतिवेदन तयार पार्न दुवै देशका पााच-पाँच सदस्य रहने अध्ययन समूह गठन गर्ने सहमति भएको छ।

अब सीमा व्यवस्थापनको कुरा गरौं। नेपाल र भारतबीचको खुला सीमा अवसर र चुनौतीका रूपमा छ। यद्यपि चुनौतीको मात्रा धेरै छन्। यिनै चुनौतीलाई सम्बोधन गर्न सीमामा हुने अतिवादी समूहको गतिविधिलाई निगरानी राख्ने, अन्तरसीमा अपराध तथा विध्वंसात्मक क्रियाकलापलाई नियन्त्रण गर्ने, जाली भारतीय नोट सीमापार हुनमा रोक्ने, लागूपदार्थ तथा मानव तस्करी एवं व्यक्ति अपहरण गर्न नदिने

संयुक्त आयोगको बैठकमा निर्णय भएको कुरा प्रकाशमा आएको छ। यसलाई कार्यान्वयन गर्ने संयन्त्रलाई चुस्त बनाइनुपर्छ।

यसैगरी संयुक्त बैठकमा सीमा सुरक्षा संयन्त्रबारे गहन छलफल हुनुका साथै सुपुर्दगी सन्धिबारे कारबाही अगाडि बढाउन र १९५० को सन्धि पनुरावलोकन, समायोजन, अद्यावधिक या संशोधन गर्न अध्ययनका लागि समूह गठन भएको छ। यसका लागि मिहिनेती गृहकार्यको आवश्यकता पर्छ। राजनीतिक ऐक्यबद्धताको खाँचो पर्ने हुन्छ।

वास्तवमा यी बुँदाहरू सीमा व्यवस्थापनसँग सम्बन्धित विषय हुन्। दुई देशबीचको सीमा खुला भएकोले यी सबै कार्य तदारुकतासाथ हुन सकेको पाइँदैन। यसबाट दुवै देशको सुरक्षा संयन्त्रमा बेला-कुबेला प्रश्नचिन्ह ठडिन पुगेको छ। सुरक्षा संयन्त्रको प्रसंगलाई लिएर होला, खुला सीमाबाट अवाञ्छित गतिविधि हुने गरेकोबारे प्रधानमन्त्री सुशील कोइराला मोदीको शपथग्रहण समारोहमा दिल्ली गएका बखत २७ मे २०१४ का दिन साइडलाइनको भेटघाट क्रममा भारतीय प्रधानमन्त्री नरेन्द्र मोदीले ‘खुला सिमाना रहेका दुई मित्रवत् मुलुकले आपसी सुरक्षा चासोमा बढी ध्यान दिनुपर्छ’ भनेका थिए। यसैकारण दुई देशबीच हालै सम्पन्न परराष्ट्रमन्त्री स्तरीय संयन्त्रमा सीमा मामिलालाई प्राथमिकता दिइएको कुरा बुझ्न सकिन्छ।

BBC Nepali Service- New Nepal Program

BBC Nepali Service
6 hours ago

Why the government is not successful to stop the continuing haphazard urbanization and plotting-planning of the land, and to implement the Land Use Policy  and regulations in different parts of Nepal ?

Concerning this issue, a discussion between former Secretary of the Ministry of Urban Development Kishore Thapa and former Director General of Survey Department Buddhi Narayan Shrestha,  is going to broadcast in BBC Nepali Service on 26 July 2014, Saturday after 8.45 PM in ‘New Nepal Program.’ Please try to listen it.

नेपालका विभिन्न स्थानमा जारी अव्यस्थित शहरिकरण र जग्गाहरुको ‘प्लटीङ’ रोक्न, र भू-उपयोगबारे सम्वन्धी नीति नियम कार्यान्वयन गर्न सरकार किन विफल?

त्यस विषयमा शहरि विकास मन्त्रालयका पूर्व सचिव किशोर थापा र नापी विभागका पूर्व महानिर्देशक बुध्दीनारायण श्रेष्ठबीचको छलफल शनिबार पौने नौ बजेपछि नयाँ नेपाल कार्यक्रममा प्रसारण हुँदैछ। सुन्ने प्रयास गर्नुहोला।

 

Talk on Open Border in International Conference

Buddhi Narayan Shrestha

 
International Federation of Surveyors 25th World Congress, International Border Management Session was held on the third week of June in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Two thousand one hundred participants from 97 countries of the world participated the world congress. There were eleven participants from Nepal. This scribe presented a paper from Nepal entitled ‘Case Study on Nepal-India Border Management, its Opportunities and Challenges.’

During the presentation I mentioned, unwanted elements have made undesirable activities through Nepal-India open border. So there should adopt some alternative measures to stop illegal activities along the border.
In connection to my presentation, I explained the opportunities of the open border as convenience in movement across the international border without any hassle. There have been facilities of quick response during hazard and natural calamities. For example, there was a great fire hazard in Ilam of Nepal on June 6, 2011. Fire Brigade brought instantly from Darjeeling, India and put off the fire. Regarding cross-border medical services facility, thousands of Indian frontier inhabitants could come to Sagarmatha Choudhary Eye Hospital, Lahan Nepal any time to get the treatment without any obstruction. Indian labours from Arariya come to Nepal for paddy cultivation and harvesting without any restriction. There is a facility to supply food grains immediately, where there are shortage on the other side of the border. Local production like vegetables and fruits of one frontier could be sold in the weekly market of the other side there and then. All these have been possible as there is an open border regime between two countries.

Challenges of the open border regime is regarded as the other face of the same coin. I explained with examples that Abdul Karim Tunda, one of India’s most wanted top twenty Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists was arrested on August 16, 2013 and Yasin Bhatkal, co-founder of the Indian Mujahideen, a militant group banned in India, listed by the United States as a foreign terrorist organization and one of India’s most wanted terrorism suspect was arrested by Nepal police near India’s border on August 28, 2013; and they were handed over to India unofficially.
Indian criminal Bablu Dubey, who did 36 crimes in India sneaked Nepal through open border, was arrested by Nepal Police on May 29, 2013. Aasin Miya was arrested with Rs. 6.9 million Indian fake currency notes on May 28, 2012 in Bara district border. Similarly, Nepal Police arrested Amit Sarraf of Raxaul, an Indian national, with smuggled gold in Parwanipur from Indian border bound bus on May 19, 2014.
There have been trafficking of narcotic drugs, smuggling of goods and machinery, illegal transaction of small arms and gun-powder, trans-border theft, robbery and rape through the open border.

On the other hand, Nepali industrialist Ganga Bishan Rathi was abducted from Biratnagar, Nepal and he was taken to Siliguri, India and was killed on January 10, 2013 after 23 days of his abduction. Nepali businessman Tulsi Ram Agrawal was abducted on July 20, 2006 and taken to the other side of the border. He was released from Betia, India after the monetary negotiation. Maiti Nepal, a social organization, rescued 264 girls and women (15-28 years old) during 2013 in the Belahia-Sunauli border crossing point. They were supposed to be sold in Indian brothels.
There are infiltrations of third country nationals in a disguised manner through the open border. Bangladeshi citizens use to cross Nepal-India porous border illegally in the disguise of Indian (West Bengal) national. Their face, language, attire, food habit are as ditto as West Bengal inhabitants. Such is the case from Pakistani, Afghani, Iranian citizens as they cross open border as Indian (Uttar Pradesh) nationals. Similarly, Bhutanese and Mynmarian citizens cross the border illegally in the disguise of Nepali nationals. If we stay and look for one or two hours in the Thamel street market of Kathmandu, we can identify such non-status third country citizens. These are some of the examples of the challenges of the open border between two countries.

So far as the reactions on open border system is concerned, newly elected Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi said on May 27, 2014 while meeting the Prime Minister Sushil Koirala informally after the swearing in ceremony in New Delhi that ‘Nepal and India should be mindful of mutual security concerns as they share an open border.’ Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar said during Chief Ministers conference in New Delhi on April 21, 2012 that Open border with Nepal poses security challenges to Bihar. It needs center’s support to regulate the border to check cross-border crimes.
Indian Ambassador to Nepal Ranjeet Rae said on February 17, 2014 in an exclusive interview to the Kathmandu Post Daily ‘India and Nepal are very close friends and neighbours that share an open border. This has been so traditionally for centuries. In any close relationship, especially between neighbours with open borders, there will be irritants from time to time. But it will be resolved through dialogue, co-operation and understanding. We have an open border, someone commits a crime in one country and runs to the other. This is a problem for both countries. We have to set up our co-operation and co-ordination to ensure that the benefits are maximized and the problems are minimized. We need to have regulation and more patrolling along the border. But sometimes, unfortunately, they are also misused by people who do not have the best interests of the two countries at heart. Terrorism-related cases, fake Indian currency smuggling, gold smuggling and trafficking of protected species are at he specific areas of concern India has with Nepal.’

During presentation, I expressed recommendation that alternative measure should be implemented in order to maintain internal and external security system, to address the challenges of open border and to make Indo-Nepal border safe and secure. In the first phase, a mechanism should be developed to monitor by the CCTV cameras. CCTV should be installed in a long but narrow corridor, and the travellers should walk through that room speaking his/her name with caste, address, purpose of crossing the border and number of days he is travelling. It has to visualise and study his face, posture, dialect, way of walking, sequence of speaking on the computer monitor from inside the corridor. Doubtful traveller should be interrogated taking him to nearby small room. If he is found suspicious, it must be arrested for further inquiry. If he is a genuine passenger, he should be allowed to cross the border without any delay.
As the second alternative, it is imperative to implement ID card system in a phase wise basis in some of the border crossing points. Introducing ID system is pragmatic for Nepal and India in course of time for the security reason. Travellers should produce ID card while crossing the international border, that should be scanned and let the passenger go through immediately. If this system was introduced, it could have been easily identified the total number of Nepali pilgrimage died last year due to land slide hazard in India. It is commendable that ID card system was introduced for the air-route passengers since October 1, 2000, after the hijacking of Indian Airline aircraft from Kathmandu to Kandahar, Afghanistan. ID was implemented with the decision of both the countries.
The last alternative measure I suggested in my presentation was- fencing the frontier. I quoted the saying of an eminent American poet Robert Frost ‘Good fences make good neighbors.’ Ultimately, it will be not too bad to erect barbed wire fencing between two good neighbours. There are one thousand eight hundred and eighty km long border line between Nepal and India. So there must have 360 exit /entry points, so that the inhabitants of both the frontiers can reach to the exit point, travelling one to two kilometer distance. But visa system should not be introduced because of the perspective of age old friendship between the government to government and people to people level relationship.
After my presentation, participants from United Arab Republic, Israel, Bangladesh, Malaysia and others put questions: whether India may agree to introduce ID card system, if there is existence of extradition treaty between Nepal and India, since how long the open border system existed, whether international terrorists travel across India-Nepal border or also Tibet-Nepal border, and how much will be the cost estimate of fencing on the border.

I answered that Nepal-India border is open for centuries, but there is no black and white agreement. However it is going on traditionally and culturally. India may be mindful to make the border regulated in the context of the security of the people and cross-border crime and smuggling of fake Indian currency notes. For this, India has deployed more than forty-five thousand Special Security Bureau (SSB) personnel along the border. Regarding extradition treaty, it has been drafted and discussed, but it is entangled on the issue whether third country criminals should be extraditated. Terrorists shuttle mostly India-Nepal-India open border, and very few from China-Nepal border. Regarding the cost of the fencing, I mentioned my book entitled ‘Border Management of Nepal’ published eleven years ago, as it was estimated as 140 million US$. But the cost may be more than four fold in these days due to market inflation.

At the end of my presentation I reiterated that for the security reason, Nepal-India international border must be restricted to the terrorists, controlled for smugglers, checked for criminals, obstructed for girl traffickers, stopped for narcotic holders, vigilant for smuggler of fake Indian currency notes. But there must not be any delayed for genuine passengers to cross the international border.

                                                                                                                             ♣ ♣

Felicitation Program by Greater Nepal Weekly

Greater Nepal Weekly Second Anniversary

and

Felicitation Program

 

I was fortunate to be the Chief Guest of a program entitled ‘Greater Nepal Weekly Second Anniversary and Felicitation Program’ on 1st July 2014, organized by the Greater Nepal National Weekly in the Siddhartha Cottage, Tinkune, Kathmandu. The program was inaugurated by myself and Surendra Dhakal, Editor/Publisher of the Greater Nepal National Weekly by lighting the candles.

I presented a Letter of Felicitation in a plaque to Rabi Lamichhane, Guinness Book of World Record Holder on behalf of the Greater Nepal National Weekly.

In the mean time, I also presented a book to Lamichhane entitled ‘International Boundary Making’ as I am one of the co-authors, published by the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), Copenhagen, Denmark.

Lamichhane had conducted a program on 10-11 April 2013 in the News24 Television for 62 hours and 12 minutes continuously (Longest Marathon Television Talk show) making interviews to more than 84 distinguished personalities from different walks of life, that broke the world record. Fortunately, I was one of the interviewees. Lamichhane had taken my interview for 45 minutes.
During my interview, I had spoken that to make publicize on the birth place of Lord Gautam Buddha, we have to write in the arrival / departure lounge of our Tribuhvan International Airport, embarkation / disembarkation cards, Hotel reception counter, meeting hall of the ministries (especially, prime minister’s diplomatic meeting room, ministry of foreign affairs and finance and various offices and commissions), at the end of the visiting card of the dignitaries that ‘Buddha was Born in Nepal.’
I had made my visiting card after three days of that interview mentioning at at the end of the card that ‘Buddha was born in Nepal.’ after two months, I had used that card when I had visited Colombo and Kandy of Sri Lanka. during the meeting, I had also given this card to Mr. Gamini Bandara, Director of International Affairs, Temple of Tooth Relic at Dalada Maligawa, Kandy on 23 April 2013. I also presented this card to Excellency Ambassador of Nepal to Sri Lanka Mr. Sushil Chandra Amatya, when he had invited our group for dinner in his residence on 21 April 2013. Mr. Amatya had told me that he will include these wordings, while he makes new visiting card.

I am happy to felicitate Rabi Lamichhane, as the chief guest of the program, for his noble work to protect the integrity and nationality of Nepal making publicity all over the world that ‘Buddha was Born in Nepal.’

I expressed that Lamichhane is committed to preserve the national identity and territorial integrity.We have to join our hands to him in the matter of national feeling. It was commendable that he conducted so long interviews that he broke the world record. It has enhanced the prestige of our nation.

I explained the terminology of nation, nationality and nationalism. Nationalism is a feeling or antimation to be honest and dedicated to the nation and to glorify the national pride. Nationalism is not a substance to be sold and to buy in the market. For the self-respect, nationalism is the soul or heart of a living person. If the soul is sold, it will be the end of country’s nationalism.

 

A man dies, if his heart is failed. In the same way, if the nationalism is failed, the country will be vanished. With these notions, one must have faith upon his country whether it is least developed or developing or under developed or developed; and must deserve for the betterment of the nation in all respect.

Similarly, Mr. Anil Joshi, Chairman of News24 Television was felicitated by Borne Bahadur Kari, Chairman of Nepal Press Council and special guest of the program. Surendra Dhakal, Editor/Publisher of Greater Nepal National Weekly and Ujir Magar, general Secretary of Federation of Nepalese Journalist and guest of the program jointly presented the felicitation plaque to Nirmal Raj Paudel, Chairman of Welcome Event Management on behalf of Greater Nepal National Weekly.
On the occasion, Rabi Lamichhane expressed thanks to Greater Nepal Weekly for the appreciation of his work presenting letter of appreciation.

In the program, Borna Bahadur Karki, Ujir Magar, Surendra Dhakal. Krishna Raj Dulal, Manager of the Weekly had made a welcome speech. Tejendra Prasai, Executive Editor of the Weekly highlighted on the activities of the Weekly. At the end of the program, Momo and tea was served for the guests and invitees.

 

International Boundary Making

International Boundary Making

FIG COMMISSION 1
Professional Standards and Practice

 

Editor
Haim Srebro

INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF SURVEYORS (FIG)
Copyright c The International Federation of Surveyors (FIG), December 2013.
All rights reserved.
International Federation of Surveyors (FIG)
Kalvebod Brygge 31–33
DK-1780 Copenhagen V
DENMARK
Tel. + 45 38 86 10 81
E-mail: FIG@FIG.net
http://www.fig.net

Published in English
Copenhagen, Denmark
ISBN 978-87-92853-08-0

Published by
International Federation of Surveyors (FIG)
Editor: Haim Srebro
Authors: Miklos Pinther, William A. Robertson, Maxim Shoshany, Buddhi N. Shrestha,
Haim Srebro

Front cover and introdcution photos: Haim Srebro
Design: International Federation of Surveyors, FIG
Printer: 2013 Hakapaino, Helsinki, Finland

ABOUT FIG
International Federation of Surveyors is the premier international organization representing the interests of surveyors worldwide. It is a federation of the national member associations and covers the whole range of professional fields within the global surveying community. It provides an international forum for discussion and development aiming to promote professional practice and standards.

FIG was founded in 1878 in Paris and was first known as the Fédération Internationale des Géomètres (FIG). This has become anglicized to the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG). It is a United Nations and World Bank Group recognized non-government organization (NGO), representing a membership from 120 plus countries throughout the world, and its aim is to ensure that the disciplines of surveying and all who practice them meet the needs of the markets and communities that they serve.

 

                                                           CONTENTS

PREFACE……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………..7
SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………………………………8
FOREWORD……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..9
INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10

PART I:
A METHODOLOGICAL COMPREHENSIVE INTERNATIONAL
BOUNDARY-MAKING MODEL…………………………………………………………………………………………..15
Part I Prologue………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….16
Chapter 1: The Process of International Boundary Making………………………………………17
Chapter 2: The Order of Precedence of Boundary Definitions…………………………………39
Chapter 3: A Model of Boundary Delimitation in a Peace Agreement……………………51

PART II:
PRACTICAL CASES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….67
Part II Prologue…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………68
Chapter 4: The Israel–Jordan International Boundary……………………………………………….69
Chapter 5: Demarcation of the Iraq–Kuwait Boundary……………………………………………..94
Chapter 6: Contributions and Challenges for Surveyors
in the Establishment of International Boundaries – Cases in Africa……………………..118
Chapter 7: Demarcation of the International Boundaries of Nepal………………………149

 

PREFACE

Robert Frost in “Mending Wall” poetically said, “good fences make good neighbours”. In
the same vein, our Profession believes good boundaries make good fences that make good neighbours. This must particularly be so with international boundaries, as good boundaries unite rather than divide. The consequence of good international boundaries should promote and contribute towards peace and shared prosperity.

This publication addresses surveying methodology and experiences in the delimitation and demarcation of international boundaries. The process of international boundary making is generally categorised into four recognised phases. They are: the preparations for an agreement, boundary delimitation, boundary demarcation and, boundary maintenance and administration. Surveying for the delimitation and demarcation of international boundaries is highly specialised.

The team of contributing authors, Miklos Pinther, Bill Robertson, Maxim Shoshany, Buddhi Shrestha and Haim Srebro, who are also professionals and practitioners, must be congratulated for their diligent efforts leading to this publication. It is an accomplishment for this team of authors, from diverse background yet eminent in their experience and expertise, under the able leadership of Haim Srebro, Editor for the publication. The support from the team’s families, employers, and FIG member organisations are equally appreciated. FIG thanks the New Zealand Institute of Surveyors for co-sponsoring the printing of this publication.

FIG extends gratitude to the United Nations Cartographic Section for their contribution to this publication, in particular the peer review carried out by Ms. Ayako Kagawa, Mr. Ghassan Mkhaimer and Mr. Kyoung-Soo Eom.

It is the hope that this publication will enhance information, knowledge and practices for the delimitation of international boundaries towards the promotion of peace throughout the world.

CheeHai Teo
President
International Federation of Surveyors
December 2013

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The following experts and institutions are acknowledged for their valuable contributions to this FIG Publication:

Editor and Contributing Author

Dr. Haim Srebro is a senior consultant on mapping and boundaries and author of books on these subjects. Former Director General of the Survey of Israel (2003–2012). He participated as a leading figure in the delimitation of the international land and maritime boundaries of Israel. Since 1994 he is chair of the Israel–Jordan Joint Team of Experts regarding the international boundary. He is vice chair of FIG Commission 1. He was FIGWW2009 Congress Director. E-mail: haim.srebro@gmail.com.

Other Contributing Authors (in alphabetical order)

Miklos Pinther, retired. Former Head, Cartographic Department, The American Geographical Society (1969–1977). Former Chief Cartographer, United Nations (1985–2001). He was the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Iraq–Kuwait Boundary Demarcation Commission at the time of this demarcation. E-mail: pinther@optonline.net.

Dr. William Alexander (Bill) Robertson ONZM has been involved in the demarcation of five international boundaries in Africa and Asia. He has also acted as an independent consultant on various World Bank Land Administration projects and for the United Nations. Previously he served as Director General and Surveyor General of the New Zealand Department of Surveying and Land Information. Bill is a Past President of the New Zealand Planning Institute and a Past President of the Commonwealth Association of Planners. E-mail: billrobertson@xtra.co.nz

Prof. Maxim Shoshany is a Professor of remote sensing at the Department of Transportation and Geo-Information, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Technion, Israeli Institute of Technology. He was in the past head of the Geography Department at Bar Ilan University. E-mail: maximsh@tx.technion.ac.il

Buddhi Narayan Shrestha     is the former Director General, Survey Department of Nepal. Currently he is working as the Managing Director of Bhumichitra Mapping Co. He is the Board Member of ‘Institute of Foreign Affairs’ nominated by Nepal Government. He has authored seven books on border demarcation and management of Nepal. He was involved in Nepal–India and Nepal–China Joint boundary Committees. He is the President of Nepal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. E-mail: bordernepal@gmail.com.

                                  SPECIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Very special thanks to the Cartographic Section, Division for Geospatial, Information & Telecommunications Technologies (DGITT), Department of Field Support, United Nations and in particular, Mr. Kyoung-Soo Eom, (Chief Cartographic Section), Ms. Ayako Kagawa (Chief Geo Support Unit) and Mr. Ghassan Mkhaimer (Technical Project Manager, Iraq-Kuwait Boundary Maintenance Project or IKBMP) for the support, the knowledgeable and invaluable review of the entire publication;

Special thanks to the New Zealand Institute of Surveyors for its support and contribution
towards the publication including co-sponsoring the cost of printing of the publication;
Special thanks to the FIG Council and FIG Commission 1: Professional Standards and Practice for their support and encouragement;

Special thanks to Dr. Bill Robertson for his thorough review of the publication on behalf
of FIG;

Special thanks also to the Survey of Israel, an Affiliate Member of FIG and its Director
General, Ronen Regev for its support;

Thanks to the Association of Licensed Surveyors in Israel, a Member Association of FIG
and the Technion Israeli Institute of Technology, an Academic Member of FIG for its support; and

Last but not least, to the FIG Office and its staff for administering the process from
conceptualisation to completion of the print version and in particular, coordinating the
layout, printing and despatch.

 

FOREWORD

It is a privilege to write this forword for this important FIG publication on international boundary making. The New Zealand Institute of Surveyors and I are proud to be part of the publication under the editorship of Haim Srebro, a highly experienced international boundary consultant. With this pedigree it presents an authoritative and knowledgeable outline of the surveyor’s role and challenges in international boundary making. It serves its purpose well in promoting the sharing of information, methodological knowledge and experience required in the delimitation and demarcation of international boundaries.

As such it fills an important gap in publications on the subject of international boundary
determination. Over the last century there have been numerous determinations of international boundaries and many books and papers on this. However, these are invariably concerned with the legal and political dimensions of international boundaries. Thus, this collection of surveying methodology and experience is particularly timely in emphasising the role of surveying and describing the range of processes and procedures involved. It records a full surveying and demarcation methodology that has existed previously only in the scattered records of various international boundary projects.

The contents confirm surveying for international boundaries is of a high level specialist
nature and that the surveyors’ role demands a wide portfolio of surveying expertise. These range through documentary research, geodetic surveying, digital imagery and mapping, reconnaissance, ground marking and positioning etc. The references to the surveyor working within strict legal and political parameters are most valuable and highlight the serious constraints imposed on surveying activity and conduct in the international legal and political arena. The proposed methodology for establishing a boundary making process between two states provides a very useful survey guidance model avoiding the need to continually reinvent from surveying first principles. The process of international boundary making is categorised in the four generally recognized phases. These are the preparations for a boundary agreement, boundary delimitation, boundary demarcation, and boundary maintenance and administration. All phases require significant surveyors’ input. The compilation of chapters from five well experienced authors on seven different international boundaries provides a wealth of surveying experience. It contains a depth of learning through the application of survey practice in a wide variety of historic, physical and political circumstances. References to International Court of Justice and Permanent Court of Arbitration and other cases provide authoritative sources for detailed follow up by readers and practitioners.

This publication is timely and it provides comprehensive documentation and guidance
on a specialist topic of surveying that has been lacking up until now. It is a very good
reference publication for all involved or interested in international boundaries and fills
a gap both in surveying and international boundary literature. FIG is to be congratulated
on producing this publication at this time as a valuable service to the international
surveying community.

Dr Bill Robertson ONZM FNZIS
New Zealand Institute of Surveyors
December 2013