India-China thaw: What it means for Nepal

Five years after the deadly clashes in the Galwan Valley that severely strained ties, India and China now appear to be moving toward normalization of relations.

While the US President Donald Trump’s tariff war may have nudged the two Asian powers closer, the current thaw stems largely from sustained confidence-building measures and dialogue. For Kathmandu, cordial relations between India and China create a more favorable environment to engage constructively with both New Delhi and Beijing.

On both the Doklam and the Galwan clashes, Nepal consistently maintained that disputes should be resolved peacefully. Following the Galwan incident, Nepal stated: “In the context of recent developments in the Galwan Valley area between our friendly neighbors India and China, Nepal is confident that both the neighboring countries will resolve, in the spirit of good neighborliness, their mutual differences through peaceful means in favor of bilateral, regional and world peace and stability.”

Over the past year, multiple rounds of dialogue helped rebuild trust. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited India on Aug 18–19, where discussions included the sensitive border question. Earlier, in July, Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar traveled to Beijing.

India has long maintained that relations cannot return to normal unless border issues are addressed. In delegation-level talks, Jaishankar remarked: “Having seen a difficult period in our relationship, our two nations seek to move ahead. This requires a candid and constructive approach from both sides. Overall, it is our expectation that our discussions would contribute to building a stable, cooperative and forward-looking relationship between India and China, one that serves both our interests and addresses our concerns.”

On the global context, he added: “We seek a fair, balanced and multi-polar world order, including a multi-polar Asia. Reformed multilateralism is also the call of the day. In the current environment, there is clearly the imperative of maintaining and enhancing stability in the global economy as well.”

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, for his part, urged both sides to draw lessons from the past, cultivate a correct strategic outlook, and view each other as partners and opportunities rather than rivals or threats. He emphasized confidence-building, expanded cooperation and consolidating positive momentum. Pointing to the US, Wang warned that “unilateral bullying practices are on the rise, while free trade and the international order face severe challenges.”

This thaw in India-China ties comes at a time when New Delhi’s relations with Washington have soured after Trump imposed an additional 25 percent tariff on Indian goods, citing India’s continued imports of Russian oil. Meanwhile, China and the US have been locked in a trade and technology war since 2018.

According to Kathmandu-based geopolitical analyst Chandra Dev Bhatta, shifting global geopolitics has compelled both India and China to temporarily set aside differences. “Both countries now recognize each other as competing powers, not necessarily the binary rivals often portrayed in Western media,” he said. “The backdrop to these developments is important for countries like Nepal. For instance, the Trump administration’s tariff measures against India for its Russian oil imports came despite the fact that most major countries were doing the same, something that actually helped stabilize the global oil market, benefiting even Nepal.”

Bhatta added that India and China have long learned from each other, and countries in between stand to benefit if ties continue to improve. Closer relations could generate alternative ideas for development and global governance.

Still, he cautioned that states prioritize their own interests, especially in times of heightened geopolitics. “We too must focus on our own interests and prepare to navigate accordingly,” he said. “There’s an old saying: whether elephants fight or make love, it’s the grass that suffers. It may be old, but it remains relevant when external factors increasingly shape regional relations.”