THE MOUNT EVEREST CONTROVERSY BETWEEN NEPAL AND CHINA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP08C01297R000200050001-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 31, 2012
• Sequence Number: 1
• Content Type: MISC

Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/31 : CIA-RDP08CO1297R000200050001-6 '
The Mount Everest Controversy
Between Nepal and China
Mount Everest,' the highest peak in the world, lie, about the
point of intersection between longitude 86.6 E. and latitude 27.59 N.
on the i,tahriangur range of the Himalaya in the Kirat area of eastern
Nepal (district East No.3). The Himalayan range which this peak
crowns, is about three miles long. It has on its northern side the
Tibetan area of "Chang". On its east is Lhotse (27,890 ft.) and on
its west Nuptse (25,680 ft.). The peak is surrounded on all sides
by glaciers: Rongbuk on the north, Kongmung on the east, Iinja on
the south and Khu mbu on the west. The Thyangboche monastery
(12,000 ft.) marks the highest point of human habitation on the
south. Or: the north there is habitation as far high as the Rongbuk
monastery 119,570 ft.).
The local name of Mount, Everest is not clear. The Nepalese
historian Babu Ram Acharya named it "Sagarmatha" ((head of skV)
in 1938, and in Nepal it is known by that name. In Tobet its name
is Chomo Lungma for Jolmo Lungma or Jhyamo Lungma).
From 1921 to 1953--for three decades and more--as many
as eleven expeditions had been organised. Eight of these were for
the express purpose of getting on the peak; and the rest were for the
purpose of finding out the route. The then Rana `rovernmeiit.of
Nepal refused permission to these expeditions. All attempts, there-
fore, except the attempts made in 1952 and 19,53, were undertaken
from the -northern side and with the permission and blessings of the,
Dalai Lan-.a. Nepal started giving permission only after 1949. A
Chinese e_,: )edition led by Shin Chang-Chuin claimed to have ,ucce-
ssfully an assault from the northern side in 1960.
re t s named atier Sir George Everest, Who R'as Sun'e)' tic:; r.a of
India a-:d undertook the surce)' of this regimn in 1850.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/31 : CIA-RDP08CO1297R000200050001-6 -
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/31 CIA-RDP08CO1297R000200050001-6
The dispute about the Mount Everest arose in the course of
boundary negotiations between Nepal and China, ",en'the Nepalese
Prime Minister B.P. IKoirala was on a State visit to China in March
1960. The Chinese did not lay any specific claim to it, but their map
sho-,ved not merely the Everest, but the entire Mahalangur range
within five miles of the border.'- The Chinese case. was based on
three grounds. (l) expeditions undertaken from the northern side
were with the Tibetan permission. Nepal never objected to
that. (2) Whereas the Tibetan name for Everest was Chomo Lung ma,
Nepal had no name or in any case a recent one. (3) The Thy-
angboche monaster, on the southern side of the watershed, was at
one time under the religious jurisdiction of the Rongbu monastery,
which as in Tibet. Obviously, the Chinese contention was mixing
up the religious jurisdiction with territorial claiins.
On learning the Chinese claim the Nepalese Prime Minister
v. as ' ta`.:en aback" and firmly refused to entertain it.3 The Nepa-
lese side argued, on the basis of geography, literature, scriptures and
tradition. that the Everest belonged to there and they also had a
name for it. The two Prime Ministers could not come to any agree-
muent. The matter was raised by Koirala during his meeting with
the Chinese leader Mao Tse-tung, who unilaterally suggested some
sort of a joint ownership of the mountain. According to a Nepal
correspondent. who had accompanied the Prime Minister on China
visit, the Chinese insisted that expeditions to Mount Everest should
be. joint!% authorized by them. To this the Nepa ese did not agree4.
No agreement having reached. the two sides agreed to discuss it
again during the forthcoming visit of the Chinese Premier to Nepal.
The issue was kept out of the purview of the Joint Boundary Co-
mmittee, which had been instituted to delineate and demarcate the
Sino-Nepalese boundary.
On his return to Kathmandu the Nepa ese Prime Minister
disclosed the Chinese claims. The disclosure tivas deliberate. The
2. Asian Recorde 21-2~ May 1960 : 3330,
3. Ibid., 30 April : 6 May 1960 : 3294.
4. TheHindusdan Tirr.es, 5 April 1960.
5. Iiulpara (K2thrrandu), 4 April, 1960.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/31 : CIA-RDP08CO1297R000200050001-6
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/31 : CIA-RDP08CO1297R000200050001-6
150 S -U111 ASIAN STUDIES
idea was to %w:hip up the Nepalese public opinion and impress China
with strength of popt_':__armatha was placed
n th > Nepalese territor\ as c_ear't" nisi megiil ocally as the
Sa ar;riatha area on the basis of the t aditio;la~, customary border-
If r.e1 he King also, on his ret_.:: fro:n C __na, chose to remain
v tae. He c,bserved:
........ all the \epaiese :'. est;eriet ce a sense of glory
when I State that on v. hich the eyes of the
world seem to he focused, osuitinues to be cis it has been
(emphasis added) our and wit'-:in our terr`ory.-,
T`h.:: Nepalese Foreign Minister, T--1,i Giri, repeated that the peak
of Everest lay inside Nepal. He aso added that China would in-
Nepal c all expeditions from :ale nort h.=' Some news papers
also agreed that the peak belonged to
All these public declarations sere, perhaps, necessary to satisfy
the public sentiment; and the Chinese :r_terestingiv (lid not contradict
t} c.;:. It , ould appear that both :':rig Mahendra and the Chinese
basad on F':.h important people by the
a_.thor in -'\ ?- . _1cco;d.n, :o o nothir.; old b_ dacid(,d in regard
:o Everest u.it:g the visit t' the eve _. the sigof the Boundary Treaty.
Ti , Chinese ,var.ted to sign .,_.::i,.)ni ;g anything about it,
-;bile the lair:, insisted that he r;ouid _tge t};? :y Without settling the
Everest iO;ue fi_:ally. Tire n: ght tang s ~.;vi on 4 ~J~toher ut.timately resulted
in a seciet :xchauge of letters. (1;" 1r e U . os information Willits to
remaiii anon .noi]S).
29. 1 pie Times (London), 10 Octo',er lOol.
26. N pali, op. cit.
27. P,-oclarnatio"s, Speeches, anti .'4?ssageS iA ::L iiir:nda, 'Ur) vol. 2 : cc.
2S. T rte Hindus:an Times, ` Qc:ob~r 196:.
29. ''_)-.'hapatra ( athnlar:du). 10 October, 1E," 1.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/31: CIA-RDP08CO1297R000200050001-6
 Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/31 : CIA-RDP08CO1297R000200050001-6
equally needed to co- e to terms on this problem. The King could
not have cliir:bed down on this issue of Everest without damage to
his image. Nor could be have done without a Boundary Treaty.
The Chinese wanted Boundary agreement with Nepal in view of
their dispute :;with I,-dia, but they did not want to give up the peal:
entirely. Thus a co.,--promise was inevitable. What the Boundary
Treaty states is not very clear. It seems that the peak has been,
divided with Nepal seeping the southern face and calling it Sagar-
rnatha and China keeping the northern side and calling it Jolmo-
Lungrna.
Declassified and Approved For Release 2012/08/31: CIA-RDP08CO1297R000200050001-6