Call Us Now

+91 9606900005 / 04

For Enquiry

legacyiasacademy@gmail.com

Whose mountain is it, anyway?

The Immediate Incident: NIMAS on Mt. Khangchendzonga

  • On May 18, 2025, a NIMAS team scaled Mt. Khangchendzonga from Nepal’s side.
  • This sparked protests in Sikkim where the peak is held sacred and climbing it from the Indian side is officially prohibited.
  • The act was part of the Indian Army’s Har Shikhar Tiranga campaign to plant the Indian flag on every state’s highest peak.

Relevance : GS 1 (Geography),GS 2 (Governance)

Sacred Mountains and Indigenous Beliefs

  • Mt. Khangchendzonga is deeply revered in Sikkims indigenous spiritual culture.
  • The Sikkim government had issued notifications under the Places of Worship Act, 1991, disallowing climbs from the Indian side.
  • Similar global instances of sacred mountain reverence:
    • Mauna Kea (Hawaii) – Thirty-Meter Telescope stalled due to native protests.
    • Haleakalā volcano (Hawaii) – U.S. military project opposed by natives.
    • Cerro Armazones (Chile) – Atacameño communities protested telescope construction.

Broader Tensions: Science, Security vs. Spirituality

  • Mountains hold significance for:
    • Scientific exploration (geology, climate).
    • Strategic concerns (military, water sources).
    • Spiritual sanctity (indigenous communities).
  • The clash between state-centric objectives and indigenous rights is growing.
  • Scientific and defence actors often neglect cultural sensitivities, assuming their goals supersede local beliefs.

Patterns of Marginalization

  • In multiple cases, consultation with local communities happens late or never:
    • India-based Neutrino Observatory (INO) faced protests due to denial of temple access.
    • Heavy police presence undermined trust and spiritual autonomy of local communities.
  • State actions often appear heavy-handed and dismissive of indigenous agency.

Legal and Ethical Shifts

  • Global instruments supporting indigenous rights:
    • UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples).
    • ILO Convention 169 – both stress free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC).
  • Article 30 of UNDRIP obliges consultation even in military-related activities.
  • Increasingly, litigation, protests, and reputational risks are pushing states to seek consent proactively.

Role of Civil Society and Changing Power Equations

  • Youth-led civil society, technology, and climate vulnerability have empowered indigenous advocacy.
  • Indigenous individuals are gaining political representation and legal voice.
  • Strategic or symbolic actions (like planting flags) must be weighed against the social and spiritual costs.

Recommendations and Cautions

  • Consult before acting – cheaper and more sustainable than post-facto correction.
  • Governments must balance national pride and local sensitivities.
  • The NIMAS act may seem benign, but bypassing local consultation undermines trust and sets a negative precedent.
  • Symbolism must not override sacred geography and cultural dignity.

Conclusion

  • A growing global and domestic consensus favours inclusive and respectful engagement with indigenous communities.
  • As mountains become zones of climate fragility and cultural assertionconsultation and consent are no longer optional—they are essential for ethical governance and sustainable national interest.

June 2025
MTWTFSS
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30 
Categories