[5] The Himalayan Gazetteer (1884) states that the watershed that forms the boundary between India and Tibet in the region of Uttarakhand is "a simple longitudinal range" for the most part, but its structure is a little complicated between the Niti Pass and Unta Dhura.

The region is bounded in the northeast[b] by a continuous ridge with passes called Niti, Tunjun, Marhi, Shalshal, Balcha and Kungri Bingri, beyond which lay the "great plateau of Guge".

The Chor Hoti pass leads to the valley of Rimkim Gad, at the bottom of which (known as Rimkhim) India currently has a border police post.

[14] Frontier villages in the Kumaon —that served as important conduits in the trans-Tibetan trade of Bhotias— were exempted from paying any taxes to the British authority at the behest of then-commissioner G. T. Lushington, c. late 1842.

land tax) from these areas, Lushington was soon advised to assert territorial sovereignty; he refused to tamper with "long established" customs lest it fomented a needless enmity with Tibet and affected the trade.

[15][d] K. Gopalachari, an Indian officer of the Historical Division of the Ministry of External Affairs writing for the International Studies Journal, notes Barahoti to have had paid taxes to Garhwal Kingdom, since at-least 1815.

The local Patwari (Durga Dutt), unable to resist the intrusion, intimated the Commissioner of Kumaon Division who in turn, informed the Foreign Office.

However, back in the Foreign Office, Undersecretary G. R. Irwin (and others) deemed of it to be an encroachment which ought not be tolerated and a 200 strong column of sepoys was dispatched from Sobha around early November, 1889.

Lhasa had gone about its usual practice of vesting ordinary natives (typically two to four) from its frontier villages as messengers to declare the trading session open, collect due trade-taxes from a temporary outpost, and prevent non-complying (Bhotiya) traders from entering into Tibet.

Two days later, on the basis of a letter from the local patwari (Durga Dutta), the ministry evaluated that Tibet had acknowledged British sovereignty over Barahoti, and only engaged in routine cross-border trade.

In November, the Deputy Collector of Kumaon (Dharma Nand Joshi) was sent down to convince the Serji about the alignment of international boundary along a series of mountain-passes and the watershed, running north of Barahoti.

[16] In 1905, Charles A Sherring, a fellow of the Royal Geographical Society (and Deputy Commissioner in the Indian Civil Services) toured across Western Tibet from India.

Shatra had only wished to "investigate the matter" and Tibet continued to send troops for years, implying a rejection of Bell's arguments.

In July 1952, the Indian Intelligence Bureau (IB) prepared a note titled "Border Disputes and Collection of Taxes by Tibetans in Garhwal District".

It recounted an incident in 1951, when the Dzongpen of Daba took umbrage at Indian traders setting up trade at the Hoti plain and even served them notices.

[17] The IB went on to criticize the absence of Garhwal authorities in the region[e] and speculated that, if the Tibetans were allowed to continue their activity, they might eventually claim the territory.

[17] The Ministry of External Affairs however believed that the Tibetan officials's actions were due to suffering loss of revenue as the Indian traders were not using the customary trading location at Nabra in Tibet.

[19] The State Government[f] disagreed that any "encroachment" had taken place in any area barring the odd Tibetan tax-collectors, who nonetheless went back on persuasion.

[20] Highlighting the difficulty of arranging any meaningful defence at such remote high altitude locations,[g] it hoped for a quick diplomatic resolution to avoid such sporadic "embarrassment".

[26] China rejected the claims and a fortnight later, complained about twenty five Indian troops having "crossed into Wu-je" around 25 June to construct fortifications, close to their garrison.

[29] In November, India reiterated its previous claims, reemphasized that Barahoti laid 2 miles south of the pass, and blamed the Chinese for intruding into Barahoti and setting up camps close to Indian forces; it also noted that an Indian detachment had spotted Chinese Forces camping about 12 miles South of Niti Pass, in Damzan.

On 23 January 1959, in a letter to Nehru, Zhou regretted the delay in arriving at a settlement about Wu-je, being hampered by the lack of on-spot investigations; he went on to refer to all relevant disputes as "minor affairs", which were impossible to avoid pending a formal delineation of boundary.

In May 1959, Nehru claimed in the Lower House of Parliament that as Indian troops made to Barahoti in summer (c. a couple of weeks back), they did not spot any Chinese forces and as of then, the only inhabitants were an unarmed police party from the Uttar Pradesh Government.

He emphasised that pending renewal of negotiations on a rather minor affair, the territory was being considered as a neutral zone and the government did not plan on tackling the characteristic winter aggression of China by stationing forces.

[34] Anthropologist Nayanika Mathur notes that Barahoti remains a forgotten non-state space and is hardly visible in local discourse — it is primarily used by the Bhotiya tribesmen and their Tibetan counterparts as a grazing ground.