On the eve of the First Constituent Assembly’s deadline to draft a constitution, a consortium of politicians and civil society groups under the banner Akhanda Sudurpaschim, “Undivided Farwest,” announced a transportation strike across Nepal’s Farwest Development Region that lasted for 32 days. Anxious that the two Tarai districts of the region—Kailali and Kanchanpur—would be separated from the seven Hill districts and consolidated into an ethnic federal state, “Tharuhat,” Akhanda Sudurpaschim supporters demanded the government recognize the entire Farwest Development Region as a single federal province under the principle of “geographic federalism.” In this paper, I address how it became possible for the development region concept to garner sentiment and create territorial attachments in Nepal’s Farwest. Using archival documents and administrative reports describing the planning of the development region model in the 1960s alongside personal fieldnotes collected during my reporting on the Akhanda Sudurpaschim and Tharuhat movements, I explore how a “market-zone”/administrative unit competes beside concepts of indigenous “homeland” for territorial recognition in Nepal’s post-2006 nationalism, suggesting that the ontological divide between the two concepts (market zone/administrative unit and homeland) may be counterproductive to the study of nationalism in its contemporary forms in Nepal.