By Sunil Raman
BBC News
Nepalese Prime Minister Prachanda visits India apparently determined to change the terms of engagement with his country's giant neighbour. The visit is being watched with great interest as India prepares to work with a Nepal that looks like being governed very differently from the past.
For years Nepalese leaders have expressed a desire to review a peace treaty which has defined relations between the two countries since 1950.
Prachanda, under pressure from Maoist comrades not to be pro-India, has gone further.
He is being urged to stand up to India and has said he will bring the draft of a new agreement to Delhi.
'Hype'
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru stressed Nepal's importance for a newly independent India in 1959 when he said "we cannot allow anything to go wrong in Nepal or permit that barrier to be crossed or weakened because that would be a risk to our [India's] security".
Prachanda is conscious that his visit to India is unlike trips made by his predecessors. His remarks and body language clearly show that he wants to engage with India as the leader of a sovereign nation and not of a "vassal state".
He has been under pressure from his party comrades and others to scrap the treaty with India. His India trip has dominated Nepalese newspapers, television channels and radio stations for days. Nepal and India have an open border more than 1,800km (1,125 miles) long.
Prachanda is conscious that his visit to India is unlike trips made by his predecessors. His remarks and body language clearly show that he wants to engage with India as the leader of a sovereign nation and not of a "vassal state".
He has been under pressure from his party comrades and others to scrap the treaty with India. His India trip has dominated Nepalese newspapers, television channels and radio stations for days. Nepal and India have an open border more than 1,800km (1,125 miles) long.
Over five million Nepalese people work and own property in India. They do not need visas or work permits and instead have all the rights of an Indian citizen.
Continuing with the British tradition, India recruits Nepalese Gurkhas into its army. There are 40,000 Nepalese Gurkhas in the 1.13m-strong Indian army and thousands of them receive monthly pensions in Nepal from India.
Former Nepalese ambassador to India, Prof Lokraj Baral, says demands to review the treaty are nothing new. The hype, he says, is more to "satisfy" public opinion.
Some recent media reports in Nepal were highly critical of reports that Indian soldiers might be sent to Nepal to protect river projects.
Massive floods in India's Bihar state after a river burst its banks upstream in Nepal are another source of argument.
Buffer
As a landlocked country Nepal is acutely dependent on India. India sells Nepal all its oil and the Himalayan nation's imports and exports transit through Indian ports.
A difference of opinion about the language of a trade agreement saw India bring Nepal to its knees in the early 1990s, with an economic blockade that lasted several months.
India believes that Nepal, as a buffer with China, is integral to its security concerns.
It is for this reason that a controversial clause in the India-Nepal treaty does not allow Nepal to buy arms and weapons from a third country without consulting India. This clause is seen by many Nepalese as subverting the country's sovereign rights.
In the early 1990s King Birendra threatened to buy weapons from China which saw India froth with anger. While Nepal's dependence on India is something that cannot be ignored by Prachanda and his team, experts feel some of the wording of the 1950 treaty should be changed.
One Indian official admitted that the clause dealing with defence matters will need to be revised. "One has to understand that 2008 is not 1950. People's aspirations cannot be brushed aside," he said.
But Indian commentator Inder Malhotra says it will not be easy for India to agree to change the clause dealing with defence. He says Nepal is too important for India to allow it to embrace China.
Given the high Himalayan ranges to its north, Nepal needs India for access to sea ports. Mr Malhotra blames "traditional anti-India sentiment" of the Nepalese elite for the renewed demands to end the peace treaty.
"Just like the elite in India who for a long time remained anti-America in their outlook, so is the elite in Nepal anti-India," he says.
Even so, India is now dealing with a new order in Nepal which demands to be treated more as a partner than a subordinate nation.
Continuing with the British tradition, India recruits Nepalese Gurkhas into its army. There are 40,000 Nepalese Gurkhas in the 1.13m-strong Indian army and thousands of them receive monthly pensions in Nepal from India.
Former Nepalese ambassador to India, Prof Lokraj Baral, says demands to review the treaty are nothing new. The hype, he says, is more to "satisfy" public opinion.
Some recent media reports in Nepal were highly critical of reports that Indian soldiers might be sent to Nepal to protect river projects.
Massive floods in India's Bihar state after a river burst its banks upstream in Nepal are another source of argument.
Buffer
As a landlocked country Nepal is acutely dependent on India. India sells Nepal all its oil and the Himalayan nation's imports and exports transit through Indian ports.
A difference of opinion about the language of a trade agreement saw India bring Nepal to its knees in the early 1990s, with an economic blockade that lasted several months.
India believes that Nepal, as a buffer with China, is integral to its security concerns.
It is for this reason that a controversial clause in the India-Nepal treaty does not allow Nepal to buy arms and weapons from a third country without consulting India. This clause is seen by many Nepalese as subverting the country's sovereign rights.
In the early 1990s King Birendra threatened to buy weapons from China which saw India froth with anger. While Nepal's dependence on India is something that cannot be ignored by Prachanda and his team, experts feel some of the wording of the 1950 treaty should be changed.
One Indian official admitted that the clause dealing with defence matters will need to be revised. "One has to understand that 2008 is not 1950. People's aspirations cannot be brushed aside," he said.
But Indian commentator Inder Malhotra says it will not be easy for India to agree to change the clause dealing with defence. He says Nepal is too important for India to allow it to embrace China.
Given the high Himalayan ranges to its north, Nepal needs India for access to sea ports. Mr Malhotra blames "traditional anti-India sentiment" of the Nepalese elite for the renewed demands to end the peace treaty.
"Just like the elite in India who for a long time remained anti-America in their outlook, so is the elite in Nepal anti-India," he says.
Even so, India is now dealing with a new order in Nepal which demands to be treated more as a partner than a subordinate nation.
