If only you didn't get carried away and even knew the first thing about this topic. But who can expect any different?
Nepal's king had made overtures personally with Nehru about a confederation between both nations at our independence. Nehru turned it down because he felt the world would see it as 'Indian imperialism' despite both parties being willing to enter such arrangement. It seems even though we did not, people like you still harbour ill feeling, whereas the 1950 treaty between our countries established relations that were amongst the closest between any states.
There is for all purposes only a symbolic border where citizens of Nepal and India can travel without passports, live in the other country whilst availing of benefits as if they were citizens, be it education, health, government or any other jobs, and purchase any property without restriction. The general of IA is occasionally made COAS in Nepal and vice versa, as an honorary gesture. Until recently it was the only Hindu kingdom in the world where state religion was that of the majority. Not even western European nations, where some resemblance of free movement exists, can claim such an interwoven relationship in terms of history, culture, ethnicity, etc.
But I agree, since the freedom fighting generation started to pass away in India, younger leaders who took the helm began to treat Nepal as any large-small power relation, and their confidence began to wane as they looked to the Chinese out of desperation. This was but one of the many foreign policy blunders in our recent history, but nothing beyond repair. Just a few thoughtful policy measures are required to regain their trust and confidence, in true spirit of the open border we have always enjoyed.
