sense, good points! india has a direct interest in keeping nepal destabilized. here are some similar points made by author eric s. margolis in his 1999, 2000 book, "war at the top of the world: the struggle for afghanistan, kashmir, and tibet": "china and india are in dispute over yet another contentious issue in the himalayas: the mountain kingdoms of nepal, bhutan, and sikkim." p. 220 "nepal, an overpopulated nation of 23 million, occupies a highly strategic position along the indo-chinese himalayan border. consequently, india has long had designs on nepal, regarding it as a natural sphere of influence, if not an integral part of india, as some hindu nationalists claim." p. 221 "china, by contrast, has generally viewed nepal as a useful buffer state and strategic salient that curbs indian ambitions in the himalayas, and renders more difficult india's defense of its northern mountain border. in time of war, china would quickly occupy nepal in order to benefit from its mountain passes and roads that lead south to debouch on the plains of northern india" p. 221 "india has taken alarm and protested to india (sic) over china's building of military roads up to the nepalese border. india has repeatedly warned nepal over its economic and transit links with china, once going so far as to impose a trade blockade (we all remember that, right?) that almost wrecked nepal's economy." p. 221 "the nepalese are keenly aware their nation exists at the pleasure of india and could share the fate of their neighboring mountain kingdoms." p. 221 there's more, but you get the jist....