Submit your Article

In Nepal, there is a general tendency to blame the constitution for every political failure. Many voices hold it responsible for rising corruption and political instability. However, no matter how perfect a constitution may be, it becomes nothing more than a piece of paper unless it is implemented in both letter and spirit.

The constitution of Nepal, which came into effect on September 20, 2015, marked the country's transition from a long-stayed unitary system to a federal structure. Federalism was introduced as an alternative to the long-standing constitutional monarchy, which had failed to deliver. Today, however, some youths blame the federal constitution, arguing that provincial governments are an expensive burden for a country with limited resources. Yet, the constitution--with its strong provisions for inclusivity, republicanism, devolution of powers, progressive fundamental rights and federalism—cannot itself be held responsible for the failures of nation's political course.

Need for Moral and Civic Education 

If we revisit the unfortunate incidents witnessed during the Gen-Z protest, the burning of government documents and assets,along with vandalism and looting of both private and publicproperty, conveys the message that a section of society lacks civic sense and is ready to loot at any given opportunity. 

This reflects that the concepts of morality and civic responsibility are yet to be deeply rooted among a section of Nepalis. If our democracy produces youths who can burn government assets and documents, or vandalize private business and property, we can conclude that civic values have been seriously compromised. 

The viral videos reveal the unfortunate reality of some youthswho, while protesting against the incumbent government, also aligned themselves with those looting government offices and private enterprises such as Bhatbhateni Mall. 

This exposes our unchecked greed for money and material possessions. Its high time for the state to introduce subjects, like that of Moral and Civic Studies as mandatory courses at every level of education.  

Blame the politics

In Nepal, none of the governments formed after 1990 have completed a full five-year term. The state has witnessed the greedy dance of political parties in their pursuit of power and positions. We saw communist parties forging alliances with the democratic forces, and even conflicts breaking out within communist alliance governments. These incidents prove that our political parties neither stood firmly with their ideology, nor practiced politics in line with constitutional mandates. 

Perhaps we are the only democracy in world where leaders resort to forgery in Bills passed by the House. We saw that in case of Federal Civil Service Bill this year. 

We might also be the only country where top leaders publicly hurl thorny comments against the opposition. A former education Minister once remarked that KP Oli is like the "Pele of Football" who cannot be defeated or overthrown by any earthly power. KP Oli himself has an inherent habit of passing sharp comments and making fun of others. 

The governments formed after the promulgation of the current constitution have failed to deliver. This is a well-known fact. The state has witnessed massive corruption, limited initiatives for employment creation, and an almost negligible role of the government in ensuring good governance. 

The constitution does not allow for the corrupt practices. However, the document itself, like a ghost, cannot punish the abusers. It’s the government and constitutional mechanisms that must demonstrate a strong commitment to upholding the rule of law. 

We have seen appointments to the constitutional posts made for individuals with clear political affiliations. At times, their power-hungry nature has challenged the principle of separation of powers. A person of high moral stature would ordinarily refrain from accepting positions they believe compromise this principle. Yet, in Nepal, such individuals are rarely found. Should constitution be blamed for this?   We reiterate that moral education and civic sense must be imparted not only to our youths but also to our professionals. 

Way forward

As a matter of fact, no constitutional or legal document is so perfect that it can provide a solution to every given problem of every generation. That’s why, laws and constitutions are regarded as living documents, capable of being amended to ensuring broader ownership and necessary reforms. 

In India, the 1949 Constitution has been amended 106 times so far, and the US constitution has witnessed 27 amendments. In the similar vein, we can introduce amendments in our constitution to make it more progressive. We are already operating our democracy under our seventh constitution. Frequent changes to it every decade would create wrong impression in world and could invite political instability. 

The failure of our leaders cannot be seen as the failure of the constitution. If those at the helm take pledge to practice genuine politics—free from corruption and unlawful elements-- then our democracy would possess everything required for a sustainable future. Our constitution envisions for a welfare state grounded in the firm foundations of the rule of law and good governance. Its high time we translate the mandates of the constitution into reality for advancing the cause of rule of law and a vibrant democracy. 

Call it the “unintended consequences” of a movement, at least for now. 

The recent Gen Z movement against corruption, nepotism and bad governance has left behind a trail of deaths and destruction while making the myopic and reactive ruling clique flee the scene. 

More than 70 people have lost their lives and around 1000 have suffered injuries. All three organs of the state—the executive, the legislature and the judiciary—have suffered extensive infrastructural damage—as if damage resulting from the loss of credibility due to various scams and scandals were not enough—along with the fourth estate—the free press—a soft target of protesters of all hues and shades at all times. 

Throughout the country, government offices have turned into cinders while business and industries have suffered significant losses.

The most affected parts make one wonder if something more sinister has hit this country than mere protests.  

Even in a grim scenario like this, there’s a feeling among the public that all’s not lost. 

From the ashes of death and destruction, the country appears to be rising slowly. 

A caretaker administration has taken shape under a retired chief justice on the precincts of what used to be an imposing, historic Singhadurbar—the federal government secretariat—with a mandate to conduct elections within six months.

Housed in tents, the Supreme Court has begun hearing habeas corpus writ petitions. On the arteries of Kathmandu devoid of dividers and traffic islands, traffic police personnel have returned to duty and one can see them trying to bring some semblance of order amid traffic jams and snarls. 

Though badly burnt and dissolved, there’s some semblance of the bicameral Parliament at New Baneshwor, with the speaker of the House of Representatives and the chair of the National Assembly still in office. 

While the national army is back in the barracks, the Sheetal Niwas—the presidential palace—remains at the center of the current scheme of things, with burns and all. 

As a long and arduous process of national healing begins, the onus is on us—Nepalis from all walks of life, within the country and beyond—to join hands for national reconstruction by mobilizing our resources and utilizing our skills rather than looking for international support. At this juncture, the government would do well to appeal to the Nepalis to contribute to this great cause.  

From the ashes of destruction, we can—and shall—rise like a phoenix.

Nepal has recently witnessed a wave of violent protests, initially triggered by the government’s controversial decision to ban social media platforms. While these demonstrations reflect domestic frustrations ranging from nepotism and corruption to high unemployment, they have simultaneously become fertile ground for disinformation campaigns. 

A closer examination reveals that Pakistan-based social media accounts have actively sought to hijack the narrative, shifting blame toward India and framing it as the primary destabilizing force in South Asia.

This phenomenon demonstrates how modern digital propaganda transcends national borders, turning real grievances into geopolitical instruments. By analyzing the patterns, players, and methods involved, we can better understand how this campaign was designed, why Nepal was chosen as the latest battleground, and what its broader implications are for regional politics.

The first wave of misleading posts emerged not from Nepal but from Pakistani social media circles. Accounts began alleging that India was operating fake Nepali bot accounts to engineer unrest, punishing Nepal for engaging diplomatically with China’s President Xi Jinping. They claimed India had adopted a systematic strategy to destabilize its neighbors, citing Sri Lanka, Maldives, and Bangladesh as “previous victims.”

Crucially, these narratives were not spontaneous. They followed a tested playbook:

Initial trigger posts: The first notable push came from Ahmad Hassan Al-Arbi, a self-styled “defense analyst.” He had previously accused India of staging false flag operations, including the Pahalgam terror attack. His thread blaming India for Nepal’s protests became the seed for a larger campaign.

Amplification: What began as scattered posts by cyborg like accounts quickly gained traction through amplifiers larger accounts with audiences between 3,000 and 300,000 followers. Their role was to provide visibility and legitimacy to otherwise fringe claims.

Media recycling: Outlets like the Kashmir Media Service picked up these threads and published them as news, quoting the same Pakistani social media users as “commentators.” These circular references created an illusion of expert validation.

Repetition by repeat offenders: Prominent disinformation spreaders on X such as @iMustansarPK and @Fizz_Urooj, previously involved in pushing fabricated stories like “Kashmir shutdown” or “Operation Sindoor,” reappeared to recycle and reinforce the new claims.

Hashtag narratives: Phrases like “India = Net Destabilizer” gained traction between Sept 4–9. X posts in English targeted global audiences, while Urdu language posts catered to regional and domestic Pakistani users.

The players behind the campaign

Several recurring actors surfaced in this disinformation drive:

Cyborg accounts: Semi-automated accounts that rapidly produced and retweeted content to create artificial trends.
Amplifiers: Medium-to-large accounts like @IntelPk and @faizannriaz, which carried the narrative to wider audiences.

Legacy disinformation accounts: Profiles such as @HelloPKofficial and @mohsin_o2, known for praising Pakistan’s “cyber warriors” during past Indo-Pak tensions, returned to recycle the “India destabilizer” trope.

Thematic hashtags and frames: By positioning India as a “net destabilizer” instead of a “net security provider,” these accounts sought to undercut India’s diplomatic positioning in South Asia. The interplay of these actors ensured that what started as isolated claims rapidly evolved into a widely circulated narrative. Within just eight days, a freshly minted storyline had been established and accepted by segments of online discourse.

Why Nepal?

The choice of Nepal as the newest stage for this campaign is not coincidental. Several factors make it an attractive target for disinformation:

Strategic geography: Sandwiched between India and China, Nepal is particularly vulnerable to narratives that highlight “great power meddling.”

Historical sensitivities: Anti India sentiment has historically flared in Nepal, particularly around border disputes and trade dependencies. Propagandists exploit these pre-existing tensions to lend credibility to fabricated stories.

Domestic instability: With Nepal’s youth disillusioned by unemployment and corruption, foreign narratives blaming external interference resonate more easily.

Regional projection: By portraying India as interfering in Nepal, attempts to universalize its anti-India messaging across South Asia, tying together disparate events in Sri Lanka, Maldives, and Bangladesh, under one conspiratorial frame.

Implications for South Asia

This disinformation drive is not merely about Nepal—it reflects a broader contest over narrative dominance in South Asia. By projecting India as the destabilizer, Pakistan aims to achieve several goals:

Diplomatic isolation: Undermine India’s image as a regional stabilizer and counterweight to China.

Information warfare: Distract from Pakistan’s own domestic crises by shifting attention to Indian actions.

Psychological impact: Erode trust between India and its neighbors by sowing doubt and suspicion.

For Nepal, however, this campaign is doubly harmful. It distorts legitimate grievances, weakening the credibility of protesters’ demands, and risks polarizing society along manufactured foreign-policy lines.

Nepal’s protests are a reflection of frustration with governance failures, not the product of Indian interference. Yet Pakistan’s disinformation machinery has opportunistically hijacked the narrative, reframing a domestic movement as a geopolitical conspiracy. This campaign, spearheaded by a familiar ecosystem of Pakistani accounts and digital outlets, once again illustrates how online propaganda can reshape perceptions of unfolding events in real time.

The challenge for policymakers, media platforms, and civil society lies in exposing and countering these narratives before they calcify into “common knowledge.” For Nepal, the greater danger is that its citizens’ real grievances risk being overshadowed by a synthetic blame game manufactured far beyond its borders. And for South Asia, the episode underscores the urgent need for a collective response to the rising weaponization of information in the digital age.

The author is the National Chairperson of Muslim Students Organisation of India MSO, he writes on a wide range of issues, including, Sufism, Public Policy, Geopolitics and Information Warfare

With the formation of an interim government led by Sushila Karki, tasked with holding elections, debates have emerged over how major powers perceive this development and what direction the new government’s foreign policy may take.

In the aftermath of the Sept 8–9 GenZ uprisings, India swiftly adjusted to the new political reality, expressing its readiness to work with Karki’s administration. Indian Ambassador to Nepal Naveen Srivastav was the first foreign envoy to meet Karki and discuss bilateral relations. Soon after Karki was sworn in, India welcomed the new leadership, expressing hope that it would contribute to peace and stability.

“As a close neighbour, a fellow democracy and a long term development partner, India will continue to work closely with Nepal for the well-being and prosperity of our two peoples and countries,” India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement. The following day, Prime Minister Narendra Modi congratulated Karki on X, signaling India’s keenness to support the new government in organizing elections within six months. Speaking in Manipur, Modi also praised Nepali youth, an act of public diplomacy aimed at the Nepali people.

Karki, for her part, has extended positive gestures toward India even before assuming office. In an interview with Indian television, she said: “First, I will say Namaskaar to Modi Ji. I have a good impression of Modi.” Such remarks suggest New Delhi is likely to invite her for an official visit, an opportunity it denied KP Sharma Oli for over a year.

On Thursday, Modi held a telephone conversation with Karki and reaffirmed India’s support for peace and stability. “Had a warm conversation with Mrs. Sushila Karki, Prime Minister of the Interim Government of Nepal. Conveyed heartfelt condolences on the recent tragic loss of lives and reaffirmed India’s steadfast support for her efforts to restore peace and stability, Also, I extended warm greetings to her and the people of Nepal on their National Day tomorrow,” Modi posted on X.

Prime Minister Karki conveyed to Modi that election will remain topmost priority of the government, with strong determination for accountable, responsive and corruption-free governance, reflecting the aspiration of the youth.

According to the statement issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Prime Minister Karki also expressed that the historical and close relationship between Nepal and India will continue to be strengthened by multifaceted people to people ties.

By contrast, Beijing has responded more cautiously. Following Karki’s appointment, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson offered a routine response to a media query, reaffirming that China “respects the development path chosen independently by the people of Nepal” and stands ready to advance cooperation under the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence.

Chinese Ambassador to Nepal Chen Song called on Prime Minister Sushila Karki on Thursday to extend a congratulatory message. 

“Great Pleasure to call on Rt. Hon. PM Madam, Sushila Karki, and extend our warm congratulations and support. We exchanged views and agreed to further promote our friendship and cooperations,” Ambassador Chen posted on X. 

Navigating Nepal’s evolving politics could be challenging for China. Its engagement strategy has long centered on a small, left-leaning political elite. Over the past decade, this approach brought Beijing significant advantages—most notably under KP Sharma Oli, who signed the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) framework and attended China’s Victory Day parade. However, with the current cabinet expected to draw from diverse groups, China may find it harder to safeguard its interests in Kathmandu.

In a BBC interview, Karki reassured that relations with China would remain unchanged. Yet, an unusual congratulatory message from the Dalai Lama may have unsettled Beijing, given his silence toward previous Nepali prime ministers. China is likely to urge Nepal to ensure the participation of all political forces in the broader process.

For Western powers, the change of government is acceptable as long as Nepal’s constitution, which enshrined federalism, republicanism, inclusion, and secularism, remains protected. Their concerns continue to center on endemic corruption, persistent political instability, and the growing influence of China in Nepali politics. From their perspective, Karki’s leadership offers continuity, provided that democratic values, human rights, and constitutional safeguards are upheld. Support from the West, along with partners such as Japan and Australia, is likely to hinge on these commitments.

As for foreign policy orientation, the interim government is unlikely to make any major departures. Its priorities will largely depend on the composition of the cabinet, but its mandate is limited to conducting elections. Being a caretaker administration with a narrow scope of mandate, it cannot enter into significant agreements with powerful countries.