Submit your Article

Ever since I started using Facebook in 2015, I’ve realized how deeply social media shapes our narratives and reflects society, often more than we notice. Recently, the government called for a social media ban, requiring platforms to register under the Directive on Regulating the Use of Social Media, 2080, issued by the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MoCIT). The directive was heavily criticized for its perceived risk of censorship. With 16.5m Facebook users in Nepal as of Aug 2024 (51.6 percent of the population), questions arise about what exactly we are consuming.

The concept of GenZ has often been misunderstood in Nepal, as seen this past week. GenZ refers to those born between 1997 and 2012. What began as a peaceful movement demanding the restoration of social media and accountability for corruption quickly escalated into unprecedented violence. Government buildings, including Singha Durbar, the Supreme Court, the Federal Parliament, provincial and local offices, along with the homes of politicians and commercial properties, were vandalized and set ablaze. The protests were not limited to GenZ; older generations linked to political parties also joined in.

Tensions intensified after KP Sharma Oli, then Prime Minister, issued a press release, and large sums of Nepali and foreign currency were discovered in the home of Sher Bahadur Deuba, Chairperson of the Nepali Congress, and his wife, Arzu Rana Deuba, then serving as Foreign Minister.

The aftermath left Nepalis grappling with both shock and guilt, sparking intense debate across the country. Young people from diverse backgrounds discussed legal, economic, and political issues, prompting me to reflect on Nepal’s education system. Ironically, many who were previously disengaged from politics now gave passionate lectures. The GenZ movement soon shifted focus toward leadership. Sudan Gurung, head of the NGO Hami Nepal, led negotiations with the Nepali Army and the President, representing GenZ’s call for former Chief Justice Sushila Karki to lead the interim government, along with the dissolution of parliament. However, the NGO’s links with controversial partners and possible political affiliations raised questions about the movement’s legitimacy and long-term sustainability. Though partially successful, the government has been slow to act against corrupt politicians or restore damaged public property, including police stations.

Social media content fueled much of last week’s discussions. Civil society and media figures largely blamed GenZ without offering constructive guidance. Observing these intergenerational exchanges made me reflect on how different age groups consume content. Where older generations once relied on television and radio, today nearly everyone with a smartphone receives content from across the globe.

Contents consumed by the GenZ and younger generations 

GenZ and younger groups spend more time on Instagram, TikTok, and other social apps than older generations. Having grown up with Google and social media, they differ significantly in how they learn and interact. Urban youth engage with reels, influencer content, gaming, and sports, alongside a growing wave of cultural revival. Rural youth follow viral local trends on TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook. Businesses and social organizations actively target them with content for outreach and sales, explaining why marketing investment has shifted online. Social media is also a tool for job hunting, especially in IT, marketing, business, and the social sector, through platforms like LinkedIn, Instagram, and Facebook.

Young Nepalis abroad, many of them GenZ, also shape the flow of ideas, political debates, and transnational activism. Some creators from legal, political, and business backgrounds produce educational content, though much of it is based on assumptions or incomplete analysis. Political discourse often takes the form of short videos, memes, or sensational claims, which spread rapidly and challenge traditional norms. Platforms like Reddit provide space for anonymous debates. As digital natives, young people absorb and share ideas quickly, though not always with careful fact-checking.

Contents consumed by Millennials and Gen Y

Millennials and GenY share some overlap with GenZ but generally gravitate toward different content. Their feeds are filled with news, interviews, political analysis, celebrity gossip, clickbait, and shopping-related posts. Professionally, they track sector-specific updates. Many engage with TikTok trends, actively express opinions, and play significant roles in government, civil society, and mid-sized businesses.

This generation is also strongly represented among Nepalis abroad, many of whom participate in policy debates, election campaigns, and social issues online. On Twitter, they openly discuss politics and governance.

Millennials are often seen as both cautious and naive online. They balance traditional and digital media, approach content critically, and are influenced by news, articles, peers, and the broader political context. Depending on their needs, they consume both national and international news.

Contents consumed by older generations

Older generations, generally less tech-savvy, rely mostly on YouTube, Messenger, and Facebook. They prefer content in local languages, particularly religious programs, bhajans, folk songs, and television-style reality shows. However, they are more vulnerable to clickbait and misinformation, as fact-checking is difficult on local YouTube channels.

Although the recent social media ban mainly targeted younger generations, it inevitably affected all age groups. People increasingly depend on these platforms not just for information, but also for business promotion and communication with family abroad. Many older users, not fully comfortable with technology, are especially vulnerable to misinformation.

These dynamics have deepened polarization across age, region, ideology, and education. Generational divides even appear within households, as narratives shaped by different online spaces clash. In one tragic case, a young boy livestreamed his suicide on Facebook after being harassed as a “GenZ” by political party affiliates.

While social media has amplified activism around the environment, mental health, and women’s rights, it has also fueled political tensions and misunderstandings.

Nepal’s reported average IQ score of 42.99, the lowest globally, has sparked debate and skepticism. While such figures may not accurately capture intellectual capacity, they underscore the urgent need for accessible, fact-checked, and unbiased content across platforms.

Beyond regulation, civic education and digital literacy are essential. Social media can be a space for informed discussion, but it also risks becoming a source of division. Promoting critical thinking, responsible sharing, and awareness of credible sources can help Nepalis of all generations navigate the complex digital landscape more responsibly.

“For someone who believed that change in Nepal was impossible, this moment feels like a victory,” says 22-year-old Anish Maharjan, reflecting on the recent GenZ-led protests. 

Despite all the destruction and devastation, he is optimistic about the future. There was a time when Maharjan had lost all hope for the country. That all changed when the youth-led protests on Sept 8–9 brought the old political parties to their knees. 

The movement gained momentum with the appointment of Sushila Karki as the 42nd Prime Minister, sparking fresh hope for progress. “We are hoping for a country where merit is prioritized over nepotism, where living feels like a blessing, not a forced choice”, adds 20-year-old Seejal Rai from Kathmandu. 

She explains that youth frustration stems from a corrupt system that has failed to meet even basic needs. “From corruption to unemployment to political instability, there are many problems in this country. No wonder young people are concerned about their future.” 

On Sept 8, thousands of youths took to the streets across Nepal against the corrupt system. The demonstration escalated after security personnel gunned down dozens of protesters. “We want to make Nepal better,” says 18-year-old Uttam Pariyar, who joined the protests on Sept 8 and 9.

The wave of protest even reached abroad. Amar Lama, who is currently in Australia, describes his conflicting emotions. “The news about young people dying in protests shattered my heart. Now with the new government in place, I hope things will get better.” If opportunities existed at home, Lama says many youths like him would be in their own country.  

Psychologist Gopal Dhakal at MARC Nepal says the GenZ protests were the culmination of pent-up frustration and resentment against the corrupt political leaders. “Most people today seek fairness, equal opportunities, and a society free of corruption. When these things are denied, they will protest,” he adds.
The two-day protests were marked by violence, vandalism, and arson. Government buildings, police stations and private homes of politicians across the country were set alight; there were prison riots and lootings; and security personnel were overrun by angry mobs, forcing them to run for cover.

“On the afternoon of Sept 9, all I could hear was the sound of gunfire, with black columns of smoke rising in the sky,” says 23-year-old Sima Maharjan, who lives in the Baneshwar area. For others the horror of the protests came online. Asmita Bhujel recalls being shocked at the images and videos of young protesters who were shot by police. “It was too much to bear. I couldn’t find peace,” she says.

Psychologist Dhakal says such a situation can intensify anxiety and stress. “The barrage of misinformation on social media made matters worse.” 

Meanwhile, widespread destruction of businesses and office buildings have left many people jobless. Dhakal warns this could lead to further hopelessness and mental health issues.  

While social movements can indeed be transformative and bring the masses together, Dhakal says it is crucial to keep this unity intact for realizing the much-needed reforms and changes. “The protests have lit the spark, now everybody must channel their energy toward building a better country.”  

Shiva Raj Shrestha, who was part of the GenZ protests, says every honest, hard-working Nepali wanted this change. “I believe every generation aspired to see this change, and it was made possible through the collective effort of youth.” 

Nepal’s exports surged by nearly 89 percent in the first two months of the current fiscal year, but the sharp rise has once again exposed the country’s growing overdependence on refined edible oil shipments to India.

According to the Department of Customs, Nepal exported goods worth Rs 47.32bn during mid-July to mid-September, compared to Rs 25.09bn in the same period of last fiscal year. Nearly half of the export earnings came from soybean oil alone, while sunflower oil and palm oil took the second and third spots, respectively.

In just two months, Nepal exported 509,962 tons of soybean oil worth Rs 20.42bn (509,962 tons) to India. Sunflower oil followed with Rs 1.38bn (35.2m liters) in exports, also to India. Refined palm oil, which ranked low in last year’s list, jumped to third place with Rs 1.31bn (7.4m liters) in shipments.

Nepal’s edible oil trade with India has flourished largely because of a loophole in regional trade agreements. Under the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) and the bilateral India-Nepal Trade Treaty, Nepali exports to India enjoy zero-duty access. In contrast, exporters outside South Asia face a 35 percent tariff on soybean oil exports to India. This makes Nepali refined oil significantly cheaper for Indian buyers.

Nepal imports almost all of its crude soybean oil from countries such as Argentina, Brazil, China, Iraq, Thailand, and Ukraine, refines it, and re-exports it to India. Domestic production of soybean, which was just 36,671 tons in 2023, is insufficient even to meet local demand.

Experts say this re-export model leaves Nepal highly vulnerable to Indian policy changes. Indian refiners, led by the Solvent Extractors’ Association of India (SEA), have long complained that cheaper Nepali oil has been affecting their business. Earlier this year, SEA urged the Indian government to regulate edible oil imports from Nepal and other SAARC countries.

If India were to curb these imports, Nepal’s export earnings would collapse overnight. This will put investments made in refining plants at serious risk.

Nepal’s private sector has said that the violent GenZ protests of Sept 8 and 9, which left government offices and private establishments vandalized and torched, have inflicted losses running into billions of rupees, setting the economy back by years.

Speaking at a discussion organized Tuesday by the Nepal Economic Journalists’ Association on the theme “The Road Ahead for Economic Recovery,” business leaders said the destruction has undermined investor confidence, shaken the foundations of industries, and halted incoming investments.

Confederation of Nepalese Industries (CNI) president Birendra Raj Pandey estimated that the protests cost the economy around five percent of gross domestic product (GDP). “For investors, security of capital is fundamental. But the violent destruction of public and private structures has eroded confidence. The government must now step in with supportive fiscal and monetary policies to help businesses recover,” Pandey said.

He urged the government to design both short- and long-term recovery strategies, including special facilities for large industries. He also highlighted the need for reforms in education and improvements to laws that remain complicated and difficult to implement. According to him, the unrest has already stalled major joint-venture investments that were in the pipeline.

Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FNCCI) vice president Hemraj Dhakal described the protests as a “massive setback.” The destruction of large public and private infrastructures, he said, has crippled the economy. “We are ready to rise from the ashes, but what is the guarantee that such destruction won’t happen again? The government must provide a security guarantee,” Dhakal said.

Former president of Nepal Chamber of Commerce Rajendra Malla said the unrest has created an atmosphere of fear across the business community. He stressed that peace and security must be the government’s immediate priority and urged authorities to assure entrepreneurs that they need not fear operating in Nepal.

Malla also called for policies that would encourage youth to stay and work in Nepal rather than leaving for foreign employment. He identified startups, IT, artificial intelligence, and rural technology programs as areas where the government could foster growth. “Tourism has taken a severe hit, but Nepal can still brand itself as a safe destination if the government acts quickly,” he added.

Business leaders further warned that widespread informal transactions and the misuse of remittances have aggravated Nepal’s economic vulnerabilities. Unless structural reforms and effective utilization of resources are ensured, they cautioned, the country risks being pushed five to six years behind its development trajectory.

Perhaps it was not just outrage against corruption and nepotism but something that goes much deeper to the unequal structure of the system that led to the recent spate of destruction and violence in Nepal. Now youths will have a unique window to shape the future of politics of the country. Will they remain united? Will they be able to offer pragmatic proposals to change the ways politics work?

In trying to make sense of what unfolded in the past few days, I cannot help but think if corruption, nepotism and the greed driving them are the only factors to take into account in order to understand the rage that unfolded in the streets. Certainly, violence that can never be condoned nor justified was driven by a sense of revenge toward all those youths who were murdered on the streets.

While the trigger of the destruction is clear, is it worthy to reflect on the deeper causes that might have unleashed the fury and outrage we witness. Here I am not specifically focusing on the manifest acts of vandalism and looting from which the vast majority of the so-called Generation Z (Gen Z) have correctly dissociated themselves from.

I am rather focusing on the hatred toward politicians that was so intentionally violent and aggressive. It would not be incorrect to define these feelings as hatred. Yet it is one thing to profoundly despise corrupted politicians and their family members but it is a different thing altogether to use violence against them.

This is unacceptable no matter the levels of disgust felt against them. That’s why it is important to reflect if corruption and nepotism are the only elements to take into consideration while trying to comprehend the factors that led to such brutal violence. Is it perhaps that the dirtiness of politics is just the tip of the iceberg rather than the foundational elements that can explain what happened?

By watching online videos and pictures of the incidents that occurred, I feel that many young people involved in them were feeling, for the first time ever, a sense of empowerment. Perennially alienated by an elitarian political system, with their voice suppressed and without any channel through which they could express their grievances and frustrations, youths of this nation felt powerless.

Perhaps a vast majority of them also felt disrespected and completely ignored and systematically discriminated against. The youths of this nation who belong to historically marginalized groups have been shrugging off their frustrations, unable to fully speak up also because their problems and issues were never truly embraced by some of their peers.

Could also a lack of recognition together with a want of more equity and fairness have led to the outrage that suddenly materialized itself through brutal violence? Could it be that the time of reckoning for truly helping build an inclusive and equitable nation has arrived? The country has a unique window of opportunity to really press for change through unity and inclusiveness.

It is a rare occasion to try to build a new country where all the youths, including those from marginalized and historically discriminated communities, have a voice. In order to do so, unity is a must but it is also equally important to harness people’s listening skills. It is almost ironic that in an era of massive use of social media, whose defense was what brought thousands of members of Gen Z to the streets on Sept 8, people stop attempting to understand each other.

And listening carefully is a paramount skill that must be strengthened because while there are many good things in having platforms where everyone can talk and express their opinion, there is also a need to slow down, listen, analyze and reason. But what will happen onward? 

Will the youths of this nation resist the comeback attempts from the political elites? We know that it is impossible to completely sideline the traditional parties, something that would be probably unwise because it is hard to conceive a completely “tabula rasa” from which rebuilding the country, brick by brick, would be possible. But the young generations have at least the power of bargaining with the entrenched political interests and they have a considerable amount of assertive authority at the moment and this for the first time ever in their lives.

Whatever propositions they express, they will count and be taken into consideration. But will they be able to come up with a coherent plan and ideas? This is an incredible opportunity to re-write the playbook of politics, making the whole system more inclusive and just.

Let’s not forget that the violence that we saw in the streets is a symptom of a wider and much more complex condition afflicting the nation. The greed that has turbocharged the corrupted political system that, apparently, has fallen, must be contextualized and understood from the perspective of the oppressed. Only engagement, participation and unity among youths transcending their different backgrounds will offer the most effective tools for real empowerment.

Their political emancipation and freedoms will arise from there.

The recent GenZ protests in Nepal caused profound political changes in Nepal, including the resignation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, dissolution of Parliament, and appointment of former Chief Justice of Nepal Supreme Court, Sushila Karki, as interim Prime Minister. Nevertheless, the process is far from complete, as the President has announced 5 March 2026 to be the date of the next general elections. It will be interesting to note what kind of reform the interim Prime Minister will be taking, which may be added once the new parliament is constituted. It will also call for constitutional reforms in Nepal, which has been a foremost demand of GenZ protestors. In light of these changes, it is essential to stocktake the journey of constitutional reforms that Nepal has taken in the past seven to eight decades, and what the friction points were back then. 

Nepal’s constitutional journey since the 1940s reads less like a tidy sequence of institutional reforms and more like a long, uneven negotiations over where sovereignty should sit and what it should look like. King or people. Party or palace. Kathmandu or the Tarai. Hill heartland or the periphery. Each text, from the first experiments under the Ranas to the 2015 charter and beyond, is a record of bargains struck and bargains deferred. To understand why Nepal is once again on the verge of serious change after a youth-led uprising, we need to trace how these bargains have shifted, which problems were solved, and which were simply moved down the road.

The starting point is the late Rana rule. Under pressure at home and from winds blowing across the subcontinent, Prime Minister Padma Shumsher announced constitutional reforms in the late 1940s. The Government of Nepal Constitution Act of 1948 floated the idea of a bicameral legislature and ministerial responsibility. It was carefully drafted. Selection powers sat with the prime minister, and the edifice rested on executive discretion. Still, it broke a tradition by acknowledging that state power might be shared. That act was followed by the Interim Government of Nepal Act of 1951, issued as the Rana oligarchy fell and a broad coalition ushered in a constitutional monarchy and multiparty politics. The 1951 text listed civil liberties, set out a provisional institutional design, and promised a fuller democratic settlement to come. It also carried the first seed of a recurring problem: lofty rights were planted in thin soil. Institutions to protect them were weak, and the balance between palace and parties was unsettled.

The 1959 Constitution tried to make good on the promise. Nepal held its first general elections. BP Koirala became the first democratically elected prime minister. For a moment, parliamentary democracy had a constitutional home. Alas, it did not last. In December 1960, King Mahendra dismissed the government, jailed elected leaders, and moved the country into a partyless Panchayat system. The 1962 Constitution codified the Panchayat system, concentrating sovereignty in the crown and constructing a pyramidal set of assemblies that were consultative in form and royalist in effect. This was not an aberration but a full constitutional project. It sought to bring nationhood, religion, and monarchy into a single frame and to define politics as social harmony under royal guardianship. Its longevity came from that ideological glue; its undoing came from the same source when economic change, social mobility, and a rising political class found the frame too tight.

The popular movement of 1990 was the first decisive mass amendment to that project. The protest forced a bargain. The palace would remain, but power would flow through elected institutions. The 1990 Constitution restored multiparty democracy, expanded fundamental rights, and set up an independent judiciary. It looked European in design, and for a while, it delivered plural politics. Yet the monarchy still held reserve powers. Identity-based claims were largely absorbed into the language of national unity rather than represented as constitutional pluralism. Federalism was absent. These omissions did not cause the insurgency that began in 1996, but they certainly narrowed the channels through which socioeconomic grievances and peripheral voices could be routed into policy. The palace’s 2005 coup temporarily snapped even the 1990 compromise, convincing many that a constitutional monarchy could never be safely caged.

The 2006 people’s movement broke the last link. The 2007 Interim Constitution disempowered the king and reoriented the state toward an elected sovereign Constituent Assembly. When the monarchy was abolished in 2008, it was less a leap into republicanism than an acceptance that the 1990 dualism had failed. From that point forward, legitimacy would be negotiated not between palace and parties but within a widening circle of political and social actors: Maoists now in suits, Madhesi parties galvanized by long exclusion, indigenous nationalities, women’s movements, and a younger generation that had grown up inside conflict and transition. The first Constituent Assembly collapsed under the weight of that diversity. The second produced the 2015 Constitution, a republican, federal, secular settlement that promised inclusion, proportional representation, and a new map of provinces. It was a bold step, but once again, some bargains were patched rather than resolved.

Two pressures immediately exposed those seams. The first was identity and representation. Many Madhesi and Tharu groups protested that the federal boundaries and electoral formulae diluted their political weight. Protests in the plains and a crippling impediment to cross-border trade followed. The new constitution’s legitimacy arrived with a caveat attached. Kathmandu amended the text on proportional inclusion and constituency delineation, but the deeper question, whether federal design tracks social geography closely enough to make people feel represented, was left for politics to answer. It still has not. The second pressure was state capacity under stress. The 2015 earthquake devastated infrastructure and livelihoods. A new federal republic with developing democratic institutions was suddenly tasked to deliver large-scale reconstruction, manage competing party interests across new provincial layers, and keep the economy afloat. The constitution’s promise of devolution and local empowerment was good, but the administrative reforms could not pick up the pace. This gap between constitutional aspiration and everyday governance seeded the frustration that now fuels youth anger: a sense that no matter which coalition takes Singha Durbar, services remain patchy, jobs scarce, and integrity negotiable.

Since 2015, constitutional politics has not rested. A 2022–23 set of amendments eased pathways for citizenship by descent for children of those who held citizenship by birth, and opened a narrow door for non-resident citizenship without political rights. Each change eased one pressure while stirring another. That pattern, addressing the immediate grievance and postponing the structural fix, has been the through-line of the last decade.

With this grand rupture, what can be expected from the constitutional positioning of new political actors is a timely question that needs to be asked. How federal should the state be? What mix of electoral system and party democracy can ensure accountability? How can conflicts of interest be managed in a political sphere where networks are tight and incentives distorted? These are some essential questions that the new democratic political elite of Nepal will be dealing with for quite some time. Nevertheless, in the opinion of this author, the 2015 constitution provides a good roadmap with some recalibrations to work upon, more importantly, in the areas of safeguarding human and digital rights. Along with this, a serious approach needs to be taken to tackle corruption by developing more constitutional checks and balances. Nevertheless, it also needs to be kept in mind that constitutional and legal reforms need to be done in parallel with overhauling already existing institutions as well as serious bureaucratic and institutional reforms; only then can long-term stability be achieved. 

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. 

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

The events of the eighth and ninth September of this year (2025) were nightmares to Nepal. The first day showed the tyranny of our rulers who did not hesitate using excessive force on unarmed young demonstrators, just because they challenged government restrictions. The second day demonstrated how criminal minds could misuse popular demonstrations as camouflages, and carry out terrorist attacks on civilians, security forces, national institutions, public and private properties, destroy national archives, and loot.

The events, known as the GenZ movement, have taken at least 72 lives, and left over two thousand injured. Some are missing. Many families have lost their lifelines. Some have become homeless. Over ten thousand people have lost their jobs. Estimates are that the country has suffered an economic loss of Rs 3trn, 50 per cent more than the national budget of the current fiscal year. The mental trauma is beyond scale.

Illusion, disillusion, and illusion

Good governance, economic development, inclusive empowerment, and growth opportunity have remained core issues, at least since the 1951 Delhi Accord that ended the Rana dynasty’s direct rule. Dissatisfaction followed that and each of future settlements, ultimately leading to a cascade of political unrests or revolutions, at an approximate interval of one or two decades. Each time a new Constitution was promulgated, the proponents declared it as the “ultimate truth”.

To be brief, the 1951 Revolution pulled down the Rana family rule but consolidated the Shah dynasty while embracing plurality. While the multiparty system was taking root, the monarch scrapped the 1959 Constitution of the multiparty system, and introduced the 1962 Constitution institutionalizing Panchayati system—all in the name of the nation and good governance!

In due course, the multiparty system was reinstated through people’s movements and ultimate promulgation of the 1990 constitution. The disgruntled CPN (Maoist) waged a “People’s War” (1996–2006) against the system. The war and movements led by a seven-party alliance ultimately abolished the monarchy in 2008. After much debates, meddling from INGOs and foreign powers, formation of different caucuses of the Constitution Assembly (CA) members such as women, indigenous groups, and their training in foreign lands, failure of first elected CA, second CA election, collections of people’s suggestions and so on, Nepal was officially declared a federal republic through the 2015 Constitution. 

Article 4 of Part 1 of the Constitution clearly maintains that Nepal is socialism-oriented.

The Constitution is full of promises. It grants 31 fundamental rights to all citizens, including rights to equality, privacy, employment, health, education, food, housing, information and social security. Also included are many freedoms and rights of special groups. Then, why are people unhappy? Because people know that these promises are hollow. The Constitution promises mandatory free elementary education; the public discover the performance of most of the community schools very poor, and the haves are sending their kids to costly private schools. The book promises rights to health; the government sells poorly delivered health insurance to the ordinary, and pays for healthcare of the leaders in foreign hospitals. 

Leaders of parties who present themselves as “vanguards of democracy” issue dictating whips to their members in parliament to vote this or that way on national issues. Leaders, who brand themselves as communists, fail to show a role model, sometimes falling far below one practiced by an ordinary citizen.

Leaders show no shame. A leader tries to get an entry to the House through proportional pathway or direct nomination, after losing the first-past-the-post election. A leader tries to bring his wife, daughter or other relatives in the House, misusing the seats reserved for women. As in Bangladesh, resentments over these issues have built up in Nepali youths, which may foment further unrest in the coming days.

Profiteering has sucked. Schools do not pay the teachers even two-thirds of the fee students pay. Corporates and big houses do not pay their lowest paid worker even one-tenth of what the CEO receives. A doctor educated under government scholarship charges the patients the maximum possible in the market. 

Cartels are commonplace, from politics to business. In politics, the big parties have made provisions that only those receiving at least three percent of the valid votes are eligible to claim proportional seats. Denying healthy competitions based on quality parameters, MOE, MEC, and universities restrict or facilitate colleges, suiting their tastes. 

Policy corruption is rife at all levels: from land ownerships and use to tariffs to revenues to tax exemptions to biddings to clemencies.

Now to the most painful part. Look what happened on Sept 9. Some of those who hit the streets against corruption and for good governance were seen breaking and looting the private homes and markets. Chances are high that such hypocrisy is not limited to one age group.

Wake up, unite

It is time for introspection. People need to wake up, and so do the leaders. You put your voice; others, theirs. To count, let there be free, fair and secret voting. Let’s effectively ban vote-buying. Do not try to obstruct election campaigns of opponents.

Dear parties and leaders, refrain from selling populist slogans. If you mention, I mean it. You are free to propose any political system you like. If your votes allow, you can change the Constitution and laws. Deposit your election manifesto with the Election Commission, and make it public. Do not deviate from it. Do not make extra claims, do not entice the voters, explicitly or implicitly. Let the voters decide. Once the votes are counted, respect the verdict. If you are in a hung parliament, work as a team member, and support the majority. Obey the decisions, even when they are your antithesis. Unite within your party, or leave it. Unite within the parliament, not for the government but for national cause, or leave it. Do not seek external support against your fellow members in your party or parliament.

We need to move forward. We have destroyed our property, damaged infrastructure, caused human fatalities, and injured thousands. Let’s heal the wounds on our own. Let’s not seek external aid and donation. After destroying the economy equivalent to one and a half years’ national budget in just 10 hours, we should feel ashamed to beg and refrain from accepting external aid. Let’s all stakeholders, including different level governments, political parties, businessmen and workers, discuss together and frame a long-term, stable economic policy, encouraging domestic capital, brain and workforce to play their roles in the national reconstruction. Do not forget to include Nepali diaspora in the process. By virtue of their connections and exposure, they may offer far more to national pride than we can imagine.

Neighbouring country India has welcomed the formation of the new interim government in Nepal. 

Issuing a statement, Indian Ministry of External Affairs welcomed the development immediately after former Chief Justice Sushila Karki took charge as the Interim Prime Minister. 

“We welcome the formation of the new interim government under the leadership of Sushila Karki. We hope this would help in fostering peace and stability in Nepal”, the statement read. 

As a close neighbour, a fellow democracy and a long-term development partner, India will continue to work together with Nepal for the welfare and prosperity of both the nations and the people, it has been stated.

Three days after violent protests shook the nation, Nepal is gradually returning to normalcy with heavy security deployment and cautious optimism among the populace. However, the process of government formation remains the key focus, as citizens look to political stability for lasting peace.

The recent unrest in Nepal, largely driven by the youth-led “Gen Z" movement, erupted over demands for political reform and accountability. Protesters accused political leaders of inaction, corruption, and a disconnect from the people’s concerns. The protests quickly escalated, turning violent, leading to mass prison breakouts, damage to public and private property, and a paralysis of normal life in many parts of the country. To restore order, the government deployed the Nepal Army, Nepal Police, and Armed Police Force, enforcing strict security measures across affected regions.

Currently, night-time curfews are strictly enforced, with heavy deployment of military personnel across major urban areas. During the daytime, prohibitory orders are in place, allowing individuals to move about but banning public gatherings. Main streets remain largely deserted, although some private vehicles are seen on the roads. Public transportation remains suspended.

Banks and small markets, especially in inner city areas, have cautiously reopened, but major business houses and offices remain closed. Government offices, including Nepal Police headquarters, are slowly resuming operations. The police have urged the public to submit photos, videos, and any proof of individuals involved in the recent violent acts. More than 11,000 inmates who escaped during the chaos are still at large. Authorities have called on them to return voluntarily, and security forces have begun arrest operations targeting escaped prisoners.

Despite signs of recovery, fear lingers. "There are still fears that mobs could attack again. It would be a huge relief if a new government is formed soon," said Kishwor Tamang, a shopkeeper in Kathmandu. In the wake of the crisis, the nation’s attention has shifted toward forming a new government. President Ram Chandra Poudel has taken the initiative, holding consultations with representatives of the Gen Z movement, leaders of major political parties, and constitutional experts.

A key debate centers around the potential appointment of Sushila Karki as the new Prime Minister. While one faction of the Gen Z protesters supports Karki—a former Chief Justice known for her integrity—others oppose her candidacy. Furthermore, the 2015 Constitution bars non-members of Parliament from holding the prime ministerial post, posing a constitutional hurdle. Initially, the Nepal Army facilitated early discussions for government formation. Now, President Poudel is taking the lead amid rising pressure from political parties to adhere strictly to constitutional provisions. 

The private sector, which suffered major losses due to vandalism and disruption, is slowly regaining its footing. Business leaders have expressed determination to rebuild despite the challenges ahead.  However, the tourism industry has taken a severe blow. Several hotels were targeted during the unrest, and the perception of instability is expected to significantly reduce tourist inflow in the short term. As the country cautiously recovers, all eyes are on the nation’s leaders to form a stable and inclusive government that can restore public confidence and chart a path toward lasting peace and economic revival.

The senators of the United States (US) Foreign Relations Committee have urged to keep peace in Nepal through democratic process. 

Issuing a statement on Thursday about the recent political development in Nepal, senators, Jeanne Shaheen and Chris Van Hollen, said, “The incidents of violence, loss of the lives and arson that occurred in Nepal lately are not acceptable. We extend deep condolence to the families of those killed during the recent protests”. 

Appealing for holding those involved in extreme suppression against the citizens to account, the senators noted, “Nepal has gained significant achievements during the last two-decade of its democratic exercise. It is ever necessary to protect the achievements earned with substantial contributions of the citizens”. 

Stating that the peaceful, dynamic and full democratic Nepal is the shared concern of the people of Nepal, the United States and the region, the senators expressed their confidence that the Government of Nepal would put tough measures to control corruption and fix institutional weaknesses to win the trust of the citizens. 

Residents of Nepal’s capital rushed to buy groceries Thursday morning when the army briefly lifted a curfew it imposed to quell violent protests that toppled the country’s government, as confusion set in about who would govern the Himalayan nation, Associated Press reported.

Nepal army, which took control of the capital Tuesday night after two days of protests that burned government buildings and businesses, lifted the curfew for four hours Thursday morning. People rushed to buy rice, vegetables and meat, while others took the opportunity to pray at Hindu temples.

Armed soldiers were guarding the streets, checking vehicles and offering assistance to those in need.

It remained unclear who would take control of the government as the search for an interim leader continued, according to Associated Press.

Soldiers guarded Nepal's parliament and patrolled deserted streets on Wednesday with the capital Kathmandu under a curfew, after two days of deadly anti-corruption protests forced Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli to resign, Reuters reported.

The upheaval in the poor Himalayan nation was unleashed by a social media ban that was announced last week, but was rolled back after 19 people were killed on Monday as police fired tear gas and rubber bullets to control crowds.

The death toll from the protests had risen to 25 by Wednesday, Nepal's health ministry said, while 633 were injured.

Nepal's army said that relevant parties were coordinating to tackle the situation after the protests and resolve the issue. Media also said preparations were being made for authorities and protesters to hold talks, without giving details. Reuters could not independently confirm the information, according to Reuters.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for a thorough investigation and restraint Tuesday following deadly protests in Nepal that left 20 people dead and forced Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli to resign.

"I'm closely following the situation in Nepal and I'm deeply saddened by the loss of life," Guterres wrote on X.

"I urge a thorough investigation, restraint to avoid further escalation of violence and dialogue towards forging a constructive path forward," he said.

He called on the authorities to "comply with human rights law," underscoring that protests "must take place in a peaceful manner, respecting life and property."

He also called for compliance with human rights laws.

The Ministry of External Affairs of India has expressed sorrow over the loss of many young lives in the recent incidents taking place in Nepal since Monday.

As the Ministry states, it is closely watching the developments in Nepal since yesterday.

In a statement issued today, the Ministry conveyed that its thoughts and prayers are with the families of the deceased, wishing for the speedy recovery of the injured.

As a close friend and neighbor, the Ministry expresses hope that all concerned bodies will exercise restraint and address any issues through peaceful means and dialogue.

India also takes note that authorities have imposed curfew in Kathmandu and several other cities of Nepal, the statement reads.

Similarly, Indian nationals in Nepal have been advised to exercise caution and adhere to the steps and guidelines issued by the Nepali authorities.