Nepal Gen Z Uprising: Why is Kathmandu Burning?

Why in the News?

1. Nepal witnessed large-scale protests led by Generation Z youth, resulting in widespread damage to public buildings and residences of senior leaders in Kathmandu and other cities.
2. The developments followed a ban on social media platforms and the death of 19 protesters in police firing.
3. The resignation of Prime Minister K P Sharma Oli and the absence of clear leadership have created a political and constitutional uncertainty.

Key Highlights

1. Build-Up to the Protests
   1. Youth-led online communities such as Next Generation Nepal criticized corruption and nepotism in politics.
   2. Generation Z (1996–2012) became the leading voice, expressing frustration with governance and limited opportunities.
   3. Anger grew around the perception of privilege among political elites’ children, commonly labeled as “Nepo Kids”.
2. Immediate Triggers
   1. The government’s ban on 26 social media platforms (Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, X, YouTube, etc.) removed a key avenue of youth expression.
   2. Police firing on September 8, 2025, led to the death of 19 protesters.
   3. These developments accelerated the mobilization of young demonstrators in Kathmandu.
3. Scale and Targets of Violence
   1. Government buildings, including Singha Durbar (seat of ministries), and the Federal Parliament were attacked.
   2. Residences of five former Prime Ministers — Oli, Prachanda, Madhav Kumar Nepal, Jhala Nath Khanal, Sher Bahadur Deuba — were vandalized or set on fire.
   3. Prominent figures, including Finance Minister Bishnu Paudel and MP Eknath Dhakal, were targeted, while opposition leader Rabi Lamichhane was released from prison.
4. Political and Institutional Fallout
   1. PM Oli resigned; President Ram Chandra Poudel moved under Army protection.
   2. The Nepal Army, under General Ashok Raj Sigdel, assumed responsibility for security operations but did not take political control.
   3. Demands for the dissolution of Parliament and an interim government
5. Regional and International Reactions
   1. India convened its Cabinet Committee on Security to review developments.
   2. Former King Gyanendra issued a statement of condolence and appealed for dialogue.
   3. Observers highlighted the risk of instability affecting Nepal’s regional relations.

Implications for India

1. Security Concerns along Borders
   1. Instability in Nepal may affect open Indo-Nepal borders, increasing risks of smuggling, human trafficking, or cross-border unrest.
   2. India may need to enhance border surveillance without disrupting the historic free movement agreement.
2. Impact on Bilateral Relations
   1. India must carefully balance engagement with Nepal’s diverse political actors.
   2. Any perception of favoritism could affect India’s standing among the Nepali public.
   3. The crisis provides an opportunity for India to project itself as a neutral partner for stability.
3. Strategic Competition with China
   1. The political vacuum in Nepal could provide space for Chinese influence through economic or security channels.
   2. India will have to intensify diplomatic outreach to maintain strategic balance in its neighborhood.
4. Economic and Trade Implications
   1. Nepal is a major trading partner with cross-border electricity and hydropower projects.
   2. Instability could disrupt trade routes and supply chains critical for bordering Indian states like Bihar, UP, and West Bengal.
   3. India’s investment projects may face delays.
5. Regional Stability and Diplomacy
   1. Nepal’s unrest highlights the fragility of South Asian democracies.
   2. India may face pressure to play a facilitating role in dialogue.
   3. Stability in Nepal is crucial for India’s broader neighborhood first policy and regional security architecture.

Challenges and Way Forward

Conclusion

For India, Nepal’s unrest is both a security challenge and a diplomatic test. The protests highlight generational aspirations for accountability and transparency, which will reshape Nepal’s political future. India’s response must be measured, neutral, and supportive of democratic stability, ensuring both regional peace and the protection of its long-term interests.