By Ranjan Solomon
“Power does not part with power voluntarily; it does so only under pressure”
Nepal finds itself in the throes of yet another political earthquake. The Himalayan nation, often romanticized for its mountains and serene landscapes, is today a cauldron of anger, disillusionment, and restless youth. The spark this time was seemingly small: a government decree banning popular social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Authorities defended the move as a temporary “regulation” to curb misinformation. But for millions of Nepalis – especially the young -social media was not only a tool of communication but also a lifeline to the wider world and a vehicle of accountability. To them, the ban symbolized a government intent on silencing voices rather than addressing grievances (AP News, 2025).
Within hours, protests erupted in Kathmandu and quickly spread to other cities. The rallies drew strength from Gen Z, Nepal’s restless generation, long frustrated by unemployment, corruption, and the suffocating grip of political elites. Their slogans, painted on walls and shouted in the streets, went beyond the demand to lift the ban. They called for the resignation of Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli and, more fundamentally, for an end to a system that has failed to deliver either stability or prosperity (Washington Post, 2025).
The Flashpoint and Its Fallout
The government’s response was brutal. Security forces fired on crowds, killing at least 19 protesters and injuring hundreds (Reuters, 2025a). The images that flooded back into the country—ironically via Virtual Private Network (VPNs) and underground networks circumventing the ban – showed young demonstrators drenched in blood, running through tear gas, carrying the wounded on makeshift stretchers. The public fury intensified. Protesters torched the Parliament building, vandalized government offices, and targeted the private homes of political leaders (India Times, 2025).
Tourists, too, were caught up in the chaos: hotels were burned, flights to Kathmandu were diverted, and a nationwide curfew imposed (Times of India, 2025). What had begun as a movement about digital rights escalated into the biggest anti-government uprising Nepal has seen in over a decade. Oli, a veteran politician and repeat prime minister, found his position untenable and resigned, leaving behind a dangerous political vacuum (Wall Street Journal), 2025.
The Deeper Grievances
The unrest has roots far deeper than a social media ban. Protesters consistently spoke of corruption, nepotism, and the arrogance of leaders who treat the state as private property. Ordinary Nepalis point to the lavish lifestyles of politicians, the unending scandals of kickbacks and favouritism, and the daily struggles of citizens to find jobs or affordable services (AP News, 2025).
Youth frustration has been building for years. Nepal’s unemployment rate officially hovers around 11 percent, but among the young it is estimated to be closer to 20 percent or more. Each year, tens of thousands leave to work abroad, sending back remittances that make up nearly a quarter of the national GDP. Migration has become both an economic necessity and an escape route from political paralysis. Those who remain face a sense of exclusion and betrayal.
“Social media was the last place where we felt we had some power,” one 22-year-old protester told reporters. “They tried to take even that away from us. That’s why the streets exploded” (Associated News), 2025.
The death toll has mounted and the numbers been revised upwards to about 30. Injuries are over 1,000 now; many have already been discharged, while others remain hospitalized.
The parliament building (and associated infrastructure) has reportedly been almost entirely destroyed by fire.
Other public/private buildings (media headquarters, political party offices, etc.) continue to be assessed; many remain damaged.
Current Security Measures
Curfews / prohibitory orders remain in effect in Kathmandu and other affected areas, at least till Thursday morning. Soldier patrols and checkpoints are stronger. Security forces are detaining people accused of violent acts (arson / looting). What Nepal needs is not more law and order. It needs long term and just political solutions.
A History of Instability
Nepal’s democratic experiment has been fragile since its inception. The abolition of the monarchy in 2008 raised hopes of a new era, but instead, the country has cycled through governments with dizzying speed. Fourteen different administrations have taken office in the past 17 years, few completing a full term (Reuters, 2025b). Coalition collapses, floor crossings, and political betrayals have become the norm.
The Communist Party of Nepal (UML), Oli’s own faction, has alternated between dominance and internal schisms. The opposition Nepali Congress, meanwhile, has often been too divided to present a credible alternative. This pattern has left citizens with little faith in their representatives. Institutions—from the judiciary to the anti-corruption watchdogs—are viewed as compromised or ineffective.
Against this backdrop, the current protests represent both continuity and rupture. Continuity, because instability is nothing new in Nepal. Rupture, because this time the movement is youth-driven, decentralized, and less beholden to traditional party structures.
Short-Term Prognosis: Vacuum and Militarization
The immediate future looks fragile. Oli’s resignation has created a political vacuum with no clear successor. Protesters are unlikely to accept a simple reshuffle of elites, and the ruling class appears unable – or unwilling—to make concessions beyond the prime minister’s departure.
Curfews remain in place across several cities. The army, already deployed in support of police, could take a larger role if the unrest continues. Analysts warn of the risk of militarization, a scenario that would not only deepen the democratic crisis but also revive painful memories of Nepal’s civil war, which ended only in 2006 (Washington Post, 2025).
Medium-Term Prognosis: Reform or Restoration?
In the medium term, there is talk of an interim government led by technocrats or a cross-party coalition with youth representatives. Such arrangements could provide breathing space, but their feasibility remains uncertain. Nepal’s traditional parties are deeply resistant to sharing power with outsiders.
The likelier scenario is a cycle of negotiations between elites, resulting in yet another short-lived coalition that offers cosmetic reforms while leaving the structures of corruption intact (WSJ, 2025). If that happens, the protests may subside for now—but discontent will fester, returning with even greater force.
Long-Term Prognosis: Renewal or Repetition
The deeper question is whether the current movement can transform into long-term change. There is hope. The protests have mobilized a generation, introducing new voices into the political sphere. If harnessed, this energy could pave the way for democratic renewal, with greater accountability and citizen participation.
But there are also serious risks. Entrenched elites have repeatedly demonstrated their capacity to absorb crises and reassert control. Without structural reforms—such as strengthening anti-corruption bodies, guaranteeing media freedoms, and reforming electoral laws—the movement could be co-opted or crushed (Reuters, 2025a). The long-term outcome will hinge on whether Nepal’s youth can translate their anger into sustained political organization, and whether institutions can adapt to a society that is no longer content with empty promises.
A Region-Wide Pattern
Nepal’s turmoil also resonates with regional dynamics. South Asia has recently seen similar youth-led uprisings—from Sri Lanka’s “Aragalaya” in 2022, which toppled a president, to student protests in Bangladesh earlier this year. These movements reveal a generational impatience with corrupt elites and a demand for dignity and livelihood. Whether Nepal joins Sri Lanka in forcing systemic change—or slips back into cycles of unrest like Bangladesh – remains to be seen. Other countries in the region may want to learn some hard lessons about the potency of peoples’ power.
A Society at a Crossroads
Nepal today stands at a crossroads. The resignation of a prime minister is not the end of the crisis but its beginning. The question is whether this moment will be remembered as just another episode in Nepal’s long history of instability, or as the turning point when a new generation seized the political stage.
For now, the streets remain restive, the young remain defiant, and the old order struggles to reassert itself. The outcome is uncertain – but one truth is clear: Nepal’s future will be determined not by its tired elites, but by the courage and persistence of its youth.
Nepal needs stronger democratization efforts to address ongoing challenges like widespread corruption, political dysfunction, and social inequality, which fuel public frustration and undermine faith in the democratic system. The protests, particularly by Generation Z, highlight deep-seated issues with underdeveloped democratic institutions, rampant nepotism, and a lack of responsiveness from political elites.
While Nepal has transitioned to a Federal Democratic Republic, achieving true democratic consolidation requires strengthening the rule of law, fostering political accountability, promoting inclusive participation, and addressing the lingering impacts of its feudal past to ensure political stability and equitable growth.
The protesters and Government have accepted former chief justice Sushila Karki for the post of the interim prime minister of the country amid until fresh elections are held. Karki will hold the position until fresh elections are held. It remains to be seen if she can restore governance and bring about functionality that meets the urgent challenges to deconstruct Nepal from an awful period of misgovernance and corruption. Most importantly, can this happen without the interference of powers from across the border? India’s Hindutva machinery has shown an inclination for a long while to convert Nepal into a Hindu Kingdom.
Nepal’s peaceful transition to a just, peaceful, and archetypal democratic state requires autonomous decisions and processes. Interference from States in the region with vested interests will create further chaos and retard the search for a new and viable form of government, particular to the aspirations of Nepalese society.
Ranjan Solomon is a political commentator, human rights defender, and argues that Nepal must be allowed to craft a political solution without any external interference that is potentially negative.
11 September 2025
Source: countercurrents.org