A street revolt in restive Nepal

Yet another prime minister and government in South Asia has fallen to the fury of protesting people on the streets. After Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, it is Nepal’s turn to face a regime change. At least 22 have died, most in police action, hundreds injured and public properties torched in violence, arson, and vandalism that raged in Kathmandu, Pokhara, and other parts of Nepal for two days before the Army took charge of the situation on September 9. The government of K P Sharma Oli brought this end upon itself with its thoughtless ban on social media. While the ban was the spark, the underlying causes reveal the seething anger and frustration of a neglected people who have had enough of Nepal’s self-serving elected elite that enriched itself even as the majority slipped deeper into inequalities, deprivation, and joblessness.

In Nepal, social media serves more than entertainment. For most Nepalese, the internet is also a key source of news, livelihood pursuits, and remittances, making it a survival connection in their daily life. It was equally useful for the discontented to let off steam, which they did with stories and videos of the corruption and indulgences of politicians and their ‘nepo kids’. Instead of reading these writings on the wall for the depth of the economic crisis and disparities they revealed, the Oli government sought to kill the media, messages, and messengers. This set off an eruption of discontent over corruption, government failures, and opportunistic changes of prime ministers (16 since 2008), made worse by suppression of the protests.

While the elected political class has discredited itself, the situation has opened the space for mischief and sabotage of multiparty democracy by monarchist forces that may well be aided and abetted by foreign powers. These powers, both near and far, have reasons for being unhappy with Nepal where the monarchy subserved their interests. The protesting Gen Z groups have alleged infiltration by external elements. Both India and China have little to gain from turmoil, instability, and the uncertain outcome of a leaderless upheaval which can be manipulated for foisting a ‘popular leadership’ that is pro-monarchy and propped up by external powers. India has tightened security along its border with Nepal. It needs to deal with this regime change with diplomatic tact: discourage the return of anti-democratic forces, isolate the corrupt, help revive the economy, and keep out extra-regional interests with a proclivity for meddling in South Asia. This could be a test of New Delhi’s neighbourhood policy.