Submit your Article

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.

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.