Submit your Article

Why did the Nepal Army (NA) not take the initiative to protect vital state installations such as the Parliament building, Singha Durbar, the Supreme Court, and the President’s Office? 

Since the violent GenZ protests of Sept 8–9, this question has reverberated from tea stalls to television studios, from ordinary citizens to political leaders and security analysts. And it is a question the Army will likely continue to face for generations.

 At a press conference on Oct 17, more than a month after the unrest, the NA said that Singha Durbar could have been saved only at the cost of significant human casualties, meaning it would have had to open fire on protesters. The Army, which has historically refrained from suppressing popular uprisings, maintained that the Sept 9 chaos was not a peaceful protest but a riot.

 According to Army officers, troops attempted to hold back demonstrators at Singha Durbar’s gates through physical restraint and warning fire. But as mobs surged in from all four directions, the Army acted under what it called the “principle of necessity,” prioritizing human lives over physical infrastructure. In essence, the NA decided not to kill civilians to protect government buildings.

Still, the Army claims it succeeded in safeguarding strategically vital assets. Despite the blaze at Singha Durbar, it says its personnel managed to protect sensitive documents and data servers belonging to the National Security Council, the Ministry of Defense, and the Ministry of Finance. Had those systems been destroyed, the state’s financial operations, such as salary payments, transactions, and accounting, could have ground to a halt within days, NA said.  The NA also claims credit for securing Tribhuvan International Airport during the unrest.

Initial media reports suggest that the NA has launched an internal investigation to identify deployment lapses that occurred on September 9 at sensitive and vital installations.

Inside the NA, there appears to be serious reflection underway regarding its failure to protect vital installations. However, publicly, the NA leadership is defending its actions on various grounds.

The questions confronting the Army today are not entirely new. Article 267 of Nepal’s Constitution designates the President as the Supreme Commander of the Army.

This has raised another sensitive issue: why did the Army not take measures to protect its own Commander-in-Chief, as President Ram Chandra Poudel reportedly had to seek temporary shelter elsewhere during the unrest? Public reaction on social media following the Army’s statement suggests deep skepticism. The common perception remains that soldiers stationed at key gates could have either convinced the protesters not to torch the buildings, or, if necessary, used limited force to defend them.

 Another question concerns the Army’s role in controlling the fires. Officials claimed that fire engines were dispatched to critical sites but were obstructed by protesters. According to the NA, by the following day, flames at most government buildings were under control, except at the Hilton Hotel. Chief Justice Prakash Man Singh Rawat, however, stated in an interview that he had to rely on the Lalitpur Municipality’s help to extinguish the blaze at the Supreme Court on the third day of arson.

 The list of questions goes on: Why didn’t the Army provide backup to the Nepal Police in controlling the mobs? Why was there a delay in mobilizing the Army after Prime Minister Oli’s resignation?

 Despite criticism, the Army’s subsequent actions helped stabilize the country. After taking full command of security on Sept 9, the law-and-order situation improved dramatically. At a time when political parties faced public anger, the Army facilitated dialogue between President Poudel and the GenZ protesters. Political leaders across party lines have since praised the NA for helping steer the crisis toward a constitutional resolution.

 Yet controversy lingers over the Army’s decision to confiscate the mobile phones of top political leaders under its protection. Officials justified the move, saying unrestricted communication among party leaders could have derailed the delicate process of forming a new government and deepened the crisis. The phones were returned only after Sushila Karki was sworn in as Prime Minister. Although President Poudel reportedly sought verbal consent from major parties, their actual role in the government formation process was minimal.

Public suspicion toward the Army is not without historical precedent. After the 2001 royal massacre that claimed the lives of King Birendra and his family, the NA repeatedly asserted that security of the royal palace was beyond its jurisdiction. Yet many citizens never accepted that explanation. Even after 25 years, people still ask: why did the Army fail to protect its own supreme commander?

Similarly, when the monarchy was abolished by the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly in 2008, the Army chose to remain silent. Monarchists continue to question why it did not resist the removal of the King.

 This time, however, the stakes are far greater. The questions facing the Army today cut deeper, carrying long-term implications for civilian–military relations and the integrity of the state.

 Despite the wave of criticism, the NA deserves recognition for restoring order and refraining from political intervention at a volatile moment. Rumors of a military takeover or a royal return were rife, but the Army maintained its apolitical character and ultimately acted to safeguard the constitutional framework.

 Still, the questions directed at the NA cannot be answered by the Army alone. They also implicate Nepal’s political leadership and its constitutional arrangements. The coalition government of the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML had the authority to declare a state of emergency or mobilize the Army through the National Security Council, but did not.

 The new government that comes from the March 5 elections must treat these issues with seriousness and urgency. Lessons from the September crisis should inform legal and constitutional reforms to ensure such lapses never recur. What unfolded in Nepal was unprecedented, both in terms of scale and the symbolism it carries.

 Rather than dragging the Army into controversy, political leaders must confront their own failures. The events of Sept 8–9 were not just a breakdown of security; they were a test of Nepal’s entire state apparatus.

With the arrival of Tihar, the second greatest festival of Hindus, the Kathmandu Valley has been beautifully illuminated with decorative lights. Every house, neighborhood, and the entire valley is now adorned with dazzling lights. The valley, glittering with colorful illumination, looks mesmerizing from the surrounding hills.

Tihar is also regarded as the festival of lights. It is believed that Goddess Laxmi, the goddess of wealth, resides in bright and clean homes, so people light oil lamps and decorate their houses with sparkling lights to welcome her.

Photos: Nepal Photo Library 

​​​​​​​

Namo Buddha, deeply rooted in the ancient legend of Siddhartha Gautama’s past life more than 6,000 years ago, holds profound spiritual significance. It is revered as the sacred site where Prince Mahasattva, a previous incarnation of the Buddha, performed the ultimate act of compassion (Avayadan) by offering his own body to save a starving tigress and her cubs. This powerful story of self-sacrifice and unconditional compassion continues to inspire to this day. In modern times, it resonates strongly with ethical discussions around organ donation, medical altruism, and selfless service in healthcare, underscoring the enduring relevance of ancient values in contemporary contexts.

A visionary yet informal forum, comprising cultural thinker Biswo Ulak, spiritual leader Naresh Prasad Manandhar, and peace advocates such as Deva Sainju, Palden Lama, Subarna Shrestha, Rajaram Karmacharya, and others, came together to lay the foundation for what would later be known as the Global Cultural Peace Walk. The initiative emerged with the profound intent to rekindle the ancient spirit of selfless sacrifice (Avayadan) exemplified 6,000 years ago by Prince Mahasattva and to carry forward the timeless values of peace and compassion taught by Gautama Buddha 2,500 years ago. Collaborating with a grassroots movement, the team sought to revive age-old values through a one-day Global Cultural Peace Cycle Rally held in April 2017, from Swayambhu Mahachaitya to Namo Buddha Stupa, under the guidance of Venerable Tapssidhamma Bhikkhu, a respected monk based at Charumati Buddhist Bihar, a historic Theravāda monastery in Kathmandu.

Meanwhile, it was learned that Gautama Buddha had visited Hiranya Gandhaman Parbat, the site of the present-day Namo Buddha Temple, to pay homage at the burial site of Prince Mahasattva. During his pilgrimage to Swayambhu, it is believed that he may have traveled through Sree Gha, Thimi, Bhaktapur, Nala, Panchal (Panauti), and Itey before reaching the sacred site.

In the same year, 2017, the forum organized a three-day Global Cultural Peace Walk, carrying the symbolic Peace Lamp in honor of the International Day of Peace, observed from Sept 21st to 23rd. The walk followed a spiritually significant route, beginning at Swayambhu Mahastupa and continuing through Sri Gha, Thahity Baha, Jam Baha, Charumati Bihar, and Boudhanath Stupa, with an overnight stay at Nagadesh Bihar. On the second day, the journey continued through Muni Bihar, passed Shristikanta Lokeswor, and concluded with another overnight stay at Dhyanakuti Bihar. On the final day, the walk proceeded through Panauti and Itey, ultimately reaching the sacred destination of Namo Buddha.

This three-day walk continues to be held annually on the occasion of the International Day of Peace, from September 21st to 23rd, under rotating leadership. From 2019 to 2022, it was led by the Education Foundation for Buddhism, followed by Kavre Sewa Samaj in 2023. The World Forum for Buddhism has actively participated since its inception in 2017. In 2024, the walk was led by the World Forum for Buddhism under the new name Nepal Peace Walk, in collaboration with Halin Newa Guthi and Jyapu Mahaguthi, with technical support from Peace Tour International. That year saw strong international participation, including representatives from India, China, Thailand, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and the United States. The first-day overnight venue was shifted from Nagadesh to Muni Bihar, Bhaktapur, to better accommodate international participants.

The upcoming 2025 edition is being jointly organized by the World Forum for Buddhism and Halin Newa Guthi, in collaboration with Jyapu Mahaguthi. It is scheduled for November 3rd to 5th, culminating at Namo Buddha Temple on the day commemorating the Bodhisattva’s enlightenment through Prince Mahasattva’s selfless act. This year, even greater international participation is anticipated, with participants from an increasing number of countries expected to join this meaningful journey for peace.

Given its deep spiritual legacy, Namo Buddha holds immense potential to be developed as a meaningful tourist and pilgrimage destination. With thoughtful planning, the site can serve as a global platform for education on compassion, non-violence, and peace, bridging ancient wisdom with modern humanitarian values. By connecting timeless stories with contemporary moral challenges, Namo Buddha can become not only a place of worship but also a living classroom for ethical reflection and intercultural dialogue through an inner peace engineering approach. Such initiatives can reinforce the peacebuilding missions of international organizations like the United Nations, while simultaneously promoting outdoor and spiritual tourism in partnership with Nepal’s tourism institutions.

There have been moments in my life that, when I look back, leave me with only questions—questions that still make me wonder why. I never joined journalism school out of passion; I had always wanted to pursue law. Yet today, when I hold my published book The Attempt in my hands, I see the fruition of my labor. I don’t wait for others to read or review it. I’m simply proud of having written, edited, designed, and published it all by myself. The journey wasn’t easy. I battled insomnia, often waking up in the middle of the night to jot down thoughts that surfaced in my restless mind. The process was intense, demanding immense dedication and devotion. Yet the most fulfilling part was the freedom from judgment, the feeling that I was in control of my own experiences and words, allowing my creativity to flow naturally.

Coming from a middle-class family, I see my writing themes and ideas reflecting my background. I understand what it means to throw yourself into uncertainty, to have nothing and still strive for something better. I consider myself fortunate that I can express myself, share my experiences, and keep learning and unlearning along the way. Perhaps this ignition would never have sparked without my time in journalism school. In the span of four and a half years, I was taught empathy above all and to be the voice of the voiceless. I learned about mass communication, media ethics, human rights sensitivity, media literacy, media laws, reporting, investigative writing, and the nuances of media trials, angles, and sources. The field is vast and pragmatic, and I don’t think anyone without such training can truly translate its depth.

However, when I look at the current state of media practice in Nepal, I see a contrasting picture. Dozens of media outlets are mushrooming and they are spreading false information. The media landscape has turned into a battleground of misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation. Today, anyone can show up and write anything about anyone. Being seen and heard has become easy, but to what purpose and to what extent?

As a literature graduate, I understand deeply what it means to express freely.. The Constitution of Nepal, in Article 17, enshrines the right to freedom. As human beings, our nature resists control, yet we must also recognize that freedom requires responsibility. In journalism, a reporter’s qualification isn’t only about how well they write, but also about their morality and motivation. Unfortunately, I rarely see such reflection in today’s newsrooms. Catchy headlines often outweigh the ABCs of reporting. Partisan news sells more than independent stories. Unregistered online media sometimes gain more public trust than mainstream outlets. It’s important to understand that not every good writer can be a reporter, and not every reporter can be a good writer. My heart burns when I read news written without an understanding of what a true “nose for news” means. Truth is not gossip. No one has the license to write about anyone or anything without consent or purpose.

Creative storytelling and journalistic storytelling are vastly different. Though often used interchangeably, both fields have distinct purposes and disciplines. As a graduate in English Literature and Journalism, I see this distinction more clearly than those who study only one. I say this with conviction, because journalism today has, for many, become an easy route to entrepreneurship, often without the necessary knowledge or practice. The result is that Nepali audiences are not being served, but misled. One of the most dangerous powers of media lies in how it sets narratives, how information is framed to shape illusions and manipulate public perception.