Gen Z–Led Uprising in Nepal: Ripple Effects in South Asia, and Why India's Robust Democracy Makes Uprisings Unlikely and Unnecessary

 Gen Z–Led Uprising in Nepal: Ripple Effects in South Asia, and Why India's Robust Democracy Makes Uprisings Unlikely and Unnecessary

Dr. Asif Nawaz

Assistant Professor

Hamdard Institute of International Studies

Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi

9013228794 | draasifnawaz@gmail.com 

In the volatility of international relations, youth-led movements have emerged as decisive agents of political and social transformation, often signalling underlying systemic and deeper discontent within nations. These uprisings, characterized by their spontaneity, digital amplification, and demand for immediate accountability, challenge the traditional paradigms of state sovereignty and governance stability. Nepal’s Gen Z uprising in September 2025 serves as a clear example—what began as a response to a government-imposed social media ban rapidly escalated into nationwide unrest. Within days, protests intensified, resulting in the resignation of Prime Minister K.P. Sharma Oli and the destruction of key symbols of state authority, including the Federal Parliament building in Kathmandu and the residences of high-ranking officials—reduced to ashes. The protests, dubbed the "Gen Z Revolution," have claimed at least 19 lives and injured over 600 individuals. For scholars and students of international relations, this episode is not merely a domestic crisis in a particular country, but it provides a unique lens through which they can analyze the intersections of technology, generational activism, and geopolitical vulnerability in the Global South.

By the second week of September 2025, Nepal was on the brink of disorder. An indefinite curfew was imposed across Kathmandu and surrounding districts, and the Nepal Army was charged with maintaining security at the request of the President’s office. Protesters, primarily individuals under 25 who comprise over 40% of the population, occupied Tribhuvan International Airport, effectively halting air travel and stranding thousands of tourists in a country heavily dependent on tourism revenue. Although the government partially lifted the social media blackout in response to the unrest, intermittent internet shutdowns continued. Youth activists circumvented these restrictions using VPNs, broadcasting live footage of the protests and circulating symbolic images—such as waving the Straw Hat flag from the anime One Piece—to express their defiance.

The protests transcend a singular policy grievance, reflecting deep-rooted frustration with persistent corruption, as epitomized by the “nepo kids” scandal. Leaked documents indicated that relatives of political elites, including associates of former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba, received lucrative contracts for disaster relief and infrastructure projects following the devastating floods in recent years, exacerbating hardship in rural communities. Echoing through the streets are slogans like "Topple this government" and "Hatyara Sarkar" (Murderous Government); the protesters’ demands have expanded from reversing the social media ban to seeking mass resignations and comprehensive systemic reform. International organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have condemned the use of lethal force by security personnel and called for independent investigations. The economic impact is severe—preliminary estimates project a 3-5% contraction in GDP for 2025, with tourism revenues, which account for 7% of GDP, evaporating almost overnight.

From an international relations perspective, Nepal’s crisis underscores the paradoxical role of digital connectivity. While the government intended the social media ban to suppress dissent, it instead galvanized a decentralized, leaderless movement whose activities attracted global attention. The widespread sharing of protest footage has drawn scrutiny from neighbouring powers, notably India and China, raising concerns about potential external intervention. This case invites a comparative analysis with recent youth-led uprisings in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh and prompts reflection on why similar movements are unlikely and unnecessary in India due to its institutional resilience. The broader implications for Pakistan and the South Asian region are also significant, offering critical insights into the dynamics of youth activism in an increasingly multipolar world.

The Anatomy and Evolving Dynamics of Nepal's Gen Z Protests

The contemporary protests led by Nepal’s Generation Z reflect a complex interplay of political instability, socioeconomic strain, and evolving forms of digital activism. The turbulence traces back to the aftermath of Nepal’s 2015 constitution, which ushered in an era marked by fragile coalitions and frequent realignments—most notably under the leadership of K.P. Oli and the Nepali Congress, whose government has survived multiple no-confidence motions through opportunistic alliances.

Economic challenges exacerbate this instability. Youth unemployment hovers near 20%, according to International Labour Organization estimates, while over two million Nepalis work abroad, remittances from whom constitute over a quarter of national GDP. Unfortunately, these remittances remain susceptible to elite misappropriation, fuelling public frustration. The government’s abrupt decision to ban social media platforms—enacted without parliamentary debate—further alienated young Nepalis by severing access to critical educational and economic resources, particularly for those engaged in the rapidly expanding gig economy projected to grow 20% annually.

The ongoing protests first erupted in Kathmandu’s Thamel district on September 7, initially manifesting as peaceful demonstrations but escalating to violent confrontations by the following day. The police responded to stone-throwing with tear gas, rubber bullets, and eventually live ammunition, resulting in 14 fatalities on September 8 alone. By midday September 9, the death toll had risen to 19, with unrest spreading to cities like Pokhara and Biratnagar. Protesters breached barricades at Singha Durbar, Nepal’s administrative centre, setting documents and effigies alight, while the torching of the Kantipur Publications complex, the headquarters of Nepal’s largest and most influential media conglomerate, located at Central Business Park in Kathmandu, signified broader attacks on information flows. Incidents of looting, particularly at politicians’ residences—documented in viral videos of cash spilling from burning structures—fed into a narrative of retributive justice against corruption.

The political ramifications of these upheavals were swift. Prime Minister Oli’s resignation, alongside the Home Minister’s, temporarily mitigated tensions but failed to resolve underlying grievances. Meanwhile, ongoing curfews and military patrols signal the risk of prolonged instability. Army Chief Gen. Prabhu Ram Sharma appealed for calm and constitutional adherence, while international stakeholders responded with caution: India evacuated hundreds of citizens, China prioritized safeguarding its infrastructure investments, and the America’s State Department condemned the violence while positioning itself as a pro-democracy advocate in great-power contests.

A distinctive feature of the current uprisings in Nepal is their decentralized and digitally mediated nature. Unlike previous party-driven mobilizations, Nepal’s Gen Z protestors have relied on encrypted platforms such as Signal and Discord, leveraging internet memes and augmented reality filters to satirize the lifestyles of political elites. This hybrid activism—where viral online content amplifies offline engagement—aligns with global trends but also introduces new risks, notably the rapid spread of misinformation (e.g., false rumors regarding the Prime Minister’s wife).

The situation poses significant dilemmas for policymakers and scholars alike. Balancing digital freedoms with public security, especially in a context where young citizens view online platforms as essential rights, not privileges, remains a formidable challenge. In sum, Nepal’s Gen Z protest movement illustrates not only the volatility of the country’s current political landscape but also the transformative potential—and hazards—of digitally enabled activism.

Historical Context: A Global Chronicle of Youth-Driven Revolutions

Now let’s talk about revolutions driven by the youths around the world. The ones where school-going kids and university students basically flip the script on history while adults are too busy clutching their pearls. Young people have led revolutions throughout history, often starting from small acts of injustice and leading to big changes. Their in-depth research shows that there are patterns: educational or economic complaints that get worse because of the media, which leads to changes in government with different levels of repression and success.

The Soweto Uprising of June 16, 1976, in apartheid South Africa stands as a cornerstone. Apartheid’s in full swing, and the government decides, “Hey, let’s force Black kids to learn in Afrikaans”—you know, the language of their oppressors. Naturally, the students are like, “Nah, not today.” So, 20,000 of them hit the streets in Soweto township, Johannesburg. The police, being the absolute worst, open fire. Hector Pieterson, just 13, gets killed. His sister and a friend carry his body, and that photo is basically seared into the global conscience and becomes an iconic emblem of resistance, as chronicled in I Saw a Nightmare...' -- Doing Violence to Memory: The Soweto Uprising, June 16, 1976, by Helena Pohlandt-McCormick. The protests explode, over seven hundred more die, the UN slaps sanctions on South Africa, and the wheels start turning toward the end of apartheid. Fast-forward: Mandela gets out of jail, and democracy finally arrives in 1994. All because a bunch of teenagers refused to stay quiet in class.

Across the Atlantic, the United States Civil Rights Movement was notably propelled by youth activism, fundamentally transforming the landscape of racial justice. In 1957, the Little Rock Crisis unfolded as nine African American students, later known as the “Little Rock Nine,” attempted to integrate Central High School. Their entry, resisted by Governor Orval Faubus and ultimately enforced by President Eisenhower via the 101st Airborne Division, is thoroughly chronicled in Melba Pattillo Beals’s memoir, Warriors Don’t Cry. The perseverance of these students advanced the implementation of the Supreme Court’s Brown v. Board of Education (1954) decision, translating judicial mandates into lived realities.

 

Anti-war fervour defined the late 1960s U.S. youth activism. The Vietnam War protests peaked with the 1970 Kent State shootings, where Ohio National Guard killed four students during a rally against the Cambodia incursion. Allan Canfora's Students for a Democratic Society recounts how 4 million students struck nationwide, eroding public support and hastening the war's 1975 end via the Paris Accords. In Europe, France's May 1968 événements saw 10 million youth and workers paralyze Paris, demanding university reforms and workers' rights; barricades and strikes forced President de Gaulle's concessions, influencing global '68 movements, per Kristin Ross's May '68 and Its Afterlives.

Authoritarian contexts yield grittier tales. China's 1989 Tiananmen Square protests began with student mourning of Hu Yaobang, escalating to hunger strikes by 100,000 demanding anti-corruption and democracy. The June 4 crackdown killed hundreds, as estimated by the Tiananmen Mothers group and documented in Louisa Lim's The People's Republic of Amnesia. Though quashed, it inspired dissident networks and international embargoes. In Eastern Europe, Serbia's Otpor! (Resistance!) youth movement (1998-2000) used non-violent tactics—fist logos, satirical songs—to oust Slobodan Milošević after electoral fraud. With 70,000 members, mostly students, Otpor! played a pivotal role in the Bulldozer Revolution, culminating in Milošević’s ousting and subsequent trial at The Hague, as detailed in Ivan Marović's From Dictatorship to Democracy. This movement served as a blueprint for subsequent revolutions, such as Georgia’s Rose Revolution in 2003, where youth-led actions forced governmental change amid electoral irregularities (see Lincoln Mitchell’s Uncertain Democracy).

The digital era has further amplified youth mobilization. The Arab Spring (2010–2012) began in Tunisia with Mohamed Bouazizi’s self-immolation, sparking Facebook-organized protests that ousted President Ben Ali who ruled Tunisia for 28 years. In Egypt, youth constituted the overwhelming majority of demonstrators in Tahrir Square, utilizing Twitter and other platforms for logistical coordination; President Mubarak resigned after 18 days, though military rule soon followed, a trajectory examined in Wael Ghonim’s Revolution 2.0. Similar youth-led uprisings occurred in Libya and Yemen, whereas Syria descended into civil war, illustrating the risks of fragmented opposition. In Hong Kong, the 2014 Umbrella Movement and 2019 protests, orchestrated via Telegram by student leaders such as Joshua Wong, drew millions demanding democratic reforms. Despite initial momentum, Beijing’s 2020 national security law significantly curtailed freedoms (see Antony Dapiran’s City on Fire).

Across the African continent, Nigeria’s #EndSARS movement in 2020 stands as a striking example of youth-driven activism. Young Nigerians, mobilizing primarily through Instagram, demanded an end to police brutality. The aftermath of the Lekki Toll Gate incident drew international attention, compelling authorities to initiate panel investigations—a testament to the potency of digital solidarity. Similarly, Kenya’s 2024 protests, spearheaded by Gen Z activists on TikTok, successfully opposed proposed tax increases on essential goods. The widespread nature of these demonstrations forced President Ruto to make notable policy concessions, as observed by the African Union’s youth envoy. Latin America witnessed a parallel phenomenon in Chile during 2019’s estallido social. Here, student-led protests against systemic inequality escalated, ultimately resulting in the drafting of a new constitution. Peter K. Levine, in his work Youth Activism in an Era of Globalization, synthesizes these cases to highlight the transformative potential of youth mobilization. According to Levine, the effectiveness of such movements frequently relies on organizational unity, international visibility, and the willingness of states to compromise. Nonetheless, these successes are often shadowed by subsequent governmental repression.

So, what’s the takeaway? If you’re a regime terrified of change, keep an eye on the kids. They’ve got the energy, the networks, and—let’s be honest—the stubbornness to keep pushing until something snaps. And if you think digital revolutions aren’t a thing, you are mistaken.

Regional Parallels: Echoes from Sri Lanka and Bangladesh

Nepal's turmoil resonates with recent South Asian youth insurgencies, forming a putative "Aragalaya Wave." Sri Lanka's 2022 Aragalaya protests erupted amid economic meltdown—225% inflation, fuel rationing—driven by corruption in Rajapaksa family dealings. Youth occupied Galle Face Green, storming the presidential palace; Gotabaya Rajapaksa fled to the Maldives, resigning to enable a multi-party interim government. Social media bans backfired, amplifying #GoHomeGota; the movement's leaderless nature, per Sri Lanka's Aragalaya analyses, restored some democratic norms but left debt woes unresolved.

Bangladesh's 2024 quota protests, sparked by job reservations favoring Awami League loyalists, ballooned into anti-corruption fury against Sheikh Hasina's 15-year rule. Students blockaded Dhaka University, clashing with police; over 300 died before Hasina's August flight to India, paving the way for Muhammad Yunus's interim administration. Digital tools evaded internet blackouts, with #MonsoonRevolution trending globally. Parallels to Nepal abound: youth bulges (50%+ under 30), nepotism scandals, and bans as catalysts. Yet, Bangladesh's involvement alleged Indian backing for Hasina, straining ties, while Sri Lanka's exposed IMF dependencies.

These events signal South Asia's youth demographic dividend turning into a liability for fragile states. Geopolitically, they test India's Neighborhood First policy—evacuations from Nepal echo Bangladesh ops—and China's BRI, with projects in all three nations now vulnerable to populist backlash.

Revolutions, Uprisings, or Regime Changes Like Those in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Nepal Remain Unlikely and Unnecessary in India

India’s political trajectory stands in stark contrast to the upheavals witnessed in neighbouring South Asian countries such as Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Nepal. While these nations have experienced dramatic regime changes and youth-led protests—often resulting in significant governmental turnover—India has largely remained insulated from such instability. This is not a coincidence, nor merely the product of authoritarian controls; rather, it stems from the country’s robust institutional frameworks and mechanisms for addressing public grievances.

At the core, India’s democratic system integrates diverse voices, including those of the youth, through regular elections, an active judiciary, and a pluralistic media environment. These features collectively function as safety valves, channelling dissent and reformist energies into institutional pathways rather than erupting into disruptive revolution. Economic diversification further reinforces resilience, buffering the nation against shocks that might otherwise provoke mass unrest.

Crucially, empirical data from sources such as the IMF, World Bank, and Centre for Monitoring Indian Economy (CMIE) underscore the relative stability of India’s socio-economic indicators compared to its neighbors. The presence of multiple avenues for political participation and economic mobility diminishes the perceived necessity for radical upheaval. The nation’s stability, therefore, is not accidental but the outcome of deliberate structural choices that have nurtured both adaptability and continuity in governance. In sum, while India is not without its challenges, the likelihood and necessity of large-scale uprisings remain low due to institutional resilience and systemic mechanisms that effectively integrate and respond to societal demands.

India’s Economic Buoyancy: A Foundation for Stability and Opportunity

India’s current economic position sets it apart within the South Asian region, providing a measure of stability rare among its neighbors. As reported by the IMF, GDP growth is projected at 6.4% for 2025. This translates to nominal GDP passing $4.19 trillion, whereas Nepal barely crosses $46 billion, Sri Lanka struggles to recover post-inflation crisis (with its GDP around $98 billion), and Bangladesh remains constrained by ongoing political uncertainty and industry-specific disruptions. India’s economic scale and diversification mean that domestic shocks—while not absent—are generally less catastrophic than in less robust economies. The sharp hyperinflation experienced in Sri Lanka in 2022 (which soared to 70%) or the vulnerabilities of Nepal’s remittance-dependent model (where remittances account for a quarter of GDP) underscore the risks of undiversified growth strategies.

Another crucial component of India’s economic resilience is its foreign exchange reserves, which peaked at a record $704.89 billion in September 2025. This has allowed for ongoing fiscal interventions, including subsidy provision and continued investment in public infrastructure. Contrasts are stark; Sri Lanka’s reserves dipped below $2 billion in 2022, precipitating widespread shortages and social unrest. In India, these reserves underpin efforts to manage youth unemployment—recognized by various survey data and by the Ministry of Labour—with initiatives such as Skill India training over 14 million individuals across emerging sectors since 2015.

Economic diversification is central to India’s comparative advantage. Projected IT export values of $210 billion for 2024-25 highlight the country’s significant share of the global outsourcing market. Schemes like the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) have mobilized more than ₹1.76 lakh crore in investment by August 2025, generating over a million new jobs and significantly increasing manufacturing output. In comparison, Bangladesh’s reliance on a single export sector (garments represent 84% of exports) and Nepal’s aid dependency leave both economies exposed to idiosyncratic shocks and policy failures, as seen in Nepal’s 2025 social media ban.

 

The expansion of India’s startup ecosystem, with over 494,000 ventures by 2025—including 159,157 recognized by the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT)—reflects increased opportunities for youth entrepreneurship and innovation. The emergence of 73 unicorns by September 2025, valued together at over $363 billion, is indicative of this growing vibrancy. Digital infrastructure forms a critical foundation, with 806 million internet users and widespread financial inclusion enabled by platforms like UPI, which processed 20 billion transactions valued at ₹24.85 lakh crore in August 2025, enabling seamless gig economy participation. So, the breadth and depth of India’s economic activity, combined with substantial reserves and efforts to foster innovation and skills training, have positioned the country to weather socioeconomic shocks that have destabilized its neighbors in recent past years. While significant structural challenges persist, India’s multifaceted economic base provides a foundation for relative stability and growth.

India’s Democratic Edifice: Mechanisms for Inclusive Participation

India’s democracy, established in 1947 and further tempered by the Emergency of 1975–1977, has developed solid institutional avenues for dissent, making unlawful rebellions largely irrelevant. Universal suffrage is a defining feature—969 million people were eligible to vote in the last general elections held in 2024, and the turnout was a substantial 65.79%. Young people play a significant role; students’ organizations like the BJP’s Yuva Morcha, the Congress-affiliated NSUI and other national and regional parties’ students’ wings actively engage youth, providing them platforms  to address issues like education and unemployment. These concerns have spurred government responses, including the Skill India Mission and the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.

Federalism helps stabilize this vast country by distributing power across 28 states and 8 union territories. Regional parties (for instance, the DMK in Tamil Nadu or the TMC in West Bengal) are often at the forefront of local problem-solving, a stark contrast to the instability of Nepal’s shifting coalitions or the centralized control in Bangladesh. India’s arrangement resembles the consociational model in international relations theory, emphasizing inclusive power-sharing and accommodation of diversity.

Among the Indian citizens, public trust in democratic institutions remains strong. According to Pew Research Center’s 2023 survey, 70% of Indians believe their nation’s influence on the global stage is rising. Furthermore, data point to higher institutional confidence among Indian youth (78%) compared to their peers in neighbouring countries (45% regionally). This framework underscores India’s commitment to participatory democracy and multi-level governance.

India’s Judicial Independence and Anti-Corruption Frameworks Ensure Accountability

The judiciary basically functions as an essential fail-safe within India's democracy. Through Public Interest Litigations (PILs), the Supreme Court has previously intervened numerous times decisively on landmark issues—including the cancellation of $20 billion in 2G spectrum licenses in 2012, which set a precedent for addressing high-level corruption, and the 2017 Aadhaar privacy verdict, which affirmed citizens' fundamental rights.

Unlike the situation in Nepal, where violent attacks on courts also erupted in 2025 uprisings, India’s approach has centered on institutional conflict resolution. For instance, the judiciary processed over 140 petitions during the 2019 CAA protests and engaged with stakeholders during the 2020-2021 farmers’ movements, ultimately contributing to the repeal of controversial legislation through dialogue, not violence.

India’s anti-corruption framework, bolstered by agencies like the CBI and Enforcement Directorate, works alongside transparency laws such as the RTI Act of 2005, which records over six million annual requests. These mechanisms serve to limit the entrenchment of dynastic political interests (e.g., the Gandhis, Scindias, Yadavs, Chautalas)—a contrast to the persistent “nepo kids” scandals in Nepal. Overall, such institutional accountability nurtures at least the perception, if not the consistent reality, of meritocracy.

Media Freedom, Education, and Social Mobility: Additional Pillars of Resilience in India

India’s media landscape sits at 151 out of 180 on the 2025 RSF World Press Freedom Index—a slight, if not celebratory, improvement from 159 the previous year. The country’s vast array of over 100,000 publications doesn’t guarantee total freedom, but it at least sustains some pluralism in public discourse. Unlike crackdowns faced by outlets in neighbouring Nepal, such as Kantipur, India’s media isn’t under the same level of direct attack, which is notable given the regional context.

Turning to education, the government’s NEP 2020 reforms and the proliferation of 1,113 universities reflect significant investment in upward mobility. Though, let’s not overstate it: India’s stuck at 76th out of 82 on the World Economic Forum’s Social Mobility Index (the latest stats are still from 2020). Reservations—22.5%—for marginalized groups do increase access, but gaps remain. The middle class, now over 400 million strong thanks to post-1991 economic reforms, stands as a key absorber of individual aspirations. Lipset’s modernization theory actually describes this pretty well. Compared to Sri Lanka’s economic cronyism, India’s social and economic mobility, while flawed, demonstrates a degree of resilience grounded in scale and constant churn.

India’s Geopolitical Leverage: G20 Heft and Regional Mediation

India’s engagement with the G20, particularly as host in 2023, underscores its rising international stature and capacity for agenda-setting within global forums. This elevated profile is not merely symbolic; it has translated into concrete actions—such as the provision of a $4 billion aid package to Sri Lanka during its financial turbulence. Such interventions have had a stabilizing effect, both for the region and for India’s own interests, insulating the country from potential spillover effects arising from neighbouring instability.

When examining the broader domestic context, India’s substantial foreign exchange reserves (standing at over $700 billion), the sheer scale of digital transactions via platforms like UPI (numbering in the billions), and a robust ecosystem exemplified by its portfolio of unicorns collectively point to a structural resilience that is rare among its peers. Rather than remaining static or vulnerable to upheaval, India’s institutions—spanning democratic processes, judicial accountability, and various social mechanisms—demonstrate a capacity for ongoing adaptation. Unlike neighbouring states often beset by sudden disruptions, India appears to channel transformative energy into systemic evolution, rendering wide-scale revolutionary change both unnecessary and unlikely.

Nuanced Implications for Pakistan and Broader South Asia

Examining Pakistan’s position in light of recent developments in Nepal and Bangladesh reveals a complex landscape of risks and potential parallels. Despite the recent displacement of 33 million citizens due to the floods in 2025, Pakistan’s elite—mostly implicated in corruptions like the Panama Papers—have largely evaded accountability, in part due to widespread digital distractions such as TikTok, which boasts approximately 80 million users within the country. Youth unemployment stands at around 40%, mirroring Nepal’s demographic challenges. Yet, in Pakistan, the military’s entrenched authority, particularly under Article 245, has effectively curtailed mass mobilization, as evidenced by the suppression of PTI rallies.

Should Nepal’s civil movements achieve tangible reforms, there is a possibility that similar aspirations could diffuse among Pakistan’s opposition, especially within Imran Khan’s support base and through Pashtun social networks. Nonetheless, stringent IMF-imposed austerity measures could provoke significant public discontent, potentially mirroring unrest in Nepal.

Regionally, the risks of spillover are considerable. Refugee flows from Nepal threaten to strain India’s borders, while disruptions in SAARC trade—Nepal-India bilateral trade alone accounts for $8 billion—could have broader economic consequences. China’s Belt and Road Initiative corridors may face sabotage, prompting deeper Chinese engagement, as noted by Brookings. The United States, primarily through USAID, positions itself as a promoter of democracy, counterbalancing India’s more discreet diplomatic efforts.

The situation is further complicated by hybrid threats. According to UN reports, protests could become radicalized, with Islamist factions in Pakistan or Maoist elements in Nepal may exploit unrest. Conversely, there remains the potential for positive outcomes—such as the emergence of youth parliaments or advancements in digital governance—that could bolster regional resilience.

Conclusion: Navigating Youth Activism in a Fragmented World Order

Nepal’s recent Gen Z-led uprising—culminating in resignations and widespread unrest in the 2nd week of September—underscores the increasing centrality of youth movements in international relations. From Soweto’s defiance to the momentum of Tahrir Square, young people have repeatedly challenged the supposed invulnerability of established regimes. The most recent developments, such as the deployment of military patrols, lifting of bans, and ongoing urban standoffs, point to a tentative easing of tensions. Yet, the underlying fractures remain far from healed.

Across South Asia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh, and also the Maldives and Afghanistan, have exposed the vulnerabilities embedded within their institutions, while India’s relatively stable response is often cited as evidence of proactive governance. In contrast, Pakistan’s reliance on unfettered social media as a pressure valve carries its own risks—Nepal’s unrest serving as a cautionary example of how quickly such mechanisms can be overwhelmed.

For students and scholars of international relations, these events present a crucial question: In an era defined by digital connectedness and multipolarity, can states effectively channel the dynamism of their youth populations, or are we witnessing the emergence of new patterns of sovereignty born from popular mobilization? Nepal’s experience suggests that adaptation, rather than alienation, will be vital if the region hopes to harness its demographic dividend—otherwise, the potential for unrest remains dangerously high.