Chaos in Kathmandu

M A Hossain,

History has a way of repeating itself, first as tragedy, then as farce—and sometimes as both at once.

Nepal is living through such a moment. Eighteen years after mass protests forced King Gyanendra Shah to surrender power, ending a royal dictatorship, the same man is now being championed as the solution to the country’s political dysfunction. The streets of Kathmandu have erupted in violence, with pro-monarchy demonstrators clashing with police, two dead (including a journalist), and a government crackdown in full swing. The Rashtriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), a Hindu nationalist group backing the protests, has warned Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli against arresting the former king—or risk turning simmering discontent into a full-blown revolt.

This is more than just another episode of Himalayan instability. It is a case study in democratic failure—and a warning for the region.

Nepal’s transition from monarchy to republic in 2008 was supposed to usher in an era of stability and prosperity. Instead, the country has cycled through thirteen governments in sixteen years, a revolving door of corruption and incompetence. Economic growth has stagnated, while inflation hovers near seven percent, crushing ordinary Nepalis who rely on remittances that account for nearly a quarter of the country’s GDP. These remittances are now shrinking as job opportunities dry up in India and the Gulf.

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the state’s weaknesses. Nepal’s healthcare system buckled under the weight of the crisis, tourism collapsed, and the government’s response was sluggish and mired in infighting. Meanwhile, China and India poured money into infrastructure projects, turning Nepal into yet another battleground for regional influence. Now, the bill has come due.

The former king, now eighty-two, has seized the moment. In a calculated move, he declared last month that Nepal’s republican experiment has failed—a message that resonates with a public weary of political paralysis. His supporters, a mix of Hindu nationalists, royalists, and disaffected youth, have taken to the streets, demanding a return to monarchy. But nostalgia is a dangerous drug.

Gyanendra’s reign was hardly a golden age. His 2005 power grab, dissolving parliament and ruling by decree, ended in disaster, triggering the protests that ultimately toppled him. The 2001 palace massacre, in which Crown Prince Dipendra gunned down much of the royal family before killing himself, left deep scars. While nearly ninety percent of Nepalis still identify as Hindu, support for restoring the monarchy is far from unanimous. Yet, when democracies fail, people often turn to strongmen—or in this case, a strongman from the past.

If New Delhi believes a Hindu nationalist resurgence in Nepal would serve its interests, it is making a grave miscalculation. India’s heavy-handed approach to its neighbors has backfired repeatedly. The blockade between 2015 and 2017, orchestrated by Madhesi groups along the India-Nepal border, was meant to pressure Kathmandu into constitutional concessions. Instead, it fueled anti-Indian sentiment, pushing Nepal closer to China. Today, Beijing has surpassed Delhi in infrastructure investment, including highways, hydropower plants, and even a proposed railway link to Lhasa. The RPP, despite its Hindu nationalist rhetoric, is no Indian puppet. Its leaders have courted Chinese investment and criticized India’s big-brother attitude. If the monarchy returns, it will be on Nepal’s terms—not India’s.

Beijing prefers dealing with Nepal’s communist leaders, who have proven reliable partners. But China is nothing if not pragmatic. If the tide turns decisively toward monarchy, expect Beijing to adapt swiftly—perhaps even backing Gyanendra if it serves their interests. Already, Chinese state media has framed the protests as a symptom of Western-style democracy’s failures. A stable, authoritarian-leaning Nepal would suit Beijing just fine.

Nepal’s ongoing crisis is emblematic of a broader geopolitical shift in South Asia. In Bangladesh, a former close ally of India, Sheikh Hasina’s government has been ousted, and the interim administration under Dr. Muhammad Yunus is actively strengthening ties with China, fueling a surge in anti-India sentiment. In Sri Lanka, despite India’s efforts to stabilize its economy following the 2022 financial meltdown, Colombo has increasingly gravitated toward Beijing’s influence. Meanwhile, in the Maldives, President Mohamed Muizzu has taken a firm stance by expelling Indian troops, signaling a clear strategic realignment in favor of China. India’s neighborhood policy is in shambles. Instead of building trust, Delhi has alienated allies with abrupt moves like the Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019, which sparked fears of marginalization in Bangladesh. Meanwhile, China offers cash without lectures—a winning formula in the region.

The political instability in Nepal is also leading to a concerning security vacuum. Given its porous borders with India and China, a weak or chaotic Nepal could become fertile ground for extremist elements to exploit. The presence of armed Maoist factions, remnants of Nepal’s decade-long civil war, further complicates the situation. If governance continues to deteriorate, there is a risk that radicalized groups could take advantage of the instability, adding another layer of volatility to the already fragile region. Intelligence reports have previously warned about the potential for cross-border extremism, which would be disastrous not only for Nepal but for its neighbors as well.

The impact of Nepal’s crisis on its people is equally alarming. Youth unemployment has soared, prompting an exodus of Nepali workers seeking jobs abroad. The desperation is palpable as thousands of young men and women leave their homeland every day, seeking economic opportunities in the Gulf and Southeast Asia. This mass migration not only weakens Nepal’s domestic labor market but also creates a long-term demographic crisis where the country’s brightest and most capable individuals seek futures elsewhere. As public frustration grows, Nepal’s ruling elite remains engrossed in petty power struggles, showing little urgency in addressing these fundamental issues.

The immediate crisis may pass. The protesters’ April 3 ultimatum could fizzle out. But the anger won’t disappear. Nepal’s political class faces a stark choice: reform or face revolt. If it continues to govern as it has—with incompetence and graft—the calls for radical change will only grow. As for India, it must finally learn that influence isn’t imposed by coercion. It’s earned through consistency, respect, and reliable partnership. Right now, Delhi is failing on all fronts.

This isn’t just about Nepal. It’s about whether democracy can deliver in places where it’s still young and fragile. When governments fail to provide basic stability, people will look elsewhere—even to the ghosts of the past. The chaos in Kathmandu is a warning. The world should pay attention.

M A Hossain, political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. He can be reached at: writetomahossain@gmail.com

  This article published at :

1. The Nation, Pak : 16 April, 25