In early September 2025, mass protests broke out in Nepal after the government decided to block 26 social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube.
The protests, mostly youth-led, quickly turned violent with demonstrators storming the parliament and government ministers’ offices and setting politicians’ homes on fire. In a particularly shocking incident, the home of former Prime Minister Jhal Nath Kanal was set on fire, and his wife, Rajyalakshmi Chitrakar, suffered severe burns and died from her injuries.
Several ministers were also killed in the clashes.
How It Started?
Fed up with corruption, abuse and restrictions on free speech, young people in Nepal have embraced the social media ban as a symbol of a wider injustice. They have demanded accountability, transparency, and an end to abuses of power.
Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli resigned despite an earlier state of emergency, yet protests continued after his resignation.
Europe’s Silence
European states and institutions have expressed concern about violence and human rights violations, but failed to take serious sanctions or collective action.
EU media outlets have raised the issue of censorship and rare interventions, and individual parliamentarians have condemned the events.
However, there have been no official declarations from the EU as a bloc that would identify a systemic threat to democracy. This underlines that Europe is either cautious or unwilling to intervene unless there are direct interests or threats to stability at stake.
Dangerous Dynamics and Lessons for Authoritarian Regimes
The case of Nepal serves as a warning to governments in North Africa, the Middle East, and Africa:
- Social media bans and censorship can trigger a swift and powerful civil response, especially among the young and tech-savvy.
- Violence against politicians’ families shows that elite personal responsibility can become a central theme of protests.
- Without an adequate international response, authoritarian regimes can face a surge of people power if systemic corruption becomes well known and untackled.
What Europe Should Do?
- Publish clear, unmitigated condemnations of violence and abuses, including killings and arson.
- Support independent media and human rights organisations whilst ensuring the protection of journalists and witnesses.
- Consider international investigations or monitoring through the UN or other bodies, documenting abuses.
- Apply sanctions to individuals if abuse of power or involvement in violence is proven.
The Role of India and China
India and China, Nepal’s two most powerful neighbors, have responded cautiously to the crisis.
India, which has traditionally had cultural, economic, and political ties with Nepal, expressed deep concern and called for stability while avoiding direct criticism of the government for fear of losing influence to Beijing.
China, for its part, emphasised non-interference but has quietly strengthened ties with Nepalese security forces, offering technical cooperation. Both countries see the instability as an opportunity: India is seeking to secure its border and labour flows from Nepal, while China is using the crisis to maintain the Belt and Road Initiative via the Himalayas.
Historical Context of the Protests in Nepal
The current protests in Nepal cannot be understood without precedent.
In 2006, the People’s Movement II was a key moment: mass protests against the monarchy and authoritarian rule led to the restoration of parliament and democratic reforms. Young people played a decisive role in organising street protests and pushing for political change.
By 2020, this role was reinforced by digital technologies: social media became a platform for mobilisation, the dissemination of information, and criticism of the government. The government’s ban on social media in 2025 only emphasised the mistakes of the past and showed that the digital generation sought genuine news than age old propaganda.
Global Message: Authoritarianism
The events in Nepal are not just an crisis for the host country. Instead, the protests are a reminder to authoritarian regimes and their practices. Censorship, repression, and the restriction of freedoms are becoming more obvious and more accessible to the national population in a digital age.
If Europe remains on the sidelines, such violations could repeat themselves whilst Europe’s credibility on human rights, corruption, and malpractise could be dented.
For regimes in North Africa and the Middle East, Nepal’s story is a warning: bad governance will not go unchallenged.
Read the Latest Articles on DET!
Suez on Rails: China is Changing the Map
Plucked Out of Thin Air? How Meteorologists Name Storms
I Need My Labubu: Wang Ning’s Billion Dollar Toy
