While it is essential to acknowledge the influence of foreign actors, it is equally crucial not to
dismiss the legitimate concerns of the populace as mere external interference

By Sanjay Upadhya
The massive protests spearheaded by Generation Z in Nepal earlier this month should have acted
as a catalyst for a comprehensive nationwide reflection on the nation’s political, social, and
economic trajectory. Instead, the conversation has been hijacked by a familiar narrative:
accusations of a ‘foreign hand’ fueling the unrest.
The interim government, formed in consultation with the protesters, has scheduled parliamentary
elections for March 5, 2026. Although it has only a limited mandate, the new administration has
taken tentative initiatives to foster public trust. However, the broader dialogue Nepal urgently
needs – about an overburdened political system, corruption and governance issues, and the
unfulfilled hopes of a whole generation – is at risk of being overshadowed by claims of external
conspiracies.

External Instigation
This is not a novel concept. The overthrow of the Rana oligarchy in 1951, the Maoist insurgency
from 1996 to 2006, the royal massacre of 2001, and the abolition of the monarchy in 2008, all
have at different times been linked to interference from neighboring states or international
powers. The notion of a ‘foreign hand’ has functioned both as a strategic instrument and as a
defensive mechanism, employed by those in authority to undermine their opponents and by
critics to depict themselves as victims of international conspiracies.
Nepal’s geographical position renders such suspicions comprehensible. Positioned between the
emerging powers of India and China, both of which are pursuing conflicting objectives, Nepal
has rarely enjoyed complete political insulation. India has extended support to political factions
opposing the monarchy and has implemented blockades amid diplomatic disagreements.
In 1989, New Delhi imposed a 13-month economic blockade following a trade and transit
dispute, severely harming Nepal’s economy and speeding up the decline of King Birendra’s
panchayat system. Again, in 2015, as Nepal adopted a new constitution, India carried out an
unofficial blockade – allegedly due to dissatisfaction from Madhesi groups – resulting in
shortages of fuel, medicines, and essential supplies. Many Nepalis saw this as punishment for
seeking greater independence.
Concurrently, China has discreetly augmented its influence via infrastructure initiatives, trade
agreements, security collaborations, and cultural exchanges. Nepal’s involvement in the Belt and
Road Initiative since 2017 has increased hopes for major connectivity projects. However, many
are still stalled due to funding talks and debt issues. Beijing’s focus on stability, especially
regarding Tibet, has also pressured Nepali authorities to limit Tibetan refugee activism,
sometimes at the cost of human rights.

Western nations also contribute through development assistance, advocating for democracy and
implementing policy reforms. The United States, Europe, and various international organizations
each exert influence on Nepal’s governance framework. The Millennium Challenge Corporation
agreement, ratified in 2022 after rigorous debate, has become contentious. Critics argue it serves
as a conduit for Washington’s Indo-Pacific strategy. For the United States, Nepal aligns with its
comprehensive Indo-Pacific strategy, primarily focused on countering China’s increasing
influence.
In this complex geopolitical landscape, each wave of unrest fuels accusations of outside
interference. Some see the youth protests as India’s way of expressing frustration over Nepal’s
alleged tilt toward China. Others believe China is promoting nationalism to counter Indian
influence. Still others claim that the United States and its allies secretly support activists to push
Nepal closer to Western ideals and modes of governance.
However, these perspectives overlook a crucial aspect. External influences do not generate
fundamental discontent. The youth protesters in Nepal are predominantly motivated by domestic
concerns such as corruption, unemployment, inflation, the decline of education and healthcare,
and political apathy, rather than foreign conspiracies. Dismissing their initiatives as foreign
interference undermines their agency and unjustly shifts responsibility away from internal
leadership.
The narrative of the ‘foreign hand’ endures primarily due to its political convenience. Incumbent
governments frequently attribute issues to foreign interference to diminish critics, justify
crackdowns, and evade accountability. Opposition factions also employ this narrative to invoke
patriotic sentiments. This recurring pattern conceals genuine citizen grievances and undermines
confidence in democratic institutions.
Many continue to dismiss allegations of foreign interference in the recent unrest as paranoia.
They challenge critics to provide evidence, as if foreign intelligence agencies are known for
leaving their fingerprints. Clearly, external actors have engaged in Nepal’s internal affairs in
various forms. Historically, political groups have depended on foreign exile communities,
obtained campaign funding, or utilized diplomatic channels. Certain non-governmental
organizations and media outlets have faced allegations – substantiated or not – of advancing the
interests of foreign donors. Furthermore, the digital realm complicates matters through
clandestine disinformation campaigns that exacerbate social divisions.
The key point is not to deny the possibility of outside influence but to understand that such
influence grows in situations of weak governance. External actors take advantage of
vulnerabilities, but they are not the creators of the underlying structural weaknesses.
Nepal necessitates a nuanced and balanced strategy. It is imperative to safeguard sovereignty and
guard against unwarranted foreign influence, requiring ongoing vigilance. Concurrently, genuine
domestic issues should not be dismissed as foreign conspiracies. The most effective approach
involves a two-pronged strategy. First, internal institutions must be strengthened through anti-
corruption initiatives, employment creation, accountability measures, and reform. When citizens feel that their voices are heard and properly represented, they are less likely to see politics as a
puppet show controlled from abroad.

Second, developing political maturity is of paramount importance. Allegations of foreign
interference must be investigated impartially, rather than exploited for partisan advantage.
Leaders should refrain from turning every crisis into a nationalist rallying point.
Cost of Inaction Ultimately, the notion that a ‘foreign hand’ is orchestrating Nepal’s protests likely indicates leadership deficiencies rather than genuine external threats. For Nepali youths confronting
unemployment, inequality, and disillusionment, the primary adversary is not a clandestine
foreign entity but a dysfunctional political system that persistently fails.
If these systemic issues are not addressed, real or perceived foreign interference will continue to
be used as an excuse, allowing leaders to avoid accountability and jeopardizing Nepal’s
democratic development. The biggest threat is not just foreign influence but leaders who conceal
their failures behind such claims.

Sanjay Upadhya is a Nepali analyst based in the US. He has written a number of books
including Empowered and Imperilled: Nepal’s Peace Puzzle in Bits and Pieces; Nepal and
the Geo-Strategic Rivalry Between China and India; Backfire in Nepal: How India Lost the
Plot to China and The Raj Lives: India in Nepal.