Nepal became the third South Asian country in three years to witness collapse of elected government following mass uprising by youths. On September 8, Gen Z youths of Nepal organized protest rallies in the streets of Kathmandu to oppose corruption, political disorder, nepotism and ban on various social media sites by the government. The protests turned violent next day as the security personnel under the K.P. Oli government used excessive force against the youths, leaving at least 76 people dead and more than 2,000 injured. The violent protests combined with vandalism and arson on September 9 caused hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of damage. Nepal’s Parliament building, Singhdurbar Secretariat, Supreme Court, police posts, government offices, business complexes, political parties offices and houses of selected politicians were also vandalised and set on fire on the second day of the agitation.
Within 27 hours of the agitation Prime Minister Oli had to quit the power and fly away on Nepal Army’s helicopter leaving the PM’s quarters at Baluwatar to save his life as hundreds of protesters entered the PM’s residence complex towards the mid-day. Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak had resigned on the first day of agitation, September 8, after Nepal Police and Armed Police Forces shot dead 22 innocent youths who marched towards the Parliament building during the agitation. There was a political as well as power vacuum after PM Oli resigned and flew to unknown destination. He was not available to assume the responsibility of the caretaker Prime Minister, which is a normal practice after the resignation by the executive head. To fill the vacuum and bring the situation under control the Nepal Army chief and President Ramchandra Paudel played a crucial role and negotiated with the Gen Z youths to form a caretaker government under the leadership of former chief justice Sushila Karki.
According to analysts, it would be injustice if we tried to explain the turmoil only from political point of view as there was economic despair behind the uprising by Gen Z youths.
The political crisis in Bangladesh in 2024 and Sri Lanka in 2022 were also fuelled by economic disparity. Across these three South Asian nations, volatile economies, worsened by corruption, unemployment, remittance dependence, and policy mismatch, have become the true fault lines of political instability.
This sequence suggests a region-wide crisis of governance linked to vulnerable economic situation. In Nepal, over 60 percent of the population is under thirty, and youth unemployment comes around 25 percent. In Bangladesh, inflation surged to double digits while billions of dollars were allegedly siphoned abroad. In Sri Lanka, foreign reserves dropped to almost neel, leaving the state unable to pay for importing essential commodities such as oil. These are not just hypothetical statistics but economic realities that cut into the daily survival of normal people—rising food prices, queues for fuel, stagnant economic activity, and youth unemployment. No political settlement, however carefully negotiated, can hold for long without addressing these economic problems.
In all the three countries, citizens reached a breaking point because economic conditions collapsed, both at the national and household levels. Sri Lanka provides the most ashtonishing example. Years of reliance on foreign borrowing and “white elephant” infrastructure projects—ports, airports, and highways that generated little revenue—left the country highly indebted. In 2019, newly elected President Gotabaya Rajapaksa cut taxes, costing the state $1.4 billion annually in lost revenue. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit, the tourism sector, contributing to around 12 percent of GDP, collapsed. Foreign exchange reserves dwindled, fuel and medicine imports stalled, and inflation spiked above 70 percent in 2022. An abrupt ban on chemical fertilizers reduced harvests by up to 40 percent, leaving farmers bankcrupt. For ordinary Sri Lankans, this meant days without power, hours-long queues for petrol, and an inability to purchase staple foods. Their frustration led to the Aragalaya (Sinhala for “the struggle”) protests, which ultimately overthrew the Rajapaksha’s government.
Bangladesh’s crisis surfaced slightly in a different manner but had similar causes. For years, the country celebrated its status as one of the world’s fastest-growing economies, powered by the ready-made garment sector (covering over 80 percent of its exports) and remittances from overseas workers (around 7 percent of GDP). Yet by 2023–24, the sheen of growth had slowed down. Inflation reached 9 percent, unemployment persisted, and allegations of corruption exploded. Reports accused elites of laundering billions of dollars out of the country, even as millions struggled with the soaring cost of rice, onions, and cooking oil. Public anger mounted as the government cracked down on dissent under draconian digital security laws. Student activists, known as a significant part of Bangladesh’s political history, staged mass protests. The military’s withdrawal of support from Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s government in August 2024 sealed her fate, pushing her into exile.
Nepal’s ‘September revolution’ revealed a different kind of vulnerability: the fragility of a remittance-driven economy. Remittances contribute more than a quarter of Nepal’s GDP, covering the weakness caused by domestic job cuts. Remittance dependence leaves Nepal and other South Asian countries uniquely vulnerable to external shocks; any downturn in Gulf economies or tightening of labour migration policies directly translates into lost income for many households. High youth unemployment and underemployment in the informal sector have left recent graduates disillusioned, as a weak education system, poor vocational training, and ineffective public employment services have left them mismatched to labour market needs. The government’s inability to diversify beyond remittances and tourism meant that when political instability hit, the economic fallout became catastrophic.
What began as anger over inflation, joblessness, and shortages of food and goods became full-blown political crises because entrenched elites proved unable—or unwilling—to respond. In Sri Lanka, the Rajapaksa family had dominated politics since 2005, enriching themselves and their allies while hollowing out state institutions. Their failure to manage the crisis forced citizens from all walks of life into the streets—farmers, students, professionals, and trade unionists. In Bangladesh, Hasina had been in power since 2009, centralizing authority and silencing opposition. But once the economic base of her legitimacy cracked, protests led by students spiralled into a nationwide revolt. Three major parties – Nepali Congress, CPN-UML and Maoist Centre- rotated in and out of power in Nepal for over a decade without delivering jobs, economic security or policy consistency. When Oli attempted to suppress criticism by banning social media, he miscalculated: instead of silencing dissent, the ban fuelled it. Like in Bangladesh, Gen Zs hit the streets of Kathmandu and other major cities in Nepal.
Gen Z and social media were crucial catalysts for mass protests in all three cases. In Sri Lanka, young activists transformed Colombo’s Galle Face Green into GotaGoGama, a protest commune complete with libraries, art exhibitions, and community kitchens. In Bangladesh, student groups organized nationwide strikes, using social media to document repression and rally support. In Nepal, social media accounts for 80 percent of internet usage, with Instagram videos and hashtags bypassing government censorship, turning online outrage into street-level mobilization. These movements were not exclusively youth-driven—farmers, trade unions, and retirees also joined—but younger generations’ energy, creativity, and digital savvy turned them into unstoppable forces. Their tactics—flash mobs, viral hashtags, and decentralized organization—made it harder for rulers to supress them.
The fall of regimes in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Nepal has underscored a fundamental truth: political stability cannot be separated from economic prosperity. Sri Lanka’s foreign reserves and debt repayment crisis, Bangladesh’s corruption and inflation, and Nepal’s corruption, nepotism and political disorder all led to the same result: young people forcing entrenched elites from power. Leaders who ignore inflation, unemployment, and the everyday struggles of their citizens do so at their peril. The primary sufferers of the economic downturns are South Asia’s youth population, who are no longer willing to accept corruption as the cost of politics.
The international implications of the South Asian crisis are profound. These countries sit at the heart of the Indo-Pacific, where India and China compete for influence. Instability in Dhaka, Colombo, or Kathmandu reverberates beyond borders, shaping regional geopolitics and economic flows. For example, there were similar youth protests in Indonesia recently. For policymakers in the United States, the lesson is clear: Supporting South Asia’s stability means going beyond election monitoring and diplomatic engagement. It requires confronting the economic roots of instability—unemployment, corruption, debt dependency, and over-reliance on single sectors such as remittances, garments, or tourism. (Compiled from agencies)
