India cannot afford to ignore lessons from the recent upheavals in South Asia

As the “Gen Z” protest against endemic corruption and a ban on several social-media platforms gained momentum in Nepal, the first reaction from supporters of the Narendra Modi government was to allege a “foreign hand.” They had sung the same tune after students in Bangladesh deposed Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, in August 2024, with a senior officer in the Indian Army calling it a “colour revolution”—a reference to protests in several Eastern European countries that are believed to have been instigated by the United States in order to instigate regime change. “Mobilising people against the government is what a weaponised narrative is all about,” Major General SP Vishwasrao, an additional director general for recruitment, said at a conference last month. “It happened in Bangladesh. It’s happening across India.”

Not many credible experts buy this conspiracy theory. “What has happened in Nepal over the last two days is largely a home-grown uprising,” Ranjit Rae, a former Indian ambassador to the country, wrote on 10 September. Akhilesh Upadhyay, a former editor-in-chief of the Kathmandu Post, concurred. “There seems to be little geopolitical games at play although Indian media may have played the ‘China hand’ and some conspiracy theorists in Nepal see an ‘American hand,’” he wrote. Focussing on non-existent external actors undermines what the Kathmandu-based journalist Dinesh Kafle captured best: “This is not a protest against social media ban, nepotism or corruption anymore; it is a struggle to save our democratic rights and our humanity.”

Nevertheless, the collapse of governments across South Asia, from Sri Lanka’s economic meltdown, in 2022, to the uprisings in Bangladesh and Nepal, has established a regional pattern that should alarm New Delhi. As youth-driven anti-establishment movements topple seemingly stable governments, crucial questions emerge. Can India remain immune to the forces reshaping its neighbourhood? Does it not face remarkably similar economic and political vulnerabilities? Or does the Modi government possess exceptional attributes that insulate it from such uprisings?

For the government’s supporters—and many others—the notion that India might face such upheavals remains inconceivable. They point to India’s vast size and federal structure as natural buffers against unrest. India’s complexity prevents unified national movements, they argue, while federalism provides outlets for regional grievances that do not exist elsewhere. Samrat Choudhary, the deputy chief minister of Bihar, went so far as to claim that the anarchy in Nepal was a result of previous Congress governments’ inability to annex it. “If Nepal had been part of India today,” he told the media, “there would have been peace and happiness.” The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party recognised the diplomatic damage such statements can cause and instructed its leaders to avoid commenting on Nepal, but the underlying mindset was revealed: India’s supposed inherent superiority shields it from the chaos afflicting its neighbours.