For decades, India’s foreign policy has rested on a principle of non-interference in the domestic affairs of its neighbours.

Rooted in the shared experience of anti-colonial struggles and a commitment to respecting national sovereignty, this approach has long served India well, preserving its image as a responsible regional power.

Yet, when the political crisis in Nepal spiralled into violence this week, with student protesters brandishing sophisticated weaponry in the streets and the army on the one hand calling for talks and preparing for decisive action to preserve law and order on the other,  the old doctrine appeared ill-equipped and unresponsive.

Nepal’s Prime Minister, KP Sharma Oli, was compelled to resign Tuesday following two days of intense protests led largely by Gen-Z activists, which left more than a score people dead and hundreds injured.

The mass demonstrations, fuelled by economic grievances and political disillusionment, bore a striking resemblance to the unrest that engulfed Dhaka, Bangladesh, last year, following an almost similar template.

Economic Stagnation

At the heart of the protests was widespread frustration over chronic economic stagnation and a growing army of jobless youths.

 Nepal, one of  the world’s poorest countries, struggles with the South Asian region’s lowest per capita income and an unemployment rate approaching 13 percent, according to official estimates.

The economic hardship has been compounded by deep-seated corruption among political elites and a heavy reliance on remittances from a large segment of the population who were forced to work abroad in search of opportunities.

Faiure to Provide Jobs

The protests reflected not only anger at the government’s failure to provide jobs and development but also a broader sense of disillusionment with the political system.

 As demonstrators took to the streets of Kathmandu and other major cities, calls for accountability and economic reform merged with a palpable sense of desperation, creating a volatile and unpredictable situation that saw the public humiliation of many ministers, burning down of 5-star hotels and attacks on Nepal’s gateway to the world – the Kathmandu airport, ultimately forced Oli’s departure.

The Himalayan nation, long seen as a buffer between India and China, now stands at the edge of chaos. Political gridlock, deep social fissures, and the spectre of foreign influence have converged in a perfect storm.

The Nepalese army’s public warning of imminent crackdown reflects the gravity of the situation, while numerous politicians remain effectively shielded from accountability.

The apparent involvement of well-organised, armed student wings raises troubling questions about where such weapons originate, hinting at external interference.

Amassing of Arms

 It also reminds us of reports that prior to Bangladesh’s regime change last year, Islamic Shibir and several othe organisations had similarly amassed arms caches and of television interviews by student leaders who said they were prepared for an armed incursion if the army had refused to accept their takeover.

India’s strategic stakes in Nepal go far beyond bilateral goodwill. With porous borders stretching over 1,700 kms  and deep cultural and familial ties binding communities on both sides, instability in Kathmandu does not stay confined.

An unstable Nepal emboldens adversarial powers, threatens the region’s economic corridors, and amplifies risks of uncontrolled militant networks spilling over into India’s northeastern states.

Some Indian voices now argue that the country should go beyond rhetorical support and engage more directly with the unfolding crisis.

A calibrated approach could include logistical, intelligence, and even tactical support to the Nepalese army. In extremis, the deployment of Indian Gorkha regiments might be warranted, not as an occupying force but as a stabilising assistance lent to the Nepalese army.

Such cooperation would mark a bold shift from India’s traditional policy, adopted since the failure of the IPKF intervention in Sri Lanka, yet it might prove necessary to preempt the collapse of order.

The long-term solution, however, must transcend military involvement. India should actively advocate for the formation of an all-party interim government or a technocratic body capable of organising fresh elections and restoring constitutional rule.

While some in Nepal have floated the idea of a monarchical revival, New Delhi’s posture should remain neutral but pragmatic, acknowledging that legitimate popular sentiment must guide any structural political shift.

India Must Redefine Role

At its core, this moment calls for India to redefine its role as a regional power in an era of strategic competition. Passive non-intervention risks allowing the creeping influence of external actors, whether Beijing’s quiet diplomacy or the reach of transnational militant networks.

Conversely, heavy-handed interference could undermine India’s long-standing credibility as a champion of sovereignty and democratic values.

India’s challenge lies in walking a tightrope — offering support to stabilise a neighbouring State while refraining from actions that could be construed as coercive or neo-imperial.

The future of South Asian stability, and India’s position within it, may well depend on how deftly it navigates this crisis in Kathmandu.

(The writer is a senior Indian journalist and geopolitical analyst. Views expressed are personal)