Violence is a recurring feature of political life. Every few years, somewhere in the world, a crisis erupts , crowds pour onto the streets, governments totter, and flames consume symbols of authority. The chants may call for democracy, justice, or accountability, but the aftermath is often less inspiring burned-out buildings, broken economies, grieving families, and leaders replaced by new faces who prove scarcely different from the old.

The recent violence in Nepal has once again thrown this dilemma into sharp relief. The Himalayan nation, long known for its mountains, temples, and resilient people, is today engulfed by the smoke of political unrest. As Kathmandu chokes under black plumes from torched landmarks, the question arises , Do violent upheavals ever truly deliver progress? Or are they merely destructive spasms that leave ordinary citizens worse off than before?

Lets try to explore the Nepal crisis in detail, while drawing lessons from similar upheavals in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and other parts of the world. By the end one finds that the common thread across these crises is not the nobility of slogans, but the devastation they inflict on the very people who march in hope of change.

Nepal 2025 – A Country in Flames

Two images from Nepal’s turmoil have come to define the crisis. The first is the skyline of Kathmandu, darkened by black smoke when rioters set fire to the city’s pride the newly built Hilton Hotel, barely a year old, which had symbolized Nepal’s ambition to revive tourism after the pandemic. The second is a heartbreaking social media post, dozens of women employees of the hotel, sitting outside in tears, realizing that they were now jobless and their livelihoods destroyed overnight.

The protests began with grievances that were far from trivial. Discontent had been building for years over entrenched inequality, the lavish lifestyles of political elites, rampant corruption, and, most explosively, new restrictions on social media platforms that had become lifelines for Nepal’s young population. Gen Z activists spearheaded demonstrations, demanding accountability and railing against nepotism and state censorship.

What began as slogans in city squares soon escalated into running battles with police. Security forces opened fire and protesters retaliated with arson. By the time the army intervened and a transitional government was installed, the toll had become grim, at least 51 dead, more than 1,300 injured, and a staggering wave of prison breaks that left 12,500 convicts roaming free across the country.

Nepal has seen upheaval before. The Maoist insurgency from 1996 to 2006 claimed over 17,000 lives before the monarchy was abolished and a republic declared. Yet two decades later, the structural weaknesses that fed that conflict remain unresolved. This latest eruption suggests that Nepal’s political elite failed to learn the lessons of its own history.

The irony is striking, protesters set out to fight corruption and authoritarianism, but in the process they gutted their own economy, torched symbols of national pride, and unleashed insecurity that will likely strengthen the very forces they despised.

Sri Lanka 2022 – From Hope to Hunger

Nepal’s tragedy echoes closely the devastating crisis that engulfed Sri Lanka in 2022. There, years of government mismanagement, reckless borrowing, and misplaced populist policies had driven the island into bankruptcy. Foreign reserves collapsed between 2019 and 2022 and by March that year, Colombo had only $1.9 billion left against $4 billion in immediate debt obligations. Fuel, medicine, and food became scarce, inflation soared to 60%.

When hundreds of thousands of Sri Lankans marched peacefully against President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s corrupt dynasty, the world hailed it as a democratic awakening. Images of protesters swimming in the president’s pool and occupying his mansion went viral. For a moment, it appeared that people power could topple kleptocracy without bloodshed.

But as frustration deepened, protests turned violent. At least eight people died in clashes, while hundreds were injured. Pro-government mobs attacked demonstrators, in retaliation, enraged crowds burned down the homes of more than 80 politicians, including the prime minister’s residence.

By the end of 2022, the cost of this upheaval was staggering. GDP contracted by 7.8%, one of the sharpest declines in the world. Schools closed for lack of paper , hospitals performed surgeries under mobile phone light due to power cuts. Sri Lanka defaulted on $51 billion in foreign debt the first such default in its history.

Did the uprising succeed? The Rajapaksas were indeed forced out, but their departure left a crippled economy, traumatized citizens, and a political vacuum filled by interim leaders struggling with the same structural issues. Ordinary people paid the highest price , poverty soared, emigration spiked, and daily life became a battle for survival.

Bangladesh 2024–25 , A Bloodstained Transition

If Sri Lanka demonstrated economic ruin, Bangladesh in 2024–25 highlighted the human toll of violent repression and chaotic transition. What began as student-led protests against Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s authoritarian policies and nepotism snowballed into nationwide revolt.

Between July 1 and August 15, 2024, the United Nations estimated, at least 1,400 people were killed mostly protesters shot by security forces or party militias. Some reports put the death toll closer to 1,500 by the year’s end. Hasina eventually resigned and fled on August 5, but the violence did not stop. Retributive attacks targeted ruling party members , communal violence flared against the Hindu minority , and lawlessness spread.

Economically, the fallout was devastating. Bangladesh’s garment industry the backbone of its exports, employing millions suffered losses of $150 million a day due to curfews, internet shutdowns, and disrupted supply chains. Investors fled, fearing instability.

The caretaker government, led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, inspired hope but soon faltered under the weight of expectation. Lacking political experience, it struggled to stabilize the economy, contain extremist groups, or reassure foreign partners. Instead of ushering in a new era of democratic prosperity, the upheaval left Bangladesh mired in debt, insecurity, and uncertainty.

The grim lesson , even when autocratic leaders fall, the vacuum they leave behind can unleash new dangers sometimes worse than the regime itself.

Pakistan 2022–23 , The Fall of Imran Khan and Its Turbulent Aftermath

Pakistan’s experience following the ouster of Prime Minister Imran Khan in April 2022 is another example of how political upheavals can destabilize nations without offering real solutions. Khan, a former cricket star turned populist politician, had risen to power in 2018 on promises of fighting corruption and building a “New Pakistan.” Yet by 2022, his government faced mounting economic crises, inflation, and growing discontent among allies and the powerful military establishment.

Parliament removed Khan through a no-confidence vote the first such removal of a prime minister in Pakistan’s history. His supporters, however, saw it not as a constitutional process but as a conspiracy engineered by the military and foreign powers. Massive street protests erupted across cities, with Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party mobilizing tens of thousands.

What followed was a cycle of confrontation. Khan defied court summons, survived an assassination attempt, and accused the military of orchestrating his downfall. His supporters attacked military installations during protests in May 2023, including storming the Corps Commander’s residence in Lahore. In response, security forces cracked down brutally , thousands of PTI activists were arrested, internet services were suspended, and media outlets censored.

The economic situation worsened amid the turmoil. Inflation surged above 35%, the highest in decades. Pakistan teetered on the brink of default, relying on emergency IMF loans and bailouts from allies like Saudi Arabia and China. Political uncertainty spooked investors and deepened the currency crisis.

For ordinary Pakistanis, the cost was crushing. Energy shortages worsened, unemployment rose, and trust in institutions eroded further. While Khan remained a popular figure among youth and urban voters, his removal did not end corruption or governance failures it only widened the gulf between the military, political parties, and the people.

As in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, the promise of change through upheaval translated into instability and hardship. Pakistan’s crisis illustrates that even when upheavals play out through parliamentary drama rather than outright revolution, the street battles that follow can drag a country deeper into dysfunction rather than closer to reform.

India , A Study in Contrast

While Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Pakistan have all lurched from one crisis to another, India has despite its own enormous challenges largely managed to absorb major agitations without collapsing into chaos.

Consider the Jat reservation protests, which paralyzed Haryana in 2016, or the nationwide farmers’ agitation against new agricultural laws in 2020–21. Both saw disruptions, road blockades, and occasional violence. Yet the Indian state contained them through a mix of negotiations, concessions, and calibrated use of force. The farmers eventually succeeded in having the laws repealed, but without burning the republic to the ground.

Even the explosive Anna Hazare anti-corruption movement in 2011, which drew millions into the streets, ended with political consequences channeled through elections rather than riots. Likewise, protests over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and other controversial policies tested the system but did not topple it.

The resilience comes from India’s deeply ingrained democratic traditions, a relatively free press, and institutions that however flawed still provide avenues for dissent short of insurrection. For its neighbors, this is a sobering reminder that democracy’s strength lies not in how loudly people shout in the streets, but in how effectively grievances are addressed without tipping into violence.

Global Lessons , When Upheavals Fail and When They Succeed

The turmoil in South Asia is part of a broader global pattern. The Arab Spring, which began in 2011 with hopes of democratic renewal, offers a cautionary tale. In Egypt, Hosni Mubarak was ousted, but the military soon reasserted control, leading to a harsher dictatorship under Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. In Libya, Muammar Gaddafi’s fall plunged the country into civil war. In Syria, peaceful protests against Bashar al-Assad metastasized into one of the bloodiest conflicts of the 21st century.

By contrast, a handful of revolutions have delivered lasting gains. The American Revolution of 1776 created a durable republic (though only after years of instability). The anti-colonial struggles in Asia and Africa eventually produced independent states, though many slid into authoritarianism. Eastern Europe’s “Velvet Revolutions” of 1989, remarkably nonviolent, successfully dismantled communist regimes with minimal bloodshed. South Africa’s negotiated transition from apartheid in the 1990s avoided mass violence and delivered democracy albeit imperfect.

The pattern is clear , violent upheavals almost always inflict enormous human and economic costs. Success comes only when violence is restrained, institutions are built, and leadership prioritizes reconciliation over revenge.

The Human Cost of Revolution

It is easy to romanticize uprisings. Images of students waving flags, crowds chanting slogans, and dictators fleeing palaces have dramatic appeal. But the true images are less glamorous , mothers searching for missing sons, children out of school for months, patients dying in understaffed hospitals, small businesses destroyed in fires.

In Nepal, the Hilton hotel employees sobbing in the street captured this reality. Their livelihoods were not restored by the slogans of “justice” or “freedom.” They were simply casualties of a movement that promised change but delivered unemployment.

Similarly, in Sri Lanka, the doctors who reused surgical gloves and performed operations by flashlight were not liberated by the fall of the Rajapaksas. They were trapped in a collapsed system. In Bangladesh, garment workers lost wages not because they opposed Hasina, but because protests shut down their factories.

It is always the poor, the voiceless, and the vulnerable who bear the brunt of violent upheavals.

Do Violent Upheavals Do Any Good?

History suggests that while uprisings may topple rulers, they rarely resolve the structural problems that triggered them. Corruption, inequality, debt, and weak institutions do not vanish with a resignation. Indeed, they often worsen amid the chaos.

That does not mean protests are futile. Peaceful mass movements have, in many contexts, brought genuine reform India’s independence struggle, the civil rights movement in the United States, or Eastern Europe’s peaceful revolutions. The key distinction is whether dissent channels itself into constructive political change or degenerates into mob violence.

The smoke over Kathmandu, the shortages in Colombo, and the bloodshed in Dhaka all testify to the dangers of the latter path.

Building Change Without Burning Nations

The crises in Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, and Pakistan are not aberrations , they are warnings. They remind us that violent upheavals, however righteous their slogans, are blunt instruments that too often harm those they claim to help.

Change is necessary in societies plagued by corruption, inequality, or authoritarianism. But change that arrives through flames and blood rarely builds lasting institutions. Instead, it leaves rubble, debt, and grief.

For Nepal, the challenge now is not only to restore calm but to learn from history , to create channels where young people’s anger can be transformed into policy reforms, not arson , to build institutions strong enough to withstand dissent without collapsing , and to ensure that the next protest in Kathmandu ends not with smoke and tears, but with dialogue and dignity.

The lesson is universal , democracy cannot be built by burning hotels or storming palaces. It is built slowly, painstakingly, through reforms, accountability, and the difficult art of compromise. Until societies embrace that truth, the cycle of upheaval will continue leaving behind nothing but ashes.