In an ever more linked world, where digital propaganda travels quicker than guns, countries like Nepal find themselves vulnerable to a new kind of threat: ideological extremism crossing borders, religions, and nationalities.
Once protected by its benign image and non-aligned diplomacy, Nepal now finds itself at the edge of a gathering storm. The recent shooting death of Sudip Neupane, a Nepali Hindu pilgrim gunned down in Pahalgam, Kashmir, was not a war accident. It was a note. And that message is chillingly clear: Nepalis are not safe—not even in sacred areas, not even distant from home.
The Larger Trend of Targeted Violence Against Nepalis
Neupane’s death fits into a rising pattern of assaults on Nepali nationals in worldwide battle zones—particularly those areas where Islamist radical networks run. Brutally killed in Iraq in 2015, 11 Nepali migrant laborers’ deaths went almost unrecognised outside of a few diplomatic comments.
More lately, Bipin Joshi’s kidnapping in the Middle East highlights the ongoing danger of Nepalis living abroad. Though done by various organizations in various places, every one of these events suggests a comparable ideology—one that sees non-Muslims, particularly Hindus, as disposable.
Especially at risk are Nepali labor migrants—almost 4 million of whom work overseas. Many of them live in nations with weak political conditions and are regarded as second-class people.
In such settings, militant groups aiming to make ideological statements or obtain concessions by violence find them simple targets. Nepal’s lack of a thorough foreign employment safety system or its unwillingness to hold host countries responsible adds to the disaster.
The Part of Pakistan: Under a Geopolitical Cloak, Exporting Extremism
One important but often overlooked aspect of this rising danger is Pakistan’s ongoing support of Islamist extremist groups. Historically, Pakistan has backed groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and more recently, proxies sympathetic to Hamas and the Taliban either via the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) or other madrasa networks. These organizations flourish on a worldview that views religious plurality as a danger and violent jihad as a responsibility.
These ideas are now being exported—sometimes openly, sometimes via subtle cultural infiltration. Nepal’s strategic position between India and China, along with its open border with India and somewhat limited domestic monitoring, makes it a soft target for foreign influence activities.
Recent increases in Islamic goods, political literature, and even pro-Hamas graffiti—none of which existed ten years ago—have occurred in Kathmandu’s traditional market areas such those surrounding Boudha and Ratnapark. These are indications of ideological assertion, not only emblems of religious plurality.
“Hamas Zindabad” and “Pakistan Zindabad” are not accidents; they resonate in Nepali internet spaces and sometimes in public protests. They demonstrate an evolving alliance between transnational Islamist networks and local sympathizers—some motivated by ideology, others by financial and political reasons.
Lessons from Bangladesh: A Warning, Not a Comparison
One need go no further than Bangladesh to see what results from unbridled radical ideas. From 2014 to 2016, the nation saw a startling rise in violence directed against Hindus: more than 500 temples were desecrated and many religious leaders were murdered in coordinated assaults. In broad daylight, bloggers, freethinkers, and minority rights campaigners were hacked to death. The government acted, but the harm to religious unity had already been caused.
Nepal, with its own rich religious history, has to stay away from this route. We cannot let misplaced tolerance or complacency open door for hatred. Should radicalism take root here, it will not just attack Hindus but also undermine the core of our secular, inclusive democracy.
A Foreign Policy in Decline? Time to Rethink Nepal’s Diplomatic Strategy
Often, Nepal’s foreign policy has boasted neutrality and non-alignment. Although these values have worked well for us in the past, they are inadequate in the era of ideological conflict. Diplomacy has to change when Nepali lives are sacrificed to transnational extremism, when foreign-funded ideas disturb our society, and when silence turns deadly.
Not just for our sake but for the larger purpose of regional peace, Nepal must diplomatically and publically address countries supporting terrorism. This entails advocating for international action against terrorist supporters, asking security guarantees for migrant workers, and actively participating in counter-extremism discussions inside SAARC, BIMSTEC, and the United Nations.
We also have to cooperate more closely with India, a nation that has suffered the most from Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, to coordinate our intelligence-sharing systems, border control policies, and community involvement plans. Our people are paying the price; the days of sitting on the fence must end.
Concrete Actions for National Security and Social Harmony Right Now 1. Adopt a National Strategy Against Radicalism: Nepal requires an official national policy to stop radicalization. This should cover foreign-funded religious and social organizations’ surveillance, religious curriculum change, and cyber-monitoring.
Establish a thorough diplomatic system to guarantee Nepali workers have access to consular support, safety training, and legal protection in unstable areas.
Religious institutions, public society, and educational institutions have to play more active part in fostering interfaith discussion and exposing radical ideas for what they are—tools of divide. Any NGO, religious group, or political organization funded from outside has to be open about its operations.
Legal sanctions should be imposed on anyone pushing sectarian ideas. Reclaiming and redefining Nepal’s historical identity as a spiritual and tolerant country in contemporary terms can help to revitalize the national narrative. Our pluralism should be celebrated as a fundamental national security resource rather than only as culture.
Last Reflections
Nepal is on the edge. Guided by knowledge, alertness, and a fresh dedication to national unity, we may either stand firm or let foreign-funded extreme ideas take advantage of our free society by ignoring the indicators.
Sudip Neupane’s death is a national worry, not an individual tragedy. Ignoring it as such could lead much more future loss. This is a moment for brave leadership, strong diplomacy, and grassroots awakening. Will we act before it is too late?
(The opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not reflect the official position of any organization. – Editor)
Comment