Category World News

Kathmandu, Nepal – As Nepal burned on Thursday after two days of deadly unrest that ousted a government accused of corruption, thousands of young people gathered in a heated debate to decide their nation’s next leader.

To them, the country’s mainstream politicians across the major parties were discredited: 14 governments representing three parties have taken turns at governing since 2008, when Nepal adopted a new constitution after abolishing its monarchy.

But in the wake of a brutal crackdown on protesters by security forces that killed at least 72 people, their trust in the country’s political system itself had been shattered. They wanted to select a consensus leader who would steer the country of 30 million people out of chaos and take steps towards stamping out corruption and nepotism. Just not in the way countries usually pick their heads.

So, they chose Nepal’s next leader in a manner unprecedented for any electoral democracy – through a virtual poll on Discord, a United States-based free messaging platform mainly used by online gamers.

The online huddle was organised by Hami Nepal, a Gen Z group behind the protest with more than 160,000 members.

Hami Nepal ran a channel on the platform called Youth Against Corruption, where a fiery debate on the country’s future brought together more than 10,000 people, including many from the Nepali diaspora. As more people tried to log in and failed, a mirrored livestream was held on YouTube to allow about 6,000 more people to see the debate.

After hours of debate that included difficult questions for protest leaders and attempts at reaching out to potential prime minister candidates in real time, the participants chose former Supreme Court Chief Justice Sushila Karki to lead Nepal. The 73-year-old took the oath of office as the country’s interim prime minister on Friday.

But Nepal’s transition is only beginning, say analysts, and the approach protesters took to choose the country’s leader only underscores how a chaotic new experiment in democracy appears to be under way, with rewards as well as risks.

‘Trying to figure it out together’

The Discord debate was a revolutionary counter to the traditional practice of politicians choosing leaders behind closed doors, which had displayed little transparency, say supporters of the Discord approach.

Discord enables users to connect through texts, voice calls, video calls and media sharing. It also allows communication through direct messages or within community spaces known as servers. It was one of the platforms banned by the government earlier this month alongside two dozen other popular applications, including Instagram, Twitter and YouTube.

The ban, protesters said, was the last straw that spiralled into a nationwide movement against Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s government. The demonstrators accused it of being unrepresentative of young people, as well as of widespread corruption and nepotism.

Tens of thousands of young protesters hit the streets on Tuesday, torching government buildings, including the parliament and residences of top politicians, and forcing Oli to resign. On Friday, President Ramchandra Paudel dissolved parliament and called for a general election in March.

By then, Nepal’s Gen Z protesters had turned to Discord to decide who should lead their nation until March. The social media ban was lifted after the killings earlier in the week.

Virtual polls on mobile screens allowed participants to nominate their interim leader in real time, marking a radical experiment in digital democracy.

“People were learning as they went,” said 25-year-old law graduate Regina Basnet, a protester who had then joined the Discord debate. “Many of us didn’t know what it meant to dissolve parliament or form an interim government. But we were asking questions, getting answers from experts, and trying to figure it out together.”

The discussion revolved around a wide range of issues Nepal must battle now, including jobs, police and university reforms, as well as the state of government healthcare, as the moderators urged the participants to focus on the main question before them: the next leader.

Five names were shortlisted for the final voting: Harka Sampang, a social activist and mayor of the eastern city of Dharan; Mahabir Pun, a popular social activist running the National Innovation Centre; Sagar Dhakal, an independent politician who ran against the powerful Nepali Congress leader, Sher Bahadur Deuba, in 2022; advocate Rastra Bimochan Timalsina, also known as Random Nepali on his YouTube channel, who has been advising the Gen Z protesters; and Karki.

Karki, who emerged as the winner of the poll, had campaigned for an independent judiciary during her brief tenure as chief justice from 2016 to 2017. In 2012, she and another Supreme Court judge jailed a serving minister for corruption. In 2017, the government unsuccessfully tried to impeach her as chief justice after she rejected its choice for police chief.

That history added to her credentials in the eyes of the Discord voters.

“The situation that I have come in, I have not wished to come here. My name was brought from the streets,” she said in an address to the nation after assuming office. “We will not stay here more than six months in any situation. We will complete our responsibilities and pledge to hand over to the next parliament and ministers.”

Many people who took part in the Discord debate also suggested Balen Shah, the popular rapper-turned-mayor of Kathmandu, as their choice for interim prime minister. The Hami Nepal moderators informed the participants they could not reach Shah, who later posted his endorsement of Karki on social media.

Many in Nepal believe Shah could be a frontrunner for the prime minister’s post in the March 5 elections.

‘Much more egalitarian’

Aayush Bashyal, who was part of the Discord discussions, told Al Jazeera he witnessed a “spectrum of understanding, and it was all ‘trial and error’”.

“Some people would come and belittle the ideas, which would paralyse the conversation. However, it was absolutely the need of the moment, and was an impromptu common ground to bring as many voices as possible,” he said.

Bashyal said some in the Discord forum also called for a restoration of Nepal’s monarchy, which was abolished in 2006 after a decade-long rebellion by left-wing forces in the country.

“There was also a pro-monarchy Discord group going on side by side. Sometimes, people would share the screenshots from their chats,” the 27-year-old student of public administration at Kathmandu’s Tribhuvan University told Al Jazeera. He branded the pro-monarchy group as “infiltrators”.

In the same forum, some Gen Z participants even questioned the legitimacy of the protest leaders. “You made the agenda, but we don’t know you. How we can trust you is also another issue,” one participant said.

Other issues that came up during the deliberations included investigating the killings of protesters and cracking down on corruption.

‘This is the future’

Pranaya Rana, a journalist who sends out the popular Kalam Weekly newsletter to more than 4,300 subscribers, said that using Discord made sense for a Gen Z-led movement, but that it also came with challenges.

“It is much more egalitarian than a physical forum that many might not have access to. Since it is virtual and anonymous, people can also say what they want to without fear of retaliation,” he told Al Jazeera. “But there are also challenges, in that anyone could easily manipulate users by infiltration, and using multiple accounts to sway opinions and votes.”

Aware of how misinformation, fake news and rumours could derail such movements, the Gen Z leaders also launched a sub-room called “fact checks” on their Discord discussion page.

Among the things they debunked was a photo showing protest leader Sudan Gurung, the chief negotiator for the formation of the interim government, with Arzu Rana Deuba, the ousted foreign minister. The picture was falsely claimed to have been taken a week before, when it was actually from an event that had happened six months earlier. Gurung had met the minister to demand justice for a Nepali student who had died by suicide after he was allegedly harassed at an engineering college in neighbouring India’s Odisha state.

There were also rumours that Gurung was not a Nepali citizen, but from Darjeeling, a hill town in eastern India. A copy of his Nepali citizenship card was released in the Discord discussion room and on social media.

The Gen Z organisers also debunked claims that former King Gyanendra had met the protesters. It was found that an old video of Nepal’s last monarch interacting with youngsters was being shared on social media.

It was also discovered that multiple social media handles and profiles claiming to be the “official” youth movement had contributed to some confusion on the ground. On Thursday night, a Gen Z leader was even seen calling a Nepal military officer on the phone, warning him against potential royal interference in the formation of the next government.

Rana, the journalist, said the protest leaders made good use of technology, “something that Gen Z is best at”.

“This is the future. We can either remain in the days of giving speeches on stages with mics or get used to talking freely on online platforms,” he told Al Jazeera.

“Gen Z is naive, but that’s to be expected. They are young, but they have shown a willingness to learn, and that’s the important part.”

Anticorruption activist and the former president of Transparency International Nepal, Padmini Pradhanang, urged Gen Z protest leaders to work on what the previous governments “miserably failed at – integrity, accountability, transparency and good governance”.

“These young people have only experienced kleptocracy. They have never seen true democracy or good governance,” she said.

But law graduate Basnet is not sure.

“At first, it was a peaceful protest. The mood was celebratory. But the state-ordered carnage later was traumatising… The uprising and burning of private and public properties was scary, and then, with people participating in a discussion on social media to form the government has only added to the confusion,” she told Al Jazeera.

Brazil’s president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has dismissed criticism from the United States over the conviction of the country’s former leader, Jair Bolsonaro, on coup charges, and slammed Washington’s sweeping tariffs as “misguided” and “illogical”.

The comments, published in an op-ed in The New York Times on Sunday, came as Bolsonaro made his first public appearance since last week’s conviction for a hospital visit.

In his essay, Lula said he wanted to establish “an open and frank dialogue” with US President Donald Trump over his administration’s decision to impose a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian products in the wake of Bolsonaro’s trial.

He noted that the US has a trade surplus with Brazil, accumulating a surplus of $410bn in trade over the past 15 years, making it “clear that the motivation of the White House is political”.

The tariffs, Lula wrote, are aimed at seeking “impunity” for Bolsanaro, whom he accused of orchestrating the riots in Brasilia on January 8, 2023, when the former leader’s supporters stormed the presidential palace, the Supreme Court and the Congress in protest over his election defeat the previous year.

The events in the Brazilian capital echoed the storming of the US Capitol by Trump’s supporters on January 6, 2021, after he insisted for months, without evidence, that there had been widespread fraud during the election he lost to his Democratic rival, Joe Biden.

Lula described Bolsonaro’s actions as “an effort to subvert the popular will at the ballot box” and said he was proud of the Brazilian Supreme Court’s “historic decision” on Thursday to sentence the former president to 27 years and three months in prison.

“This was not a ‘witch hunt’,” he wrote.

Instead, it “safeguards” Brazil’s institutions and the democratic rule of law, he added.

Brazil’s democracy ‘not on table’

Lula’s op-ed comes after Trump’s secretary of state, Marco Rubio, threatened more action against Brazil over Bolsonaro’s conviction. In addition to the tariffs, the US has so far sanctioned Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who has overseen Bolsonaro’s trial, and revoked visas for most of the high court’s justices.

For his part, Trump, who has repeatedly labelled the judicial proceedings a “witch-hunt”, has said he was “surprised” by the ruling. The US president, who also had faced criminal charges over the Capitol attack before they were withdrawn following his re-election, likened the trial against Bolsonaro to the legal actions against him.

“It’s very much like they tried to do with me, but they didn’t get away with it,” Trump told reporters on Thursday, describing the former leader as a “good president” and a “good man”.

In his op-ed, Lula said the US’s decision to turn its back on a relationship of more than 200 years means that “everyone loses” and said the two countries should continue to work together in areas where they have common goals.

But he said Brazil’s democracy was non-negotiable.

“President Trump, we remain open to negotiating anything that can bring mutual benefits. But Brazil’s democracy and sovereignty are not on the table,” he wrote.

Economists in Brazil estimate that Trump’s tariffs would hurt the country’s economy, including through the loss of tens of thousands of jobs, but not derail it, given its strong trade ties with other countries such as China. The blow has further been softened when the US granted hundreds of exceptions, including on aircraft parts and orange juice.

US consumers, too, are paying more for products imported from Brazil, including coffee, which has already seen recent price rises due to droughts.

In Brasilia, meanwhile, Bolsonaro, who is under house arrest, left his home to undergo a medical procedure to remove several skin lesions.

His doctor, Claudio Birolini, told reporters that the former president had eight skin lesions removed and sent for biopsies.

He added that Bolsonaro, who has had multiple operations in recent years due to complications from a 2018 stabbing in his stomach, was “quite weak” and had developed slight anaemia, “probably due to poor nutrition over the last month”.

Dozens of supporters gathered outside the hospital to cheer on the former leader, waving Brazilian flags and shouting, “Amnesty now!”.

The chant is in reference to the push of Bolsonaro’s allies in Congress to grant the former president some kind of amnesty.

“We’re here to provide spiritual and psychological support,” Deuselis Filho, 46, told the Associated Press news agency.

Thursday’s sentence does not mean that Bolsonaro will immediately go to prison.

The court panel now has up to 60 days to publish the ruling. Once it does, Bolsonaro’s lawyers have five days to file motions for clarification.

The suspect in the assassination of the conservative American activist Charlie Kirk espoused left-wing views, Utah’s governor has said, amid heightened tensions and recriminations over surging political violence in the United States.

In an interview with NBC News’s Meet the Press on Sunday, Utah Governor Spencer Cox said the arrested suspect, 22-year-old Tyler Robinson, had a “leftist ideology” despite growing up in a conservative family.

“We can confirm that, again, according to family and people that we’re interviewing, he does come from a conservative family. But his ideology was very different than his family, and so that’s part of it,” Cox said.

Cox, a Republican, did not elaborate on Robinson’s suspected motive, but said the suspect had spent time in “dark places” online.

“We do know, and again, this has been well publicised, that this was a very normal young man, a very smart young man,” Cox said.

According to public records, Robinson registered as a nonpartisan voter in Utah, while his parents are registered Republicans.

In a separate interview with CNN’s State of the Union, Cox said the information about Robinson’s left-wing views had come from interviews with family members and friends.

“I really don’t have a dog in this fight. If this was MAGA, and a radicalised MAGA person, I would be saying that as well,” Cox said, referring to US President Donald Trump’s Make America Great Again movement.

“That’s not what they’re sharing.”

Cox also confirmed reports that Robinson had a romantic relationship with his transgender roommate, who was transitioning from male to female.

“This partner has been incredibly cooperative, had no idea that this was happening, and is working with investigators right now,” he said.

Cox said he was not aware if Robinson’s relationship had any relevance to the assassination, but that authorities were investigating.

“We’re trying to figure it out. I know everybody wants to know exactly why, and point the finger, and I totally get that. I do too,” he said.

Kirk, the leader and cofounder of youth activist group Turning Post USA and a close ally of Trump, was shot dead on Wednesday during a speaking appearance at Utah Valley University.

A key figure on the political right, Kirk was described in media profiles as a “rock star” among young conservatives, and played a pivotal role in driving the youth vote in Trump’s November re-election.

A polarising figure, Kirk was lionised by conservatives as a defender of traditional values and a champion of free speech, but seen by liberals as an incendiary figure who stoked hatred towards racial minorities and members of the LGBTQ community.

While both Republican and Democratic leaders have condemned Kirk’s murder, the killing has drawn attention to the extreme political polarisation pitting everyday Americans against one another.

In the aftermath of Kirk’s assassination, some left-leaning Americans took to social media to celebrate, prompting outrage from conservatives and the launch of online campaigns to get people deemed disrespectful of Kirk’s memory fired from their jobs.

On the right, some figures invoked the rhetoric of retribution and war.

“If they won’t leave us in peace, then our choice is to fight or die,” tech billionaire Elon Musk said on X.

Trump, who swiftly denounced the rhetoric of the “radical left” after Kirk’s killing, has declined opportunities to stress the need for unity and avoid partisan blame since the assassination.

Speaking on Fox News’s Fox & Friends on Friday, Trump sought to paint left-wing extremism as worse than extremism on the right.

“The radicals on the right oftentimes are radical because they don’t want to see crime,” Trump said.

“The radicals on the left are the problem, and they’re vicious and they’re horrible, and they’re politically savvy.”

In an interview with NBC News on Saturday, Trump said that while he would like to see the country heal, “we’re dealing with a radical left group of lunatics, and they don’t play fair and they never did”.

Kirk’s assassination has prompted fears of further violence amid a documented increase in politically motivated attacks.

Dubai, UAE – The wide-ranging ramifications of an ongoing political standoff between India and Pakistan have led to a controversial conclusion of the archrivals’ cricket match at the Asia Cup 2025 in Dubai, where India’s captain Suryakumar Yadav confirmed that his squad opted against shaking hands with their opponents as a mark of protest.

When Sunday’s Group A fixture between the South Asian archrivals was confirmed after long deliberations from the Indian government, fans and experts had hoped that the on-field action could help cool the off-field heat.

Yadav, though, crushed all expectations by saying his team’s thumping seven-wicket win in the T20 match was a “perfect reply” to Pakistan in the wake of the intense four-day cross-border conflict that brought both countries to the brink of an all-out war in May.

“Our [Indian] government and the BCCI [Board of Control for Cricket in India] were aligned on the decision to play this match. We came here just to play the match and gave them [Pakistan] a perfect reply,” Yadav told the media shortly after the match.

What happened at the end of the India vs Pakistan match?

Yadav, who hit the winning runs for India, walked off the field alongside his batting partner, Shivam Dube, without approaching the Pakistani captain and team for the traditional post-match handshakes.

Pakistan’s players trudged off in a group and waited for the Indian squad and support staff to come out and shake hands, as is the norm at the end of cricket matches.

However, the Indian contingent only shook hands with each other before walking into their dressing room and shutting the door as the waiting Pakistan players looked on.

No handshakes between the teams. Salman Agha looked to lead Pakistan over to the India dressing room, but nothing doing. They all headed straight in #INDvPAK pic.twitter.com/0BbJtYdkAf

Why did Indian team refuse to shake hands with Pakistani players?

The Indian captain was asked to clarify his team’s actions and whether they were in contradiction with the spirit of the sport.

“A few things in life are above sportsman’s spirit,” the 35-year-old swiftly responded.

“We stand with all the victims of the Pahalgam terror attack and with their families, and dedicate this win to our brave armed forces who took part in Operation Sindoor.”

Yadav was referring to the Indian armed forces’ multiple missile attacks on six locations inside Pakistan.

India said the missiles were in response to the April 22 attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir in Pahalgam, in which 26 men were killed. An armed group called The Resistance Front (TRF), which demands independence for Kashmir, claimed responsibility for the attack, but India had alleged Pakistani involvement.

Two days later, Pakistan responded to the missile strikes by attacking military installations across its frontier with India and Indian-administered Kashmir, striking at least four facilities.

The conflict ended four days later, thanks to an internationally-brokered ceasefire.

While the exchange of aerial fire came to a halt, the diplomatic ties between the neighbours remained suspended, and the political tension spilled over into cricket when the fixture between India and Pakistan was announced by the Asian Cricket Council (ACC).

Did India break any rules by not shaking hands?

As a result, the match was played under a highly charged political climate, and when both captains did not indulge in the customary handshake at the pre-match toss, the focus swiftly shifted to the interactions between the teams.

However, Al Jazeera has learned that the match referee, Andy Pycroft, had asked Yadav and his counterpart, Agha, to skip the pre-toss ritual.

“The match referee requested both captains to not shake hands at the toss,” an official of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB), requesting anonymity, told Al Jazeera after the match.

Match officials also granted India permission to skip the post-match handshakes with Pakistan, but did not inform Agha or his team, according to the source.

This resulted in an awkward-looking post-match scenario, where the Pakistani players followed Yadav off the pitch and waited for the Indians to emerge, only to watch them shut the dressing room door.

How did Pakistan respond?

Pakistan’s manager Naveed Akram Cheema lodged a protest against the Indian cricket team’s actions with Pycroft, who is an International Cricket Council (ICC) accredited match referee.

“The umpires had allowed the Indians to walk off the field without shaking hands for which the match referee apologised after the protest of our team manager,” the official said.

Additionally, Pakistan captain Agha did not speak at the post-match captain’s chat with the host broadcaster in a mark of protest.

Mike Hesson, Pakistan’s head coach, confirmed that Agha’s refusal to show up for the talk and the media briefing was a “follow-on effect” of the Indian team’s actions.

“We were ready to shake hands at the end of the game, but our opposition did not do that,” Hesson said.

“We sort of went over there to shake hands, and they had already gone into the changing room.”

Why are handshakes important in cricket, and what’s the protocol?

As per the norm in cricket, the two on-field players of the team batting second shake hands with the fielding team and the umpires before walking off.

And in what is now a common practice in all international cricket matches, the batting team then enters the ground to shake hands with their opponents.

It offers both sides to end the match on a friendly note and exchange words of encouragement.

In the same manner, both teams’ captains shake hands before the toss, which takes place 30 minutes before the start of play.

The toss is conducted by the match referee on the pitch and usually broadcast live.

Both captains and the match referee can also indulge in a pre-match chat regarding team lineups or any other matters of mutual interest for both teams.

The match referee can also meet a captain, head coach or manager of either team before the match.

What have the tournament officials said about the incident?

The move was lamented by the ACC chairman, Mohsin Naqvi, who is also the chairman of the PCB.

“Utterly disappointing to witness the lack of sportsmanship today,” Naqvi said in a post on X.

“Dragging politics into the game goes against the very spirit of sports.”

Utterly disappointing to witness the lack of sportsmanship today. Dragging politics into the game goes against the very spirit of sports. Lets hope future victories are celebrated by all teams with grace

Al Jazeera has reached out to the ACC for a comment on the revelation that both captains were asked not to shake hands at the toss.

The ACC has not yet responded to the request.

Pakistan and India are likely to meet again in the Asia Cup if both teams qualify for the Super Four stage.

India have all but qualified after two wins in two games, while Pakistan face the UAE in a must-win fixture on Wednesday.

Can US President Trump fulfil his promise of ending the war, or is the conflict proving more complex than expected?