I have seen a lot of peddling of same narrative from both in support and opposition. Just repeating what they see online. What’s happening with Sukumbasi demolition in Nepal looks sudden but it is really a problem that was left unresolved for 20+ years. There is a paradox in it. If the government gives early notice, people do not move because there is nowhere affordable to go inside the city. If they offer relocation, it is often rejected because it is outside the valley or far from jobs and daily life. If they try to give land inside the valley, it is seen as unfair or even excessive by others. If they give compensation, it still does not match what people feel they have already invested over years. Even apartments are not a simple fix. Many families are large, sometimes 6 to 12 members, so they need bigger units. If larger apartments are given, it can feel unfair to others waiting for housing in the city. If smaller units are given, it becomes impractical for those families to actually live there properly. And if nothing is done for too long, the settlement slowly becomes permanent in practice even if it was never legal, especially in flood-prone riverbank areas. So every option creates resistance. Every delay reduces the quality of future options. When enforcement finally happens after decades, it feels sudden but it is actually the result of long accumulation. That is the paradox. The longer you wait, the fewer acceptable choices remain, and the more unfair every solution starts to look. The criticism should be constructive. The only sane opposition I saw was from Kulman Ghising. He acknowledged the government efforts and asked for swift relocation of displaced people. That is mature and responsible.