Submit your Article

Nepal adopted federalism to bring the government closer to the people. If there is a deeper decentralization, the government comes closer to its citizens. Through the proximity to its citizens, the government earns trust of the people.  The extent to which the government is close to the people is determined by the effectiveness of public services delivered through its different offices and centers. 

In the past, although central policies were rhetorically anchored in the ideology of decentralization of power, their implementation portrayed a different picture. Despite advocating the dire need for decentralization of power  while in  opposition, the same political party showed an  unwillingness to let go of power and  merely paid lip service to the idea  once in office. Owing to Singhadarbar’s centralized mindset, local authorities were left with partial autonomy, which limited their ability to exercise real power of making prime decisions of their own.  

Against this backdrop, the present federal system has sought to ensure decentralization in practice, enabling the government to reach each and every household across the country under the slogan of Gaun Gaunma Singhadurbar. How far the slogan has been emanated in the actions taken by the government has become a matter of evaluation.

Trust building

Trust is built on the bedrock of effective policy implementation, and when government commitments bring fruitful results, that make  people satisfied. One of the major reasons a government loses trust and confidence of the people is its failure to effectively reach people through efficient and responsive public service delivery. In democracy, a government exists to serve the people and the nation by safeguarding the sovereignty and national unity, keeping law and order in place, driving sustained economic growth for inclusive national development, striking a balanced and pragmatic foreign policy in the national interest, and working tirelessly for the welfare and well-being of its citizens.

It is a part of the national culture of Nepali people to be peace- loving and to believe in maintaining harmonious relations on real ground, not just in principle. They value tolerance and patience. This is the reason we see them happy most of the time, despite being burdened by multiple financial and physical difficulties. Because of their tolerant character, they are generally perceived liberal and positive toward the government and its governance institutions.  As long as their minimum requirements of daily necessities, such as drinking water, reliable electricity, quality education, healthcare services and employment, are easily available, Nepalis do not tend to create public backlash by making high demands with the government.

If they do not get access to these basic services, naturally a certain degree of public discontent inevitably simmers. In this situation, the government loses the trust of the people. If the people's dissatisfaction is not addressed timely, they may lose their patience and tolerance, which ultimately may turn into public unrest, and open resistance against the government. In the past, mass protests and demonstrations launched by the Nepalis, regardless of their intensity, were the result of a deficit of trust in the government. It is a widely known reality that every service-counter is a test of government credibility and efficient service of today generates public trust tomorrow.

For years, people have harbored grudges and complaints about the government's way of dealing with them and delivering public services. It is the bureaucracy that is responsible for implementing the public policies into action through certain tangible plans and procedures. If the bureaucracy shows its ineffectiveness in providing prompt services to needy citizens, it tarnishes the image of the government. Public services are primarily delivered through service counters and centers.  Many service seekers  at service centers are often told by the service providers to come tomorrow (‘Bholi Aaunus’). Instead of satisfying citizens by providing quick services, if they are simply told to come back the next day without any reasonable explanation, how can the ‘citizen-first’ policy of the government be implemented in an effective manner?

This is the crux of the problem in establishing good governance. Unfortunately, when service seeking citizens turn to middlemen and pay under the table, they get services then and there. In many cases, such a situation still prevails within the bureaucratic system, which is capable enough to erode the public trust and undermine institutional integrity. A culture of buck-passing the responsibilities to others is being established gradually. In many cases senior government officials do not dare to take any risk in making decisions due to a latent fear of being summoned by the anti-graft body to give a statement.

Trade unionism within bureaucracy has divided civil servants into rival groups operating under the cloak of political parties, eroding the political neutralism. This type of situation prevailing within the government mechanism is enough to widen the gulf between the government and the citizens.

The Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI) highlighted that within the period of 2013-2019, Venezuela’s administration was highly politicized. The bureaucracy was incompetent and mismanaged the economy, public services and petro-currency controls, lacked transparency, and this dire situation triggered hyperinflation and institutional collapse. 

In a similar vein, the OECD’s ‘Italy Public Administration Review-2018’ explicitly portrayed a picture of how political bargaining in senior bureaucratic appointments and weak insulation of administrative institutions from party politics affect negatively over policy implementation, public trust and administrative efficiency.

These eye-opening instances suggest that Nepal must seriously work to build its citizens’ trust in government, for which the political and bureaucratic leaders must deliver exemplary results through their personal and public conduct, guided by transparency, zero tolerance for corruption, citizen-friendly behavior, and strong commitment to policy implementation. 

In a technology dominated global system, when the interests of one country overlap with those of others, conflict rises and crises emerge. The crises are entangled with various sectors of state affairs such as politics, technology, economy and social development. Crises emerge not only at the global level but also at the national level. In many cases, a small event can trigger painful consequences. In a democratic system, state affairs are delicate in nature as they are meticulously linked with people’s aspirations. If these aspirations are not fulfilled, disruptions escalate rapidly. Prior to the 1990s, the world was mainly divided along ideological lines—capitalism and communism, steered respectively by the USA and the then Soviet Union.

In the present day of the 21st century, situations have dramatically changed, as developed countries are locked in unhealthy geopolitical competition to increase and expand their traditional means of state power. The seen and unseen rivalry has no longer focused on strengthening their military power alone, rather they have concentrated their entire activities on economic dominance influencing and coercing others by fair means or foul. Thus, being a consequence of global interconnectivity, the polycrisis neologism has captured the present-day state affairs.

Vulnerabilities

Nepali GenZ (Nava Pusta) protests of Sept 2025 were largely based on non-political ideologies in nature. The protests were primarily rooted in structural economic grievances, antediluvian working style of established political parties and poor service delivery of the government.

A weak national economy, heavy dependence on remittances and foreign loans, ineffective governance, poor implementation of public policy and frequent changes in federal and provincial governments resulted in challenges of unemployment, inflation, corruption and a trust deficit in political parties, fueled widespread dissatisfaction among the Nava Pusta.

The collapse of the entire federal government within just two days of Nava Pusta’s protests was an unprecedented incident in the political history of Nepal. However, the destruction of government physical infrastructures, and public and private property through arson by anti-national elements (who were not genuine members of GenZ) cannot be condoned and pardoned.

The changes that took place after the Nava Pusta movement shuddered the foundations of established political parties were significant. The  international media labeled the protests as a ‘color revolution’. Whether this was truly a ‘color revolution’ or simply GenZ-led protests remains a matter of academic discourse. The former Home Minister’s statement given before the High Level Investigation Commission clearly points to direct influence of foreign elements in the peaceful GenZ protests. But the wave created by these protests has had a long-lasting tremor. The political instability in a geopolitically sensitive country has created a space for different actors who have hidden agendas to exploit Nepali soil and politics for their benefits, and is a serious threat to national security.

At this point of critical juncture, a single issue can spiral into a polycrisis. It can trigger the erosion of public trust in democratic institutions, leading to ineffective crisis response and governance paralysis. Security, in such a polycrisis situation often becomes reactive rather than strategically active. Nepal’s security needs to be active and agile to ensure that the Nepali people are competent enough to handle their internal challenges independently. The Nepali people and leadership alike must act accordingly so that no external power gains a foothold in the country’s strategic decision-making processes—directly or indirectly.

To demonstrate one’s capability to manage internal issues independently, requires the application of strong security measures backed by accurate information, use of advanced technology, coordinated strategic planning and action, and high-morale security personnel. The security organizations must have the ability to anticipate the future, not just respond to it. Experienced and highly skilled security officers are crisis managers, risk analysts, strategic communicators, and protectors of national interests and sovereignty. They are not merely the persons in uniforms rather they are the backbone of state security and stability.

Driving seat

Citizens are the first to bear the effects of polycrisis. The interwoven challenges in the  economy, society and governance can escalate into a full-blown crisis at any time that requires more vigilance in national affairs.

Sometimes, voices appear in the media alleging that the country—X has played a foul game by intervening in Nepal, provoking public agitation against the government and fueling conflict among the castes and social class. Diplomatically, it is not wise to allege Country X or Y, while ignoring the need to analyze and address domestic causes and their impact in society. Instead of pointing fingers at others, the government, political parties and concerned authorities should mend flawed policies and change outmoded mind-sets, and ensure good governance for the well-being of citizens and the nation at large.

It is natural for Country X or Y to take all necessary steps to safeguard their national interests. If they believe that by destabilizing a weaker country serves their purpose, they leave no stone unturned to fish in troubled waters. This is a routine work of  global diplomacy.

Ultimately, it is the major responsibility of Nepali political parties who hold the reins of state governance to keep their own house in order. They must foster harmonious relations within Nepali society and among common citizens, keeping in mind the age-old saying—Anekata Ma Ekata, Nepali Samaja Ko Biseshata (Unity in Diversity is the defining characteristic of Nepali Society).

Sustained economic development, a secure civil society, transparent practices, good governance, effective security organizations, and justice for all will help to keep foreign elements at bay. When the entire society upholds a value-based system rooted in patriotism and ethics no external force dares to rock the boat or destabilize the nation.

In this age of artificial intelligence, communication has become remarkably efficient at transferring knowledge, skills and disseminating opinions, which has revolutionized the entire socio-economic and political landscape of the country. When citizens become dissatisfied with the government, they voice their concerns through various means of expressions—chiefly newspapers, electronic media, and public speeches at mass gatherings. When the government’s off-color performance draws harsh castigation, the vulnerability to security threat intensifies.

People today are more aware than ever. They judge the entire functioning of the governance system—the power exercise mechanism for the management of the country’s internal and external affairs. In the name of establishing good governance, if it is marked by corruption, unaccountability, impunity, poor leadership and unresponsiveness, the nation becomes vulnerable to insecurity and instability. 

In such a state of vulnerability, overall governance becomes progressively weaker. Weak governance refers to the government’s inability to function effectively, resulting in a loss of trust among its citizens and international community. Once the trust deficit flows on the surface of government—citizen relations, public participation in socio-economic and political development declines. 

Sudan and South Sudan have endured relentless and devastating civil wars because of the utter failure of the public delivery system, widespread corruption, grossly unequal distribution of resources, deep-seated ethnic divisions, and exclusionary governance. Haiti’s frequent leadership changes and rampant corruption are another example of internal conflict resulting from weak governance, which invited insecurity across the country. Ineffective policing and low morale among security personnel allowed criminal gangs to gain control over parts of the capital. 

Even today foreign tourists rarely dare to visit the country, contributing to a continued decline in its economy. These two instances give an eye-opening lesson to all the developing nations about the dire consequences of the government’s failure to establish good governance. If the governance system deteriorates due to the shortsightedness of ruling leaders and ineffective performance of bureaucracy, it creates fertile ground for external powers to exploit such countries for their strategic interests. A country with a weak government is fertile ground for corruption, conflict and foreign interference.

Learning lessons 

In 1990, following the restoration of multiparty democracy, Nepal adopted a neoliberal policy in response to the global wave of liberalization. Liberalization necessitates strong competition across all spheres of national activity, including the economy, social development and political democratization. Competitive strength is gained through the cultivation of a highly skilled human resource base, the production of value-added industrial goods based on national resources, manufacturing of low cost-high value products, maintaining stable national policies, winning the trust of private sector, and upkeeping of a stable, transparent, corruptionless governance and fostering hassle free business environment. 

However, the expected outcomes of the goals envisioned through policies on industrial development, quality education, creation of a corruption-free society, promotion of professional ethics, reduction of inequality between rural and urban populations, modernization of agriculture, and the creation of job opportunities for youth were not materialized to the extent anticipated. In the past, during the election campaign, political parties used to entice voters with ambitious promises—pledging to transform Nepal into a ‘second Singapore’, generate employment and ensure free housing, clothing and food for all Nepali citizens. Unfortunately, such promises were never fulfilled. Rather, the youth were made to leave their homeland to seek employment abroad. as there were limited job opportunities within the country. This situation left young people and others frustrated and dissatisfied. 

Empirical studies reveal that if the public dissatisfaction with the government continues for long, it can pose a serious threat to national security, potentially triggering turbulence resulting through peaceful or violent actions. The GenZ (Nava Yuba) protest on Sept 8 began as a peaceful demonstration. However, under the guise of the GenZ movement, the next day witnessed unlawful activities of arson targeting historic government buildings, private residences, media houses, and business centers followed by looting of public and private property and killing of police personnel amid growing suspicions of infiltration. This was an unprecedented incident in the political history of Nepal. Even during the decade-long Maoist insurgency, no such incident had taken place.

Some politicians and intellectuals opine that the protests and destruction of Sept 9 caused by purported GenZ were orchestrated by foreign powers. But was the unrest truly instigated by external elements? This is indeed a sensitive and serious question. One thing is clear: weak governance invites foreign interference and fuels domestic discontent. No doubt, external actors are always active in attempts to destabilize the government to serve their interests. Nevertheless, it is the solemn duty and responsibility of all Nepali patriots—whether in government or outside it—to be vigilant and resolute in  sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity. 

If Nepal becomes economically resilient and technologically advanced, its voice on global platforms will be far stronger than before. In such a case, no foreign power will be able to turn the country into its playground. It is also time to understand why governance remains so fragile in the Sahel region of Africa and how Ukraine has been enduring the ravages of war for the last three years. There are significant lessons to be learnt from their experiences. 

Despite its major mandate to conduct free and fair elections scheduled on 5 March 2026, the government simultaneously should ensure effective governance so that the people’s hopes for a better life do not go in vain.