Submit your Article

It has been over a week since the World Exposition opened in Osaka, where an estimated 28m visitors are expected over the six-month event. Among the 158 participating countries—including Nepal—nearly all have set up their pavilions. However, Nepal failed to open its pavilion on the inauguration day (April 13) due to construction delays, exposing governance shortcomings.

The delay stems from a dispute between the Nepali government and the contractor. Two years ago, the government selected a private company to construct the pavilion, yet poor coordination and unresolved issues prevented its timely completion.

Jitendra Basnet, spokesperson for the Ministry of Industry, Commerce and Supplies, cited cost overruns, budget shortages and logistical lapses as key reasons for the delay but declined to provide further details. Other officials also refused to comment.

A senior official involved in the project, speaking anonymously, revealed that the conflict arose over payment procedures. Nepal Rastra Bank required contractors to pay a 30 percent tax before transferring funds from Japan, which the contractor refused. Visa complications further stalled progress. “Despite two years of preparation, we couldn’t complete the pavilion—it’s embarrassing,” the official admitted.

Government authorities are now scrambling to resolve the dispute and open the pavilion soon. Durga B Subedi, Nepal’s Ambassador to Japan, said he would assess the situation in Osaka next week before commenting. Meanwhile, it remains unclear whether Nepal will have high-level representation at the expo.

The Nepal Pavilion was intended to showcase the country’s cultural heritage, natural beauty and other attractions. With 119,000 visitors on opening day—and other nations’ pavilions drawing large crowds—the delay could hurt Nepal’s tourism and economic prospects at the event.

Held at Yumeshima (“Dream Island”), a reclaimed industrial site in Osaka Bay, the expo—with the theme “Designing Future Society for Our Lives”—features futuristic exhibits from over 160 countries and organizations across 80 uniquely designed pavilions. This is Osaka’s second expo after the hugely successful 1970 , which set a record with 64m visitors until Shanghai’s 2010 event.

The United States of America has condemned the violence that occurred during the pro-monarchy protests in Kathmandu on March 28. It extended deepest condolences to the families and friends of those who lost their lives.

On that day, pro-monarchy protests vandalized the public buildings including the offices of Annapurna Media Network and Kantipur Publication. They also set the buildings on fire with some damages.

A State Department spokesperson said: “The fundamental freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly must be protected. However, we do not condone violence and the destruction of property.” Regarding the attack on media houses, the spokesperson said that the United States supports media globally. The free flow of accurate information, ideas and opinion is the cornerstone of democracy, and it is essential that journalists be able to perform their work free from fear, the spokesperson said.

There are growing demands that there should be a fair investigation on the violence that occurred in the Tinkune area of Kathmandu. 

There are also reports that police used excessive force and indiscriminately opened fire on the protestors. Police have already arrested more than five-dozen people in connection with the violence.

The Nepal government is refusing to form a judicial commission to probe the March 28 violence. Regarding the attack on media houses, the international community remains silent and the US is the first country to speak about the violence. Over the past few weeks, pro-monarchy protests have been hitting the streets demanding the restoration of the monarchy and the Hindu state. In a latest series of protests, Rastriya Prajatantra Party organized a protest in Kathmandu on Tuesday.

The events of March 28, 2025 at Tinkune remain shrouded in uncertainty. What started as a pro-monarchy demonstration quickly spiraled into a violent confrontation between protestors and police. Protestors claim the situation escalated when police fired teargas shells while they were assembling for a peaceful demonstration. On their part, police officials argue they had no choice but to intervene after some commanders allegedly urged crowds to advance toward the airport and the parliamentary building.

In the aftermath, police arrested Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) leaders Rabindra Mishra and Dawlshamsher Rana for their alleged involvement in inciting a mob that vandalized multiple office buildings and private properties in the Tinkune area.  Authorities are now collecting evidence to file cases against them, while Durga Prasai—reportedly named as a protest commander—remains on the run. 

The Ministry of Home Affairs and Nepal Police are under fire for their handling of the protests. Reports indicate that officers used live rounds on demonstrators, with at least 20 people injured in the shootings. Tragically, two individuals—including a journalist—lost their lives, while dozens more sustained injuries. The police have admitted to the shootings, claiming they aimed to defuse tensions.

Adding to the chaos, misinformation and disinformation have flooded social media. Fake videos falsely linked to the Tinkune incident have been widely circulated, making it even harder to determine the truth. Protestors also launched a targeted attack on media houses, vandalizing the offices of Annapurna Media Network and Kantipur Television and even attempting to set them on fire.

Surprisingly, international media rights organizations and democratic nations—including the United States and the European Union—have remained silent. This marks a stark departure from their usual strong stance on press freedom violations in Nepal. The silence raises questions about whether human rights and freedom of speech are still priorities for the global democratic community. Some analysts even speculate that the shift could be linked to Donald Trump’s return to the US presidency.

Amid the growing controversy, there is mounting pressure on the government to establish an independent commission to investigate the Tinkune incident. Such a body could uncover the truth, ensure justice for victims, and hold those responsible accountable. However, Nepal’s major political parties have shown little interest in forming such a commission.

The incident has also exposed serious flaws within Nepal’s security apparatus. First, there was a lack of coordination among agencies. Second, security forces failed to gather intelligence on Prasai’s plans in advance. Lastly, Nepal’s law enforcement faces severe shortages of essential equipment, with no significant procurement in the last decade.

The government has pointed fingers at former King Gyanendra Shah, alleging that he played a role in orchestrating the protests by appointing Prasai as a commander. On March 27—just a day before the demonstrations—Shah met with Prasai, further fueling suspicions. Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal has publicly stated in Parliament that the former king was involved and "will not be spared." However, it remains unclear what legal actions, if any, will be taken against him.

Meanwhile, political leaders are busy countering the pro-monarchy narrative that the republican system has failed Nepal. Nepali Congress General Secretary Bishwa Prakash Sharma has sought to shift the debate by presenting comparative data on development under monarchy versus republican governance. Kathmandu Mayor Balendra Shah’s move to fine the former king for the environmental damage caused by protestors has also drawn mixed reactions. Major political parties who criticized Mayor Balen’s activities in the past are now praising him, while pro-monarchy forces have decried the mayor’s action.

Despite their shared goal of restoring the monarchy, pro-monarchy factions remain divided. Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) leaders Rajendra Lingden and Kamal Thapa, while supporting the broader movement, chose not to participate in the March 28 protests. In contrast, Mishra and Rana did, despite warnings that Prasai’s involvement could lead to violence.

Leadership changes have also added to the instability. With Nava Raj Subedi placed under house arrest following the protests, Jagman Gurung has taken over the movement’s leadership. However, internal conflicts continue to plague the royalist forces, threatening their momentum.

India’s influence has also been a topic of debate. Last week, the CPN-UML had to issue a formal statement clarifying that it never accused India of backing the pro-monarchy movement. Despite this, some communist leaders continue to push the narrative that India is supporting the royalist cause. Meanwhile, Nepal’s Ambassador to India, Shankar Sharma, recently met with Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, sparking speculation about whether India—or at least some of its political figures—has a stake in the unrest.

The pro-monarchy movement shows no signs of slowing down, with protestors vowing to continue demonstrations despite the setback on March 28. However, the movement faces internal fractures, wavering political support, and government crackdowns. Whether the former king himself will break his silence remains an open question, but his close aides insist that he does not take sides in political matters.

In a landmark visit—the first official trip since the establishment of Nepal-Thailand diplomatic relations over 60 years ago—Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli held bilateral talks with Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra. The two leaders witnessed the signing of eight Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs), expanding cooperation in tourism, culture, trade, industry, medicine, agriculture, and academia.

The visit, coinciding with the 66th anniversary of their diplomatic ties, highlighted the strong spiritual and cultural connections, particularly the annual pilgrimage of thousands of Thai Buddhists to Lumbini. 

Following the talks, the two leaders held a joint press conference, hailing the visit as a milestone in elevating bilateral relations. Prime Minister Oli extended an invitation to his Thai counterpart to visit Nepal, which she accepted, pledging to do so at a mutually convenient time.

Oli emphasized the discussions on deepening diplomatic and people-to-people ties. He highlighted Nepal’s potential in hospitality and aviation, urging Thai investors to explore opportunities in these sectors. “Nepal and Thailand share strong agricultural, trade, tourism, and cultural ties. I encourage Thailand’s business community to invest in Nepal,” he said.

Prime Minister Shinawatra noted the long-standing friendship between the two nations, rooted in shared history and culture. “This visit marks an opportunity to strengthen our partnership and explore new avenues for collaboration,” she stated. She praised Nepal’s effective management of water resources for hydropower development, which has significantly contributed to economic growth.

The Thai prime minister also stressed the importance of improving the ease of doing business, reducing trade barriers and leveraging comparative advantages. “With bilateral trade currently at $40m, we have significant potential to expand. These measures will boost trade and investment, giving Thai businesses greater confidence to enter Nepal’s market,” she added.

Connectivity emerged as another key focus. “We recognize the role of Thai airlines in enhancing ties through increased flight frequency, resuming direct Bangkok-Kathmandu routes, and expanding services to Lumbini,” Shinawatra said.

The leaders also discussed strengthening the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC). “With solidarity among member-states, we will ensure BIMSTEC remains a dynamic and relevant organization,” Shinawatra said. She reiterated her commitment to advancing bilateral and multilateral relations across diverse fields for sustainable prosperity.

Nepal and Thailand also signed several agreements regarding cooperation in various sectors. Foreign Minister Arzu Rana Deuba and Thailand’s Minister for Culture, Sudawan Wangsuphakijkosol, signed an MoU on cultural cooperation, while Deuba and Thai Tourism and Sports Minister Sorawong Thienthong inked a tourism agreement. 

Other agreements included partnerships between Nepal Netra Jyoti Sangh and Thailand’s Mahidol University, Janata Agro and Forestry Nepal (JFL) and Kasetsart University, the Federation of Nepalese Chambers of Commerce and Industry and the Board of Trade of Thailand, and Kathmandu University and Siam University. 

Additionally, the Confederation of Nepalese Industries (CNI) and the Federation of Thai Industries, along with the Nepal Chamber of Commerce and the Tourism Council of Thailand, signed agreements to bolster private-sector collaboration.

Key areas of discussion 

• Bilateral relations 
• Trade and investment 
• Agriculture and technology 
• Development cooperation 
• Multilateral and regional cooperation 
• Connectivity 

In the wake of violent protests organized by pro-monarchy forces in Kathmandu on March 28, politicians and security experts have raised serious concerns over the government’s handling of the demonstrations. Critical lapses in intelligence and security preparedness allowed chaos to spiral out of control.

Security officials revealed that agencies failed to detect or act on the plans of Durga Prasai, the protest’s designated leader. Prasai reportedly used incendiary language, framing the event as a “people’s revolt” rather than a peaceful rally. Experts argue that his rhetoric was deliberately provocative, even suggesting the Nepal Army might intervene—a claim that heightened tensions ahead of the protest.

Lawmaker Raj Kishor Yadav, chair of Parliament’s International Relations and Tourism Committee, criticized the glaring lack of preparations. “Despite knowing about the protests days in advance, key installations in the Tinkune area—including airports, petrol pumps, and media houses—were left unsecured,” Yadav noted.

The administration’s decision to permit two large-scale protests on the same day further strained security forces. Authorities were reportedly preoccupied with preventing potential clashes between republican and pro-monarchy supporters, diverting attention from preventing vandalism and property damage. Yadav argued that a single protest might have led to a less severe outcome.

Another point of contention was the police’s inaction when Prasai was seen recklessly driving from Tinkune to Baneshwor. Security experts criticized the decision not to immobilize his vehicle—such as by deflating its tires—instead of resorting to a risky attempt to snatch the keys from a moving car. Many believe this hesitation endangered both law enforcement and the public.

Former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal, chairman of CPN (Unified Socialist), questioned whether police ignored directives after protesters vandalized the party office in Aalok Nagar. “Did police disobey your instructions?” he pressed Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, highlighting concerns over accountability. Party leaders claim they had warned police of a potential attack on their party office that morning—yet no preventive measures were taken. Further scrutiny arose over Prasai’s delayed arrest. Despite remaining in the Kathmandu Valley late into the night, he was not apprehended, with police now claiming ignorance of his whereabouts.

Behind these operational failures lies a long-standing issue of resource shortages. Both Nepal Police and the Armed Police Force have repeatedly cited inadequate funding and outdated equipment. For over a decade, requests for modern weapons, vehicles, and logistical support have gone unaddressed by the Home Ministry, severely hampering their ability to manage large-scale unrest.

Last year, Nepal Police explicitly warned the Home Ministry of their inability to control riots due to logistical deficiencies. Home Minister Lekhak too was informed but took no action. “The failure to procure weapons for over a decade has crippled our operations,” a senior officer stated. As the country reflects on the events of March 28, urgent questions remain about security agencies’ decision-making and the systemic failures that enabled the chaos. A thorough review of security protocols, resource allocation, and inter-agency coordination is now imperative to prevent future breakdowns.

Whenever significant political developments unfold in Nepal, politicians are quick to draw connections to India. For instance, in 2021, when the then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli dissolved Nepal’s Parliament, his own colleagues accused him of acting under India’s influence. Senior leaders from major parties, including Pushpa Kamal Dahal, publicly urged India to “stand in favor of democracy” in Nepal, arguing that Oli’s move was an attempt to undermine the 2015 constitution.

At the time, many political leaders speculated that India’s influence extended to Nepal’s judiciary, suggesting that the Supreme Court might validate Oli’s decision to dissolve Parliament. However, the court overturned Oli’s move, reinstated Parliament, and directed the then President Bidya Devi Bhandari to appoint Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba as the new prime minister.

Fast forward to the present, and pro-monarchy forces are mobilizing to restore the monarchy and what they describe as “true democracy.” Once again, whispers within Nepal’s ruling party suggest that India might be backing this movement. According to The Kathmandu Post, Foreign Minister Arzu Rana Deuba raised this concern directly with her Indian counterpart, S Jaishankar, during a recent meeting. Jaishankar reportedly denied any involvement, and upon her return from India, Deuba stated that she sensed no intention from India to alter Nepal’s current political system.

Despite these assurances, some politicians have pointed to the presence of a poster featuring Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath as “evidence” of India’s support—a claim widely dismissed as weak and unconvincing.

Foreign Minister Deuba’s blunt and undiplomatic remarks have drawn criticism from strategic circles. In a recent internal meeting, senior leaders of the CPN-UML discussed the possibility of “foreign forces” supporting royalist movements. Similarly, CPN (Maoist Center) Chairperson Pushpa Kamal Dahal briefly alluded to external backing for the pro-monarchy campaign.

Political analyst Puranjan Acharya notes that while the Indian government may not officially support the monarchy, organizations like the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), its affiliate Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and other Hindu nationalist groups have long advocated for Nepal to return to being a Hindu state. Acharya explains that while the Indian government is committed to secularism, these organizations are free to push their agendas in Nepal.

Arun Subedi, a foreign affairs advisor to a former prime minister, adds that while RSS and BJP may not directly support the pro-monarchy protests, India has become increasingly reactive to Nepal’s political developments due to geopolitical considerations.

Former Indian ambassador to Nepal Ranjit Rae emphasizes that Nepal’s issues must be resolved by its own people and leaders. In an op-ed published in India’s Deccan Herald, Rae stated that it is not in India’s interest to take sides in Nepal’s internal affairs. He also cautioned the Indian media, which has a significant audience in Nepal, against engaging in partisan rhetoric.

Rae further argued that instability in Nepal is detrimental to India’s interests as a turbulent Nepal could provide opportunities for external players to increase their influence, thereby jeopardizing India’s strategic position. Historically, both the monarchy and communist forces in Nepal have fueled anti-Indian sentiments and sought closer ties with China. For example, in 2005, shortly after assuming absolute power, King Gyanendra attempted to facilitate China’s entry into SAARC during the Dhaka Summit.

Geopolitical analyst Chandra Dev Bhatta believes there is no evidence of Indian backing for the pro-monarchy protests. Instead, he attributes the growing support for the monarchy to widespread public frustration with Nepal’s major political parties, which have failed to deliver on their promises. Bhatta stresses that the protests are driven by internal factors rather than external influence.

After years of strained relations, China has recently intensified its engagement with the Nepali Congress (NC), Nepal’s oldest and largest democratic party. Over the past decade, the relationship between China and the NC had soured due to various political and diplomatic reasons. However, recent developments indicate a shift in China’s approach, as Chinese diplomats and leaders of the Communist Party of China (CPC) have begun actively engaging with NC leaders.

A notable example of this renewed engagement is the recent visit of an NC delegation led by senior leader Sujata Koirala to China. During the visit, the delegation toured several Chinese cities, including Chengdu, and held meetings with senior CPC officials. This marks a significant step in China’s efforts to strengthen ties with the Koirala family, a prominent political dynasty within the NC.

In early March, Sun Haiyan, Vice-Minister of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee, met with Koirala. According to a Chinese readout, Sun praised the NC and the Koirala family for their long-standing commitment to fostering China-Nepal friendship and for upholding the correct stance on issues related to Xizang (Tibet) and Taiwan. Sun emphasized the CPC’s willingness to enhance exchanges and cooperation with the NC and other major political parties in Nepal, urging both sides to focus on implementing the consensus reached between the two countries.

Koirala, in response, reaffirmed the NC’s firm support for the One-China principle and expressed her party’s eagerness to leverage the 70th anniversary of Nepal-China diplomatic relations to deepen mutual understanding and collaboration. This marks a notable shift from the past, when relations between China and the NC deteriorated significantly. One key incident was in 2016, when NC President Sher Bahadur Deuba shared a stage with a representative of the Tibetan government-in-exile at an event organized by the India Foundation in Goa. This incident, among others, led to a period of mistrust and strained ties.

Other factors contributing to the rift included China’s preferential engagement with Nepal’s communist parties, often at the expense of sidelining the NC, as well as the NC’s public criticism of China’s alleged border encroachment and its cautious stance on China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). During this period, Chinese state media frequently portrayed the NC as a pro-Indian party, further exacerbating tensions.

However, relations began to improve following the signing of the Framework for Belt and Road Cooperation during Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli’s visit to China in December 2023. NC General Secretary Gagan Kumar Thapa and Foreign Minister Arzu Rana Deuba played pivotal roles in facilitating the agreement, despite strong opposition within their own party. Their support for the BRI marked a turning point in China-NC relations, even as senior NC leaders like Prakash Sharan Mahat and NP Saud continued to voice concerns about the initiative, arguing that it contradicted the party’s position against taking loans under the BRI.

Since the signing of the BRI agreement, there has been a noticeable increase in visits by NC leaders to China, and the Chinese Embassy in Kathmandu has actively engaged with senior NC figures. This represents a departure from China’s previous approach of primarily engaging with Nepal’s communist parties, a trend that had persisted for over a decade. During this period, China focused on fostering unity among Nepal’s communist factions, leading to a perception among NC leaders that they were being marginalized.

China’s recent outreach to the NC suggests a recognition of the need to broaden its engagement beyond communist parties. This shift is seen as an effort to build a more balanced and inclusive relationship with Nepal’s political landscape. While senior communist leaders have frequently visited China over the years, NC leaders have rarely done so. The current wave of engagement indicates that both sides are working to address past misunderstandings and strengthen bilateral ties.

This renewed engagement comes at a critical juncture, as China seeks to consolidate its influence in Nepal amid evolving regional dynamics. By fostering closer ties with the NC, China aims to ensure that its initiatives, including the BRI, gain broader political support within Nepal. For the NC, this represents an opportunity to reaffirm its role as a key player in Nepal’s foreign policy and to balance its relationships with both China and India.

Sixteen years have passed since the abolition of Nepal’s 238-year-old monarchy, yet the political landscape remains unsettled.

The occasional statements from former King Gyanendra Shah and the persistent protests by his supporters continue to rattle the fragile foundations of the federal republic established in 2008. Interestingly, these pro-monarchist demonstrations often serve as a unifying force for Nepal’s major political parties, temporarily bridging their deep-rooted divisions.

As spring arrives, pro-monarchist forces have once again intensified their protests, echoing their perennial demands for the restoration of the Hindu state and the monarchy. While large-scale demonstrations were rare between 2008 and 2018, the momentum has been steadily building since then, though it has yet to reach a tipping point capable of overturning the 2015 constitution.

The growing disillusionment with successive governments, plagued by unfulfilled promises and systemic failures, has fueled anti-establishment sentiment. This dissatisfaction has provided fertile ground for the resurgence of royalist forces, whose recent street protests have sparked fear and anxiety among Nepal’s major political parties. Spring, traditionally a season of political unrest in Nepal, has once again become a stage for demonstrations, with royalist protests capturing significant attention this year. Even within the largest party, the Nepali Congress, there are vocal advocates for reinstating the Hindu state—though not necessarily the monarchy.

The latest wave of protests was triggered by former King Gyanendra Shah’s Democracy Day message on Falgun 7. In his address, he called on all “nationalists,” democrats, and patriots to unite and address the country’s deepening crisis. While he stopped short of explicitly urging people to take to the streets, his message was notably more pointed than his previous vague appeals. Following this, pro-monarchist forces organized sizable protests in Pokhara, Biratnagar, and Madhes provinces, sending alarm bells ringing among mainstream political parties.

The former king’s message, likely crafted after informal consultations with his supporters, has galvanized a series of protests across the country. Two prominent parties—the Rastriya Prajatantra Party led by Rajendra Lingden and the Rastriya Prajatantra Party (Nepal) led by Kamal Thapa—have openly endorsed the king’s agenda. However, dozens of smaller groups and outfits are also actively working toward the same goal. While Gyanendra Shah has not formally aligned himself with any political party, he has provided tactical support, including financial backing, to these groups.

This is not the first time monarchist forces have made their presence felt. Significant demonstrations in 2021 and 2023 drew considerable attention from both domestic political parties and the international community. However, these protests have lacked a unified structure or leadership, with deep divisions among the various groups hindering the emergence of a cohesive movement.

In response to the growing unrest, the CPN (Maoist Center), which prides itself as a defender of the 2015 constitution, has suspended its ongoing party programs. Party leaders cite the need to monitor the royalist forces, whom they accuse of attempting to create chaos. Meanwhile, Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, CPN (Maoist Center) Chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal, Nepali Congress President Sher Bahadur Deuba, and other leaders have issued a unified message to the former king: if he wishes to return to power, he should register a political party and contest elections. Some have even threatened to arrest him if he undermines the current political system. Royalist parties have countered by asserting that the king is a unifying figure above partisan politics and therefore cannot be expected to contest elections.

Gyanendra Shah has been actively touring the country to rally support, while also making frequent visits to Uttar Pradesh, India, to meet Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, a long-time supporter of his bid to regain power. The former king appears to be seeking backing from India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for his campaign to reinstate the monarchy and the Hindu state. While some within the BJP support the idea of Nepal as a Hindu state, it remains unclear whether they endorse the restoration of the monarchy. Last August, Gyanendra’s visit to Bhutan at the invitation of King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuk fueled rumors of third-country involvement, adding another layer of intrigue to his efforts.

Adding to the political turbulence, former US President Donald Trump’s remarks labeling USAID funding for Nepal’s fiscal federalism as a “fraud” have bolstered pro-monarchy and right-wing forces in Nepal. These comments have been seized upon by royalist groups to discredit the current federal system and argue for a return to a more centralized, monarchical governance model.

As major political parties face growing unpopularity due to rampant corruption, unemployment, and economic stagnation, royalist forces see an opportunity to advance their agenda. On a recent Sunday, supporters organized a mass demonstration in Kathmandu, coinciding with Gyanendra’s return to the capital after a week-long stay in Pokhara. He was greeted by enthusiastic supporters at the airport and escorted to his residence, Nirmal Niwas, under heightened security.

Criticism of the 2015 constitution is mounting, fueled by the failures of the political parties that have governed since the monarchy’s abolition. Widespread corruption, economic stagnation, and a lack of opportunities have created a pervasive sense of pessimism, which royalist forces are exploiting to push their agenda. Political analysts warn that the current system could be in jeopardy if mainstream parties fail to address these issues effectively.

While even the monarchist forces doubt that street protests alone can restore the monarchy, they believe their movement could pressure mainstream parties into making concessions. However, the lack of a clear representative for the former king complicates any potential negotiations with the current government. Royalist forces remain steadfast in their belief that only the monarchy can resolve the nation’s deepening crisis. As the political drama unfolds, Nepal stands at a crossroads, with its future hanging in the balance.