Submit your Article

Three days before the March 5 election, I left Hetauda and began a short but revealing journey toward the eastern plains and hills. My purpose was simple: to listen. Over the past few months, I had already been spending long hours in tea shops, buses, and college campuses talking with ordinary people. Those conversations had convinced me that public frustration with traditional political parties had reached an unusual level. Still, I wanted to see whether that sentiment was truly widespread or simply limited to a few urban circles and social media.

So I decided to travel—from the Madhes districts toward Jhapa—to hear directly from voters on the move. The journey began around 10 in the morning in a small tea shop in Hetauda. In front of the shop, a line of microbuses waited to depart, filled with passengers heading back to their home constituencies to vote. Elections in Nepal always bring this familiar movement—students, workers, and migrants returning home to cast their ballots. Curious about the mood, I asked one passenger a simple question: “Which party will you vote for?”

He answered without hesitation: “I will vote for the Ghanti.”

“Ghanti,” the Nepali word for bell, is the election symbol of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). Within minutes several others joined the conversation. One after another, they said the same thing—they were voting for “Ghanti.” Interestingly, many of them did not even know the name of the local candidate representing RSP. Their reasoning was straightforward: they wanted to see a new political force rise. For them, supporting the bell symbol represented change.

Some even spoke enthusiastically about wanting to see Kathmandu’s mayor, Balen Shah, take on a national leadership role someday. After spending some time there, I continued my journey toward the Madhes districts. Along the highway I stopped at several small tea shops—those familiar roadside gathering points where farmers, drivers, students, and shopkeepers debate everything from local politics to international affairs.

What struck me most during these conversations was not just the curiosity about a new party, but the depth of fatigue with the old ones. In district after district, people spoke about wanting to give someone new a chance. In Sarlahi, I met an 85-year-old man sitting quietly in a tea shop courtyard. When I asked about his voting preference, he smiled and said he would vote for the new party. “I have given many chances to the old parties,” he said calmly. “This time I want to give someone new an opportunity.”

His words captured a sentiment I had heard repeatedly during the journey—not simply anger, but exhaustion. Many voters were not necessarily hostile toward the traditional parties; they simply felt those parties had already been tested many times and had failed to deliver the change people had hoped for.

As my journey continued eastward, I eventually reached Jhapa. In Jhapa-5, I stopped at a small haircut salon. While waiting, I asked the barber about the local election atmosphere. He told me he was originally from Morang-3 and was preparing to travel there to vote. “Over the past two months,” he said, “almost everyone who came here said they would vote for the new party this time.”

A day before the election, I walked through several areas considered strongholds of traditional political parties. Normally such areas are filled with party flags and banners during campaign season. This time the visual landscape looked different. The flags of the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML were surprisingly rare. Instead, the bell symbol associated with RSP appeared frequently across houses, shops, and roadside poles.

It was difficult to determine whether this reflected stronger grassroots enthusiasm or simply more visible campaigning. But compared to previous elections, the difference was striking. During my stay in Jhapa-5, I also had the opportunity to share tea with several families. One particular conversation revealed a generational divide I had been noticing across the country. In a family of three—a father, mother, and a 21-year-old college student—the son passionately argued that the family should support the new political party. The father, a long-time supporter of UML, was hesitant to abandon the party he had supported for decades.

The mother eventually suggested a compromise: one vote for Balen and another for UML. Similar conversations seemed to be unfolding in many households. Younger voters were strongly pushing for new political alternatives, while older family members remained emotionally tied to the parties that had shaped Nepal’s political history.

In another home nearby, a father tried to persuade his daughter to remain loyal to the party he had supported all his life. She listened respectfully but appeared unconvinced. These quiet debates inside homes reflected something deeper: Nepal’s political loyalties were slowly shifting.

Throughout Jhapa I also met several committed party supporters of CPN-UML who openly expressed frustration with their own leadership. Some longtime party cadres complained about internal factionalism, leadership styles, and the growing distance between senior leaders and ordinary supporters.

By the end of the day, after nearly four hours of conversations across tea shops, homes, and small businesses, one impression stood out clearly: voters were eager for change, though not necessarily united behind a single political alternative. Later that evening, back at the hotel, the staff were packing their bags to return home to vote. I casually asked them about their preferences.

They laughed. “Dai, do you still have confusion?” one of them said. “Of course we are voting for the bell.” The next morning, before voting officially began, I visited a polling station near the hotel. Around nine o’clock, an energetic elderly man—well into his seventies—walked out after casting his ballot.

When I asked him about the atmosphere inside, he confidently replied that many voters there seemed to be choosing the bell symbol. Throughout the day I visited several polling stations. While it is impossible to know exactly how people vote inside the booth, the conversations outside suggested that many voters were reconsidering long-standing party loyalties.

The reasons behind this shift appeared consistent across districts. People repeatedly spoke about corruption scandals, dissatisfaction with governance, lack of job opportunities, and the painful reality of watching young people leave the country in search of work. Among these concerns, employment stood out as the most urgent.

At the same time, voters did not express blind trust in the new political actors either. What they demanded most was accountability—clear answers, transparent leadership, and tangible results rather than speeches. By the time I completed my journey from the Madhes districts to Jhapa, one conclusion seemed unavoidable: the psychological environment of this election felt different from previous ones.

Now the election results are out. As anticipated, the Rastriya Swatantra Party has secured nearly a two-thirds majority in the 275-member House of Representatives, and Balendra Shah is poised to become the next prime minister.

The conversations I heard along the road help explain why. Across tea shops, buses, salons, and family kitchens, people repeatedly spoke about their exhaustion with traditional political parties. Many felt those parties had dominated politics for decades but had failed to deliver the jobs, governance, and opportunities citizens expected.

Yet the mood was not defined by frustration alone. It was also filled with hope. People now expect the new government to control corruption, create employment, strengthen governance, and restore a sense of trust between citizens and the state.

Whether those expectations can be fulfilled remains to be seen. But one thing is already clear. Across the country—from the plains of the Madhes to the eastern towns of Jhapa—citizens are questioning old loyalties, debating politics more openly, and demanding greater accountability from those who seek to represent them.

Barring any dramatic political developments, Balendra Shah is poised to become Nepal’s next prime minister  following the strong electoral performance of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) in the March 5 election for the House of Representatives.

RSP Chairman Rabi Lamichhane and senior leader Shah have already begun receiving congratulatory messages from the international community after the party emerged as the largest force in parliament. 

Despite their rapid political rise, however, both leaders remain relatively inexperienced in the realm of foreign policy and international relations. 

Over the past three decades, a number of leaders have engaged with these countries, and vice versa. However, under Balen’s leadership, the situation will be entirely new. Aside from existing institutional memory, bilateral issues will be discussed afresh. 

Shah served as mayor of Kathmandu Metropolitan City for three years but engaged with the international community only in a limited capacity. During his tenure, he avoided several official visits to major countries and showed little interest in expanding international ties. Some of his remarks and decisions related to foreign countries also stirred controversy.

Lamichhane briefly headed the Ministry of Home Affairs, a role that gave him opportunities to meet foreign diplomats and visiting delegations in Kathmandu, providing him with some exposure to the concerns of major powers.

Although both leaders have spoken little about Nepal’s foreign policy, the RSP election manifesto offers clues about the priorities of a potential Shah-led government. The party advocates what it calls “balanced and dynamic diplomacy,” aiming to transform Nepal from a traditional buffer state into a “vibrant bridge” between its two giant neighbors — India and China — through strategic partnerships, connectivity and development cooperation. The party has also emphasized leveraging the economic rise of India and China to accelerate Nepal’s development.

 In the past three years, Shishir Khanal, who headed the party’s international department, often spoke publicly on foreign policy issues on behalf of the RSP. In talks with representatives of foreign countries, Khanal states that his party’s key priorities are good governance and economic prosperity, and that any dialogue with other countries should be based on these agenda.

During the same period, Swarnim Wagle, an RSP lawmaker, also commented frequently on foreign policy matters and is therefore likely to play a key role in shaping the foreign policy direction of the incoming government. For years, Wagle has argued that Nepal must better understand the aspirations and concerns of rising powers such as India and China. “Rising powers have legitimate interests and aspirations, and they also have certain red lines which we must understand,” Wagle has said in the past.

In a recent post on X following a phone conversation with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Lamichhane said the RSP-led government would prioritize development diplomacy. This suggests that Nepal’s primary engagement with major powers would focus on economic collaboration rather than broader strategic issues.

“We look forward to a partnership with India that scales new heights through cooperation in connectivity, cultural tourism, energy and trade, ensuring a prosperous future for the people of both countries,” Lamichhane wrote. Modi, in the same conversation, reaffirmed India’s commitment to working with Nepal’s incoming government on “mutual prosperity, progress and well-being.” He expressed confidence that bilateral ties would scale new heights in the coming years.

However, contentious issues such as the boundary dispute and the 1950 India-Nepal Treaty of Peace and Friendship are likely to resurface when Shah eventually visits New Delhi.  In his role as the mayor of Kathmandu Metropolitan City, he raised the issue regarding the map.  As in the past, the new government may face domestic pressure to raise these matters with India. Relations with New Delhi remain crucial for Nepal’s domestic political and economic stability. 

The United States also congratulated the Nepali people for holding the election and said it looked forward to working with the incoming government on the shared goals of prosperity and security. The reference to “security” has sparked debate within Nepal’s political and security circles. Washington appears eager to begin a new chapter in bilateral relations with a government led by younger leaders who are exposed to western values and culture. 

Ahead of the election, Samuel J. Paparo, commander of the United States Indo-Pacific Command, visited Nepal and praised the country’s role in promoting regional stability, disaster preparedness and peacekeeping. Meanwhile, Bill Huizenga, chairman of the US House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on South and Central Asia, said recent elections in Nepal and Bangladesh present new opportunities for US engagement in South Asia.

At a congressional hearing on US policy in the region, Huizenga described South and Central Asia as a dynamic region where young populations are increasingly drawn to Western cultures and values. For the administration of Joe Biden, trade and security remain key priorities.

Following the 2025 September Gen Z movement that triggered the political upheaval, China initially remained largely silent. However, with the arrival of a new ambassador in Kathmandu, Beijing has become more vocal. China also congratulated Nepal on successfully conducting the election. 

Speaking at a press briefing on March 6, Mao Ning, spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry, said Beijing valued its traditionally friendly ties with Nepal and looked forward to strengthening the strategic partnership between the two countries. China’s key priorities include implementing agreements reached during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s 2019 visit to Nepal and advancing projects under the Belt and Road Initiative.

Although RSP leaders historically had limited engagement with major powers, international outreach toward the party increased after it emerged as the fourth-largest party in the 2022 general election. Senior RSP leaders have since visited India and held meetings with leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party and Indian government officials.

China has also cultivated contacts with RSP leaders. In 2024, a 14-member delegation led by Wagle visited China but cut short the trip following Lamichhane’s arrest. Another senior RSP figure, Indira Rana, the former deputy speaker of the now-dissolved House of Representatives, frequently traveled to China and participated in programs organized by the Chinese embassy in Kathmandu.

As Nepal prepares for a possible political transition under a new generation of leaders, the coming months will test how the RSP balances relations with global and regional powers while pursuing its vision of development-driven diplomacy.

Newly appointed Chinese Ambassador to Nepal, Zhang Maoming, has pledged to implement the important consensus reached between the two countries during Xi Jinping’s 2019 visit to Nepal.

In remarks made upon his arrival to assume office, Ambassador Zhang said, “I look forward to working with friends from all sectors of Nepal to carry forward our traditional friendship and advance all-round exchanges and cooperation across all fields.”

He added that the Embassy of the People's Republic of China in Nepal will continue to practice people-centered diplomacy, serve as a trusted partner to Chinese nationals in Nepal, and act as a steadfast guardian of their legitimate rights and interests overseas.

“Let us work hand in hand to advance the Strategic Partnership of Cooperation Featuring Everlasting Friendship for Development and Prosperity between China and Nepal, and jointly build a China-Nepal community with a shared future,” he further said.

Ambassador Zhang noted that 2026 marks the opening year of China’s 15th Five-Year Plan period. China will accelerate the advancement of Chinese modernization and proactively expand high-standard opening-up, creating new development opportunities for countries around the world, including Nepal.

“Nepal is also at a critical stage of transformation and transition,” he said. “At a time when changes unseen in a century are accelerating and turbulence and transformation are interwoven in the international landscape, China stands ready to work with Nepal to implement the four Global Initiatives, strengthen solidarity and cooperation among the Global South, and jointly promote an equal and orderly multipolar world and universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalization, so as to contribute to building a community with a shared future for mankind.”

In 2019, President Xi Jinping paid a historic and successful state visit to Nepal, elevating bilateral relations to a Strategic Partnership of Cooperation Featuring Everlasting Friendship for Development and Prosperity, he said.  Under the strategic guidance of our two countries’ leaders, political mutual trust has continued to deepen, high-quality Belt and Road cooperation has delivered fruitful results, and people-to-people exchanges have grown ever closer, bringing tangible benefits to our two peoples, he added.

With just 20 days remaining before the election, a powerful anti-incumbency wave is sweeping across Nepal’s political landscape, placing senior leaders from all major parties under unusual pressure.  From long-established figures to leaders of relatively newer parties, few appear insulated from growing voter dissatisfaction.

A leader close to CPN-UML Chairperson KP Sharma Oli recently acknowledged the changing mood, remarking, “This is the first time Oli is truly contesting an election.” The comment reflects a striking shift in electoral dynamics.

In past elections, established leaders relied heavily on party networks and traditional voter loyalties. This time, however, even prominent figures are engaged in intensive door-to-door campaigns, signaling that electoral victories can no longer be taken for granted.

Pushpa Kamal Dahal, coordinator of the Nepal Communist Party and former chair of the CPN (Maoist Center), is also facing the heat. In recent public remarks, Dahal suggested that “external forces” are backing emerging political actors, a statement widely interpreted as a reference to the growing popularity of Kathmandu Metropolitan City Mayor Balendra Shah and other non-traditional figures. Dahal also argued that the “scenario on social media” differs from the “reality on the ground,” implying that digital enthusiasm may not necessarily convert into votes.

Analysts point to the rapid expansion of internet access and social media platforms as a key factor driving the current anti-incumbency sentiment. Platforms such as TikTok, Facebook, and YouTube have become central arenas for political debate, criticism, and mobilization.

Studies conducted in various democracies suggest that increased internet penetration can weaken trust in traditional political parties and institutions. In Nepal, social media has amplified scrutiny of incumbent leaders and provided space for alternative voices. The digital sphere has also facilitated the rise of populist and anti-establishment narratives, eroding the dominance of established political actors over public discourse.

Beyond digital influence, long-standing governance challenges appear to be fueling public frustration. Major political parties have alternated in power for decades, yet many structural issues—ranging from unemployment and corruption to weak public service delivery and political instability—remain unresolved.

Voters are increasingly questioning senior leaders who have held the prime ministerial office multiple times. “If you have been in power repeatedly, why have our problems not been addressed?” has become a common refrain at campaign events, according to party insiders. This cumulative dissatisfaction suggests that the current wave is not merely cyclical but rooted in deeper structural grievances.

Nepal’s electoral contests were traditionally shaped by competition among four principal forces: Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, the Maoists, and Madhes-based parties. However, the rise of new political forces and independent candidates has disrupted this familiar pattern.

While these emerging actors may lack extensive nationwide party structures, they are capitalizing on voter frustration and presenting themselves as credible alternatives. Observers note that the anti-incumbency sentiment does not appear to favor any single opposition party; rather, it reflects a broader desire for new and “fresh” faces in politics.

Despite the prevailing mood, incumbent leaders remain hopeful that strong grassroots networks and organizational capacity will help them withstand the challenge. They argue that online narratives do not always translate into electoral outcomes and that traditional campaign mechanisms still hold influence.

Nevertheless, the atmosphere leading up to the polls suggests that this election is shaping up as more than a routine contest among parties. For many voters, it appears to be a referendum on the political establishment itself.

House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on South and Central Asia Chairman Bill Huizenga has said that recent elections in Bangladesh and Nepal present new opportunities for U.S. engagement in South Asia.

In his opening remarks at a subcommittee hearing titled “South Asia: U.S. Foreign Policy in the Region,” Huizenga described South and Central Asia as a dynamic region where young and growing populations are increasingly drawn to Western cultures and values rather than to what he called China’s “authoritarian alternative.”

Bordering India, both Nepal and Bangladesh are undergoing significant political transformations. Bangladesh held general elections on February 12, following the July 2024 revolution that led to the ouster of an authoritarian government in September 2025. Meanwhile, Nepal is set to hold democratic elections on March 5 after youth-led protests overthrew the previous government.

Huizenga said these developments mark “new chapters for engagement” in South Asia and provide an opportunity to redefine U.S. relations with the new governments.

Emphasizing the strategic importance of the region, he reiterated that South and Central Asia remain vital to U.S. foreign policy interests, particularly as their young populations shape the political and economic future of the region.

Here is the full-text of his speech: 

Our strategy there is key to the United States national security and economic strength and our global presence. South and Central Asia is home to nearly 2 billion people, dynamic economies and strategic waterways that shape the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.

 Throughout the region, the President has successfully negotiated deals that open markets and advance U.S. Economic interests. Now we are going to engage and how we engage will define America's role in Asia for decades to come.

 China has come to the same conclusion, no surprise. Through its belt and road initiative, China engages in predatory lending to further its security interests and force smaller nations into debt traps. Furthermore, China has hardened its border with India, Nepal, and Bhutan, building infrastructure to support its military aspirations.

 Despite its distance from our shores, maintaining a free and open Indian Ocean is a priority for our national and our economic security. The Indian Ocean is one of the busiest maritime corridors on the Earth, carrying the lifeblood of global commerce and energy, including more than 80% of global seaborne oil trade.

Safeguarding these sea lanes through enhanced naval cooperation with partners and allies will only serve to counter China's growing influence and limit its malign behavior in the region. Alongside President Trump, I too see the importance of our naval base on Diego Garcia in the middle of the Indian ocean. 

I echo this sentiment that preserving America's military fortitude in the region will deter Chinese coercion, prevent piracy, and ensure the free flow of American and world trade. Directly north of Diego Garcia, India, the largest democracy in the world and one of the fastest growing economies, remains a vital strategic partner. Just last week, President Trump brokered a historic trade deal with India, completely revamping US engagement with the country. The US-India trade deal sets India's tariff rate at 18%, one of the lowest regionally. Moreover, Delhi has agreed to buy more American energy. This deal will strengthen US-India relations, support American workers through manufacturing and joint technology ventures, and boost our exports.

Strengthening ties with New Delhi through defense cooperation, trade and technology partnerships advances our shared interests. I look forward to increasing cooperation, co-production and investment, especially under the new framework negotiated by the President. Bordering India, Nepal and Bangladesh are undergoing political transformations. 

Bangladesh will hold free elections tomorrow following its 2024 July revolution, which ousted an authoritarian government in September of 2025, Nepalese youth overthrew the government and Nepal will hold democratic elections next month. Both of these instances offer new chapters for engagement in South Asia, defining US relations with these new governments. South and Central Asia is a dynamic region, young growing populations are more often drawn to western cultures and values than to China's authoritarian alternative.

Strategic US led diplomacy will make a difference in building alliances and achieving our mutual beneficial goals throughout the region. Our strategy in South Asia must be comprehensive, anchored in strong partnerships, economic engagement, and a commitment to democratic values. Our engagement in the region must advance American interests, but also continue to contribute to a more secure, prosperous and free Indian Ocean. I look forward to hearing from Assistant Secretary Kapur regarding the administration's South and Central Asia strategy.

As political parties escalate their election campaigns, the Sept 8–9 GenZ protests have transformed from a moment of civic outrage into a central battlefield of electoral politics. What began as student-led demonstrations demanding the lifting of the social media ban and stronger action against corruption has now been reframed by political actors into competing narratives of accountability, responsibility, and legitimacy.

The Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) has positioned the killing of 19 students during the Sept 8 protests as evidence of state repression under then Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. By directly holding Oli accountable, RSP is attempting to challenge the moral authority of the traditional political establishment, especially the CPN-UML. This framing resonates strongly with younger voters who view the state’s response to the protests as excessive and emblematic of a deeper culture of impunity. This has forced UML Chairperson Oli to come up with a long elaboration that he did not order to shoot the protestors on Sept 8. 

The political stakes rose sharply after Balendra Shah (Balen), former mayor of Kathmandu Metropolitan City, joined RSP as a senior leader and was projected as its prime ministerial candidate. Shah’s refusal to share a debate platform with Oli, citing the latter’s alleged responsibility for the deaths, is not merely a personal stance—it is a calculated political move. By refusing engagement, Shah seeks to frame the election as a moral judgment rather than a contest of rhetoric, thereby forcing Oli and UML onto the defensive.

In response, traditional parties—particularly UML—have attempted to counter this narrative by shifting the focus from Sept 8 to Sept 9. UML leaders argue that Shah himself should be held accountable for the arson and destruction of state institutions, including Singha Durbar, that took place on September 9. Criticism of Shah for failing to mobilize fire engines during the attacks is meant to undermine his image as a decisive and effective administrator.

RSP’s decision to officially project Shah as its prime ministerial candidate marks a significant departure from Nepal’s recent political practice and signals growing confidence within the party. The declaration of prime ministerial candidates by major parties—Shah for RSP, KP Sharma Oli for UML, Gagan Kumar Thapa for Nepali Congress, and Pushpa Kamal Dahal for the Nepali Communist Party—has personalized the election to an unprecedented degree. Shah’s direct contest with Oli in Jhapa-5 has further nationalized the race, transforming a constituency battle into a symbolic clash between old power and political disruption.

Shah’s nationwide campaign and the public enthusiasm it has generated have clearly unsettled traditional parties. This unease is reflected in the rhetoric of Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who has shifted from cautious sympathy toward Shah to open criticism. Dahal’s claim that domestic and foreign forces are investing heavily in promoting leaders who gain popularity through “stunts” reveals an anxiety shared by established parties: the erosion of ideological politics and organizational discipline in favor of personality-driven movements. His assertion that GenZ movements and new political parties are backed by foreign forces echoes a familiar tactic in Nepali politics—delegitimizing dissent by externalizing it.

The Nepali Congress has attempted to distance itself from this polarizing debate. By refusing to take sides on either Sept 8 or Sept 9 and instead invoking “Sept 10,” the party appears to be pursuing a strategy of calculated ambiguity. While this may help avoid immediate controversy, it risks making the party appear evasive at a moment when public demand for accountability is high.

Taken together, the emerging electoral landscape suggests a far more confrontational and emotionally charged campaign than in previous elections. The struggle to define Sept 8 and Sept 9 is not merely about dates or events; it is about controlling the narrative of state violence, civic responsibility, and political legitimacy. As these narratives harden, the risk of heightened polarization—and even election-related violence in certain constituencies—cannot be dismissed. Ultimately, this election may hinge less on policy debates and more on which version of recent history voters choose to believe.

With nominations now complete for both the First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) and Proportional Representation (PR) categories, the prospects of holding the House of Representatives elections for March 5 have improved significantly. 

President Ramchandra Paudel and Prime Minister Sushila Karki have maintained a firm, non-negotiable stance in favor of the polls. Political parties across the spectrum have participated actively, showing organizational readiness and enthusiasm. Except for a fringe group under businessman Durga Prasai, no major force seems capable of disrupting the electoral process at this moment. Earlier, divisions within the Nepali Congress (NC) had raised doubts about whether the elections would take place on time. Those concerns have now largely subsided, clearing the way for the polls. 

The elections are widely seen as essential for restoring political normalcy by fully activating the constitution. Yet, security remains a concern. Morale within the Nepal Police is reportedly low, which could complicate campaigning and voting. The Nepali Army has already been deployed, signaling the state’s commitment to holding the elections as planned. The primary security concern comes from potential clashes between established and emerging parties. A minor clash in the Jhapa-5 constituency on nomination filing day serves as an early warning.

Why the vote matters

The March 5 elections are crucial for the country. First, the lower house election will formally transfer governing authority to a legitimate parliamentary body, restoring democratic credibility. The current unelected government will be replaced by one chosen by the people. Second, the polls will also address constitutional breaches and ambiguities that emerged after the Sept 8-9 unrest through a renewed popular mandate. Third, the elections will reduce the risk of a deepening constitutional crisis by re-establishing fully functional state institutions. 

Furthermore, the elections are expected to safeguard the current constitution and political system. Newer forces, like the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) and leaders such as Balen Shah—whose earlier positions on the political system were ambiguous—have publicly reaffirmed their commitment to republicanism and secularism. This has eased fears of a rollback of the post-2008 political order. Major parties are also making visible efforts to bring fresh faces into Parliament. While limited, this reflects growing public dissatisfaction with entrenched elites. 

Failure to hold elections on schedule will seriously undermine the legitimacy of both the president and the prime minister, potentially plunging the country into renewed political conflict.

Will it bring stability and reform?

Despite these positive aspects, a critical question remains: will the elections bring political stability? The answer is far from reassuring. Current realities suggest that no single party is likely to win a clear majority. Major parties—including the NC, CPN-UML, the Nepali Communist Party, and the RSP—have fielded candidates in nearly all constituencies. Under the PR system, the balance of power among these parties is also expected to remain largely unchanged.

This points to a hung parliament. A stable majority government appears unlikely in the present context, making fragile coalitions almost inevitable. Coalition politics will dominate governance once again, limiting the government’s ability to pursue bold or long-term reforms. Sweeping changes, especially institutional and constitutional reforms, are unlikely to materialize. Constitutional amendments require a two-thirds parliamentary majority—a threshold nearly impossible under current conditions. Historically, even powerful parties such as the NC and UML have shown little appetite for serious reform. 

Corruption and governance reforms will also be difficult to pursue. A hung parliament will likely become a battleground for party politics, with indecision and obstruction dominating parliamentary work.

Foreign policy post-vote

Political fragmentation will affect Nepal’s foreign policy. Instability creates space for foreign influence. Managing balanced and cordial relations with major powers will be more difficult, as old and new parties bring divergent, and at times contradicting, worldviews. Even when Parliament was dominated by three major parties, building a unified foreign policy had proved difficult. A more fragmented legislature will make consensus even harder. Differences on issues like the MCC of the US and BRI of China are already apparent.

Some traditional political parties have accused newer parties of being backed by foreign interests, particularly regarding the Sept 8-9 protest. Nepal’s engagement with major powers has slowed since the GenZ unrest. Meanwhile, major powers are waiting for a new government before adjusting their strategies. Managing the competing interests of major powers will be especially challenging for a coalition government. China seems to favor traditional, particularly communist, parties. New Delhi is open to working with any government. Western countries appear more supportive of newer parties. Conflicting agendas among these powers will place additional pressure on a coalition government. 

Conclusion

The March 5 elections are necessary and constitutionally indispensable. They offer a chance to restore democratic processes, correct past deviations, and prevent a constitutional crisis. However, while the elections may restore procedural normalcy, they are unlikely to bring political stability or transformative change. A fragmented mandate, coalition politics, and external pressures will continue shaping Nepal’s trajectory long after the vote. 

Elections, therefore, should be seen not as a solution, but as the start of another challenging phase in Nepal’s ongoing democratic transition.

Nepal has completed candidate nominations under its First-Past-the-Post (FPTP) electoral system, marking a critical step toward the country’s upcoming parliamentary elections scheduled for March 5. The process concluded largely peacefully, easing concerns about political instability.

Nepal’s federal parliament consists of 275 members, with 165 elected through the FPTP system and the remaining 110 through proportional representation (PR). With nominations now finalized, the Election Commission is moving ahead with the election calendar. Below are ten developments emerging from the nomination process that merit attention.

1. Candidate numbers exceed 3,000

According to Nepal’s Election Commission, more than 3,000 candidates have filed nominations under the FPTP system. This figure is expected to decline slightly as parties negotiate withdrawals. Separately, 3,293 candidates from 63 political parties have registered under the proportional representation system.

2. An influx of new faces

Political parties have introduced a notable number of first-time candidates, reflecting growing public pressure for political renewal. Analysts link this trend partly to youth-led protests in September that called for accountability and generational change. The Nepali Congress, one of the country’s largest parties, has nominated 106 new candidates out of its 165 FPTP slots. The CPN-UML, CPN (Maoist Centre), and the newly formed Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) have also fielded a large number of new contenders, though comprehensive data is still pending.

3. Absence of pre-election alliances

In contrast to the 2017 and 2022 elections—when major parties formed electoral alliances—no formal pre-poll coalitions have been announced this time. Major parties, including the Nepali Congress, CPN-UML, RSP, and the Nepali Communist Party, have fielded candidates in most constituencies. While limited seat adjustments may still occur, parties appear to be testing their individual electoral strength.

4. Limited progress on inclusion

Despite constitutional commitments to inclusivity, candidate representation under the FPTP system remains uneven. Women, Indigenous communities, and other marginalized groups are underrepresented. While proportional representation lists are legally required to ensure diversity, no such obligation exists under FPTP, resulting in only about 400 female candidates nationwide.

5. High-profile contest draws attention

One of the most closely watched races is in Jhapa-5, where former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli is facing former Kathmandu mayor Balendra Shah, a popular independent figure known for his anti-establishment appeal. The constituency drew nationwide attention during nominations, with competing demonstrations of political strength and minor clashes reported.

6. Prominent political figures shift constituencies

Several senior leaders are contesting from strategically significant constituencies. Nepali Congress President Gagan Kumar Thapa has moved from his traditional stronghold in Kathmandu to Sarlahi-4 in the southern Madhes region. Former Prime Minister and Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal is contesting from Rukum (East), a historic center of the Maoist insurgency. Former Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai has reversed an earlier decision not to contest and is running from Gorkha-2. RSP chair Rabi Lamichhane is contesting from Chitwan-2, while former top bureaucrat Kul Man Ghising is running from Kathmandu-3. Veteran leader Sher Bahadur Deuba, a dominant political figure since the 1990s, has opted not to contest this election.

7. Journalists enter electoral politics

A growing number of journalists have entered the electoral race, underscoring public distrust in traditional political elites and the media’s expanding role in politics. Prominent television host Rishi Dhamala and several other journalists are contesting from various constituencies. Nepal’s state-run news agency reports that more than a dozen journalists are running for office—more than in previous elections.

8. RSP expands nationwide presence

The Rastriya Swatantra Party, which emerged as a major political force in the 2022 elections, has fielded candidates in 164 of Nepal’s 165 constituencies, excluding the remote Himalayan district of Manang. This positions the party alongside long-established parties and reflects its rapid organizational growth. The monarchist Rastriya Prajatantra Party has also fielded candidates nationwide.

9. Legal hurdles cleared

Nepal’s Supreme Court declined to intervene in internal disputes within the Nepali Congress, refusing to issue a stay order that could have delayed the election process. The decision has removed a major legal obstacle and allowed the Election Commission to proceed as scheduled.

10. Cabinet ministers resign to contest

Four cabinet ministers resigned to contest the elections, drawing criticism from civil society groups and opposition figures. Critics argue that ministers should prioritize ensuring free and fair elections rather than seeking electoral office, while supporters defend the resignations as consistent with democratic norms.