Submit your Article

The decision by the Balendra Shah-led government to form a task force to prepare a discussion paper on constitutional amendment signals renewed political intent. Yet, despite years of rhetoric and electoral promises, translating that intent into action remains deeply challenging.

At the heart of the difficulty lies the arithmetic of power. Although the ruling bloc—particularly Rastriya Swantra Party—appears to command close to a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives, this strength does not extend to the National Assembly. Since constitutional amendments in Nepal require approval from both houses, the absence of sufficient numbers in the upper chamber poses a structural hurdle. Even with potential support from smaller parties, securing the required majority in both houses remains uncertain.

Beyond numbers, the lack of political consensus presents an even more formidable barrier. While almost all major parties—including Nepali Congress (NC), CPN-UML, Nepali Communist Party, and RSP—have expressed commitment to amending the constitution, they diverge sharply on what those amendments should entail. 

The most contentious issue is the form of governance. The debate over executive power has resurfaced strongly. RSP and Maoist forces are advocating for a directly elected president, arguing that it could ensure stronger and more stable leadership. However, the Nepali Congress has consistently opposed this model, favoring the existing parliamentary system. This disagreement is not new—it dates back to the original constitution-drafting process of 2008 to 2015, when parties ultimately rejected a directly elected presidential system, citing risks for a politically fragile country like Nepal.

Such foundational disagreements make consensus-building extremely difficult. Constitutional amendments are not merely technical adjustments; they involve redefining the structure of the state. Without alignment on core principles like governance models, progress is likely to stall.

Adding to the complexity is the absence of a clear roadmap. The government has formed a task force to draft a discussion paper, but has not yet established a formal constitutional review mechanism. This raises questions about whether the process has sufficient institutional grounding to move forward effectively.

Political ambiguity further complicates the process. Many parties, including NC and UML, have acknowledged the need for amendments but have refrained from specifying concrete proposals. Even parties with clearer positions, such as RSP—which has advocated for a directly elected executive and a fully proportional electoral system—may face pressure to moderate their stance in the post-election political environment.

Electoral reform is another sensitive issue. While concerns have been raised about the current system’s inability to produce stable single-party governments, recent electoral outcomes have somewhat weakened that argument. This reduces urgency and consensus around reforming the electoral framework.

Finally, broader ideological issues—such as secularism—could emerge as flashpoints during the amendment process, further complicating negotiations.

In sum, constitutional amendment in Nepal is not just a legislative exercise but a deeply political process requiring broad consensus, institutional clarity, and numerical strength across both houses of Parliament. The current scenario reveals gaps on all three fronts. As a result, despite renewed momentum, the path toward amendment remains uncertain and fraught with challenges.

Prime Minister Balendra Shah’s early days in office have signaled a striking departure from traditional governance. From his restrained public presence to his assertive administrative reforms, Shah’s approach suggests an attempt to redefine how executive power is exercised. 

One of the most visible shifts has been his communication style—or the lack thereof. Unlike previous prime ministers, who typically engaged with the media immediately after assuming office, Shah has remained notably silent. He has neither addressed the press nor issued public statements, signaling a preference for action over rhetoric.

Even celebratory political norms were curtailed; his party instructed lawmakers not to organize victory rallies, and Shah himself kept his sole appearance brief and speechless.

Diplomatic conventions have also been disrupted. Traditionally, ambassadors from major nations meet a newly appointed prime minister within a day of the oath-taking ceremony. Shah, however, has limited such engagements, meeting diplomats only during the official ceremony. By avoiding customary congratulatory exchanges, he has maintained an unusually quiet Prime Minister’s Office.

At the same time, Shah has embraced symbolic gestures rooted in tradition. He followed Hindu rituals during his oath-taking and conducted a special pujabefore entering the official residence in Baluwatar. 

Structurally, Shah moved quickly to streamline the government. He reduced the number of ministries from 24 to 15, emphasizing efficiency. He also directed government secretaries to either accelerate their work or step down, demonstrating a results-oriented approach. 

Policy-wise, Shah’s administration has taken bold steps. The government issued a public apology to Dalits and historically marginalized communities—an acknowledgment of centuries of systemic oppression. This commitment is part of a broader 100-point governance reform agenda approved by the cabinet.

On the day of his swearing-in, the arrest of former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli by the Ministry of Home Affairs sent shockwaves through the political landscape, underscoring Shah’s willingness to maintain accountability. 

 Further reinforcing this stance, the cabinet decided to form a high-level commission to investigate the assets of public officials dating back to 1990.

Perhaps the most significant break from the past lies in cabinet formation. Shah has prioritized merit and professional expertise over political compromise, resisting pressure from party insiders. Senior leaders expected to secure ministerial positions were sidelined as Shah asserted his authority to choose his team independently. This has allowed him to maintain tighter control over his cabinet and demand greater accountability.

In a positive sign for legislative stability, he has begun reaching out to other parties in Parliament. He has consulted with lawmakers across the political spectrum to gather their views on the budget and the government’s priorities.

Furthermore, as the Rastriya Swatantra Party pledged to amend the constitution in its election manifesto, the government has formed a committee led by Ashim Shah, the PM’s chief political advisor, to prepare a foundational document for constitutional amendment.

 Balen Shah’s premiership is marked by a blend of administrative assertiveness, cultural symbolism, and political independence. While his opaque style and limited communication may invite criticism, his decisive actions and reform-oriented agenda set him apart from his predecessors. Whether this unconventional approach will yield long-term stability remains to be seen, but it has already redefined leadership expectations in Nepal.

The swearing-in of Balendra Shah as Prime Minister marks a dramatic shift in Nepal’s political landscape, followed swiftly by bold actions from his administration. Within a day of assuming office, his government ordered the arrest of former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and former Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, holding them accountable for the deaths of 19 youths during the September 8–9 protests, based on findings from an investigative panel.

These arrests triggered widespread backlash. The Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) launched nationwide protests, while the Nepali Congress also raised objections, citing concerns over the lack of due process. Legal experts have similarly argued that proper legal procedures were not followed in the arrests of Oli and Lekhak.

At the same time, the government intensified its anti-corruption drive by initiating money laundering investigations against top political figures. This included the arrest of Dipak Khadka after a large amount of allegedly illegal cash was discovered at his residence during the Gen Z protests. According to local media reports, the Balen administration has also begun investigating the assets of former prime ministers, including Sher Bahadur Deuba.

Alongside these crackdowns, the Shah-led cabinet unveiled an ambitious “100 tasks in 100 days” reform agenda aimed at restructuring the bureaucracy and depoliticizing state institutions. The government has also pledged to establish a new commission to fully investigate the September 9 protests, addressing gaps left by earlier inquiries, and announced plans to form a powerful body to scrutinize the assets of public officials dating back to 1990. Other initiatives are focused on improving public service delivery.

Meanwhile, a rift has escalated within the Nepali Congress. A special general convention held in January reportedly removed Sher Bahadur Deuba from party leadership and elected Gagan Kumar Thapa as the new party head. In response, the Deuba faction filed a case challenging the legitimacy of the convention. Both factions have since been conducting parallel political activities, deepening the party’s internal crisis.

Today, Balendra Shah takes the oath as the 42nd Prime Minister of Nepal. Shah enters Singha Durbar amid towering public expectations and daunting structural challenges. His party, the Rastriya Swatantra Party, emerged from the March 5 election with a near-two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives. From corruption to jobs, from bureaucratic gridlock to foreign policy tightropes, his premiership will be defined not by rhetoric, but by action. This marks the first time in Nepal's recent history that a new generation of leaders has reached the helm of power.

Corruption on trial

There is a widespread public perception that corruption has reached unprecedented levels over the past decades. Scandals involving public procurement, infrastructure projects, and state enterprises have long dominated headlines, public discourse, and popular anger. During the campaign, voters expected swift and decisive action on major corruption cases. However, many corruption networks span political parties, business interests, and the bureaucracy. Dismantling them will invite fierce opposition from multiple quarters. Anti-graft bodies are slow and politicized, and without structural reform, addressing corruption in any meaningful way will be extremely difficult.

Service delivery

Nepalis are frustrated. Slow service delivery—be it in citizenship processing, construction permits, tax administration, or infrastructure rollout—has become a symbol of state dysfunction. The prolonged delay in printing driving licenses is a case in point; many people have waited over three years without receiving theirs. Passport delays tell a similar story. Both Shah and his party have promised rapid transformation in government services, but the bureaucratic machinery he inherits is rigid, hierarchical, politicized, and deeply resistant to change. Past prime ministers have struggled to push through such reforms.

Job creation

Unemployment was among the top issues driving voters in the March election. Nepal’s youth unemployment rate of 20.6 percent is the highest in South and Southeast Asia. Shah’s critics argue that job creation cannot happen overnight and requires structural reform, private investment, and time. Yet the electorate wants immediate results. The RSP’s election manifesto has promised 1.2m jobs annually.

According to data from Nepal Rastra Bank, the national GDP at current prices has reached Rs 6,107.2bn, but the composition of this figure reveals a troubling reality. The service sector dominates at 62.01 percent, while agriculture and industry contribute a mere 25.16 percent and 12.82 percent, respectively, according to Kathmandu-based economist Laxman Neupane. This heavy reliance on services has failed to generate sufficient high-quality employment or meaningful value-added growth, placing immense pressure on the incoming RSP government to pivot toward aggressive industrial expansion, he adds.

A business-friendly Nepal

Nepal’s economic potential is considerable—spanning hydropower, tourism, agriculture, and, more recently, information technology services. Realizing that potential requires systemic reform. Red tape remains a major obstacle, with business registration, licensing, land acquisition, and import-export approvals requiring multiple clearances across agencies. 

Foreign assistance has declined in recent years, and major donor countries are increasingly signaling a shift toward facilitating private investment rather than direct aid. Every major power sees opportunity in Nepal, but all are calling for legislative reform, digitalization of services, and stronger investor protections. Foreign investors will be closely watching how Nepal balances openness with regulatory certainty. Failure to attract industrial investment means Nepali youth will have little choice but to continue relying on foreign labor markets, says US-based analyst Sushil Thapa. At the same time, instability in the Middle East and ongoing international conflicts are making those markets increasingly risky and uncertain, he adds.

Economic challenges

Nepal’s economy presents a mix of apparent stability and deep structural fragility. Macroeconomic indicators, including low inflation and strong foreign exchange reserves of around Rs 3,200bn, paint a broadly positive picture. Yet domestic demand remains weak, banks face rising non-performing loans, and investor confidence is low. The economy is heavily dependent on remittances, which account for nearly 24 percent of GDP, while manufacturing and industry are shrinking and youth migration continues to rise. The RSP government faces the task of translating electoral enthusiasm into tangible economic growth.

Its ambitious goals include doubling GDP to $100bn within five years, raising per capita income to $3,000, and creating 1.2m jobs annually. Key challenges include reforming import duties, broadening the tax base, attracting foreign investment without incurring debt traps, and managing potential labor crises stemming from Gulf instability. While genuine prospects for reform and growth exist, political constraints and high public expectations make the path forward complex.

Managing multiple social groups

The Shah government faces a complex and delicate challenge in responding to the demands of multiple societal groups, each with distinct and pressing concerns. Cooperative victims, who have suffered financial losses due to mismanaged or failed cooperatives, seek justice and compensation, requiring careful legal and administrative handling. Informal lenders may press for regulatory leniency, creating a difficult balance between formal financial governance and existing lending practices. 

Teachers and other professional groups are likely to demand fair wages, better benefits, and improved working conditions, reflecting broader concerns about public sector reform and labor rights. Various other community and interest groups will also mobilize, making the public sphere a forum for multiple, often competing demands. Navigating all of this will require not only policy acumen but also strong negotiation skills, empathy, and the ability to prioritize solutions that uphold social harmony while addressing legitimate grievances.

Managing major powers

Relations with India, China, and the United States will remain one of the defining foreign policy challenges for Shah. All three countries are waiting to hear his strategic blueprint before making their next moves. They view RSP as a genuinely new political force and want to understand Balen’s approach before offering commitments.

China has emerged as a key player in Nepal’s foreign policy calculus. Beijing has signaled patience alongside clear expectations. It is willing to engage broadly with the new administration in areas such as artificial intelligence, rural digitization, infrastructure development through concessional loans, and cooperation in health, education, and agriculture. At the same time, China has sent an unmistakable message about its security and strategic interests in Nepal. Shah’s choices will determine whether Nepal can leverage China’s willingness to invest without compromising its sovereignty or regional equilibrium.

India presents a more nuanced challenge. While it remains Nepal’s most vital economic partner, New Delhi is closely watching how the new government handles longstanding bilateral disputes. Economic cooperation will likely remain central, but Nepal must tread carefully to avoid straining this critical relationship. The United States, meanwhile, offers opportunities primarily in business and security cooperation. With USAID assistance having significantly declined, American private investors are looking for a favorable investment climate. Shah’s administration will need to demonstrate political stability, regulatory clarity, and transparency to attract such investment while aligning with broader US interests in the region.

Intra-party unity

Nepal’s political history since the 1950s is filled with prime ministers brought down not by external adversaries, but by fractures within their own parties. The collapse of KP Sharma Oli’s government in 2020, driven by intra-party conflict, stands as a cautionary tale for Shah. Despite a strong electoral mandate, the RSP remains a young party with limited institutional experience. Aligning its members around a unified agenda will require patience, sustained consultation, and strategic delegation. The working relationship between Balen Shah and RSP Chair Rabi Lamichhane is something many observers are watching closely.

Cross-party dialogue

Cross-party cooperation will be equally important. While the RSP commands a strong mandate in the House of Representatives, it holds no seats in the National Assembly. Major legislation will therefore need to be negotiated with other parties, particularly the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML, to ensure passage. Outside Kathmandu, provincial and local governments remain dominated by traditional parties. Shah’s adversarial stance toward those parties could ultimately prove a liability for his own agenda.

Building a capable team

When Shah served as Mayor of Kathmandu Metropolitan City, he built a small, focused team to manage different areas of work. The role of Prime Minister demands something broader and more sophisticated. Unlike the mayoralty, the premiership requires a different level of institutional coordination and strategic thinking, says New Delhi-based researcher Aditi Paul. Managing sensitive matters of security and trade with neighboring countries calls for diplomatic finesse. Shah will need to rely on experienced advisors and assemble a capable team equipped to handle Nepal’s complex regional dynamics, she adds.

An investigation panel formed to examine the September 8-9 protests has recommended that then-Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, and Nepal Police Chief Chandra Kishwor Khapung be held accountable for the deaths of protesters, most of whom were college students. The Sushila Karki-led government has decided to make the report public after parts of it were leaked to the media. 

The Karki-led government had formed a panel headed by Gauri Bahadur Karki, which submitted its report last week. The onus now lies on the new government, led by Balendra Shah, to implement the report’s recommendations.

The panel has recommended investigating the officials under Section 181 of the Muluki Criminal Code, 2018. This section states that “no one shall cause the death of another through negligent acts.” If a death occurs due to such negligence, the law provides for imprisonment ranging from three to ten years and a fine of NPR 30,000 to NPR 100,000. Additionally, the commission has recommended taking action against dozens of government officials for failing to fulfill their duties.

According to the report, despite being informed about the growing security threats, the Prime Minister did not take timely initiatives to prevent casualties. The panel noted that if military and police coordination had been effective, the number of deaths and injuries could have been significantly reduced. 

The report emphasizes that Nepal, while having a parliamentary system, operates effectively as a Prime Ministerial system. Even when gunfire continued for nearly four hours around the Parliament building, resulting in several deaths and hundreds of injuries, it was the Prime Minister’s responsibility—as head of government—to ensure the protection of all citizens. The failure of responsible officials to act, and the Prime Minister’s inability to prevent further loss of life, represents a major institutional weakness, according to the report.

The commission also raised questions about the role of the Nepal Army during the protests. While army personnel were deployed at key locations such as Singha Durbar and Sheetal Niwas, the report notes that the army did not appear to carry out its duty to protect these sensitive sites. Commanders stationed at Singha Durbar, the Presidential residence (Sheetal Niwas), the Federal Parliament building in Baneshwor, and the Prime Minister’s residence in Baluwatar reportedly failed to fulfill their responsibilities.

It was also revealed that Nepal Army Chief Ashok Raj Sigdel pressured Prime Minister Oli to resign on the morning of September 9. In his statement to the commission, the Army Chief said he had informed the Prime Minister that the army was fully prepared to manage the situation following the resignation.

The report highlights systemic lapses in intelligence gathering, inter-agency coordination, and preventive measures, warning that future incidents could escalate without reforms in political and security leadership. It points out that security agencies had insufficient information regarding the preparations made by protest organizers.

 The National Investigation Department, tasked with intelligence collection, failed to gather adequate information. Similarly, coordination among the Nepal Police, Armed Police Force, and Nepal Army was found to be lacking.

To strengthen Nepal’s security apparatus, the commission has recommended conducting coordinated training programs with the security agencies of India and China. “To enhance the effectiveness of security agencies, diplomatic efforts should be made to conduct coordinated training programs with the security agencies of the two neighboring countries, India and China,” the report states.

The commission also highlighted the role of online platforms, particularly Discord, in organizing the protests. Groups such as “Youth Against Corruption” and “Yuva Hub” facilitated coordination, decision-making, and political endorsements, including the virtual selection of Sushila Karki as Prime Minister. While the District Administration Office prepared security plans for peaceful rallies, messages promoting violence and Molotov cocktails circulated freely online, largely unchecked by security agencies.

In his testimony, Pushpa Kamal Dahal, chairman of the Nepali Communist Party, suggested the possibility of both internal and external infiltration in the protests. Similarly, Rabi Lamichhane, chairman of the Rastriya Swatantra Party, stated that he was forcibly removed from jail against his will and clarified that his party was not involved in the September 8-9 protests. Kathmandu Metropolitan City Mayor Balendra Shah, who is poised to become Prime Minister, emphasized that he supported the peaceful rallies but was not directly involved in the protests.

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.