Rise of neo-fascism in Nepal

Neo-fascism, a modern revival of authoritarian ideologies characterized by nationalism, anti-liberalism, and the erosion of democratic norms, is increasingly shaping global politics. Once associated with the authoritarian regimes of the early 20th century, such as Benito Mussolini’s Italy, neo-fascism is now emerging in various parts of the world, including Nepal. Despite its democratic framework, Nepal is witnessing the rise of neo-fascist elements within its political parties and leaders, threatening core democratic principles and minority rights.

While South Asia has had limited direct exposure to European fascism, authoritarianism, nationalism, and militarism have manifested regionally in troubling ways. Countries like India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Nepal exhibit patterns resembling neo-fascism, challenging democratic norms and inclusivity. In Nepal, both old and emerging political parties and their leaders are adopting tactics and ideologies reminiscent of fascism, undermining the nation's democratic ethos.

Nepal, with its fragile democracy and history of political instability, provides fertile ground for the rise of neo-fascist tendencies. Political parties—both traditional and new—have displayed authoritarian traits, employed exclusive nationalist rhetoric, and sought to centralize power at the expense of democratic institutions and minority rights.

A remnant of the bygone royal regime, Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) embodies a yearning for monarchical centralization. The RPP often calls for the restoration of a Hindu state, promoting exclusionary nationalism that marginalizes Nepal’s religious and cultural diversity. Its leaders glorify the monarchy as a symbol of unity and stability, reminiscent of fascist ideals of a strong, centralized authority. The party’s resistance to federalism and advocacy for a unitary state align with neo-fascist tendencies of eroding regional autonomy.

The Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre), under the leadership of Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda), has also exhibited authoritarian characteristics. During the decade-long insurgency, the Maoists relied on militarization and the glorification of Prachanda’s leadership, fostering a cult of personality that echoes Mussolini’s tactics. Even in the post-insurgency period, the party’s hierarchical structure and intolerance for dissent within its ranks reveal authoritarian tendencies. The party's leaders have used populist rhetoric to consolidate power while sidelining opposition voices, undermining democratic discourse.

In recent years, concerns have grown over the influence of neo-fascism within Madhes-based political parties in Nepal. These parties, which represent the Madhesi community, have historically advocated for marginalized groups’ rights and greater autonomy. However, some factions are increasingly adopting ultra- regionalist, authoritarian ideologies, characterized by aggressive regionalism, ethnic superiority, and exclusionary politics. This shift threatens the inclusive federalism enshrined in Nepal's constitution, raising fears about undermining democratic values and political pluralism. As these parties navigate their identity and power, it is crucial for Nepal to ensure that democratic principles and federalism are upheld amidst rising nationalist pressures.

Emerging political figures like Rabi Lamichhane and his Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) have capitalized on populist and nationalist sentiments. Lamichhane’s rhetoric often targets foreign influence, invoking fears of national sovereignty being undermined. While this approach garners public support, it risks fostering xenophobia and scapegoating minorities, particularly the Madhesi and indigenous communities. This exclusive nationalism, combined with Lamichhane’s attempts to position himself as a strong leader, reflects neo-fascist tendencies.

Even mainstream parties like the Nepali Congress (NC) and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) are not exempt from neo-fascist tendencies. Leaders like KP Sharma Oli of the UML have frequently used divisive nationalism to strengthen their hold on power. During his multiple terms as prime minister, Oli oversaw a growing centralization of authority, efforts to undermine parliamentary processes, and the sidelining of provincial governments. His frequent use of national security threats to justify his policies echoes neo-fascist tactics of consolidating power through fear and division.

Neo-fascism in Nepal often manifests in exclusive nationalist rhetoric that sidelines ethnic, linguistic, and religious minorities. Political parties frame federalism and decentralization as threats to national unity, undermining the representation and autonomy of Madhesi, Dalit, and indigenous communities. The opposition to inclusive policies fosters a narrow vision of national identity, eroding Nepal’s rich multicultural heritage.

The suppression of dissent is another hallmark of fascism evident in Nepal. Successive governments have restricted media freedom, targeted journalists and activists, and leveraged cyber laws to curb online expression. These actions echo tactics used by neo-fascist regimes globally to silence opposition and control public discourse. The increased surveillance of civil society groups and restrictions on peaceful protests further signal a drift toward authoritarianism.

Nepal’s political leaders frequently invoke national security concerns to justify expanding military and police powers. For example, the government’s decision to militarize border areas under the pretext of protecting sovereignty has been criticized as overreach. Similarly, the increased reliance on security forces to manage civil unrest fosters a climate of fear and normalizes authoritarian measures.

Social media has become a powerful tool for spreading nationalist rhetoric and neo-fascist ideologies in Nepal. The widespread use and abuse of platforms have fueled the rise of figures like Kathmandu Mayor Balendra Saha and RSP leader Lamichhane. Political leaders and parties leverage platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to amplify ultra-nationalist messages, frequently targeting minorities and critics. The swift spread of misinformation and polarizing content divides society, providing fertile ground for neo-fascist ideas to flourish.

The rise of neo-fascism in Nepal threatens its democratic framework, inclusivity, and civil liberties. Continued erosion of democratic institutions, suppression of dissent, and centralization of power could undermine Nepal’s progress toward becoming a stable, pluralistic society.

Moreover, Nepal’s geopolitical position between India and China makes rising nationalism particularly risky. Anti-foreign rhetoric could strain diplomatic relations, disrupt trade, and hinder regional cooperation.

As Bertrand Russell warned, fascism thrives in times of unrest, using propaganda and nationalism to scapegoat minorities and consolidate power. Nepal’s path forward requires vigilance, an informed citizenry, and a robust civil society. Political parties must commit to democratic norms, promote inclusivity, and resist the temptation to exploit nationalist sentiments for short-term gains.

Strengthening democratic institutions, ensuring media freedom, and fostering interethnic dialogue are critical to countering neo-fascist tendencies. Nepal must safeguard its democratic achievements and uphold the values of pluralism, equity, and justice for all its people.