By P.R. Pradhan
As former King Gyanendra said, elections alone will not resolve the political crisis, this writer shares the same belief. The former King had urged the political leadership to develop a national consensus to resolve the ongoing crisis before proceeding to elections.
The government and political parties did not respond to the King’s humble request. Now, the country is preparing for the March 5 elections for the House of Representatives.
We have witnessed two political agendas in the election this time. The Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) has adopted the agenda of restoring a Hindu kingdom with a unitary state. In contrast, the other political parties competing in the election support secularism, federalism, and republicanism—principles that, according to critics, were imposed under Western influence. Among the parties following this agenda, the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) has emerged as a new political force, reportedly enjoying support from American and European circles. The traditional parties—including the Nepali Congress (NC), UML, Maoist Center, and others—though following similar agendas, appear to be increasingly sidelined. The central dynamic of the March 5 elections appears to be the rise of the RSP.
Although the NC, UML, and Maoist Center endorsed the MCC by passing it through both houses of Parliament, they created doubts and controversies prior to its endorsement. Similarly, the SPP is another initiative that the United States is reportedly attempting to introduce in Nepal. For the smooth implementation of these American-backed agendas, it is argued that a compliant government would be necessary. The March 5 elections may therefore be seen as preparation for a decisive political shift. It would not be surprising if the RSP were to secure a two-thirds majority; however, it is more likely that the elections will result in a hung parliament, with the RSP and NC forming a pro-Western government. The RPP, which carries an alternative agenda, may emerge as the main opposition party.
How China and India—emerging global and regional powers—will adjust their security strategies regarding Nepal remains to be seen. Certainly, these two immediate neighbors are unlikely to remain silent, as Nepal has entered a complex geopolitical phase.
Whether on the anniversary of Great King Prithvi Narayan Shah in December 2025 or on Democracy Day on Falgun 7, 2082 (2026), former King Gyanendra warned about the country’s bleak situation and called for consensus across all sectors, emphasizing that elections alone cannot provide a solution.
As we prepare to vote on March 5 (today), my appeal to all voters is to cast their votes in the interest of the nation. As many have continuously argued that a system based on secularism, federalism, and republicanism has not delivered the expected results for Nepal, we should unite to safeguard the nation’s sovereignty and independence. Standing against these principles, according to this perspective, may be viewed as an effort to preserve national integrity.
We also believe that the present political system cannot ensure stability. Therefore, we should consider a political framework that can be more effectively adapted to Nepal’s context. Perhaps the 1990 Constitution, with its checks and balances, could be better suited to a country like Nepal.
It is unfortunate that traditional political parties, which committed serious mistakes in the past under foreign influence, have failed to learn from experience. Foreign powers supported them primarily for their own interests; therefore, these parties should have worked to build greater unity among the Nepali people. The “Prithvi Path” describes what some consider an appropriate political system for Nepal. Why should we not be ready to adopt the Prithvi Path, followed by the Mahendra Path? We must not forget that Great King Prithvi Narayan Shah unified Nepal, and King Mahendra advanced the nation toward modernization through effective foreign, economic, and national security policies.
Login to add a comment