Nepal has seen a historic near two-thirds majority in its recent elections, achieved by the relatively new Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). The strategic alliance between former Kathmandu mayor Balen Shah and the three-year-old party turned out to be a major success. This result shows how frustrated people are with the traditional political parties, and to some extent, with regional parties, especially in the Madhesh region. That frustration led voters to strongly support the RSP. While many factors helped the party rise, the main reason has been the long-standing failure of traditional parties to deliver results.
Although Nepal has had a full democratic system for the past 18 years since after becoming a Federal Democratic Republic. Since then, people’s hopes for real change and development have been always high from the government. Traditional political parties, however, have mostly failed to meet these expectations. It is in this situation that the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) has developed its political strategy to take advantage of these opportunities and grow its influence.
Public frustration with traditional parties
In the first Constituent Assembly election of 2008, the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre), led by Pushpa Kamal Dahal (Prachanda), became the largest political party. This showed that people wanted big changes after years of conflict. Nearly ten years later, in 2017, an alliance between the Communist Party of Nepal–Unified Marxist-Leninist (CPN-UML), led by KP Sharma Oli, and the CPN (Maoist Centre) won a huge victory, almost achieving a two-thirds majority in the House of Representatives. Later, these two parties merged to form the Nepal Communist Party (NCP). At that time, people hoped that this united party would finally end long-standing political instability and bring a stable development at the national level.
The “gentleman’s agreement” between KP Sharma Oli and Pushpa Kamal Dahal, which said each would serve as prime minister for two and a half years, broke down and became a major problem. Prime Minister Oli concentrated more power in his hands and was unwilling to give up leadership after his term. This broken agreement caused serious internal conflicts and eventually split the Nepal Communist Party into two rival groups.The breakup of the Nepal Communist Party was not just another political mistake-it was like political suicide. The party had a huge public mandate, so its collapse was a major failure that shook people’s trust in democracy. Much of the political frustration in Nepal today comes directly from that collapse.
Unholy alliance
In July 2024, the Nepali Congress and the CPN-UML, the two largest parties, formed an alliance. This turned out to be a big political mistake. By coming together, they ignored basic rules of a parliamentary system, especially the need for a strong opposition. This “unnatural alliance” weakened democratic checks and balances, and the government started acting without accountability. As a result, public frustration grew, leading to more people joining protests and political movements.
The Congress-UML alliance turned out to be a historic mistake. It acted like “free-roaming bulls,” focused only on gaining power and ignoring basic political responsibility toward ordinary people. Many saw the alliance as acting without accountability in daily governance. The alliance also seemed to be formed for strategic reasons, as both parties were under pressure from the Prachanda-led government, which had taken a stronger stance against corruption and scandals, especially during Ravi Lamichhane’s time as Home Minister under the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). The unholy alliance eventually caused its own political failure and created serious uncertainty about the future of democracy in Nepal.
The two main parties got stuck in constant controversies, creating a big political gap. This gap was eventually filled by the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), even though it has no clear political ideology with little experience in running the government. This situation has raised bigger questions about the stability and future direction of Nepal’s politics.
The rise of Mr. Balen as a possible prime minister has raised questions about his political experience and maturity. Critics say his recent comments about foreign countries show he may lack diplomatic understanding. Some people worry that if he becomes prime minister, his leadership could create risks in international relations, and this concern has some valid points.Thus, there are many uncertainties in Nepal’s politics, especially about how he would handle the country’s sensitive relationship with India and China remain a major concern.
The use Algorithm (AI)
In recent Nepal’s election history, the RastriyaSwatantra Party (RSP) ran one of the most data-driven campaigns ever. While traditional parties mostly focusing on rallies to reach voters, the RSP used data and analytics teams to plan their strategy. They used algorithms to find undecided voters and targeted them with messages about corruption, unemployment, and poor governance, presenting the election as a fight between the “New” and “Old” political parties.
While traditional parties relied on official spokespersons to convey their messages, the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) employed a battalion of content creators who acted as unofficial campaigners. This algorithm-driven strategy effectively transformed the election into a form of digital insurgency. By the time traditional parties recognized they were losing control of the online narrative, the RSP had already hijacked it, successfully embedding its propaganda in the minds of ordinary voters.
1977 in India, Today in Nepal
In 1977 India, the Janata Party rose to power right after Indira Gandhi’s Emergency. That election was less about policies and more about restoring democracy, with voters united by anger. In Nepal today, the rise of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) shows a different situation but a similar strong public frustration. In both cases, the rise was not mainly about ideology; it was driven by strong anti-establishment feelings.
The Janata Party was never built on a single clear ideology. It was a mix of socialists, conservatives, former Congress members, and regional leaders, brought together mainly to defeat Indira Gandhi. Keeping such different groups together caused internal conflicts after they came to power. The Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) has similar issues. Some ambitious members from the former Nepali Congress, UML, Maoist Centre, and regional parties are not true leaders of the RSP-they are like a political time bomb that could soon cause trouble inside the party.
The fall of the Janata Party showed a simple but harsh truth: “Winning against the system is easier than running the system.” Nepal is now in a similar situation. Both times gave people a lot of hope, but history shows that a political movement lasts only if it brings real change for the people. Without real results, even the strongest movements can disappear as quickly as they appeared.
Imran’s fall, Balen’s future
Imran Khan rose to power in Pakistan in 2018 with strong support from the military. In Nepal, Mr. Balen’s close ties with the Nepal Army raise concerns from a democratic point of view. His attempts to guide the Gen-Z revolt in a military-focused direction suggest that his political approach may not fully follow Nepal’s democratic system.
The attitudes and styles of Imran Khan and Mr. Balen are very similar. Mr. Balen could become prime minister with a near two-thirds majority, but his undemocratic and inexperienced approach raises doubts about whether he can handle Nepal’s complicated political economy, and international issues. In Pakistan, Imran Khan’s conflict with the military led to his removal from power, legal problems, imprisonment, and a crackdown on his party.
Mr. Balen may face similar challenges in the future. His role in the Gen-Z uprising shows that his actions and guidance were not based on normal political processes. Imran Khan’s experience shows that winning power is easier than keeping it. In the coming years, Nepal will see whether Mr. Balen ends up like Imran or can skillfully manage both internal and international political pressures-a task that is very difficult anywhere in the world.
The Road ahead
Nepal’s recent political change, marked by the historic rise of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), shows how frustrated people are with traditional parties and how much they want real change. However, the past history from India’s Janata Party and Pakistan’s Imran Khan experience something different. Winning to power is only the first step-staying in power in a complex political environment in the changinginternational dynamics is much harder. The RSP’s success, powered by data-driven campaigns and strong anti-establishment energy, gives it a chance to bring real reform. Still, internal conflicts, inexperienced leadership, and unusual ways of running the government are serious challenges.
In the end, the party’s future will depend on how well it turns electoral wins into effective governance, while following democratic rules and careful planning. In the next few years, Nepal will witness whether the RSP becomes a true agent of change for Nepalese politics or just another short-lived political wave in Nepal’s political history. Only time will tell us about the Nepal’s political future in the coming days.
Krishna Sunuwar is a Federal Committee Member and the Head of the Youth Department of the GatisheelLoktantrik Party. He was also a candidate for a proportional representation seat in the Parliament from his party. He holds a Master’s degree in South Asian Studies from Pondicherry University.Dr. Naresh Subba is an independent researcher, he completed his PhD from School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
By Krishna Sunuwar and Dr. Naresh Subba
