Nepal stands at a familiar yet frightening crossroads. As political winds shift toward a potential two-third majority for the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) and the independent force of Balen Shah, the national psyche is split between euphoric hope and historical dread. In a country defined by a mosaic of 125 ethnic groups and 142 spoken languages, such a massive mandate for the actors less than five years into active politics is statistically anomalous. In a mixed electoral system designed to prevent hegemony and ensure inclusion, such a wave signifies that the health of our democracy is not just critical; it is in the midst of a total systemic rejection.
History warns us that in Nepal, an overwhelming mandate is often the beginning of the end. We have seen this script play out in 1959, 1991, 2008, and 2017. Each time, a historical opportunity was granted by the people. Each time, it was squandered by the leadership. If the RSP and Balen Shah are to avoid becoming another footnote in our history of failure, they must understand why their predecessors fell.
The fatal failures, 1959 to 2017
The first warning shot came in 1959 (2015 BS). The Nepali Congress (NC), led by BP Koirala, won 74 out of 109 seats. It was a mandate for modernization, yet the democracy could not survive two years. Before the NC could institutionalize its victory, King Mahendra orchestrated a coup in December 1960. The geopolitical reality of a world, indifferent to a small Himalayan democracy, meant no one came to the rescue. BP Koirala remains perhaps the only leader whose failure was forced from the outside; those who followed him failed from within.
The ego-clash, 1991 (2048 BS)
After the restoration of democracy, Girija Prasad Koirala led the NC to a clear majority. This was the moment to build the foundations of a constitutional monarchy and a vibrant economy. Instead, the mandate was consumed by "Antarghat" or internal sabotage. The infamous feud between the "Troika" of Girija Prasad Koirala, Ganesh Man Singh, and Krushna Prasad Bhattarai led Koirala to dissolve his own majority parliament in 1994. This triggered a decade of "Pajero politics," horse-trading, numerous scandals, party-split, and the eventual rise of the Maoist insurgency.
The hubris, 2008 (2064 BS)
The first Constituent Assembly saw a massive mandate for Prachanda and the Maoists. The people voted for a "New Nepal," but the mandate collapsed under the weight of revolutionary hubris. The attempt to sack Army Chief Rookmangud Katawal was a strategic blunder that pitted the executive against the permanent state. Prachanda resigned in nine months, proving that a mandate for change is not a mandate for absolute control over every institution.
The implosion, 2017 (2074 BS)
Most recently, the "Left Alliance" of KP Oli and Prachanda achieved a near two-thirds majority. It was the moststable government on paper in Nepal’s history. Yet, it became a victim of the "Two-Pilot" syndrome. Instead of governance, the mandate was used for personal glorification, one-upmanship and intra-party warfare. The House was dissolved twice, the party split, and the historical opportunity was traded for petty factionalism.
The Balen mandate: risk or reward?
The current support for the RSP or Balen Shah while offers an unprecedented hope, it also brings us to a point where one wrong move could jeopardize the very existence of the nation. When a diverse, multi-ethnic society hands a landslide victory to a new entity, it is rarely an endorsement of a detailed manifesto. It is a negative vote; it is a desperate cry against the 35 years wasted by the current crop of leadership and their parties.
For RSP and Balen, the danger is that they lack the "shock absorbers" of traditional parties. They have no deep-rooted grassroots organization to manage the friction of a two-third majority. Also, as seen in 1960 and again in recent years, Nepal’s neighbors (India and China) and global powers (USA) react sharply to sudden shifts in stability. A "one-man" or "one-party" surge can be perceived as an unpredictable variable in regional security. Not to forget, when a leader is given "unbelievable numbers," the public expects "unbelievable speed." If the system isn't reformed instantly, the same frustration that brought them to power can turn into a volatile backlash.
Therfore, If they treat this mandate as a license for populism rather than a responsibility for institutional reform, the resulting vacuum could invite external interference or internal collapse.
The path to redemption
The public often measures success through infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and buildings. However, these are merely the byproducts of a functioning state. To truly seize the opportunity, the new leadership must focus on three core pillars.
First, build democratic institutions
Our institutions such as the CIAA, the Election Commission, the Civil Service, and the Judiciary have been hollowed out by "Bhagbanda" or political sharing. A true leader does not try to control these bodies, they set them free. Building democratic institutions means creating a system where the law applies equally to a vegetable vendor, a garbage collector, and a Prime Minister. It ensures that the system survives even if the leader fails.
Second, cultivate a merit-based society. Nepal’s greatest export has been its talent, driven away by a system that rewards loyalty over competence. The RSP and Balen must dismantle the "cadre-cracy." Whether it is appointing a University Vice-Chancellor or a hospital director, merit must be the only currency. If we can replace "who you know" with "what you know," we can reverse the brain drain and ignite the economy. Every "ramro manchhe" should be "hamro manchhe".
And, third, practice high-value politics. For decades, Nepali politics has been low-value, centered on survival, corruption, and power-brokering. High-value politics is about integrity and stewardship. It is the courage to make unpopular decisions that benefit the next generation rather than the next election. It is the transition from protest politics to structural reform.
However, the 35 years wasted by the previous generation cannot be recovered by repeating their mistakes, but they can be regained in just 10 years through pure intent and skillful stewardship. This decade of recovery requires a shift from "distributive politics," where leaders buy loyalty with state resources, to "productive politics," where the state creates the conditions for national wealth.
Balen Shah and the RSP have been given an opportunity bigger than any leader since 1959. They are standing on the shoulders of a frustrated but hopeful giant: the Nepali people. If they use this mandate to reform the system, build the rule of law, and introduce meritocracy, they will be remembered as the architects of a New Nepal. If they fail, they will simply be the last names on a long list of those who promised the sun and left the country in the dark.
The clock is ticking, and history is watching.
Mr Nishaant is the Founder of Nepal Democracy Foundation. He can be contacted by email at [email protected] or by phone at 977-9851026991.
.
