Submit your Article

Nepal’s political landscape has entered an unusual and potentially transformative phase with the rise of Balendra Shah. Popularly known as Balen, the 36-year-old leader assumed office on March 27, 2026, following a sweeping electoral victory that delivered his party, the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), a near two-thirds majority in the 275-member House of Representatives (HoR), the lower house of federal parliament.

This outcome alone would have been remarkable in any context, but in Nepal—where coalition instability has been the norm since the restoration of democracy in 1990—it represents a profound political rupture. The March 5 parliamentary election was shaped by extraordinary circumstances. The protests of September 8–9, which led to the fall of the government led by KP Sharma Oli and the dissolution of Parliament, created a volatile yetdecisive moment. The deaths of 19 students during those protests became a rallying point for public anger and a symbol of state failure.

The election that followed was not merely a contest for power; it was a referendum on an entire political order. Established parties such as Nepali Congress (NC), Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist), and Maoistswere voted out, marking the first time since 1990 that they were collectively excluded from power. Their strength declined significantly, putting pressure on long-time leaders to step down. 

This shift was also generational. Out of the 275-member HoR, more than 100 members are below 40. The average age of lawmakers has dropped to 44 from the earlier 54. The cabinet is also dominated by younger faces: out of 15 ministers, 9 are below 40. The rise of Shah reflects the aspirations of a younger electorate—often described as the Gen Z movement—which demands accountability, efficiency, digital freedom, and a break from entrenched political practices.

More importantly, the election results have created a rare sense of optimism about political stability. For decades, Nepal has struggled with short-lived governments and policy inconsistency. The expectation now is that a strong majority government could complete its full five-year tenure—something no administration has achieved in over three decades.

Against this backdrop, the first month of Balen Shah’s government has been closely scrutinized. Early signs suggest a leadership that is energetic and assertive, but still grappling with the complexities of governance. In some areas, the new prime minister has broken from past traditions.

One key signal is that he is not operating under the influence of anyone, including his own party. Although he is a senior leader of the RSP, he appears intent on running an apolitical government, perhaps influenced by his experience as an independent mayor of Kathmandu. Similarly, he has been avoiding public programs and focusing on administrative work in Singha Durbar. Consultations between PM Shah and Party Chairman Rabi Lamichhane on government issues remain a matter of guesswork. PM Balen has not shown interest to attend party meetings. 

PM Shah is communicating more through actions than rhetoric. However, he is under scrutiny for not speaking in Parliament or engaging with the media. Except on a few issues, opposition parties have not taken a hard position on government decisions, and as Prime Minister he has not reached out to opposition parties, except the interaction with lawmakers form all political parties. 

One of the government’s immediate priorities was to ensure accountability for the killings during the September protests. Acting on a report by former justice Gauri Bahadur Karki, the administration initiated action against key figures from the previous government, including Ramesh Lekhak. The arrests of Oli and Lekhak sent a powerful message that even the most influential leaders could be held accountable. For many citizens—especially the families of the victims—this was a long-overdue step toward justice.

However, the manner in which these arrests were carried out has sparked debate. Critics, including legal experts and opposition parties, have questioned whether due process was followed. A month later, the government attorney has yet to file formal charges, reportedly due to insufficient evidence. This delay underscores a critical challenge: while political will is essential for accountability, it cannot substitute for institutional capacity and legal rigor. If the government is to build a credible rule-of-law framework, it must ensure that its actions are not only decisive but also procedurally sound.

On the governance front, the administration has moved quickly to outline its agenda. The first cabinet meeting introduced a 100-point plan to be implemented within 100 days, with a strong emphasis on anti-corruption and administrative reform. This ambitious roadmap is designed to demonstrate urgency and commitment, and there have already been some tangible steps in this direction.

The formation of a high-level commission to investigate the assets of public officials addresses a long-standing public perception that corruption is deeply embedded within the state apparatus. Similarly, law enforcement agencies have launched investigations into businessmen and intermediaries accused of financial misconduct. Prime Minister Shah has also taken action within his own cabinet, dismissing two ministers over allegations of financial misconduct and conflicts of interest.

The resignation of Home Minister Sudan Gurung amid allegations of undisclosed business ties, and the controversy surrounding Labor Minister Deepak Kumar Sah, further highlight the government’s willingness to confront ethical lapses within its ranks. These moves have strengthened the perception that the administration is serious about integrity. 

There have also been modest improvements in public service delivery. Reports suggest that government offices are functioning more efficiently, with shorter waiting times and fewer bureaucratic obstacles. While these changes may seem incremental, they are significant in a context where inefficiency has long been normalized. The challenge will be to sustain and institutionalize these improvements rather than relying on short-term administrative pressure.

The new government has also taken measures to depoliticize state institutions such as universities and civil service, which has drawn mixed reactions. Some have said that it is a positive move, as state institutions over the past four decades were highly politicized, while others argue that the government’s decision to dismantle student unions and trade unions goes against the constitution.

The economic dimension presents a more complex picture. The private sector initially welcomed the emergence of a stable government, viewing it as an opportunity for policy consistency and economic reform. The administration’s emphasis on governance as the foundation for prosperity has resonated with business leaders, and some measures to improve the business environment have been well received.

At the same time, concerns have begun to emerge. The arrest of prominent businessmen as part of anti-corruption investigations has raised fears about the investment climate which is already worse. Business leaders have warned that such actions, if perceived as arbitrary or excessive, could discourage investment and even lead to capital flight. Finance Minister Swarnim Wagle has sought to reassure the private sector, emphasizing that enforcement actions will be limited and necessary, particularly in the context of efforts to remove Nepal from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list.

This tension reflects a broader dilemma: how to enforce accountability without undermining economic confidence. A credible reform agenda must strike a balance between strict enforcement and predictability. Investors need assurance that rules will be applied fairly and consistently—not selectively or unpredictably. Nepal’s economy is forecast to grow by 2.7 percent in the fiscal year 2026, down from 4.6 percent in the previous year, according to the Asian Development Bank.

In foreign policy, the government has adopted a cautious and pragmatic approach. It has signaled continuity rather than major changes, with a focus on economic diplomacy and balanced relations with neighboring countries. The idea of transforming Nepal into a “vibrant bridge” between regional powers has generated debate, particularly among analysts who question this conceptual framing.

Engagements with international actors have been relatively low-key. The visit of U.S. Assistant Secretary Paul Kapur and reported interactions with Chinese officials indicate ongoing diplomatic activity, but the government has not yet fully articulated a distinct foreign policy identity. Prime Minister Shah’s decision not to hold individual meetings with foreign ambassadors—at least so far—marks a departure from past practices and may reflect either a deliberate shift or a lack of diplomatic prioritization. 

Foreign Minister Shisir Khanal met his Indian Counterpart S. Jaishankar at the Indian Ocean Conference, and both sides have indicated that preparations are underway for Prime Minister Shah’s visit to India.

The international community has responded overwhelmingly, with major countries and development partners showing strong interests in supporting the priority areas outlined by the new government.  While response vary among partners, India and several Western countries have shown strong interests in working with the new government, particularly given its youth-led leadership and internationally educated team. China’s response has been more measured in comparison, reflecting broader strategic consideration. 

Domestically, the government has also initiated discussions on constitutional reform. A panel led by political advisor Ashim Shah has been tasked with exploring possible amendments. While there is broad agreement among political parties on the need for constitutional change, progress has been slow due to limited engagement from opposition groups.

The reluctance of parties like the NC and CPN-UML to participate actively suggests that political polarization remains a significant obstacle. Despite its strong parliamentary majority, the government cannot unilaterally drive constitutional reform without broader consensus. This highlights an important reality: a strong mandate simplifies governance but does not eliminate the need for negotiation and inclusion.

One of the defining characteristics of the current administration is its generational shift. With most cabinet members under 40, this is the youngest government in Nepal’s recent history. The decision to reduce the number of ministries from 24 to fewer than 17 further reflects an effort to streamline governance and enhance efficiency. While these changes are promising, they also come with risks. Younger leaders may bring fresh perspectives, but they may also lack the experience needed to navigate complex institutional and political dynamics.

After one month, it is clear that Balen Shah’s government is active, ambitious, and reform-oriented. It has taken bold steps to signal a break from the past and to address long-standing issues of corruption and inefficiency. However, it is still too early to conclude that it has become truly efficient. Efficiency in governance is not measured solely by speed or decisiveness; it requires consistency, institutional strength, and adherence to due process. The government’s early actions have generated both optimism and concern—hope for change, but also questions about execution.

The coming months will be crucial. If the administration can translate its initial momentum into sustainable reforms, it could mark the beginning of a new era in Nepali politics. If not, it risks becoming another chapter in the country’s long history of unfulfilled promises. For now, the verdict remains open: Nepal’s strong government is moving toward efficiency, but it has not yet fully arrived.

From April 19 to 22, US Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asian Affairs Paul Kapur visited Nepal. Although it was a routine visit, it carried significance for two main reasons. First, it was his first visit to Nepal after assuming office at the State Department last year. Second, the visit came on the heels of the Rastriya Swatantra Party’s stunning victory in Nepal’s landmark March 5 elections and the appointment of Balendra Shah as prime minister on March 27.

The visit provided an opportunity for Kapur to outline the new priorities of the Donald Trump administration and to understand the priorities of Nepal’s new government. For Nepal, it was a chance to communicate its priorities to the United States, a major development partner since the 1950s. Since Trump’s second inauguration, there has been no substantial high-level engagement between the two countries. It was only after nine months that Kapur was appointed to oversee the region. Meanwhile, Nepal was preoccupied with internal issues such as the GenZ protests and the March 5 vote. That is why Kapur’s Nepal visit got delayed.

Kapur’s meetings this week with political leaders, business representatives and members of the cultural community indicate both continuity and change in the Trump administration’s Nepal policy.

During his stay in Kathmandu, he met RSP Chairperson Rabi Lamichhane, Foreign Minister Shishir Khanal and Finance Minister Swarnim Wagle. He also held discussions with members of the business community and representatives of the Tibetan community in Nepal.

 Unlike previous assistant secretaries, who typically met opposition leaders, former prime ministers, civil society representatives, and media figures, Kapur’s engagements in Kathmandu were relatively limited.

Now, turning to the key issues discussed with Nepali officials: as the Trump administration has dismantled USAID—which previously supported Nepal’s health, education, agriculture, and energy sectors—Kapur emphasized deepening and expanding commercial ties during his meetings with government ministers and business leaders. This signals that the US is shifting away from aid (except in a few areas) and focusing more on investment.

 The dismantlement of USAID created a stress on Nepal’s health, education and agriculture sector. The Trump administration has been prioritizing trade over aid and investment assistance which puts Washington in a stronger position to counter China.

In his meeting with Finance Minister Wagle, Kapur stressed improving the business climate to attract US companies. He noted that more American private firms would invest in Nepal if a more investment-friendly environment were created. Even during the Joe Biden administration, both sides had discussed increasing American investment in Nepal. The Trump administration has also continued projects under the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which the US views not as aid but as investment.

Speaking before the House Committee in February, Kapur said that carefully targeted investment can provide South Asian countries with high-quality, transparent and non-coercive support for critical infrastructure such as ports, telecommunications networks, and energy systems—helping them avoid the risks of “debt-trap diplomacy,” a veiled reference to China.

He made similar remarks during a recent meeting with Bangladesh’s finance minister in Washington, emphasizing expanded trade and investment, improved market access, energy cooperation and opportunities in infrastructure development.

Collaboration in digital infrastructure is another major US priority in Nepal. In discussions with business representatives, Kapur highlighted opportunities in Nepal’s ICT sector, including strengthening digital infrastructure, promoting artificial intelligence adoption, enhancing cybersecurity and sharing US technological expertise. Interestingly, the Chinese ambassador to Nepal recently made similar proposals in talks with Finance Minister Wagle.

Immigration policy has also become a major priority under Trump’s second term. Kapur raised concerns about illegal immigration and human trafficking in his meeting with Foreign Minister Khanal. Over the past year, the US  has deported hundreds of Nepali nationals residing illegally in the country, and this issue has been discussed in prior engagements in Washington.

Enhanced defense cooperation is another priority for the US, representing continuity with past policy but with greater emphasis under the Trump administration. Although Kapur did not meet security officials during this visit, earlier engagements suggest this focus. For instance, Admiral Samuel J. Paparo, commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), highlighted expanded defense cooperation during his visit to Nepal.

In previous statements, Kapur has emphasized that countries like Nepal, Bangladesh, the Maldives, Sri Lanka and Bhutan hold strategic importance due to their geographic positions but are also vulnerable to external pressure. Defense cooperation with the US, he argued, can help these nations safeguard their borders and waterways. The US continues to promote the State Partnership Program (SPP), although Nepal decided in 2022 not to join it.

Through INDOPACOM, the US has supported Nepal in strengthening disaster response capabilities via joint exercises, technical assistance, and non-combat equipment such as helicopters, vehicles and communication systems. Additional training and logistical support aim to enhance Nepal’s capacity for peacekeeping and humanitarian operations, aligning with broader goals of self-reliance and regional resilience.

Countering Chinese influence in Nepal remains a longstanding US priority, and the Trump administration appears to be placing renewed emphasis on it, even if it was not explicitly stated during this visit. Notably, issues such as democracy, climate change cooperation, human rights, media freedom, and minority rights—often highlighted in previous US engagements—were not prominently raised during this visit.

Paul Kapur, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs, has completed his two-day official visit to Nepal.

During his stay in Kathmandu, he held meetings with selected political leaders and government ministers to discuss bilateral priorities and cooperation.

Kapur first met Rabi Lamichhane, Chairman of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP). According to a brief statement from the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs at the U.S. State Department, the meeting aimed to understand the party’s priorities in government.

The two sides also discussed potential areas for strengthening U.S.–Nepal cooperation. However, Kapur did not meet Prime Minister Balendra Shah during his visit. In the past, senior U.S. officials typically met with both the President and the Prime Minister during their visits.

Details of the discussions have largely not been made public. Kapur’s meeting with Nepal’s Foreign Minister Shisir Khanal focused on enhancing bilateral trade and investment, as well as addressing issues such as illegal immigration and human trafficking. The talks come amid increased deportations of Nepali nationals residing illegally in the United States.

In a separate engagement, Nepal’s Finance Minister Swarnim Waglejoined discussions on improving the country’s business climate and attracting U.S. companies to invest in Nepal. Kapur emphasized that closer economic ties could strengthen Nepal’s transportation, energy, and digital infrastructure, ultimately driving mutual economic growth.

Kapur also interacted with industry leaders, highlighting opportunities to expand U.S. business involvement in Nepal’s ICT sector. Discussions included advancing digital infrastructure, promoting AI adoption, strengthening cybersecurity, and leveraging U.S. technological expertise.

He visited Patan Durbar Square and Boudhnath Stupa, representing the Newari and Tibetan cultures, two of Nepal’s stunning cultural sites. America’s contribution to preserving such sites promotes economic growth and safeguards shared values for future generations, said Kapur. He also met Tibetan community in Kathmandu and asked the government ministers to address their concerns. 

Two weeks have passed since Balendra Shah became a powerful prime minister in Nepal’s recent political history. His rise to power follows the landslide victory of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) in the March 5 elections. His swearing-in marked a major generational shift in Nepal’s power politics, as the political parties and leaders who had long dominated national politics were sidelined.

The new and strong government under Balen has signaled an assertive and unconventional governing style. Marked by a strong anti-corruption stance and institutional interventions, the administration appears intent on reshaping political norms. However, questions remain about its economic priorities, particularly its limited response to rising energy costs and inflation. Here is a preliminary analysis of Balen’s two weeks in office.

Implementation of probe panel

On the very first day in office, the Balen administration promptly decided to implement the report submitted by a probe panel formed to investigate the violence and killings that occurred on Sept 8–9 last year. The next day, former Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli and former Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak were arrested, sending a strong political message.

The arrests drew criticism on the grounds that due process was not followed, as they were carried out during odd hours and on a holiday. In response, the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) launched street protests, while the position of the Nepali Congress remained unclear and ambiguous.

Although both leaders were later released by the court, the move underscored the government’s willingness to challenge powerful figures. Despite their release following a Supreme Court order, police have continued investigations against them and plan to file cases in court.

Similarly, the government briefly arrested the then Chief District Officer of Kathmandu, but he was immediately released following pressure from the bureaucracy. The commission has also recommended action against high-profile individuals from the bureaucracy, Nepali Army, and Nepal Police. The government has decided to conduct further studies before taking action against individuals from these agencies.

Improving governance service delivery

Governance reform remains the top priority of the Balen-led administration. Shah has instructed government secretaries to avoid delays and expedite their work. In a strong message, he reportedly told government staff to either perform or step down.

At the same time, he has instructed that government services should not be interrupted even during lunchtime, with appropriate staff management. The administration has also begun dismantling entrenched bureaucratic practices, notably by removing intermediaries from land and transport offices—sectors long criticized for inefficiency and corruption.

On the governance front, the cabinet has moved to streamline the state apparatus by reducing the number of ministries from 24 to 17. The government has also taken proactive steps to deploy bureaucrats at the local level in an effort to improve service delivery. It is closely monitoring key government offices responsible for providing prompt services to citizens.

However, under the current federal structure, the federal prime minister cannot dictate the functioning of provincial and local governments. Some chief ministers and local government leaders have already objected to the instructions of Prime Minister Shah.

Corruption control

The Balen-led government has prioritized tackling money laundering and corruption. As Nepal faces pressure to take tangible steps to be removed from the Financial Action Task Force gray list, the new government has initiated investigations into money laundering cases.

Authorities have arrested a notorious middleman, Deepak Bhatta, on money laundering charges. Similarly, Nepal Police has issued an arrest warrant against former Prime Minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and his family members in connection with such cases. Police have also arrested former minister Deepak Bhatta on similar charges.

The government has emphasized corruption control. The first cabinet meeting decided to establish a commission to investigate the wealth of public officials dating back to the 1990s. In the first phase, the cabinet formed a commission to investigate the properties of public service holders from 2006 to 2026. 

While the government cannot interfere with the functioning of the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority, an autonomous constitutional body, it is coordinating with the CIAA to expedite corruption investigations. At the same time, the arrest of some businessmen has created fear in the private sector, and it is feared that it could spoil the investment climate.

Constitutional amendment

The Balen-led administration has placed strong emphasis on constitutional amendment, a key pledge made by the RSP during the election campaign. Balen Shah has formed a committee led by his political advisor, Ashim Shah, to work with political parties to prepare a base document for nationwide deliberations on constitutional amendments.

However, major political parties have not fully cooperated with the government. The Nepali Congress, for instance, has yet to send its representative to the task force. Although constitutional amendment remains a common priority among political parties, there are significant differences regarding its content.

Despite the government’s efforts, progress on constitutional amendment is unlikely in the near future due to the lack of cooperation from traditional political parties. However, the ruling RSP can initiate amendment proposals independently, as it holds a two-thirds majority in Parliament. Support from the Shram Sanskriti Party, led by Harka Sampang, is sufficient to pass amendments. Key issues include the form of governance and the electoral system.

Investigation into Sept 9 violence

Following the Sept 8–9 GenZ movement, a high-level commission led by Gauri Bahadur Karki was formed to investigate the violence. However, the Karki-led panel focused only on the events of Sept 8, drawing criticism from political parties and civil society for its selective approach.

To address this concern, the Balen-led government decided to form a separate commission to investigate the Sept 9 violence. On that day, protests targeted vital state institutions such as Singha Durbar, the Supreme Court, the President’s Office, and various business establishments. However, even after two weeks in office, the government has yet to form this commission.

Rare public speech by PM

After becoming prime minister, Balendra Shah has not delivered a public speech. It was expected that the prime minister would address the nation through television after assuming office, but he did not. Similarly, there is a tradition of the prime minister speaking in Parliament, which he has avoided.

There are reports that the prime minister addressed a function organized by the Nepali Army. He also briefly addressed the international community regarding the foreign policy priorities of the new government. Prime Minister Balen is under scrutiny for bypassing Parliament. In the past, political leaders used to engage with the media and address Parliament regularly. However, the prime minister is consulting with ministers and lawmakers.

Conflict of interest: a key priority

For traditional political parties, conflict of interest was not a priority issue. However, for the Balen-led cabinet, it is a serious concern. Rastriya Swatantra Party Chairperson Rabi Lamichhane has issued a strong warning to ministers and lawmakers not to appoint their family members and relatives to government offices or their secretariats.

Prime Minister Balendra Shah removed Minister for Labor, Employment and Social Security, Deepak Kumar Sah, for misusing his office to appoint family members. The minister was sacked just 13 days into office. In the past, politicians and ministers faced criticism for appointing their relatives to government positions.

Recovering the economy: A herculean task

Economic recovery remains a key challenge for the Balen-led administration. The Asian Development Bank has projected that economic growth will slow significantly to 2.7 percent in fiscal year 2026, amid prolonged political uncertainty following civil unrest in early September and the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.

While a stable government could contribute to economic growth, the Middle East conflict poses risks through higher oil prices, reduced tourist arrivals, and potential disruptions in remittance flows. If the conflict continues, it could also affect fertilizer supplies, thereby impacting agricultural output.

According to the ADB, agricultural growth is projected to slow from 3.3 percent in 2025 to 2.7 percent in 2026, as paddy output is expected to decline by 4.2 percent due to delayed monsoon rains and the Oct 2025 floods. The conflict in the Middle East may also negatively affect the tourism industry, including the spring mountain season.

No major departure in foreign policy

The Balen administration has signaled that there will be no major shift in foreign policy. While addressing the 9th Indian Ocean Conference, Foreign Minister Shisir Khanal stated that Nepal’s foreign policy remains firmly grounded in the UN Charter, the principles of Panchasheel, and non-alignment.

Two weeks after the formation of the government, Prime Minister Balen briefed the diplomatic community in Kathmandu about the administration’s priorities. The government has indicated that it will focus more on internal issues than foreign policy, emphasizing engagement with major powers primarily on economic terms. This approach may help Nepal avoid being drawn into great-power rivalries.

Prime Minister Balendra Shah has received an invitation from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for a bilateral visit. Both sides have tentatively agreed to conduct the high-level visit after the necessary preparations.

In the 275-member House of Representatives (HoR), opposition parties together hold one-third of the seats (93). However, the opposition is highly fragmented and lacks cohesion. As a result, it is unlikely to play an effective role in holding the government accountable.

Moreover, many opposition leaders appear hesitant to take a strong critical stance against the government, reportedly due to fear of legal or corruption-related cases being brought against them. Even leaders of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), who could have played a more assertive opposition role, are also unlikely to do so effectively, as the party has been criticized for adopting a restrictive internal approach toward its own lawmakers. Consequently, one of Parliament’s key functions—scrutinizing and checking executive power—appears increasingly weakened.

The judiciary, which should serve as an independent check on executive authority, also faces structural and political constraints. First, the dominance of ruling parties in the Constitutional Council and Judicial Council, which are responsible for judicial appointments, raises concerns about institutional independence. Second, the political tensions and protests of September last year have reportedly created an atmosphere of fear, which may discourage bold or independent judicial decision-making.

The media, often referred to as the fourth estate, also plays a crucial role in ensuring accountability. However, the current condition of the media sector is weak. Financial pressures have made many media houses vulnerable, reducing their capacity for independent and critical reporting. In addition, there is growing concern that media organizations may hesitate to challenge the government due to fears of reprisal.

Recent government actions—such as restricting access and reducing revenue channels for private media houses—have further strained the sector. Furthermore, there has been no strong commitment from major political actors, including the RSP, to uphold press freedom, and relations between media institutions and political leadership appear increasingly tense. Civil society, which traditionally acts as an important watchdog, is also largely ineffective at present. Its fragmentation along political lines has significantly weakened its independence and public trust.

In the past, the international community—particularly democratic countries—played an active role in raising concerns over freedom of expression and press freedom, often issuing statements when governments took repressive actions against journalists. However, in recent years, this engagement has noticeably declined. The international community appears to have shifted toward a more cautious or accommodating stance toward governments, even in the face of media restrictions and attacks on journalists. The democratic countries no longer uphold those values in Nepal. Taken together, these developments suggest a worrying trend: Nepal appears to be moving toward a system with a strong executive but increasingly weak and constrained institutions of accountability, with limited effective opposition voices.

Major countries including India, China, and the United States have congratulated Prime Minister Balendra Shah on being sworn in as the Prime Minister of Nepal.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi extended warm congratulations, stating: “Your appointment reflects the trust reposed in your leadership by the people of Nepal. I look forward to working closely with you to take India–Nepal friendship and cooperation to even greater heights for the mutual benefit of our two peoples.”

Similarly, the United States extended its congratulations to Prime Minister Shah and his new government. In a statement, the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs said that the United States looks forward to working with Nepal to advance mutual prosperity and regional stability.

Chinese Premier Li Qiang also sent a congratulatory message, noting that China and Nepal are traditional neighboring countries connected by mountains and rivers. He expressed that the Chinese government supports Nepal’s governance and reaffirmed China’s continued support in safeguarding Nepal’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity.

Premier Li further stated his willingness to work with Prime Minister Shah to advance high-level China–Nepal cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative, deepen collaboration across various sectors, and promote the China–Nepal strategic partnership characterized by long-term friendship aimed at development and prosperity.

A spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry also extended congratulations to Prime Minister Shah and expressed readiness to work with Nepal’s new government to strengthen traditional friendship and practical cooperation.

Similarly, Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi extended her congratulations to Prime Minister Shah. In her letter, she expressed her intention to work together to enhance bilateral relations between Japan and Nepal.

British Ambassador to Nepal Rob Fenn also congratulated Prime Minister Shah. He stated that as the new government sets its priorities, the United Kingdom looks forward to collaborating with Nepal on economic growth, youth employment, climate resilience, and other shared interests.

The European Union also extended its congratulations. EU spokesperson Anaouar El Anouni stated that the EU looks forward to further developing its longstanding relations with Nepal and supporting the government in implementing its development priorities.

Swiss Ambassador to Nepal Danielle Meuwly, in her message, said: “We look forward to deepening cooperation between Switzerland and Nepal, and to further strengthening the longstanding friendship, goodwill, and mutual trust that bind our two countries.” She added, “We extend our best wishes for a successful tenure as you pursue the aspirations of the people of Nepal, advancing peace, development, and prosperity.”

Who is Balendra Shah really? In a political landscape long dominated by familiar faces and predictable ideologies, Shah stands as an anomaly. A former rapper, a structural engineer, and the mayor of Kathmandu Metropolitan City from 2022 to 2026, he now appears poised to become Nepal’s youngest prime minister.

And yet, for someone on the brink of leading a nation, remarkably little is known about what he actually believes. What is his political ideology? Does he lean toward liberal democracy, conservatism, socialism—or something entirely different? What economic path would he chart for Nepal? Where does he stand on republicanism and federalism, the very foundations of the modern Nepali state? And perhaps most crucially, how would he navigate Nepal’s delicate foreign relations in a geopolitically sensitive region?

These are not minor gaps in understanding—they are fundamental questions. And so far, they remain unanswered.

Shah’s association with the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) offers only limited clues. While the party’s manifesto hints at priorities like governance reform and anti-corruption, it remains ambiguous at best. Shah himself deepens the mystery. Once an independent candidate who rode a wave of public frustration to power, he has maintained a conspicuous distance even after rising within party ranks. He rarely attends party meetings, avoids internal processes, and remains detached from organizational routines.

His silence is not new—it is his style. Unlike traditional politicians who thrive on speeches, slogans, and public visibility, Shah operates in near-opacity. During his entire election campaign, he spoke publicly for barely 30 minutes. Since then, he has neither delivered major speeches nor granted substantive interviews. Even recent internal party events, such as lawmaker orientations and key selection meetings, have proceeded without him, often without explanation.

This absence is not accidental. It is deliberate. Those close to Shah describe a leader who believes that excessive interaction breeds complications. “He meets only essential people,” one senior RSP leader admits, hinting at a tightly controlled inner circle. Even senior party figures reportedly struggle to access him. Behind closed doors, Shah is said to be meticulously planning—reportedly focused on forming a lean, efficient cabinet.

The international community is watching closely. Nepal’s strategic position demands a leader who can articulate a coherent foreign policy. Investors, too, seek predictability in economic direction. At home, citizens deserve to know not just what Shah opposes, but what he stands for. For now, Shah remains an enigma: a leader defined as much by his silence as by his ascent.

The Communist Party of China has moved swiftly to engage Nepal's emerging political leadership following the landslide victory of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) in the March 5 parliamentary election, signaling a pragmatic shift in Beijing's Nepal policy amid a  changing political landscape.
In a congratulatory message from the CPC's International Department, Beijing underscored its readiness to deepen bilateral cooperation, describing Nepal and China as countries “connected by mountains and rivers” with a long-standing friendship. The CPC has indicated that the RSP is not an entirely unfamiliar political actor, noting that engagements between the two sides had taken place over the past few years.

The message reaffirmed China's commitment to advancing a strategic partnership focused on development, prosperity, and high-quality cooperation under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

Notably, the CPC expressed confidence in RSP leaders Rabi Lamichhane and Balendra Shah, signaling an early effort to build rapport with Nepal's new political power center. It also highlighted ongoing party-to-party exchanges, suggesting Beijing is keen to institutionalize ties with the relatively new political force.

The electoral setback suffered by Nepal's traditional communist forces—particularly the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) and the Nepal Communist Party—marks a significant turning point in both domestic politics and Nepal's external relations. Following the abolition of the monarchy in 2008, Beijing stepped up engagement with communist parties, especially the CPN-UML and the Maoist party, whose leaderships advocated for closer political and economic ties with China.

For over a decade, Beijing relied heavily on these ideologically aligned parties as stable partners. Leaders such as KP Sharma Oli and Pushpa Kamal Dahal played a central role in strengthening bilateral ties, particularly through Nepal's participation in the BRI.

Under communist-led governments, Nepal signed the BRI Memorandum of Understanding in 2017 and a framework agreement in 2025, reflecting strong political commitment to Chinese-backed infrastructure development. These administrations also facilitated unusually close ideological exchanges with Beijing, including engagement around Xi Jinping Thought.

The decline of these parties therefore represents more than an electoral shift—it disrupts a diplomatic architecture that provided China with both ideological alignment and policy continuity.

Nepal's political landscape is now more fragmented, with traditional parties losing dominance and newer actors gaining ground. The rise of the RSP reflects growing public demand for governance reform and a break from entrenched political elites.

For Beijing, this shift complicates its long-standing approach of engaging Nepal primarily through ideologically sympathetic partners. While China has begun outreach to other actors, including the Nepali Congress, its relationships with newer political figures remain relatively underdeveloped.

Emerging leaders such as Balendra Shah have also demonstrated a more assertive posture on sovereignty and foreign engagement, including decisions to cancel China visits and distance themselves from certain embassy-backed initiatives. This evolving stance signals a potential recalibration in Nepal's foreign policy tone.

China's economic and strategic interests in Nepal, especially under the BRI framework, may face new headwinds. A coalition government without strong communist representation could slow project implementation, increase scrutiny of existing agreements, and demand greater transparency in development cooperation.

Analysts suggest that new political actors may seek to renegotiate or delay previously signed agreements, potentially introducing friction into bilateral economic ties. Several incidents following the GenZ movement have heightened Beijing's concerns, especially the recent burning of Xi Jinping's book in Biratnagar.

Despite these uncertainties, Beijing's core strategic concerns remain unchanged. Tibet-related issues continue to be central, with China expecting Nepal's adherence to the One-China principle and vigilance against activities linked to figures such as the Dalai Lama.

China's initial response to Nepal’s latest political development has been measured. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning praised Nepal for conducting a smooth and peaceful election and reiterated Beijing's commitment to cooperation. Analysts, however, note that this diplomatic composure likely masks deeper strategic concerns.

Going forward, China is expected to recalibrate rather than retreat. This may involve expanding engagement with the RSP, strengthening ties with Nepal's military and bureaucratic institutions, and adopting a less ideologically driven approach to diplomacy. Beijing may also continue leveraging its relationship with figures like Pushpa Kamal Dahal, who remains politically relevant and maintains connections across party lines.

Ultimately, the post-election landscape signals a “new normal” in China-Nepal relations—one defined less by ideological alignment and more by pragmatic engagement, institutional diversification, and cautious recalibration.