Spread the love

Nepal’s Gen Z uprising of September 8 and 9 was a clear expression of frustration with the country’s traditional political parties and an expensive, corrupt, and unaccountable political system. The youth revolt was driven by anger toward aging political leaders who have alternated in power for decades, repeatedly occupying the prime minister’s office without transparency or meaningful performance. The Nepali Congress–UML government led by K.P. Sharma Oli, despite enjoying a two-thirds majority, responded to the unrest with excessive force, resulting in the deaths of 76 people, including 45 unarmed Gen Z demonstrators.

Following the uprising, a government led by Sushila Karki was formed. However, it failed to respond to the core demands of the Gen Z movement. By preserving the existing constitution—widely viewed by protesters as fundamentally flawed—the Karki government alienated a significant segment of Gen Z. While some youths disengaged from the political process, others have continued street protests, reflecting the government’s inability to deliver structural reform or restore public trust.

Amid this instability, both traditional parties and a section of Gen Z argue that the elections scheduled for March 5 will resolve the political crisis. Yet, the political landscape suggests a repetition of old practices rather than genuine transformation. Even emerging groups that claim to represent alternative political forces appear to be following the same power-centric path as established parties.

A recent seven-point power-sharing agreement between Kathmandu Mayor Balendra (Balen) Shah and Rastriya Swatantra Party chair Ravi Lamichhane exemplifies this trend. The deal reportedly focuses on future power arrangements—designating Balen as a prospective prime minister while Lamichhane retains party leadership—without articulating any clear ideology, principles, or policy agenda. This mirrors past alliances among the Nepali Congress, UML, and Maoist Center, which often sidelined ideology in favor of power-sharing.

For many, this pattern is deeply troubling. Mothers have lost children, hundreds of youths have been injured, and yet political leaders—whether from traditional parties or emerging alternatives—appear poised to capitalize on the blood and sacrifices of Gen Z without honoring their call for meaningful systemic change.