Spread the love

By Our Political Analyst

Former King Gyanendra Shah’s question to the nation, and to political parties in particular, is not a remark made on a formal occasion. It really carries deeper meaning.  When he asked why the country still has not taken shape nearly two decades after he left Narayanhiti Palace, it carried a sense of unease that has been building for years. In his Prithvi Jayanti and National Unity Day message, he said the worry had changed form. Earlier, people felt the country was not being built. Now, he said, there is a growing fear that the country itself may not endure.

He looked back at the Shah dynasty and reminded people how the state was held together by drawing strength from different sections of society. He stressed that monarchy was never about running away from duty or banning political voices. His concern focused on something deeper, fading national confidence, rising anger among the youth, steady outflow of money, and Nepal’s fragile position in a region where power equations keep shifting.

The former king spoke plainly about young people. When they are ignored again and again, he said, frustration grows. Over time, it spills into unrest. He accused political leadership of using youth for slogans and protests, without caring for their future. That habit, he warned, has already cost lives and damaged property. He also raised a quieter but serious concern. Leaders, he said, fail to read Nepal’s sensitive position and the changing regional setting. Because of that, the country risks losing the trust of friendly nations. His remark that earlier only young people left the country, while now even capital and business owners are moving out, summed up a fear many already feel. The economy is thinning from the inside.

Why did he choose to ask this question now? The answer sits in the gap between promise and reality since the monarchy stepped aside. Political parties had promised stability, clean politics, growth, jobs, inclusion, and dignity. Republicanism was presented as the cure for old problems. Secularism was explained as a path to harmony. Federalism was sold as a way to bring the state closer to people. Two decades later, governments collapse with ease, parliaments stay stalled, corruption cases grow longer, and trust keeps slipping. For many citizens, life feels heavier, not lighter.

Politics today looks stuck in survival mode. Parties fight to stay in power, not to set direction. Leadership changes come through backroom deals, not public debate. Institutions meant to protect democracy appear weak or selective. The economy crawls along, tied tightly to remittance. Jobs remain scarce. Young people leave because they see no future here. Farmers struggle with rising costs. Small businesses shut their doors. Investors hesitate. Anger shows up on streets and screens, often without a clear voice or goal.

In this setting, the former king’s words connect with a feeling that the state lost a common anchor. For many, kingship does not mean a return to direct rule. It means the presence of a national symbol that stands above party fights. A constitutional monarchy, supporters argue, can offer continuity and a sense of shared identity while elected governments handle daily affairs. For a small country placed between large powers, such balance also reassures neighbours and partners.

What is needed now is not shouting but understanding. Parties, leaders, civil society, and citizens need space for honest talk. The monarchy debate should not be treated as taboo or dismissed as memory. It deserves calm discussion, with respect for past sacrifices and a clear look at present failures. Nepal’s neighbours value predictability. Citizens value dignity and direction. At its core, Former King Shah’s question asks Nepalis to pause and think. What went wrong, and what kind of state do they want to rebuild from here.