In Nepal, there is a palpable sense of restlessness, dissatisfaction and uncertainty in the air these days because of the overall political and economic environment. While the transition to a full-fledged democracy underpinned by credible political institutions seems to be an unending one, there is also confusion about the direction in which it is headed.
And, there are a lot of questions. Was it premature for Nepal to have decided through a Constitution (which was rushed through and barely debated) that it should be transformed instantaneously into a secular federal democratic republic? This when as a young democracy it had just battled one upheaval after another, and was in dire need of leaders, experience and institutions capable of handling daunting challenges? Should Nepal, which had a wonderful tradition of being deeply religious but with a secular and tolerant ethos, revert to its Hindu identity which it had lost when political parties were negotiating with the Maoists for an end to their 10-year insurgency? Should the monarchy be restored for want of institutions which could make sure that red lines were respected in the interests of safeguarding democracy? Was a genuine federal setup not an invitation for Nepal’s disunity? How can Nepal survive in the post-COVID-19 world when corruption and misgovernance are so rampant?
The new government in New Delhi in June will have its hands full handling its foreign policy priorities. One of them will continue to be China. And for that reason alone, a high level of attention being paid to Nepal is certain, especially in view of recent developments there and the high probability that political certainty will continue there in the months ahead.
