Nepal’s March Election: A Generational Clash With The Old Guard – Analysis

As Nepal gears up for March 2026 general elections, the fault lines between the old generation and the new generation have become more pronounced. It is perhaps one of the most important elections in the history of the country. A generational clash is imminent in the election next month, and this clash would decide the future of known political figures in the country.

In less than a year, Nepal has witnessed one of the most dramatic events since the formation of the republic. The youth-led uprising has exposed the inherent fragile nature of Nepali politics and its flaws. Against this backdrop, the March 2026 elections have become all the more important. These elections are not just carrying the mandate of the Nepali people; the hopes and aspirations of the Nepali people are also at stake. Therefore, it is important to understand the direction in which Nepal is moving. 

Background: September Protests

Who knew what had started as a protest against Nepal's social media ban would turn out to be another Jana Andolan in the history of Nepal. On September 8, people came out to protest against the Nepali government's blanket ban on social media, which included popular social media platforms such as X, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Facebook. Their protests were met with fierce state power, and 19 people lost their lives. This episode was the trigger for a much wider movement, which came to be called the Gen Z movement, now also known as the Jana Andolan. The government revoked the ban, but the loss of life did not go well with the population. On September 9, people demanded accountability and attacked government institutions and political leaders. The Prime Minister, K.P. Oli, was forced to resign, and the country plunged into anarchy.

With the September protests, Nepal has now witnessed three Jan Andolans since 1990. Nepal is no stranger to movements and revolutions. Over the last few decades, it has seen sundry movements and protests. Democracy in Nepal emerged through a protracted struggle against the monarchy system. However, a democratic system is not the panacea that can solve all the problems. 

The Roots of the Chaos

Lately, Nepal's democracy has come to be associated with instability, corruption, and misgovernance. The multiparty system in the country has not led to the formation of stable governments. Instead, the leaders often make deals with each other to stay in power. The power keeps rotating between the same leaders without any accountability. The country has not seen the formation of a stable government in the last 17 years. No leader has completed a full five-year term since Nepal became a republic in 2008.

Protesters targeted whatever symbolised authority, power, and the elite class. This points to a wider discontent in the Nepali society. The social media ban may have acted as the trigger, but it was not enough to invite such anger. It is the underlying causes, such as unemployment, poverty, corruption, and callousness of the ruling class, that led to this defining moment in the history of Nepal. Youth unemployment in Nepal stands at a startling 22.7%, whereas the national poverty rate stands at around 20%. These figures tell us the situation of the population in Nepal and point to a wider discontent in the country.

It was an attack on elites and the prevailing political system of the country, a system that came to be perceived as aloof and isolated, serving the interests of the political class. The attack targeted various political leaders, resulting in the burning of their homes. The Singha Durbar palace complex was also set on fire, which houses the Prime Minister's office. The country's system could not cope with the sudden outburst of anger on the streets, and what followed was complete chaos, leaving the country with no authority to establish order and security. Eventually, the army had to step in to bring some order, but the damage had already happened. According to the committee formed to look into the Gen Z movement, the protests resulted in the death of around 77 people and total physical damage pegged at around Rs. 84.45 billion. The committee has estimated rebuilding costs to be around Rs. 36.30 billion. This is a massive sum for a small country with limited resources.

It is interesting to note that amidst protests, no leader was seen to be associated with these protests. Essentially, making it seem like a leaderless movement or revolution, if it can be called a revolution. However, looking at the targets of protesters, it does not seem like it was spontaneous and targets were randomly chosen. The government institutions, hotels, political leaders, and their houses—these targets tell us about some sort of coordination among the protesters. Later, various Gen Z leaders such as Sudan Gurung, Ajay Soraadi, and Tashi Lhazom emerged from the shadows, which shows that there was some coordination amidst the chaos. 

Fragile Aftermath

With these developments, Nepal has stepped into an uncharted territory. Though an interim government was established with former Chief Justice Sushila Karki appointed as the interim prime minister of the country, this does not mean that stability has been restored in the country. On the contrary, Nepal is now more unstable than it has been in years. The political parties in Nepal jointly opposed the dissolution of parliament by the interim government, raising questions on the legitimacy of the government and the Gen Z movement. 

Amidst all this, the former PM K.P. Oli announced the formation of  the National Volunteer Force (NVF), new wing under CPN-UML. Apparently, this NVF is supposed to help maintain law and order in the country. The formation of NVF shows the fragile nature of Nepal's domestic and political order. When a prominent party announces the formation of a security force, it could mean many things. First, the party does not recognize the government, which appears to be true based on K.P. Oli's statements. Second, it has no faith in the security and law enforcement agencies of the state. Third, it seeks to challenge the hegemony of force. 

Though it may seem benign that the NVF is for the protection and maintenance of law and order in the country, one cannot fail to recognize that it is controlled by a party and, in the end, will serve the interests of that party. With NVF, Nepal might be pushed into more political violence. Especially after the September protests, there have been reports of clashes between Gen Z activists and CPN-UML supporters. However, it is yet to be seen what role NVF will play in the country. 

Elections: A Way Forward

Nepal is all set to vote on March 5, 2026. Thousands of candidates have filed nominations to fight elections, including those who were ousted from power in the September protests in 2025. Interestingly, most political parties, including K.P. Oli's Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist), have registered for the March 5 general elections this year, even though K.P. Oli keeps protesting the dissolution of parliament and fresh elections to be organized next month. Knowing he cannot turn back the time, he is now campaigning in his constituency, Jhapa-5. What is more intriguing is that the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) has fielded the popular former Kathmandu Metropolitan City Mayor Balendra Shah against the former PM K.P. Oli. It is direct contest between the one who represents the new generation and its politics and another who stands for the traditional Nepali politics. It has become an ideological battle between the two. 

Many new parties have also registered for the March 5 polls this year, such as Rastriya Gen Z Party Nepal, Nawa Nirman Party, and Janadesh Party. Thus, it seems like the protests have given some much-needed boost to the people of Nepal, and they are now trying their luck in the coming elections. However, the question remains—will the elections bring about the much-needed stability in Nepali politics? It is possible that the March 5 general elections might bring about a more fractured polity with no democratic stability. The Gen Z movement is not led by one group and hence not a monolith; this has given rise to various Gen Z groups claiming to represent the true Gen Z spirit, and they are often at loggerheads. 

Thus, on one hand, we have political parties and their support base standing against various Gen Z groups. On the other hand, we have Gen Z groups, which are against other Gen Z groups. There seems to be no political consensus in Nepal between various factions. It is evident from the fact that while a section of Gen Z activists signed an agreement with the interim government, others protested and tore up the agreement, showing their disapproval. The agreement calls for sweeping reforms and changes in the Nepali polity, ranging from changes in the constitution and electoral system to the judiciary and administration. It also recognized the September protests as Jana Andolan. However, if most political parties and Gen Z leaders are not supporting the agreement, then how viable is it? It would remain a dead letter without any spirit. Unless there is consensus, agreement means nothing. 

Besides, the unelected interim government is in no position to implement the agreement, and a stable majority government after the elections seems elusive. The parties like CPN-UML and Nepali Congress still have their support base. After the September protests, it is not just the old faces and parties that are vying for power; many new faces and parties have come, who are going to try their luck in the next elections. This creates a possibility of further division of votes, and a hung assembly. The hung assembly would likely put parties at loggerheads and may lead to the formation of a government on narrow interests, thus keeping the same old tradition. Therefore, it is important for Nepal that it gets a stable government either through consensus or through elections. However, there seems to be no consensus between the old guard (traditional political parties) and the new guard (Gen Z leaders and parties). 

Even the oldest party of Nepal, the Nepali Congress (NC) has split. The party was divided between two factions over party leadership and special convention. The faction led by Sher Bahadur Deuba opposed the special general convention of congress, organised by another group led by the general secretaries of the Nepali Congress, Gagan Thapa and Bishwa Prakash Sharma. Apparently, in October 2025, around 53 percent of the Nepali Congress delegates submitted petitions to call for a special general convention and election of a new leadership. Eventually, the “reformist” fraction led by general secretaries inaugurated the special convention on January 11 without the party president and the acting president, Purna Bahadur Khadka. This led to a split in the party, and the party is now effectively controlled by Gagan Thapa, who is now the Prime Ministerial candidate of the Nepali Congress. This might lead to a fragmentation of votes for the party. 

Thus, Nepal is staring at an uncertain future. The protests have ended; the elected government has been replaced with an interim government. It seems that the worst phase is over, and Nepal is slowly moving towards normalcy and stability. However, the peace remains fragile and the political system broken. True normalcy and stability cannot return until parties and leaders start looking beyond their immediate narrow interests. A shared, stable, and consensus-based democratic setup is what Nepal needs after this year's general elections. With too many candidates and parties trying their luck in the coming elections, it is possible that Nepal may not again see a majority government, thus might be pushed into the same old loop of coalition governments with narrow interests.