Tuesday, April 08, 2025

Nepal: Royalist Burst Hits Republican Barrier

By Sanjay Upadhya

As Nepal grapples with the deaths and destruction resulting from the March 28 protests, the country continues to debate its core demand: the restoration of the monarchy and Hindu state identity.
Two people lost their lives, at least 100 were injured, and numerous vehicles and businesses were set on fire during the protests, prompting the government to impose a curfew in parts of Kathmandu and deploy the army.
Two senior leaders of the monarchist Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP), along with several others, are in custody for incitement. At least a dozen individuals have been arrested for looting a department store. The police are currently searching for the chief protest organizer, Durga Prasai, who fled the scene. Some reports suggest he has crossed into India and is plotting his next moves.
The chaos, violence, and government crackdown initially raised questions about the future of the monarchy restoration project in Nepal. However, organizers have quickly regrouped. They appointed Jagman Gurung, the former vice-chancellor of the Nepal Academy, as the new head of the Monarchy Reinstatement Movement Committee. He succeeds Navaraj Subedi, who is currently under house arrest. Gurung will now serve as the committee's leader as royalist groups advance their protest plans.
The government and its allies immediately held former king Gyanendra accountable for the chaos, leading to a reduction in his state-provided security detail. Three days later, Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli informed parliament that Mr. Shah was responsible for the mayhem and asserted that the guilty would not escape punishment.
The government is facing pressure from the ruling parties and the opposition to arrest the ex-monarch and revoke his passport. The Kathmandu Municipality has imposed a fine of nearly Rs. 800,000 on Mr. Shah for the damage caused to public property and the environment during the protests. The ex-king has not issued a public statement regarding the violent protests or the allegations against him. Some reports indicate that he has been placed under informal house arrest.
The pro-monarchy movement in Nepal has intensified since February, following a message from Mr. Shah on Democracy Day. In his video message, the deposed monarch urged Nepalis to join him in ‘saving the nation’. Critics of the monarchy, both within the government and outside, began voicing their opposition, which escalated into a crescendo following a rally to welcome the ex-king on March 9, as he arrived in Kathmandu from Pokhara. An estimated 25,000 people participated in the rally, stretching from Tribhuvan Airport to Mr. Shah’s residence, located five kilometers away.

INDIAN ANGLE
The appearance of a poster featuring Yogi Adityanath, the chief minister of the neighboring Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, at the March 9 rally has raised concerns that New Delhi may be behind the royalist resurgence. Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Sharma Oli has made claims to that effect. Nepalis are also contemplating the roles of China, the United States, and the European Union – other influential players in Nepali politics – both before and after the protests.
India has not issued any official comment on the recent political developments in Nepal. However, reports indicate that it is closely monitoring how events unfold. Its broader policy emphasizes supporting Nepal’s democratic process while protecting its strategic interests. Nonetheless, if protests escalate into violence or instability, India may strengthen security along the Nepal-India border to prevent any repercussions.
Some Nepalis believe that although India may not be particularly eager to see the restoration of the monarchy, New Delhi would favor the reinstatement of Hindu statehood within the current republican framework.
The immediate narrative following the March 28 anarchy suggested that the pro-monarchy cause had been severely damaged – perhaps irretrievably – by the actions of the protesters. However, video footage of the events began circulating on social media, fueling speculation that security forces had used excessive force before any genuine security threat emerged. Protesters claimed they were merely responding to police provocation and asserted that government and party provocateurs had infiltrated the demonstration.
The most horrific episode was the burning alive of a video journalist when the building he was working in was set on fire. The government blamed the protesters for the arson, a charge they vehemently deny. It is unclear whether the second deceased was a protester or a bystander. However, some witnesses claim he was a victim of police brutality in an area that did not pose a security risk.
Conflicting accounts about the events leading up to and during the protests have challenged the initial claim of a significant defeat for the royalist cause. The RPP and other groups have vowed to continue demonstrations as part of a broader uprising against the government and the federal secular republican system.
Recent royalist protests in Nepal have been driven by growing public frustration over corruption, mismanagement, impunity, and the government's general lack of direction. Even some members of the ruling parties and supporters of the republican system agree that the government must change its approach to win back public support. Nevertheless, they assert that reverting to a monarchy is not the solution.
Royalists view the monarchy as a symbol of national unity and stability. They seek to restore the institution along with Nepal's Hindu state identity, which was abolished in 2008. Some argue that Nepal has become excessively influenced by foreign powers, particularly India and Western nations, perceiving the monarchy as a way to reclaim sovereignty and national identity.
Republicans argue that a return to the monarchy is impossible because of insufficient political and public support, along with constitutional obstacles. They point out that while royalist protests have occurred, they suffer from weak leadership and lack nationwide momentum. Previous controversies surrounding the monarchy also hinder the restoration of the institution.
Supporters of the monarchy argue that these remarks reflect the last struggles of a system already endangered by corruption, nepotism, mismanagement, and incompetence. They recall that the monarchy was abolished in a highly irregular and authoritarian way.
In 2006, public demonstrations were organized in response to the royal coup of the previous year. Both political parties and the public urged the king to restore parliament and transfer power to an interim prime minister leading a coalition of mainstream political parties and Maoist rebels, who had engaged in a decade-long insurgency against the monarchy and political parties.
A secret five-point agreement – essentially a compromise between the king and the political parties – has been reported to have laid the groundwork for subsequent political developments. The parties, among other things, agreed to support Nepal’s constitutional monarchy.
King Gyanendra appointed and swore in Girija Prasad Koirala, the president of the Nepali Congress, as the interim prime minister. His role was to sign a peace agreement with the Maoists and oversee elections for an assembly responsible for drafting a new constitution. The parties deny the existence of such an agreement, but former King Gyanendra confirmed in a televised interview several years ago that it had been reached.
The parties entrenched their positions over the following months, asserting that the assembly's initial meeting would abolish the monarchy. This development came after the king rejected backdoor negotiations to establish a 'baby king' – specifically, Gyanendra’s grandson – or a powerless cultural monarchy.
While the major parties embraced a republican agenda and secured an overwhelming majority of seats in the 2008 elections, royalist candidates claimed that mass intimidation and, in many cases, outright violence deprived them of campaign opportunities. The monarchy was abolished by a decisive vote of 560 to 4 in the 601-member assembly.
Royalists argue that the parties abandoned constitutional monarchy at the whim of a few leaders, leaving the populace voiceless. However, in successive elections, monarchist organizations like the RPP have not performed very well.
Public consultations garnered significant support for upholding a constitutional monarchy and Hindu statehood during the constituent assembly's preparation of the new constitution in 2015. However, these public sentiments were ignored, and Nepal shifted to a federal, secular democratic republic.
Rejecting the royalist narrative, republicans assert that the current political system arises from widespread discontent with an outdated institution and its inherent problems. However, even staunch republicans privately concede that such appeals are becoming increasingly difficult to make with a populace disillusioned by a series of broken promises.
Royalists express confidence that public frustration with the current order will lead more Nepalis to reconsider the monarchy as a stabilizing force. Furthermore, they argue that shifting regional political dynamics could pave the way for direct or indirect external support for a transition to a monarchy.

Originally published at https://www.vitastapublishing.com

Sunday, April 06, 2025

Nepal: Revolution, Regression and Rampage

Royalists persist in their effort to restore the monarchy, while republicans strengthen their stance.

By Sanjay Upadhya


Former king Gyanendra Shah. Photo: Krish Dulal/Wikipedia.
THE highly anticipated royalist demonstrations on March 28 devolved into chaos and violence, raising questions about the future of the monarchy restoration project in Nepal. Two people lost their lives, around 100 were injured, and numerous vehicles and businesses were set ablaze, prompting the government to impose a curfew in parts of Kathmandu and deploy the army.

Two senior leaders of the monarchist Rastriya Prajatantra Party (RPP) – senior vice-president Rabindra Mishra and general secretary Dhawal Shamsher Rana – along with several other individuals, are in custody for incitement. At least a dozen people were arrested for looting a department store.

The police are searching for the chief protest organizer, Durga Prasai, who escaped from the scene. Government supporters held a separate protest on the same day in a different part of Kathmandu, which passed peacefully.

The former vice-chancellor of the Nepal Academy, Jagman Gurung, has been appointed as the new head of the Monarchy Reinstatement Movement Committee. He replaces Navaraj Subedi, who is currently under house arrest. Gurung will now serve as the acting leader of the committee as royalist groups advance their protest plans.

The government and its allies immediately held former king Gyanendra accountable for the chaos, leading to a reduction in his state-provided security detail. Three days later, Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli informed parliament that Mr. Shah was responsible for the mayhem and asserted that the guilty would not escape punishment.

The government is under pressure from both the ruling parties and the opposition to arrest the ex-monarch and revoke his passport. Kathmandu Municipality imposed a fine of nearly Rs. 800,000 on Mr. Shah for the damage caused to public property and the environment during the protests. The ex-king has not made a public statement on the violent protests or the allegations against him. Some reports suggest that he has been placed under informal house arrest.

The pro-monarchy movement in Nepal has intensified since February, following a message by Mr. Shah on Democracy Day. In his video message, the deposed monarch urged Nepalis to join him in ‘saving the nation’. Since then, monarchists have staged multiple rallies across Nepal, demanding the restoration of the 240-year-old institution.

The immediate narrative following the March 28 anarchy was that the pro-monarchy cause had been severely damaged – perhaps irretrievably – by the actions of the protesters. However, video footage of the events began circulating on social media, fueling speculation that security forces had used excessive force before any real security threat emerged. Protesters claimed they were merely responding to police provocation and asserted that government and party provocateurs had infiltrated the demonstration.

The most horrific episode was the burning alive of video journalist Suresh Rajak when the building he was working in was set ablaze. The government blamed the protesters for the arson, a charge they vigorously deny. It is not clear whether the second deceased, Sabin Maharjan, was a protester or a bystander. However, some eyewitnesses claim he was the victim of police highhandedness in an area that was not a security risk.

Such conflicting accounts regarding the events before and during the protests have challenged the initial assertion of a significant defeat for the royalist cause. The RPP and other groups have pledged to persist with demonstrations as part of a larger uprising against the government and the federal secular republican system.

The protests were fueled by escalating public frustration over corruption, mismanagement, impunity, and the government’s overall lack of direction. Even some members of the ruling parties and advocates of the republican system concur that the government must alter its approach to regain public support. However, they insist that regressing to a monarchy is not the answer.

Royalists perceive the monarchy as a symbol of national unity and stability. They seek to reinstate the institution along with Nepal’s Hindu state identity, which was abolished in 2008. Some believe Nepal has become overly influenced by foreign powers, particularly India and Western nations, and view the monarchy as a means to reclaim sovereignty and national identity.

Republicans argue that a return to the monarchy is impossible due to insufficient political and public support and constitutional obstacles. They point out that while royalist protests have occurred, they suffer from weak leadership and lack nationwide momentum. Previous controversies surrounding the monarchy also work against a restoration of the institution.

Royalists express confidence that public frustration with the current order will encourage more Nepalis to reconsider the monarchy as a stabilizing force. They argue that the institution has played a crucial role in preserving Nepal’s Hindu identity. Additionally, they maintain that shifting regional political dynamics could lead to either direct or indirect external support for a transition towards monarchy.

For now, the contest will likely continue to take place on the Nepali street.

Saturday, April 05, 2025

Battle Royal of Narratives in Nepal

In some ways, Nepal is today involved in a robust debate that is a decade and a half overdue.

By Sanjay Upadhya


Former king Gyanendra addressing Nepalis on the eve of the
75th Democracy Day on February 19.

A message from former king Gyanendra Shah on February 18, on the eve of Nepal’s 75th Democracy Day, and a large public rally two weeks later in support of the monarchy have sparked a vigorous clash of narratives.

In his video message, the deposed monarch urged Nepalis to join him in ‘saving the nation’. Critics within the government and beyond began to voice their opposition, which escalated into a crescendo following the rally on March 9. An estimated 25,000 people participated in the rally, stretching from Tribhuvan Airport to Mr. Shah’s residence, located five kilometers away.

The tone and tenor of the outbursts from the leaders of the three main parties – the Nepali Congress, the Nepal Communist Party Unified Marxist-Leninist, and the Nepal Communist Party Maoist Center – indicate that the establishment is worried about the rise of pro-royalist sentiments.

‘What’s wrong with the nation?’ asked Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli of the Unified Marxist-Leninist Party. Sher Bahadur Deuba, a leader of the Nepali Congress and a former prime minister, offered a tepid response saying the restoration of the monarchy was mere rumor mongering. Other leaders urged Mr. Shah to contest elections if he was eager to serve the nation. The most strident reaction came from former Prime Minister Baburam Bhattarai, a one-time deputy leader of the Maoist rebels, who called for the arrest of the former king for violating the constitution.

The appearance of a poster featuring Yogi Adityanath, the ascetic chief minister of the neighboring Indian state of Uttar Pradesh and a prominent member of the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, at the rally has raised concerns that New Delhi may be behind the royalist resurgence. Nepalis are also contemplating how China, the United States, and Europe – influential players in Nepali politics – might react to these developments.

Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda,’ another former prime minister, intensified speculation by questioning whether both national and international forces were orchestrating the current developments. He described these as part of a conspiracy against the existing federal secular democratic republic. He escalated the situation days later by calling Mr. Shah a ‘brother killer’ – a reference to the June 2001 palace massacre that claimed the lives of then King Birendra, Queen Aishwarya, and seven other royal family members, leading to Gyanendra Shah’s accession to the throne.

Supporters of the monarchy argue that these outbursts represent the last gasps of a system already endangered by corruption, nepotism, mismanagement, and incompetence. They remember that the monarchy was abolished in a highly irregular and high-handed manner.

In 2006, public demonstrations were organized in response to the royal coup of the previous year. Both political parties and the public urged the king to restore parliament and transfer power to an interim prime minister leading a coalition of mainstream political parties and Maoist rebels who had been engaged in a decade-long insurgency against the monarchy and political parties.

A secret five-point agreement – essentially a compromise between the king and the political parties – was reported to have laid the groundwork for subsequent political developments. The parties, among other things, agreed to uphold Nepal’s constitutional monarchy.

King Gyanendra appointed and swore in Girija Prasad Koirala, president of the Nepali Congress, as the interim prime minister. His role was to sign a peace agreement with the Maoists and conduct elections for an assembly tasked with drafting a new constitution. The parties deny the existence of such an agreement, but former king Gyanendra confirmed in a televised interview several years ago that it had been reached.

The parties entrenched their positions over the next few months, asserting that the assembly’s first meeting would abolish the monarchy. This development followed the king’s rejection of backdoor negotiations to establish a ‘baby king’ – specifically, Gyanendra’s grandson – or a powerless cultural monarchy.

While the major parties embraced a republican agenda and secured an overwhelming majority of seats in the 2008 elections, royalist candidates claimed that mass intimidation and, in many cases, outright violence deprived them of campaign opportunities. The monarchy was abolished by a decisive vote of 560 to 4 in the 601-member assembly.

Royalists argue that the parties abandoned constitutional monarchy at the whim of a few leaders, rendering the populace voiceless. However, in successive elections, monarchist organizations such as the Rastriya Prajatantra Party have not performed that well.

During the preparation of the new constitution by the constituent assembly in 2015, public consultations garnered substantial support for preserving a constitutional monarchy and Hindu statehood. Nevertheless, these public sentiments were disregarded, and Nepal transitioned into a federal, secular democratic republic.

Rejecting the royalist narrative, republicans assert that the current political system stems from a widespread rejection of an anachronistic institution and its inherent ills. Even staunch republicans privately concede that such pleas are becoming harder to reach with a populace disillusioned by a succession of broken promises.

In some ways, Nepal is today involved in a robust debate that is a decade and a half overdue.