As Nepal government loses trust vote, the country enters another period of political uncertainty

Nepal’s Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal, also known as Prachanda, lost a crucial trust vote in Parliament on Friday after the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist), a key partner in the Left Alliance, withdrew support from the government.

Now, the two biggest parties in the parliament – the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) – have reached an agreement to form the next government.

In less than two months since the formation of the Left Alliance government in May, Prachanda and his Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre) party attempted to save the government through a vote of confidence on Friday. But given the numbers that Prachanda had, it was impossible.

The Maoist Centre is the onlyy third-largest party with 32 seats in the 275-member lower house, the Pratinidhi Sabha. The Nepali Congress tops with 89 seats and Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist–Leninist with 78 seats.

Nepal has seen three governments since the fourth parliamentary elections in 2022. Prachanda remained the prime minister all three times but changed the coalition partners. What has been more surprising is that despite having just 32 seats, the Maoist Centre was able to bargain for the top post to lead the government.

Myth of Left unity

It was no surprise that Prachanda-led government would fall again. Tthere are two key reasons for it.

First, both Communist Party of Nepal-UML chairman KP Oli and the Maoist Centre chief Prachanda are strong personalities who are always competing for the top post. Prachanda and Oli have previously formed coalition governments together, but they have not lasted long as the power-sharing deals failed mid-way.

The usual pattern of power sharing in Nepal has been that one party serves office for the first half and paves the way for the other coalition leader for the second half. Because neither Prachanda nor Oli want to exit office halfway, they forge new alliances, just like Oli has done with the Nepali Congress.

Second, the so-called ideological bond of the Left parties, especially the Maoist Centre and Communist Party of Nepal-UML, has been nothing but a nexus of convenience. In Nepal’s history, the political Left has had many breakaways. In 2019, the Maoists and Communist Party of Nepal-UML even merged into a single Nepal Communist Party. Bu that did not not last long.

History of instability

In a Hindu-majority country where cultural and political practices are highly ingrained into religious values, the Left’s condemnation of religion has been less attractive to the electorate. But because the Left had led movements, including an armed rebellion, against the autocratic royal regime (1996-2006), they were readily accepted to lead the first democratic government.

The decade-long Maoist-led armed rebellion against the Hindu monarchy made them the natural winners of the first democratic elections in 2008, and Maoist chief Prachanda became the first Prime Minister of a democratic Nepal. However, his lack of experience in governance and feud with the Army Chief Rookmandgud Katawal about including former Maoist guerilla fighters in the Nepal Army led to his resignation within a year.

In the 16 years since the advent of democracy in 2006, Nepal has had more than ten prime ministers, 30 deputy prime ministers and countless cabinet ministers. No government has been able to complete a five-year term. While in a Westminster parliamentary setup, the rise and fall of coalitions is a natural phenomenon, short-term governments exhibit the sorry situation in the youngest democracy in the South Asian region.

The other alarming development in Nepal’s electoral history is the disappearance of opposition and the rise of regression and totalitarianism. In a democracy, it is uncommon for major competing parties – in this case, the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal-UML – to form a government together.

While this won’t be the first such alliance, as they have come together in the past too, historical evidence shows that such alliances often lead to increased autocracy and arbitrary governance, undermining democratic principles.

Such a practice is typically avoided, as it can weaken institutions, reduce accountability, and threaten the integrity of the political system. No surprise that constant political instability has impacted Nepal’s development. Short-term governments have neither been effective in addressing national issues nor established cohesive policies, including foreign policy.

Cost of instability

Political instability has caused a social uproar in Nepal and made it difficult for young people to find stable livelihoods. The lack of opportunities has contributed to large-scale outward migration. In 2023, an estimated 1.6 million Nepalese left the country primarily for employment purposes. While the Nepalese diaspora contributed $11 billion in remittances in 2023, a significant contributor to the GDP, unregulated migration is risking the lives of its citizens leaving the country.

Currently, an estimated 15,000 Nepalese are illegally serving in the Russian Army fighting in Ukraine. Many are reported to have died. The government of Nepal has formally requested the Russian authorities to let them return but the lack of diplomatic manoeuvring by Kathmandu hangs over this exercise. Similarly, thousands of Nepalese waited for months in 2021 to return safely from Afghanistan after the Taliban took over.

As a major human resource-exporting nation, the responsibility to protect its citizens must be the top priority. However, by the time a minister understands the workings of a ministry, the government falls.

Similarly, Nepal’s tourism industry has suffered heavily. Though it is ome to several UNESCO World Heritage sites, including Lumbini, the birthplace of Buddha, and Mount Everes, the highest mountain peak in the world, the country fails to exploit these fully. While the tourism industry has seen some revival in recent years after Covid-19, poor infrastructure continues to fail.

Nepal’s only airport receiving international flights, Tribhuvan International Airport, truggles to cope with heavy traffic and modern facilities.

Away from the resources and potential, Nepal’s foreign policy, an essential component for the development and trade of a landlocked country, has been in limbo. Nepal’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has seen three ministers in the last two years. Indeed, the frequent changes have affected the development of a long-term stable foreign policy.

Way forward

Given Nepal’s political past, it is unlikely that the incoming coalition government of the Nepali Congress and Communist Party of Nepal-UML led by KP Oli will provide a stable government. Going by their record, expecting political stability would be a dire mistake. Therefore, the electorate’s role is now more critical than ever in ensuring political stability and long-term governance.

A more informed and engaged populace must hold leaders accountable, demanding policies that promote national development. For Nepal to truly progress, it requires not just new political alliances but a fundamental shift towards stability, accountability, and visionary leadership that rises above short-term political manoeuvring.

Rishi Gupta is the Assistant Director at the Asia Society Policy Institute, Delhi.