Nepal is voting on Thursday (March 5, 2026) in its first election since last September’s Gen Z protests that toppled the K.P. Sharma Oli government and led to the dissolution of the House of Representatives.
The sudden eruption of the movement — marked by the unprecedented participation of thousands of young people — and the killing of 19 youth in police firing left the country in shock. The international community, too, was caught off guard. In total, 77 people lost their lives during the two days of protests, making it one of the most violent episodes in Nepal’s recent political history.
After Mr. Oli of the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist-Leninist) resigned, an interim government was installed — a move some say breached constitutional boundaries. The March 5 election, hence, is expected to restore constitutional order and bring the democratic process back on track. Yet uncertainty persists over who will ultimately lead the next government.
With a clear majority for any single party highly unlikely, analysts predict a return to a hung Parliament and coalition politics — hallmarks of Nepali democracy in recent years.
“A fractured Parliament, probably the most likely scenario, means that coalition negotiations will play a key role in shaping what comes next,” said Sanjay Upadhya, a U.S.-based Nepali author of the book Nepal and the Geostrategic Rivalry between China and India. “The journey ahead is twofold. Not only do parties need to find common ground, but they also have to manage differences within their ranks.”
Dependence on India
Nepal’s economic dependence on India remains substantial, with more than two-thirds of its trade conducted with its southern neighbour. The two countries share an approximately 1,800-km-long porous border, which citizens of either country can cross without a visa or passport.
New Delhi is not merely a development partner; it has historically exercised considerable influence in Nepal’s political processes — whether in the 1950s, the 1990s, or during Nepal’s transition from monarchy to republic. Though Delhi has appeared relatively hands-off since the Gen Z protests, it consistently pushed for elections on the announced date and extended logistical support.
Frequent changes of government in Kathmandu, with familiar faces rotating in power roughly every nine months, have complicated Delhi’s engagement in the last decade or so. Analysts argue that India’s expectation of political stability in Nepal is therefore understandable.
Following episodes of instability in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, democratic derailment in Nepal is not something India would welcome. Regional stability is central to Delhi’s broader strategic interests amid rapid geopolitical flux, particularly at a time when India seeks to project itself as a leading voice of the Global South.
Security concerns, including terrorism and cross-border crime, remain significant, given the open border.
India’s stated position has been to “work with the government of the day in Kathmandu.” Yet it has not gone unnoticed that Mr. Oli’s ultranationalist rhetoric and his perceived tilt towards China had, at times, strained ties with Delhi. Analysts suggest India may quietly prefer a non-Left dispensation in Kathmandu.
Such a government could be led either by the Nepali Congress, which shares historical and institutional ties with India, or by the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), a relatively new political force experiencing a groundswell this election. The RSP’s equations with Delhi remain unclear, and the past provocative positioning of its prime ministerial candidate, Balendra Shah, has raised concerns in diplomatic circles.
Meanwhile, Nepali Congress president Gagan Thapa, though popular, remains untested at the executive level.
Geopolitical balance
In November, the outgoing Chinese ambassador Chen Song reaffirmed China’s commitment to supporting Nepal for the successful completion of the March 5 vote.
China has steadily expanded its footprint in Nepal in recent years. While it traditionally preferred quiet diplomacy, its engagement became more visibly assertive after Nepal’s communist forces united in 2018 under Mr. Oli to form a powerful Left alliance — a bloc that later imploded in 2021. Beijing’s efforts to keep Nepal’s communist parties united were widely noted.
The United States has also expressed confidence in a peaceful electoral process and indicated its readiness to work with the next government.
As China has deepened its strategic presence in Nepal through infrastructure financing and connectivity initiatives under the Belt and Road Initiative, Washington’s concerns have grown.
In 2022, debate over the Millennium Challenge Corporation compact — a $500 million U.S. grant for Nepal — triggered sharp exchanges between Washington and Beijing, with the latter describing the American initiative as a “Pandora’s box.”
The road ahead
The outcome of Thursday’s vote is expected to shape not only domestic power equations but also Nepal’s external balancing act in an increasingly polarised regional environment.
“All three countries publicly view the election as a step toward peace and stability in Nepal. India would probably welcome a coalition between the RSP and the Congress,” said Mr. Upadhya. “While recognising the advantage this could give Washington, Delhi would see such a coalition as focused on preventing any Nepali shift toward China.”
As far as Beijing is concerned, according to Mr. Upadhya, it is likely worried about a possible decrease in the communist vote share, seeing it as advantageous to Washington and New Delhi.
“The United States is keen to see whether — and to what extent — Nepal might reduce its dependence on China,” he said.
Published – March 04, 2026 11:31 pm IST
