Until the Gen Z movement, Balen’s popularity was at its peak. He was the mayor of Kathmandu, but even a schoolchild in Jumla would name Balen the moment someone said “leader.” Many may have thought he was only a social media hero, but his name was etched into the minds of many in the younger generation.
The Gen Z movement turned violent and destructive. Although the main movement was the previous day, when nothing had been burned, after many young people were killed that day, natural anger rose the next day. Self-interested groups joined in, and the movement spread beyond the Gen Z circle. After that, the scale of national damage is well known. If you watch the videos of people pouring fuel on fires, you can see more faces of party leaders and cadres than Gen Z. Balen’s Facebook post contributed significantly to making the Gen Z movement that large. Therefore, he is also a participant in both its achievements and its destruction.
That movement shook those in power. Gen Z had neither leadership nor a clear roadmap. Balen was naturally the first choice. Perhaps it was also the biggest opportunity for him. But he could not properly assess the situation or show courage. Leadership is tested in exactly such crises. At a quick glance, it looked like the parties were finished, so he may have been tempted by the idea that he could become a strong prime minister through elections. He may also not have been naturally interested in serving as an interim prime minister.
If, by that day, Balen had decided to form a party and enter politics, most of the youth votes that are now going to RSP would have gone to him instead. Understanding this, Sumanaji may have changed sides.
After that, the situation changed. The narrative changed. Party cadres across the country shifted responsibility for the fires they set onto his head. The word “Lucifer” became a hit. The parties he had harshly accused and insulted left no stone unturned to tarnish his image. No one took responsibility for the destruction—from breaking jails across the country to burning Singha Durbar and the courts—yet by pinning it all on him, others appeared clean. Neither the government, which inflamed the situation by using extremely brutal repression the previous day, took moral responsibility, nor did Gen Z, which led the movement, present accountability for it. In this, Balen’s own provocative, indecent, and aggressive expressions—such as inciting people to “burn and bring down”—are also responsible to some extent. As a result, all the blame fell on Balen, and he could not, or did not manage to, counter it effectively. Silence may be useful in family matters, but in politics one must openly present one’s side.
Today, his rating on social media has dropped sharply. What exists on the ground will be shown by the election itself. A weakness is visible in Balen: he cannot engage in sustained dialogue, cannot face the media, and cannot hold interactive discussions about his plans and programs. That may be part of a strategy, but if he does not communicate outside the room at all, it will not work.
If he had not been linked to the cooperative case, Rabi Lamichhane seemed in a position to become prime minister from this very election. Reaching this level of success before even four or five years have passed since forming a party is significant. Today, RSP is a major challenge for any party. Critics of Rabi Lamichhane have increased, but supporters have also increased. A large vote bank seeking an alternative to the traditional parties is certain to go to RSP. After the jail incident in the Gen Z movement, the damage has largely been brought under control. For RSP, it is a major victory that Rabi was able to come out on bail right on the eve of the election. Whether one likes it or not is a separate matter, but not only in Kathmandu—Rabi Lamichhane is popular enough to win elections from most places in the country. Whether he can help the party win as well will be seen soon.
Even though I have been writing in support of Kulman Ghising, I do not think he can lead a single party and win any seat directly. He has popularity, but controversies and scandals are just as present. The main point is to win on the basis of the vote bank that has grown disillusioned with the parties. There is serious doubt that vote bank will leave the “bell” and go elsewhere. The sense of revenge and impatience seen in him has also caused some damage. But restraint in speech and a style that does not offend others are his strong points.
If these three fight alone, the least damage will be to RSP. It has a strong organization, an established election symbol, and momentum. The alternative vote will also strategically go to the relatively stronger party, which is RSP. Since it is the strongest, largest, and the oldest among the new forces, the responsibility to be flexible and unite alternative forces also lies with RSP.
The scenes of division and bargaining—as if a majority has already arrived and the prime minister’s post is guaranteed—have already cost some votes. Balen by not speaking, and Rabi Lamichhane by speaking too much, could also influence the vote going forward.
Until the many cases under court consideration against him are resolved, Rabi Lamichhane does not look likely to become prime minister. Therefore, presenting Balen as prime minister for the time being may not be a major problem. The prime minister’s post is not permanent.
If the goal is to mount a serious challenge to the traditional parties, unity is necessary. Our system is arithmetic. In the end, what matters is the required number. That would also force other parties to unite. After all, once new parties establish “winning” itself as the biggest agenda, the old ones also get an excuse.
Still, if the debate over whether to unite for power and position or for change is not carried along—and if a clear economic and political roadmap is not advanced—then that same vote bank will only shift back and forth. If the goal is to attract new voters, it is getting late to do the hard work on issues.
(This article is adapted from a Facebook post written by Narayan Gaule. It has been translated into English and edited for clarity and style by Virginia Times staff.)
