Two Paths for Old Leaders: Return Home Like Gyanendra or Get Beaten on the Streets Like Deuba!
[By Madhav Guragain, Founder, Nepal Aaja]
Nepal’s politics has lived in the grip of turbulence for decades—rising from monarchy to its fall, from waves of people’s uprisings to the Gen-Z protests. The rejection of old leaders, the fury of the people, and the emergence of a new generation have redefined the political landscape. Against this backdrop, this piece seeks to frame past failures, present disillusionment, and future possibilities through a single, unflinching lens.
The Story of Former King Gyanendra
Before 2001 (2058 BS), Gyanendra Shah was merely a member of the royal family—King Birendra’s brother, engaged in private business, far removed from political ambition. But on June 1, 2001, the Royal Palace Massacre turned the nation upside down. In a moment of shock, Gyanendra ascended the throne.
Hopes for stability soon faded. By 2005 (2062/63 BS), he seized direct power, imposing absolute control. Critics called it a “hunger for power,” and his reign was remembered as the peak of authoritarianism.
Finally, on May 28, 2008 (2065 Jestha 15 BS), the Constituent Assembly abolished the 239-year-old Shah monarchy and declared Nepal a Federal Democratic Republic. That day, Gyanendra quietly issued a press release from Narayanhiti Palace and retreated to his private Maharajgunj residence—a symbolic closure of an era.
Houses to Ashes, Symbols Destroyed
On September 8–9, 2025 (2082 Bhadra 23–24), Kathmandu’s skies glowed red. Smoke and fire filled the night—not merely consuming homes but reducing decades of failed politics to ashes.
Angry Gen-Z protesters directly targeted the private residences of Nepal’s top leaders. Their chant was singular and sharp: “Enough!” Figures who had repeatedly pushed the nation into crisis were rejected at their very doorsteps. Former prime ministers K. P. Sharma Oli, Sher Bahadur Deuba, Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda,’ Madhav Kumar Nepal, Dr. Baburam Bhattarai, and Jhala Nath Khanal were the first to face the fury. These were leaders who had circled power for decades yet failed to deliver stability.
But the fire did not stop there. The so-called “second generation” leaders—Gagan Thapa, Bishwa Prakash Sharma, Mahesh Basnet, Gokul Baskota, Renu Dahal—were also engulfed by public anger. The Gen-Z uprising was not simply about burning houses; it was the writing of a new chapter in Nepal’s political culture—a decisive rejection of greed and entrenched power.
Leaders Rejected
The flames of 2025 burned not just houses, but the very legitimacy of an entire generation of politicians. From Kathmandu to Biratnagar, the list of targeted residences reads like an obituary for old politics:
Sher Bahadur Deuba and Arzu Rana Deuba; Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda’; Jhala Nath Khanal; Prakash Man Singh; Ramesh Lekhak; Prithvi Subba Gurung; Bidya Devi Bhandari; K. P. Sharma Oli; Baburam Bhattarai; Bishwa Prakash Sharma; Gagan Thapa; Mahesh Basnet; Renu Dahal; Shekhar Koirala; Nanda Kishor Pun; Ram Chandra Paudel; and Gokul Baskota.
Even the historic Koirala family home in Biratnagar was reduced to ashes, deepening the symbolism that “history itself” had been destroyed.
For decades, these leaders circulated within power but offered citizens only disappointment, inequality, and impunity. Corruption, greed, and abuse of office became their enduring legacy.
The burned homes were more than material destruction—they became markers of an era’s end. No matter how fiercely they struggle to cling to power, the people’s verdict has already been delivered: history will remember them as irrelevant.
Timeline of Turmoil
Nepal’s political journey is a cycle of upheavals. In 1960 (2017 BS), the Panchayat system dissolved party politics and silenced dissent, though street resistance never ceased. By 1990 (2047 BS), multiparty democracy was restored. Yet relief was short-lived. In 1996 (2052 BS), the Maoist insurgency dragged the nation into civil war, killing thousands and displacing millions.
In 2001 (2058 BS), the Royal Palace Massacre shook the monarchy’s foundation. By 2006 (2062/63 BS), a second People’s Movement brought millions into the streets, ending direct monarchy and strengthening democracy.
In 2008 (2065 BS), the Constituent Assembly abolished the monarchy altogether. Yet the old practices and the same faces resurfaced in power. From the constitutional struggles of 2015 (2072 BS) to political instability in 2023 (2079 BS), the leadership remained unchanged, the style recycled.
Finally, in 2025 (2082 BS), the Gen-Z uprising erupted, once again rejecting the past and demanding a new direction. Throughout these eras, first-generation leaders clung to dominance—some emerging post-1990, others after 2006. Yet today, they are struggling for relevance, while the new generation openly declares its intent to lead.
Public Fury and Rejection
The Gen-Z protests carved an unprecedented picture in Nepali politics. Smoke filled the capital as Sher Bahadur Deuba and his wife Arzu Rana Deuba faced attacks at their residence. Prime Minister Oli and several ministers had to be evacuated by the army under cover of night.
For leaders who had sat at the center of power for decades, the reliance on military protection over popular legitimacy revealed everything. Their irrelevance was laid bare in that moment.
The people have already rendered their verdict: these leaders are no longer the present, but only fading shadows.
The Road Ahead
The path for Nepal’s old leaders is now clear: like former King Gyanendra, they must retire with dignity, retreat to private life, and allow history to close their chapter. If they do, the public may forgive them once. If they resist, the risk of violent backlash only grows. Their choice is stark: honorable retirement or humiliating rejection.
Meanwhile, Kathmandu’s mayor, Balendra Shah, has unexpectedly risen to national prominence. He encouraged the Gen-Z protests, shaking the political order and indirectly paving the way for Sushila Karki’s interim premiership. Today, the country marches toward new elections.
Yet uncertainty remains: where does Balendra Shah stand? Some see him as a hero of the movement; others question his capacity to govern. The people still await clarity—will he step fully into democratic politics, or remain confined to local leadership?
Nepal today needs more than a mayor or a protest leader—it needs a statesman. If Balendra Shah embraces the democratic process with national vision, it will be welcome. If not, Nepal will demand another “new Balen”—a fresh leader with integrity and foresight.
Violence is not the solution. Political competition must flow through votes, debate, and accountability. Yet the people’s demand remains unchanged: honest, capable, visionary leadership.
Shah now faces a defining choice—either assure the people of his democratic commitment or step aside for others to rise. The nation stands at a crossroads, but the road forward remains to be paved.
Conclusion
Nepal’s political history has repeated the same picture—leaders failing, people rejecting. Despite countless opportunities, the old guard clings to power, while the nation languishes. History, however, has spoken: Nepal now needs a new generation of leadership—honest, accountable, and visionary.
For democracy to be strong and meaningful, the old must depart. Yes, if they return through genuine public mandate, they may regain relevance—but that possibility is slim. They have had their turn, again and again, and left only disillusionment.
The time has come for the new generation—for new vision, new direction, and new hope. Only fresh leadership can carry Nepal into the future.
