Nepal, the beautiful land of mountains, hills, and plains, stands today at a political crossroads. As the date of the upcoming election approaches, not only the country's internal politics but also the strategic conflicts of international powers have reached a crescendo. Nepal's strategic location—situated between China to the north and India to the south, east, and west—has always been a center of attraction for regional and global powers. However, this time, discussions about American presence and interference in the election are so profound that they have called into question the very fundamental nature of Nepali politics.
The popular uprising of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), the insecurity of the old parties, the concerns of the Nepali Army, and the activism of American strategists—all together have created a complex equation. I have attempted to analyze the current situation of Nepal's election, the American role in it, the strategies of internal parties, the dilemma of the Nepali Army, and its regional and international implications.
American interest in Nepal has been increasing for several decades. Data shows that since 2020 alone, America has spent more than $900 million in aid in Nepal. But this aid is not merely humanitarian or developmental; it has deep political and strategic dimensions. Nepal is seen as a core part of the American "Indo-Pacific" strategy, where the US objective is to balance China's influence.
In this context, the upcoming election has become extremely important for America. If the election does not take place, not only would America's significant investment in Nepal be wasted, but the entire mechanism it has built would also fail. Therefore, America appears to be committed to a strategy of holding the election at any cost and ensuring a favorable outcome.
In recent days, American supporters have started a propaganda campaign claiming that the RSP's popular support is weakening. The purpose of this propaganda is to convince the old parties—especially the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML—that they will be victorious in the election. Thus, keeping them in the electoral fray and avoiding the possibility of an election boycott is the first phase of the American strategy.
Suggesting that the RSP should focus on rural areas is also part of this strategy. Doing so will make the RSP's presence appear weak in urban areas, allowing the old parties to dominate cities. But the question of what its long-term impact will be is equally important.
The rise of the RSP is a relatively new phenomenon in Nepali politics. Energized by the youth's anger and desire for change, this party gained significant public support in a short time. However, it seems American strategists are trying to use this very popular uprising for their own benefit.
America wants to elect candidates within the RSP and Nepali Congress who are aligned with Bishwa Prakash Sharma. But there is a complexity here: America does not want to give the RSP a full majority. Why? Because an outright majority for the RSP could make the American strategy uncontrollable. Instead, America desires a situation where there is a coalition of many parties, but with sufficient presence of the RSP and Bishwa Prakash Sharma supporters. This would create an environment to "fish in troubled waters," where America can expand its influence amidst instability.
But the internal dynamics of the RSP are equally complex. There are various factions and ambitious leaders within the party. If American support becomes openly discussed, the RSP might lose its indigenous identity, which is its main strength.
Looking at the history of Nepal's elections, the role of the Nepali Army has always been significant. Starting patrols a month before the election date, securing ballot boxes, and ensuring the completion of the election are responsibilities that fall on the army's shoulders. But this time the situation is different.
Senior leaders of the UML have begun to suspect that they will be defeated, even if by rigging ballot boxes. This suspicion is not only a question mark on the sanctity of the election but also on the impartiality of the army. If allegations are made after the election that the army rigged the polls, the reputation of the Nepali Army will suffer a huge blow. Along with these allegations, the debate questioning the very necessity of the Nepali Army could gain momentum once again, which would have a deep impact on the national security structure.
The army is in this dilemma. On one hand, it must fulfill its constitutional duty; on the other hand, it knows it will become a focal point of allegations after this election. Especially if the results do not align with the American strategy, the army could face accusations of "conspiracy." This will certainly have a long-term impact on Nepal's civil-military relations.
To counter the American strategy and control the RSP's popular surge, the possibility of an alliance among internal parties has emerged. If an environment of internal consensus develops among UML, CPN (Maoist Centre), and if necessary, the Nepali Congress, then the popular surge seen in favor of the RSP can be controlled. The main objective of this alliance would be to prevent post-election instability and protect national interests.
The coordinator of CPN (Maoist Centre), Pushpa Kamal Dahal, had already expressed in a public program a few days ago that he was positive about such unity. This is an important sign that old parties can forget their differences and unite for national interest.
But time is short here. With voting scheduled for Falgun 21, such an environment needs to be created within the next three to four days at least. If this alliance does not materialize, the RSP could expand its influence not only in urban areas but also in rural regions, weakening the old parties for a long time.
What will be the role of China and India in this entire process? China has always followed a policy of non-interference in Nepal's internal affairs, but China is concerned about the increasing American influence in Nepal. Nepal is also an important part of China's "Belt and Road Initiative" (BRI), and political instability here could hinder China's long-term plans.
India also has deep strategic and cultural interests in Nepal. Increasing American influence in Nepal might make India feel a loss in its traditional sphere of influence. Although India has not yet reacted openly, policymakers in New Delhi are closely watching the developments in Nepal.
Thus, Nepal's election is not merely an internal political process; it has become a battleground for the strategic conflict of three major powers—America, China, and India.
Nepal stands at a historic turning point today. The upcoming election will determine not only the country's future but also its national sovereignty and the direction of its foreign policy. The question of how much the conflict between American strategy and the alliance of internal parties will ultimately address the aspirations of the Nepali people is equally important.
If the American strategy succeeds, a situation of "fishing in troubled waters" will be created in Nepal, where American influence will expand amidst instability. This will have a long-term impact not only on Nepal's internal politics but also on its regional relations.
If an alliance is formed among internal parties, the RSP's popular surge can be controlled, and Nepal can continue its traditional multi-party system. But for this, the old parties must forget their differences and unite for the national interest.
The role of the Nepali Army will also be equally important. If the army fails to discharge its responsibilities impartially and transparently, it will have to face allegations. But for this, political parties must also refrain from trying to politicize the army.
Ultimately, Nepal's future is in the hands of its people. The votes cast by the electorate will determine the country's direction. But this vote will not be based solely on internal issues. The influence of international powers will also be equally present. Therefore, it is essential for the Nepali people to remain conscious and vigilant. So that their vote is truly used in the national interest, and not as a tool of someone else's external strategy.
This election of Nepal will be a decisive moment not only for Nepal but also for the political future of this region. It will show how small nations can maintain their sovereignty while balancing under the pressure of major powers.
