King's gambit: Will Nepal's Gyanendra Shah make a move now?

Nepal's political landscape is currently in turmoil, following a wave of intense protests that have forced the resignation of Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli. What began as a movement against the government's controversial social media bans has escalated into widespread protests, fuelled by deep-seated frustration with the ruling elite. In the wake of this turmoil, many may wonder whether the former king, Gyanendra Shah, could play a pivotal role in the country's future, as calls for the restoration of the monarchy have grown louder in recent times.

A movement born of disillusionment with democratic parties
The protests, widely described as a "Gen Z movement," reflect a broader disillusionment among young Nepalis who feel abandoned by both the government and the political parties that promised better governance following the end of the monarchy in 2008. The protestors have expressed a deep sense of betrayal, accusing political leaders of exacerbating corruption and inequality while leading lavish lifestyles, all at the expense of the general population. The government's repeated failures to address the needs of its citizens, particularly in the areas of employment and economic security, have led to widespread frustration.

This sentiment has only deepened in the aftermath of Prime Minister Oli’s resignation. Protesters have taken to the streets with increasingly radical demands, setting fire to the homes of several top politicians, including opposition figures like Pushpa Kamal Dahal, the chairman of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist Centre). The Supreme Court building itself was set ablaze, a symbolic act that underscores the gravity of the public's dissatisfaction with the political establishment.


What sets the protests in Nepal apart from others in the region is that they don't seem to be aligned with any single political party. In contrast to previous movements, such as the 2024 student protests in Bangladesh, which saw opposition groups like the BNP taking advantage of public dissatisfaction, the Nepal protests have been aimed at the ruling and opposition figures alike. This level of broad-based anger suggests that the problem is not with individual politicians but with the political system itself.

Also Read | Nepal PM KP Sharma Oli resigns as protests turn deadly, plans to flee country

Systemic failure: From monarchy to republic
Nepal's transition from a Hindu monarchy to a secular republic was intended to usher in an era of democracy, but the reality has been far less promising. Since the monarchy's abolition in 2008, Nepal has seen a series of unstable coalition governments. Over the past 17 years, the country has had more than a dozen prime ministers, with power rotating between leaders of the three main political parties. These frequent changes have only contributed to a sense of political chaos, preventing any long-term development or stability.

The dream of a prosperous, democratic Nepal has remained elusive, as political leaders have failed to address the nation’s fundamental problems. Poverty, unemployment and corruption continue to plague the country, and many people feel that the political system, born out of a 2006 peace agreement that ended a decade-long civil war, is incapable of bringing about meaningful change. For many, this failure raises a crucial question: would the restoration of the monarchy under the leadership of former king Gyanendra Shah bring the stability that Nepal so desperately needs?

Also Read | Meet Sudan Gurung, the DJ who rocked the Nepal govt

Gyanendra Shah: A symbol of hope?
In recent years, Gyanendra Shah has quietly become a symbol of resistance for those disillusioned with the current political system. Despite being deposed nearly two decades ago, the former king has retained a loyal base of supporters who view him as a beacon of hope amid the country's ongoing political instability. These royalists argue that Gyanendra, who briefly served as an absolute monarch before Nepal's monarchy was abolished, might be the only figure capable of restoring order to a nation gripped by political fragmentation and economic stagnation.

Gyanendra's reign was marked by controversial actions, including the dissolution of parliament in 2005 and the imposition of a state of emergency to combat the Maoist insurgency. His actions drew widespread criticism, leading to mass protests in 2006, which ultimately forced him to surrender power to a multi-party government. In 2008, the monarchy was formally abolished by the newly elected government, and Nepal declared itself a secular republic.

However, since then, Gyanendra has remained a controversial figure. His supporters argue that his authoritarian measures, though heavy-handed, were necessary to preserve Nepal's sovereignty during a time of internal strife. They claim that the country's current political instability and failure to achieve economic progress are the result of the very parties that pushed for the monarchy's abolition.

The past few years have seen growing support for the restoration of the monarchy, particularly after violent clashes in March and massive rallies in May. The protests calling for the return of the king have been centered around dissatisfaction with the political elite’s failure to deliver on promises of better governance. Many argue that Gyanendra’s return could provide a sense of national unity and stability, qualities that have been sorely lacking under the current system.

The recent protests, which have been marked by violent confrontations and widespread destruction, indicate that the political crisis in Nepal is far from over. In the wake of Oli’s resignation, the political vacuum created by the collapse of the government may open a space for Gyanendra Shah to re-enter the political stage. Whether he will seek to restore the monarchy or instead play a more symbolic role as a unifying figure remains uncertain. However, what is clear is that the country’s instability has given rise to a growing contingent of royalist supporters who see Gyanendra as a potential solution to Nepal’s governance woes.

The current situation in Nepal is a deeply uncertain one. The public anger that has led to the toppling of the government and the destruction of opposition properties points to a widespread rejection of the political elite. With no clear path forward, the question remains: Will Nepal return to monarchy, or will it continue down the path of democratic governance?

While some observers are wary of a return to autocratic rule, many Nepalis appear willing to consider Gyanendra Shah as a potential alternative. His supporters argue that, unlike the current political parties, he has the ability to provide the long-term stability that Nepal so desperately needs. Yet, any attempt to restore the monarchy would undoubtedly face significant resistance from those who still believe in the democratic ideals that led to the monarchy's abolition.