Kathmandu. Nepal’s current political landscape is increasingly dominated by debate over the rise of “new faces.” From social media platforms to tea shops, universities to public forums, one question echoes across the country: will the future of politics remain in the hands of established leaders, or will a new generation take the reins?
Growing activism among Gen Z and rising dissatisfaction with traditional parties have accelerated the search for alternative leadership. In this climate, younger aspirants are stepping into the electoral arena, directly challenging veteran politicians. Analysts say this election cycle is not merely a contest between individuals, but a clash of political culture, working styles, and visions for governance.
Public frustration toward parties long at the center of power suggests voters are seeking leadership that is both results-oriented and accountable. Yet uncertainty remains over whether this momentum represents lasting political restructuring or simply a temporary surge of public sentiment.
Jhapa-5: A Clash of Two Currents
Jhapa Constituency No. 5 has emerged as a focal point of national attention due to a possible contest between K. P. Sharma Oli and Balen Shah, widely viewed as a symbolic battle between experience and change.
Oli is regarded as a formidable figure thanks to his long political career, strong organizational network, and established voter base. He is known for his strategic skills, party mobilization capacity, and deep roots in Jhapa’s socio-political fabric.
In contrast, Balen Shah has built an image as a representative of younger voters, carrying an agenda centered on reform and alternative thinking. Supporters believe disillusioned voters may turn toward new options, especially given his strong social media presence and independent public persona, which resonate with youth.
Although this would mark Shah’s first entry into parliamentary elections, observers note he would not be entering as an ordinary candidate. His ambitions extend to national leadership, signaling a bold attempt to reshape the political narrative and inject fresh energy into the campaign environment.
Still, elections are not decided by popularity alone. Organizational strength, alliances, local equations, and vote-counting strategies remain crucial. If calls for change translate into ballots, history could be written; otherwise, the wave may remain confined to online enthusiasm.
Kathmandu-3: Testing an Administrator’s Image
Meanwhile, in Kathmandu Constituency No. 3, the candidacy of Kulman Ghising has sparked another debate. Widely associated with ending chronic power cuts, his administrative reputation has positioned him as a results-driven and disciplined leader. Running under the Ujyalo Nepal Party banner, he represents a different kind of political entrant: one whose credibility is rooted in technocratic achievement.
Supporters argue that voters increasingly prioritize competence, integrity, and tangible results. Yet political analysts caution that administrative success alone may not guarantee electoral victory. Building grassroots organizations, maintaining long-term strategy, managing alliances, and articulating clear ideology are all decisive factors.
Once in the electoral arena, any public figure must transition from administrator to politician—a shift that requires not only personal popularity but institutional capacity and sustainable policy vision.
Wave of Change or Continuity of Stability?
This election appears to have sharpened polarization between experienced leadership and emerging contenders. On one side stand claims of stability, experience, and organizational strength; on the other, demands for transparency, accountability, and a new political culture.
The rise of new faces has undoubtedly generated hope and revitalized competition. However, whether decisions driven by public enthusiasm can deliver long-term stability remains an open question. Voters now face a choice between emotional appeal and measured judgment.
Ultimately, in a democracy, change is not only possible but inevitable. For it to endure, however, it must be responsible, sustainable, and results-focused. New leaders may symbolize hope—if they prioritize policy over slogans, responsibility over impulse, and institutional development over personal popularity. Otherwise, the current wave risks fading with time.
The final verdict lies in the ballot box, where voters will determine whether the nation moves toward continuity or experimentation with change.
