The wounded of the Gen-G movement are optimistic that the collaboration between Ravi and Balendra will lead to the emergence of an 'alternative force'. However, the movement leaders have expressed concern that the consensus lacks an 'agenda-centered basis', that the division of power is dominant, and that the shadow of the old power struggle may recur.
What you should know
The Gen-G generation has given mixed reactions to the political agreement reached between Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) President Ravi Lamichhane and Kathmandu Metropolitan City Mayor Balendra Shah. This generation, which emerged from disillusionment with the old political forces and a desire for systemic reform, is both excited and skeptical about the agreement.
The injured of the Gen-G movement are optimistic that the collaboration between Ravi and Balendra will lead to the emergence of an ‘alternative force’. However, the leaders of the movement have expressed concern that the agreement lacks an ‘agenda-centered basis’, that the division of positions is dominant, and that the shadow of the old power struggle may be repeated.
Prakash Bohora, an injured member of the Gen-G movement who is being treated at the Trauma Hospital, said that this agreement has raised hopes for an alternative political force. Prakash’s shoe, which he left behind after being shot in the foot in the Baneshwor area during the movement and reached the hospital, is known as the ‘icon’ of the Gen-G rebellion. He was excited by the agreement and said, ‘This is what we have always wanted. Both are the characters we expected. I am happy that both are standing together.’
However, even after three months of the Gen-G rebellion, he said that there is still no political and institutional reform and that the old leadership will become strong again. ‘The agreement is welcome. But bringing out who will be the prime minister like this does not send a good message. This issue should have been resolved internally,' he said. He opined that Energy Minister Kulman Ghising should also be included and moved forward.
Another injured party of the Gen-G movement, Santanu Dhakal, also said that the agreement made him happy. 'Balendra is a character we have always hoped for and supported. Now we can hope for both Ravi and Balendra,' he said. Although the outward appearance of the agreement is dominated by position-centric points, in practice, Dhakal emphasized that they should move forward by incorporating the demands of the Gen-G movement and the essence of the injured. Gen-G injured party Liza Adhikari also expressed enthusiasm for the Ravi-Balendra unity. 'I am very happy. Now I am confident that new faces will also come along with them,' she said.
Gen-G leader Vikas Rasaili said that there was no fundamental difference between the old and new parties and described the agreement as a continuation of the ‘power sharing’. ‘This agreement seems to focus on the distribution of posts between the two leaders,’ he said. ‘This agreement is another version of the power sharing between KP Sharma Oli and Pushpa Kamal Dahal in the past.’
He commented that there was no social issue in the agreement. ‘The distribution of posts written in the document shows their hunger for power. The ideological ground is zero. If there is no difference in practice, the so-called new ones will also move forward in the old style,’ he said. ‘It is just an illusion that everything will be fine if there is a new one. It has to be proven by work.’
Another Gen-G leader Arnab Chaudhary considered the agreement to be welcome. He said that the new generation has taken this agreement positively with the expectation that it will increase the pace of reforms compared to the old leadership. ‘It is a common expectation that new leaders will do a better job than the old ones,’ he said, ‘However, this consensus is not complete.’
Chaudhary emphasized that constitutional issues such as federalism and inclusiveness should be included as a priority in the consensus. ‘It would have been more effective if the issues of federalism and inclusiveness mentioned in the constitution had also been highlighted. The sentiments of the Gen-G movement should also have been included,’ he said. He added that the struggle against the old leadership and the interventionist role should also be played within other parties, ‘It is for the new faces that we fought for. Now the Gen-G generation should play an interventionist role in other parties to displace the old ones.’
Amit Khanal, leader of the Gen-G Movement Alliance, responded that even though the liberal and capitalist path embraced by Ravi and Balendra is promoted as an alternative to prosperity, it will push the lower classes further into crisis. He alleges that the new faces that have emerged with the slogan of displacing the old corrupt characters have also shown the same in practice.
Gen-G leader Majid Ansari described the agreement as a ‘positive but challenging’ step. Although he is in favor of the unity of forces like Ravi and Balendra, he said that the basis of the equation is not clear. ‘This unity should be based on issues and agendas, not individuals. If individuals are the only focus, there is a risk of repeating the struggles of the past between Pushpa Kamal Dahal and KP Sharma Oli,’ he said.
Ansari also questioned the indifference shown by this equation towards the current system. He said that historical documents such as the 10-point understanding between Gen-G and the government, which is considered the basis of political change, have been overlooked in the agreement process. ‘Such activities can weaken the issue of democratic republic and inclusion,’ he said.
leader Chaudhary said that Ravi-Balendra should move forward by including Gen-G’s demands, issues and themselves. Although the agreement may be a glimmer of new hope in politics, the leaders’ response is that there is a question mark over how it will advance constitutional, social and inclusion issues. They have indicated that the Gen-G struggle, born of attraction to new faces and distaste for old powers, is not just about a change in leadership but also about system reform, and that they need to earn trust through work.
