The main purpose of the formation of the interim government is to complete the election of the House of Representatives and to return politics to the constitutional path.

For this, it is the first and last responsibility of the government to conduct the elections on the date set by the constitution, i.e. February 21, and to strictly follow the constitutional process in the operation of the government until that period. 

But looking at the recent activities of the government, it seems that it is falling into the clutches of populism like a traditionalist political party, separated from its main responsibility. When the government pays more attention to things other than regular administration operations, the risk of deviating from its core responsibilities increases . If the government does not understand this trend in time and forgets the main purpose of Afno Janam, it may endanger not only itself but also the future of democracy and in turn, it will create a situation of long-term political instability. 

'Populism' is a flippant, hawkish or stunt political concept developed against the basic principles of democracy. It is often based on artificial performances intended to gain popularity in a short period of time. Rather than the real policy reform, long-term infrastructure construction and social services needed by a healthy nation, it focuses on airy gossip, symbolic steps, sensationalism or momentary attention-grabbing campaigns. Paradoxically, it helps build the foundations of a corrupt, weak and dependent state. 

Populism has been a chronic disease in Nepal's politics. In the past, different Dalahs have been using it in different ways . Sometimes it appears in the name of nationalism, sometimes socialism, sometimes democracy, sometimes democracy, sometimes republic, and sometimes anti-corruption campaign or sometimes the ideals of the young generation. Although the movements in these names were the bearers of epoch-making changes, the changes brought about by revolutions, movements and wars could not be permanent . Regardless of the name of the system or system, there has been no improvement in the government administration. The generation that sees, experiences, demands and discards the monarchy, democracy, panchayat, multi-party system, democracy and republic is still alive and he is not yet in a position to be sure how long this process will last . In the mind of the majority of that generation, the comment that every system is the same has become home. 

Although the introduction of populism in Nepal is very old, its form is changing with time. First, the revolution of 2007 seems to have been an early use of populism when King Mahendra dissolved the multi-party democracy of Lai in December 2017 and established the panchayat system. He presented the traditional parties as corrupt, foreign influenced and working against the interests of the people through the slogan of 'partyless democracy'. The 'populism' of that time was based on nationalism. The slogan 'One language, one religion, one country, one country' was used continuously till the Panchayat system existed. It gained support for a while in the name of national unity, but in the long term, political pluralism was suppressed, democratic institutions weakened and discontent among the people grew. As a result, the people's movement of 2046 ended that political system.

In 2047, even after the constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal was promulgated and democracy was restored, populism began to appear in a new form. The parties that have entered into competitive politics began to give short-term programs, grants or immediate employment to gain temporary popular support, instead of giving priority to long-term institutional reforms, structural development and inclusive governance systems to strengthen democratic institutions . Thus, the populist trend pushed the parties towards the path of seeking momentary popular support rather than sustainable policy making.

In the same way, the Maoist people's war that started in 2052, less than 5 years after the establishment of the multi-party system, was another form of populism. Maoists attracted people from rural areas by raising issues like class struggle, caste liberation, land reform. Although these issues addressed the public grievances to some extent, the populist declaration made in the name of revolution did not become a long-term institutional solution. After the Maoists entered the peace process, they failed to fulfill many of their promises to the people, which further increased frustration and discontent. 

After the people's movement of 2062/63 and the establishment of the republic, populism became more deeply a part of Nepali politics.  During this period, leaders used ethnic, regional and linguistic identity as a means of garnering political support . Populist nationalism also appeared strongly in the constitution making process. The promulgation of a constitution based on majority power by the leaders attracted public attention in the name of sovereignty and opposition to perceived foreign interference, but it disaffected the Madhesh, Tharu and other tribes and resulted in widespread protests and violent clashes. We are still suffering from it. 

The populist trend has had a serious negative impact on the political, social and economic structure of Nepal.

First, It caused institutional weakness. Populist leaders used constitutional institutions like judiciary, administration, security agencies for party and personal interests. As political interference in appointments and decisions increased, institutional independence decreased and the democratic system weakened.

Second, populist politics focuses on short-term performance  happens For example, the government prioritized temporary relief packages for the people, social security allowances or the opening of basic infrastructure, but these programs were not sustainable . Because of this, the long-term development was delayed, the economic structure became unbalanced and the administrative capacity of the state weakened. 

Third, populism served to deepen social divisions. Making ethnic, regional and class issues into election slogans increased dissatisfaction and polarization in the society.  When the constitution was promulgated in 2072, the Madhesi and Tharu communities felt neglected, which directly resulted in agitations and violence. It not only weakened the democratic practice, but also weakened the national unity . 

Fourth, Populism has also adversely affected foreign relations. When the constitution was issued in the year 2072, the leaders gathered domestic support by unnecessarily making the neighboring country India controversial, but as a response, Nepal had to face innumerable difficulties including blockade. On the one hand, it has caused great damage to the Nepali economy and not only made the daily lives of ordinary citizens unsafe, but also weakened Nepal in international relations.  Even though nationalistic populism temporarily made the people emotional, Nepal was seen as insecure and isolated at the diplomatic level. It cannot be said how long Nepal will have to suffer the consequences of this. 

Fifth, Populist policies destabilized the economy . To attract the people, the leaders promised extensive employment and development, but did not pay attention to the strategy of sustainable industrialization, investment attraction and job creation . As a result, the country became dependent on remittances. And could not develop a productive economy . 

When political leaders focus only on symbolic projects or performance programs to gain immediate popularity, they miss out on long-term goals and policy making. For example, previous governments inaugurated roads, schools, hospitals with grand ceremonies, but failed to pay attention to the regular maintenance and upkeep of these projects. As a result, roads and buildings quickly fell into disrepair, health facilities remained poor and the education system failed to produce the expected results.

Populist leaders often prefer programs based on public sentiment. They try to garner public support through short-term visible results or speeches. Such an approach delays long-term economic policy, industry, agricultural reform and technological innovation. This trend is a serious challenge in a developing country like Nepal, because of the limited resources and possibilities. If it is not properly allocated, the foundation of the entire development will be disturbed.  

Populist politics often remain as a security challenge for the country. Whether it is to get a majority in the elections or to cover up their weaknesses, we have directly seen that the parties face security challenges and risks if they are unable to fulfill those promises or ensure stable leadership and policies while in the government after the elections, even though the parties' alleged nationalist stances or promises have given them a momentary advantage . Protection of two-thirds of government members and government property under the direct control of that government could not be achieved in the Genji Movement.

In addition, the influence of populist tendencies seems to have been deeply affected in the appointment and operation of the security agencies. Appointments to police chiefs or sensitive agencies are often based on party or political pressure. When the security agencies are used to serve party interests rather than their professional capacity, insecurity increases more than security. The politicization of security becomes a major challenge for internal stability in the long run. 

Another serious effect is the erosion of public trust. Exaggerated declarations by populist leaders  People are disappointed when it cannot be implemented .  This reduces trust in the system and increases the likelihood of rebellion or agitation. The recent Gen-G movement in Nepal is an example of this. When the young generation took to the streets against corruption, it showed that when populist slogans fail to bring about real reforms, people take to the streets, leading to major security challenges. 

No argument, idea, ideal or movement has remained untouched by populism, which has entered Nepali politics since the beginning of democracy, and its practice has weakened the people's faith in the system itself. When the leaders repeatedly make impossible promises, the frustration among the citizens is increasing.  Land for the landless, employment for the youth,  Declarations such as the elimination of corruption continued but were not implemented . This disillusioned the public, resulting in the current Zen-G movement, where the new generation is rejecting the old populist style . But the big question today is whether the new government is ready to reject the old populist style.

It is not time to say that the government has gone after populism, but some of the government's actions seem to be guided by the populist approach. In recent times, the steps taken by ministers not to take government facilities, stay in the ministry and cook and eat themselves are direct examples of populism. Although such steps seem ethical on the surface, they do not contribute significantly to real reforms and good governance and sustainable development. On the other hand, there is a risk that such popular announcements will be diverted from the real issue and used to draw people's attention to less important issues and divert their attention from the real issue.

At the moment, Andon's rap and heat are not over . So the government has more opportunities than challenges, if it is to act according to its mandate . The Prime Minister's speech shows that the government is clear about its mandate. But the words and actions of the members of the government give the impression that they have not been able to follow the understanding of the Prime Minister. However, now it is desirable to give 'benefit of doubt' to the government. And for that, the government should do something immediately. 

First, the government has not yet won the trust of the parties. Therefore, it seems necessary for the government to immediately initiate dialogue with all political parties and send members who can regularly communicate with the parties to the cabinet. 

Second, The government seems to be confused by the name of Gen-ji . Instead of getting too confused or considering only one or two groups as official representatives of Gen-ji, the government needs to focus on the issues raised by Gen-ji. After every movement in Nepal, in the peace or political process, they address the force that raised the issue rather than the issue of the movement, and the movement has been happening again. So this time, the interim government has an opportunity to correct this . All stakeholders should be given equal importance and issue-focused solutions should be sought rather than individuals or groups.