After the Gen-G movement against misgovernance and freedom of expression, the farce of colorful characters continues on the political stage. The interim electoral government, formed as a solution to the procrastination of resolving the crisis, is disappearing within itself. The Sushila Karki government, like a foggy paper of destinationlessness and purposelessness, is doomed to the ironic routine of being pushed into the daily routine of spending its days explaining itself.

The capital's rooms are truly busy with the activities of elite middlemen. This is a principle of elite cotton farming and brokerage since the Malla era. The then Oli-Deuba coalition and the six parties involved in it, including Mahantha Thakur, Resham Chaudhary, have not made any official and responsible statements about the destruction of more than 600 government offices, hundreds of private residences, commercial establishments and structures across the country, including Singha Durbar, to date, except for sporadic comments.

Even after the series of meetings of the UML's central body, irresponsible outbursts and more provocative statements that become old bitter and watery are being made public. The Congress is uninvolved in the last Yadubanshi fight to save the existence of its traditional party. Even though it was made by the Constituent Assembly, the current constitution has fallen into a coma, unable to function in any way under the status quo. Nepali political history has never seen a more tragic event like this.

Even after a month and a half of the uprising, at least three aspects of the Gen-G generation are now recognizable on the surface. It is very commendable that the ‘Nepal Gen-G Front’ led by Raksha Bam represents the progressive and forward-looking side in a well-considered manner. Apart from that, Miraj Dhungana’s group seems to have organized various aspects directly and indirectly under the banner of the directly elected executive chief’s ‘bottomline’ and an organization called Hami Nepal. The document made public by the Raksha Bam leadership has drawn a detailed political dimension about the Gen-G uprising.

Even Prime Minister Karki, who has finally recognized the Gen-G groups and is demonstrating deep trust and affection for them, and the environment that has been given high importance by the President, can give political form to the uprising. The most important question at this time is the identification of the uprising, addressing the demands and issues, and the clarity about the upcoming ‘roadmap’. For this, the instigators of the uprising should not hesitate to take responsibility for the achievements and losses.

If we continue to be terrified by the fear created by some reactionaries and old-fashioned people and say that we are only here on the first day and nothing on the second day, there is a risk that the rebellion will be discredited as a sabotage. Just as the state cannot escape the repression, killing and terror during the rebellion, similarly the agitating force cannot escape the moral responsibility for the political achievements and the unimaginable material damage caused in the process. However, why not have multiple dimensions of that well-planned sabotage.

In fact, as philosopher Thomas Hobbes explained in his famous work Leviathan (1651) in the seventeenth century, ‘there is a situation among people that is like a ‘war of all against all’.’ In such a situation, political life seems to be one-sided, poor, unnatural, animalistic and short. To move forward from such confusion, as Hobbes said, the need for a powerful central authority, i.e. a broad political agreement, has become essential.

‘Natural rights are the freedom of every person to use their power in any way they want to protect their lives. But this freedom leads to chaos. Therefore, people give up some of their rights through social contracts and hand them over to a powerful authority, which maintains peace and security.’ It should be remembered that this is the agenda that must be done by the first meeting of the parliament after the upcoming elections. 

The biggest irony is that, leaving aside the interpretation of pet language, there is no consensus on a reasonable and relatively objective idea on how to handle the country in the aftermath of the movement that has become a Gen-G rebellion. As President Ramchandra Poudel said, a much more ‘comprehensive’ consensus and political agreement are needed to make the political structure that has been ‘protected with great skill’ more dynamic and move forward. Looking at the historical context, the result of the royal decree election, which was supposed to happen after the change in 2007, was the result of the royal decree election. That led to the ‘coup’ of King Mahendra on Poush 1.

The student movement of 2036 BS, which was almost a diversion, was ended through a referendum. The people's movement of 2046 BS brought down the movement and the court dictatorship through the agreement reached between the court and the parties. It is well known that the much-discussed peace agreement after the 2062-63 revolution set a milestone. Most importantly, since the aim of that revolution was a republic, all parties went to the elections only after the agreement and promise to declare a republic in the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly before the elections.

That is why, despite the long struggle, the event of the first meeting of the Constituent Assembly declaring a republic on 15 Jestha 2065 BS is of great and long-term importance. That political precedent has become most relevant at this time. 

It cannot be forgotten that the Constitution of Nepal was promulgated by the Constituent Assembly according to the 16-point preliminary agreement between the main parties after the assimilation that shook the political landscape due to the great earthquake. It is impossible to say how the constitution amendment was forgotten so soon, even if only partially, due to the agreements made to settle the Madhesh and Tharuhat movements that were triggered by the declaration of the constitution.

In addition, there is no shortage of dozens of street protests, parliamentary clashes and resistance, and hundreds of agreements made in the process of addressing the demands of various classes, professions and communities. On top of that, the constitution should be reviewed in ten years as per the written provision in the constitution, no matter how trivial it may be, an immediate comprehensive political agreement is essential to settle the Oli-Deuba seven-point constitution amendment commitment and the demands of all other opposition parties in the dissolved parliament, including constitutional amendments, and the Gen-G rebellion. Only such a comprehensive political agreement can serve as a roadmap for the upcoming elections and the exit.

It is necessary for everyone to understand the environment in which the basic political rights such as federalism, secularism, inclusiveness and proportionality, which were systematically lifted by the reactionary class, can be reversed in a murky environment. During the Gen-G rebellion, 76 people, including 22 protesters, were killed in an unimaginable and brutal manner. If we compare the loss of life with the loss of life, how many people lost their lives in the declaration of a multi-party system? Were the sacrifices of more than 17,000 for the republic nothing?

How many people were martyred in the ten-year armed struggle for federalism, inclusiveness, and proportionality, the Madhesh rebellion, and the Janajati tribal movement? Is that a provision that Girija Prasad Koirala and Subash Nembang made for dinner, as some backward courtiers have raved about? With Nepal standing at the forefront of South Asia, Nepal's prestige on the world political stage has increased, albeit slightly. Nepalese citizens from various classes, professions, and communities have gained an unprecedented opportunity to intervene in the ancient elite power and authority. The Gen-G rebellion should be viewed against that backdrop. 

Taken in its simplest form, this uprising beautifully reflects the anger of the younger generation against corruption, nepotism, unemployment and inequality of opportunity. In Nepal, 56 percent of the population is under 30 years of age, but the youth unemployment rate is more than 19 percent.

It has been more than three decades since the economy dependent on remittances has posed a serious challenge to the entire Nepali life, tradition and culture. Our Gen-G generation has not been able to confidently claim the record of challenging the old political structure by organizing through ‘Discord’, ‘Instagram’ and TikTok. In reality, the current situation is due to the Gen-G anger that shook the Nepali ruling power and shook the backbone of the state structure. But no one has been able to take overall responsibility for the uprising that shook the country in such a way. 

A new multilateral political agreement is needed to transform this surge of rebellion into stability. Political changes in Nepal often start with street protests and end in an agreement. The 2046 People's Movement ended the Panchayat. The second People's Movement of 2062/63 and the 12-point Accord brought the Maoist insurgency to a republic through a peace process. The context in which these agreements provided transitional stability by building consensus among political parties, the insurgents, and the state is even more relevant now.

The Gen-G rebellion is also at a similar juncture. This was not like the 2006 rebellion, as it exploded with the emergence of a non-party and digital-led movement. But like past movements, concluding it without a written agreement could lead to long-term failure. Just as the peace process dragged on, because the agreement failed to address issues such as land reform and a truth commission. The formation of an interim government without a formal agreement after the Gen-G rebellion has led to further political discontent.

It is important to understand that there is no political or constitutional justification for the president to sign an agreement with the Gen-G groups at this time. The agreement should be signed mainly between the parties representing the dissolved parliament, the new and especially the Gen-G generation, and the three protest groups mentioned above. A path to legitimacy should be found so that the agreement is ratified by the first meeting of the upcoming parliament to give it constitutionality. For this, the President has a key role. In this context, it would be useful to recall the bitter experience of history.

The previous agreement to declare a republic from the first meeting of the first Constituent Assembly, before the interim constitution, was possible only one and a half months after the election, because the old parties including the Congress found many excuses to cheat in the post-election environment, and that too only after the republican side accepted the majority game of 'musical chairs' that sowed the seeds of political instability in the constitution.

Even now, if these so-called old political parties are not bound by the constitution, there is a risk that they will suffer from the incurable disease of doing whatever suits them. They will show symptoms according to the disease. The President cannot direct the parliament meeting even if he wants to. The interim government is already dissolved. We should not make the mistake of making an agreement just for the sake of an agreement, forgetting the fact that two-thirds of the parliament is required to amend the constitution. The agreement should be made the only condition for the upcoming parliamentary elections, making it a binding broad commitment and the main agenda of the main parties going to the elections. 

Corruption investigation (formation of a high-level commission to investigate major corruption scandals after 2046 and judicial investigation) Youth representation, form of governance (direct executive or further improved federal parliamentary system - although it is said that no-confidence motion cannot be moved for two years, there is a provision to prevent loopholes after the vote of confidence is withdrawn) Good governance and stability To discourage unemployment and nepotism, the unimaginable sacrifice of the youth will be meaningful only if there is an advance political agreement between all the parties in the dissolved parliament, including the leaders of the Gen-G generation.

According to the teachings of the great philosopher John Locke, ‘Rebellion breaks the old agreement, only a new agreement after it gives legitimacy.’ That is why a just and inclusive agreement is necessary for the transitional period after the movement.

Without an agreement, the old parties can establish a pattern of rejecting the rebellion by calling it ‘external interference’. Oli’s remarks at the beginning indicate the same. As the lack of leadership among the Gen-Gs creates ‘enemies within’, the risk of a series of failures of the ‘Arab Spring’ seems to be the highest. At least the comprehensive agreement to be made now should guarantee 10-15 percent representation for the political representation of the Gen-G generation.

Only if this is done can Nepali politics make smooth generational transition a natural achievement within the next two decades. Without a written agreement before the elections, the rebellion is sure to return to the ‘roundabout’. Nepal should not miss this opportunity. As the Gen-G rebellion has shown, youth power can bring about change – but only through an agreement, which must be constitutionalized by amending the constitution in the first session of parliament after the upcoming elections.