KATHMANDU, Aug. 10: The Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), which came to power with 182 seats in the House of Representatives and more than 5.1 million votes, is facing growing questions over internal differences. No open split has emerged between party President Rabi Lamichhane and senior leader and Prime Minister Balendra Shah, but recent developments have fueled speculation that tensions are rising.
Although the government is led by a single party, it is increasingly being viewed as operating like a coalition of two competing camps. The concern is that the huge mandate received by the RSP, which rose as an alternative to traditional parties, could be weakened by internal disputes. Public calls for unity have helped contain the tension, but uncertainty over organizational appointments, statute amendments, and policy direction continues to raise questions.
Analysts say the party and the government need a formal coordination mechanism and greater policy clarity. Without it, the consequences could go beyond governance and public service delivery and undermine public confidence in the RSP as a new political force.
Prime Minister Shah recently wrote on social media that “sometimes you have to fight alone,” while Lamichhane said the party would pull the government back on track if it strayed from the right path. The remarks have fueled talk of growing friction.
The government's 100-day agenda has also faced one controversy after another. Shah drew criticism on May 30 after telling Parliament that Nepal, too, had encroached on Indian land in several places. Opposition parties called the statement immature and irresponsible and demanded clarification.
The government's budget has added to the pressure. Critics and opposition parties say it favors the middle class and business community while doing too little for poor and marginalized groups.
Public frustration has also grown following several self-immolation cases. On July 9, 25-year-old Ganesh Nepali of Mugu died after setting himself on fire outside the Department of Passports in Tripureshwor, Kathmandu. A dispute had reportedly escalated after Kathmandu Metropolitan City police locked the wheel of his motorcycle, which he used for ride sharing. Other cases involving Ashwin Raut, Bibek Mandal, and Gautam Kumar Sahi have further raised questions about unemployment, poverty, and the government's sensitivity toward vulnerable citizens.
The government's handling of landless settlements has also drawn criticism. Together, these issues have put Shah under pressure and exposed differences within the ruling party.
Stop Russia-Ukraine War for the Greater Interest
RSP lawmakers have increasingly criticized the government in Parliament and parliamentary committees. Manish Jha, Ramesh Prasain, Tika Sangraula, also known as Jwala, and Amresh Kumar Singh have openly questioned the government's performance.
Jha recently said that while the government's intentions might not be in doubt, its way of working was inadequate, and advised it to “change its black glasses.” He also accused the budget of discriminating between the rich and the poor. Prasain raised the hardship faced by citizens because of cooking gas shortages. Singh questioned the case of an elderly couple from Mandandeupur, Kavre, who reportedly jumped into the Sunkoshi River after being unable to access treatment.
Sangraula raised another question. Citizens, she argued, pay taxes throughout their lives, but the state still fails to ensure dignified and accessible final rites. Such criticism from ruling party lawmakers has exposed a serious lack of communication and coordination between the party and the government.
Analysts say two clear camps have emerged within the RSP since its Chitwan general convention, one aligned with Shah and the other with Lamichhane. At the convention, both leaders publicly denied any differences and pledged to focus on unity, good governance, and development. Lamichhane later instructed lawmakers not to encourage factional labels such as the “Ravi camp” and the “Balen camp.”
But the signs of division have not disappeared. Two months after the convention, the central committee remains incomplete, office bearers have not been appointed, and questions have been raised over the legality of amendments to the party statute. The gap between the leadership's public message of unity and the factionalism within the organization has become harder to ignore.
Differences have also surfaced over economic policy. Lamichhane has warned that the private sector is being pushed into fear and uncertainty, while Shah has said the government is working to revive public enterprises and industries.
Separate diplomatic activity has added another layer of concern. After Lamichhane's visit to India, the prime minister reportedly sent his own representative there. As Lamichhane prepares to visit China, Shah's meeting with the Chinese ambassador has also drawn attention. Critics fear such parallel activity could create confusion about Nepal's foreign policy direction.
Reports that senior party leaders or people close to them were placed under government surveillance have further deepened mistrust. For a party that came to power promising a break from the political culture of suspicion and factional bargaining, such reports carry particular political risks.
Experts warn that when a majority government becomes consumed by internal power struggles, ordinary citizens pay the price. Cooking gas shortages, complaints about weak social security, and the reported case of the elderly Kavre couple have exposed weaknesses in public service delivery.
The government's working style and conflicting public statements from party leaders have also created uncertainty among investors and businesses. This could slow economic recovery at a time when investment, production, and employment need greater attention.
The government's promise to prevent illegal activities and punish wrongdoing is welcome. But enforcement must be fair and consistent. If businesses and citizens believe decisions are driven by political preference or suspicion, confidence will suffer.
On Sunday evening, Lamichhane and Shah held a 45-minute meeting at Baluwatar, suggesting an effort to manage the growing unease. The meeting reportedly covered political appointments, the selection of ambassadors, the role of ministers, and other current issues.
‘We will take the plane to its destination’
“Some things take time. The right time will come. It may be delayed, but it will not be wrong.”
This was part of a social media post by Prime Minister Shah on Friday night, at a time when his government was facing criticism not only from opposition parties but also from within the RSP.
He added: “Do not panic. Reality can sometimes be different from what you hear and see. Sometimes you have to fight alone. This is not the first time.”
The post appeared to reveal the strain within the party. Shah has reportedly complained to close associates that he has not received sufficient support from the party, including on Cabinet related decisions. The dispute also gained attention after the party statute included a provision allowing the party president to remove the parliamentary party leader.
A day after Shah's post, Lamichhane sought to project confidence. Speaking at an event in Kathmandu, he said the RSP led government was working with good intentions and would reach its destination.
“Sometimes, when an aircraft enters patches of cloud, it shakes during the journey. But that does not mean we should fear that the plane is going to crash,” he said. “We will take this plane to its destination.”
Lamichhane also argued that Nepal cannot achieve economic growth by keeping the private sector in a constant state of fear.
“The private sector cannot be placed above the law, but neither can the economy function by keeping it under permanent suspicion,” he said. “Businesspeople should face action if they commit wrongdoing, but treating business itself as a crime will not increase investment, production, or jobs.”
The government's job, he added, is to control crime, not entrepreneurship.
For now, both leaders continue to deny a serious split. But the real issue is not whether they use the word “rift.” The question is whether the party and the government can create a working system to resolve differences before they begin damaging governance.
The RSP has enough numbers to govern without looking over its shoulder in Parliament. Its bigger threat may come from within. If Shah and Lamichhane allow parallel power centers, mixed policy signals, and public criticism to replace coordination, the party could waste the mandate that brought it to power.
The plane may still reach its destination, as Lamichhane says. But first, its pilots need to agree on the route.
