KATHMANDU, DECEMBER 29 While social media is abuzz with news of Kathmandu Metropolitan City Mayor Balendra (Balen) Shah and Rastriya Swatantra Party Chair Rabi Lamichhane's agreement on the seven points, experts are concerned about their political positions on various issues, including federalism, secularism, inclusion and republicanism. Shah and Lamichhane reached their much-anticipated agreement yesterday morning, following several rounds of meetings and discussions. The agreement clearly states several demands, including meeting the needs of young people, martyrs and the injured. It also specifies that Lamichhane will lead the party, while Balen will serve as parliamentary party leader and prime ministerial candidate if the party wins a majority in the upcoming House of Representatives elections on March 5. However, there has been speculation about their political stances. The Himalayan Times spoke with political experts to learn how they see Shah and Lamichhane's merger. Binay Mishra, assistant professor of Political Science at Tribhuvan University, stated that the collaboration of these two new leaders/political forces is required to put pressure on traditional forces such as the Nepali Congress and the UML to survive in elections. 'A kind of polarisation has just begun between new and old parties. But this polarisation is still in its primitive stage. Let's see how it unfolds,' he told THT. 'Overall, it's a good initiative, particularly with respect to the persona they carry in contemporary politics, and they emerged as alternative forces in the previous elections.' However, he cautioned that the question as to who seeks federalism and monarchy remains unanswered, as they appear completely silent on these issues. Shah did not vote in the last provincial election, raising concerns about the future of federalism. 'Thus, they must have a perspective on this. They also need to have an economic perspective, which they have mentioned briefly in the agreement,' he added. It is clear that they are concerned with economic prosperity, but what about other issues like federalism, secularism, monarchy, or amendment? These issues make me question their agreement,' he said. According to sociologist Pranab Kharel, political forces such as Balen Shah and Rabi Lamichhane are programmatic parties focused on governance, resulting from traditional parties' decades of failure. 'Their rise reflects a crisis in liberal democracy, akin to global trends like Trump's ascent, due to flaws in market economies and individualism,' he said. In the United States, Trump's rise is largely due to the crisis that the liberal democracy faced. 'This is not a Nepal-specific phenomenon. He said, 'Look at Europe, America, and India.' Kharel also stated that Balen's monarchist tendencies and collaboration stem from post-September protests, fear of old guards, and mutual needs despite personality clashes. Instead of seeing them as threats, he urged a rethinking of Nepal's elite-centric democracy. 'These are also parties or forces that can be called programmatic parties ... they are talking about a policy-based approach where they would say governance is a problem,' he said. 'The rise in power of the parties or political forces represented by Shah and Lamichhane reflects the crisis of liberal democracy. Their collaboration is also coming out of the fear that emanates from the duo.' According to him, both Shah and Lamichhane are personality-driven individuals. 'So they might not accept each other in the long run,' he said. 'Nonetheless, these are not people who landed from the outside, nor have they parachuted. They have emerged out of certain social processes.' Dr Sucheta Pyakurel, a political scientist, described the Shah and Lamichhane agreement as 'jockeying for power and position without any vision or mission'. 'Look at their seven-point agenda - they mention eradicating corruption but provide no details on how. Even if they say they're against nepotism, favouritism and party worker favouritism, there's nothing solid that ordinary people like us can grasp. It's all so fluid; every point is vague,' she told THT. What, according to her, should these actors do to persuade people like us that they are better? Show where you stand as political actors - your thoughts, philosophy, paradigms, and the angle you'll take, especially after you win. What formula will you use to churn public policies? Who will you target? They said inclusive Nepal, but look at the seven-point agreement - only men in one room, not a single woman. 'It's all rhetoric. How can any educated voter be convinced with this extremely shallow host reading alliance?' she stated. Another political commentator, Bikash Gupta, stated that while Lamichhane and Shah's agreement could be viewed positively, he emphasised the importance of the words 'federalism', 'secularism', 'inclusion' and 'republic', which are missing from their agreement. 'Is it a deliberate or intentional act?' he asked. 'Shah and Lamichhane should clarify their position on this. People want to put the two supremos in power, so they must be open about what they have to offer and what their stances are on this.'