Actions Speak Louder Than Promises: A Wake-Up Call for Nepal (Opinion)

In Nepal, the saying “Kam bol, garera dekhau”—speak less, show through action—has become an urgent call that is echoing across generations. It reflects a deep sense of disappointment among ordinary citizens who have listened to decades of lofty promises but witnessed minimal transformation. Since the restoration of democracy in 1990, Nepalis have been repeatedly told that the country is on the verge of change. Yet, every political shift has been followed by the same cycle of speeches, unfulfilled commitments, and lost opportunities. This culture of rhetoric over results has not only stalled development but has also eroded public trust in leadership. The time has come to reflect critically on why Nepali leaders talk more and do less, what the consequences are for national progress, and how lessons from other nations can guide Nepal toward genuine, accountable, and action-oriented governance.

Nepal’s modern political history reveals a long struggle for freedom and democracy. The 1950 movement against the Rana regime, the 1990 People’s Movement for multiparty democracy, and the 2006 People’s Revolution that ended the monarchy—all were driven by passionate leaders and powerful speeches promising justice, equality, and prosperity. Yet, after each success, the energy of revolution turned into the inertia of politics. Leaders who once stood for sacrifice and change became preoccupied with ministerial seats, party divisions, and power negotiations. The transition from monarchy to federal democracy was supposed to be a turning point. Still, in reality, it has primarily been a continuation of symbolic politics—full of slogans but short on substance. Each election cycle brings new slogans such as “Naya Nepal” and “Sambriddha Nepal, Sukhi Nepali.” Yet, the majority of citizens still face unemployment, inflation, poor healthcare, and inadequate infrastructure.

The habit of overpromising and underdelivering is deeply embedded in Nepal’s political culture. Leaders often focus more on maintaining public attention through speeches and public appearances than on ensuring administrative results. This culture of excessive talking has dangerous consequences. It erodes public trust, weakens accountability, and fuels frustration among citizens who see little difference between successive governments. People begin to view politics as a game of manipulation rather than a platform for public service. Moreover, when leaders dominate with words instead of deeds, it discourages capable and ethical individuals from entering politics, allowing mediocrity and corruption to flourish. The disconnect between political rhetoric and citizens’ lived realities also drives many young Nepalis to leave the country in search of better futures abroad. Ironically, remittance from these migrant workers sustains the economy, while the leaders who failed to create opportunities continue to boast about “development” in their speeches.

The problem, however, is not unique to Nepal. Across the world, countries have faced similar challenges, but their outcomes vary depending on how leaders translate words into actions. In Singapore, for instance, the late Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew transformed a small, resource-poor nation into a global economic powerhouse. He was not known for flamboyant speeches but for disciplined governance and a zero-tolerance approach to corruption. His philosophy was simple: less talk, more delivery.

Similarly, South Korea, once poorer than Nepal in the 1950s, focused on industrialization, education, and technology under pragmatic leadership. Their leaders understood that public trust is built through performance, not propaganda. In Rwanda, President Paul Kagame turned a country devastated by genocide into one of Africa’s most stable and efficient governments by prioritizing results, strict accountability, and merit-based public service. These examples show that the world respects leaders who work quietly and deliver consistently, not those who speak endlessly and achieve little.

Nepal’s governance system remains trapped in a cycle of promises without proof. Frequent changes of government—sometimes two or three in a single year—mean that leaders rarely stay in office long enough to implement reforms. As a result, politicians focus on quick visibility through grand announcements rather than patient execution. For instance, major projects such as the Melamchi Water Supply, Nijgadh Airport, and Postal Highway have been delayed for decades, often due to political interference and a lack of commitment. The emphasis remains on laying foundation stones and inaugurating half-finished projects, rather than ensuring their completion. The culture of showmanship has replaced the ethic of service. Leaders prefer microphones over management, press conferences over progress, and promises over policy.

Another factor behind this imbalance between talk and action is the structure of Nepali politics itself. Party loyalty and personal connections often outweigh competence and integrity in appointments. Political patronage has become the norm, with rewards distributed not on merit but on allegiance. Ministers change too frequently to provide consistent direction, and bureaucrats often adjust their behavior to survive under whichever party is in power. Moreover, the media environment amplifies this trend. Nepali media tend to give extensive coverage to speeches, ceremonies, and controversies, while often neglecting long-term policy evaluation. This encourages leaders to speak more, knowing that visibility translates into perceived power. In such an environment, results take a back seat to rhetoric.

Countries like New Zealand and Finland provide powerful lessons in action-oriented governance. Leaders such as Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand gained respect not because of elaborate speeches but through compassionate, effective crisis management during the Christchurch shootings and the COVID-19 pandemic. In Finland, Prime Minister Sanna Marin focused on education, equality, and innovation, showing that leadership can be both pragmatic and visionary. In both cases, leaders were measured not by how well they talked but by how effectively they responded to real problems. Similarly, in Germany, Angela Merkel was known for her calm and deliberate approach rather than fiery speeches. Her focus on science-based decision-making, especially during the financial crisis and the pandemic, earned her global admiration. These international cases remind us that leadership is about steady competence and public trust built through delivery—not noise.

Nepal’s political leaders could learn from such examples that credibility grows through quiet dedication, not constant declaration. But to change this culture, citizens must also take responsibility. For too long, voters in Nepal have rewarded speeches instead of scrutinizing results. Emotional appeal, caste identity, or party loyalty often determine voting patterns more than policy performance. This weakens democracy because it allows political actors to recycle promises without consequence. Citizens must therefore evolve from passive listeners to active demanders of accountability. In democracies like Norway, Canada, and Japan, citizens regularly question their leaders, track budgets, and insist on transparent governance. When voters value evidence-based performance, politicians are forced to deliver. Nepal’s democracy will mature only when the electorate rewards doers, not talkers.

Nepal’s political system must adopt institutional mechanisms that tie leadership to measurable outcomes. Every ministry and local government unit should publicly publish its performance targets. Annual reports should be evaluated not by political committees but by independent citizen and academic panels. Leaders must hold press conferences to explain not what they plan to do, but what they have done. The bureaucracy should be reformed to protect skilled professionals from political interference, ensuring that policies are implemented efficiently regardless of who is in power. Digital transparency tools—such as open budgets, public dashboards, and citizen monitoring platforms—can also reduce corruption and enhance accountability.

Leadership training should also be reoriented. Political parties in Nepal often train their cadres in mobilization and election campaigning but not in governance, planning, or ethics. A new generation of leaders must learn from global best practices in leadership, management, and social responsibility. Universities, think tanks, and civil society should work together to cultivate evidence-based leadership skills. Furthermore, Nepal’s youth, both at home and abroad, should be encouraged to participate in governance through innovation, entrepreneurship, and civic engagement. If these young minds are empowered to lead, they can challenge the old habit of overpromising and instead bring a culture of performance and progress.

At the societal level, Nepalis must rebuild a culture that values integrity and diligence over eloquence. Historically, Nepal has admired strong orators and revolutionaries who could move crowds with their words. While such charisma is valuable, it must be balanced with competence. The future demands leaders who can build systems, not just slogans. The saying “Garera dekhau” should become a moral standard across every sector—from politics to business, from education to public service. If each individual strives to deliver through actions rather than words, a national transformation will follow.

Nepal’s story is not one of hopelessness but of unfulfilled potential. The country has immense natural resources, cultural richness, and human resilience. What it lacks is consistent, disciplined, and visionary leadership that can convert words into measurable outcomes. Roads, hydropower, tourism, agriculture, and education—all these sectors could flourish if led with genuine intent and continuity. The gap between intention and implementation must be closed with honesty, courage, and a sense of service.

The message “Nepali Netaharulai Anurodh: Kam Bol, Garera Dekhau” is not just directed at politicians but at everyone who holds responsibility. It is a call to move from promises to proof, from populism to performance, and from excuses to execution. The people of Nepal have heard enough speeches about transformation; they now deserve to see it. As the world rapidly advances through technology, innovation, and good governance, Nepal cannot afford to remain stuck in the politics of talk. The time has come for leaders who act decisively, measure success by impact, and understand that, in the language of progress, action always speaks louder than words. When that spirit takes root, Nepal will finally begin to realize its long-awaited dream of a prosperous and equitable society—one built not on speeches, but on results.

This article represents the author’s personal perspective and does not reflect the views or positions of any affiliated institution.