On August 26, the Himalayas reminded Nepal, once again, of the terrifying power of nature. A sudden rush of water, rock and debris tore through communities along the Bhotekoshi River, leaving death and destruction in its wake. Roads, bridges, hydropower infrastructure and homes were swept away, while families were left searching for loved ones and communities were left confronting the ruins of what they had built. As of September 9, Nepal Police reported that 1,365 bodies had been recovered, while 4,077 people remained missing. The scale of the devastation is immense. But beyond the immediate tragedy lies a more uncomfortable question: Was this simply another natural disaster, or a warning that Nepal is entering a new era of Himalayan risks that our existing systems were never designed to withstand?
For decades, Nepal has learned to live with floods, landslides and avalanches. But the hazards confronting the country’s mountain communities are becoming harder to predict—and, in some cases, fundamentally different. Nepal’s own climate assessment reports that glacier loss across the Hindu Kush Himalaya accelerated by 65 percent in 2011–2020 compared with the previous decade, while the country has already experienced more than 26 major glacial lake outburst floods since 1970. Nepal has also identified at least 47 potentially dangerous glacial lakes.
The Bhotekoshi disaster must be understood within this changing landscape. Its immediate trigger appears to have been an ice-and-rock collapse and subsequent river blockage, rather than a conventional rainfall-induced flood. But the larger warning is clear: a warming Himalaya is changing the conditions under which these hazards occur, while our systems for monitoring, warning and protecting vulnerable communities have not evolved fast enough.
The disparity becomes difficult to ignore when Nepal’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions is placed against the scale of the damage it is being forced to confront. Nepal contributes less than 0.1 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, yet its mountain communities are increasingly exposed to the consequences of a warming planet. This imbalance has now become part of Nepal’s official international argument.
At a ministerial meeting of the Least Developed Countries in Timor-Leste, Agriculture, Forests and Environment Minister Gita Chaudhary pointed to the Bhotekoshi disaster as a stark warning of the climate crisis and called for collective action for climate justice. Nepal has also formally sought emergency support from the international Loss and Damage Fund, arguing that the scale of the disaster has exceeded its domestic response capacity.
The point is not that Nepal bears no responsibility for protecting its own people; it is that a country contributing so little to global emissions should not be left alone to absorb the escalating costs of a crisis whose consequences cross borders and generations.
SHIFT for Our Planet: Youths urge authorities to make climate j...
Climate justice, however, must mean more than sending aid after a disaster has already taken lives and destroyed communities. Nepal’s appeal to the international Loss and Damage Fund is not simply a request for assistance; it is a test of whether the global climate system can respond to consequences that are unequal despite being global in origin.
Foreign Minister Shisir Khanal has framed Nepal’s demand as one of justice and responsibility, warning that a destabilized Himalaya would have consequences far beyond Nepal’s borders. Himalayan rivers sustain hundreds of millions of people across South Asia, making the protection of the mountains a regional concern.
For Nepal, climate justice must therefore mean accessible finance for recovery, stronger early-warning systems, real-time mountain monitoring and climate-resilient infrastructure. Justice should not begin only when the water rises; it should begin long before it does.
Getting the money is one part of the challenge. Nepal also has to make sure that the money actually reaches the people who need it most. The government’s first estimates show that the damage from the Bhotekoshi disaster amounts to Rs 387.54 billion. An additional Rs 7.95 billion will be needed for recovery and initial rehabilitation over the next four months.
These figures are too large to overlook. Nepal cannot afford a system in which help arrives months or even years after communities have already had to manage on their own. Climate finance must be easy to access and delivered in a manner that remains open to public scrutiny.
More importantly, it should not simply be used to repair what has already been destroyed. Roads, bridges, hydropower plants and homes in disaster-prone areas need to be made more resilient before the next major event occurs. That is where climate finance can truly make a difference.
Climate justice cannot mean that Nepal ignores its own responsibilities. The Bhotekoshi disaster showed how badly monitoring, communication and coordination can fail. According to the Department of Hydrology and Meteorology, the flood wave travelled 36 kilometres from the Nepal-China border to Betrawati in roughly 40 minutes. The monitoring station near the border sent its reading at 8:40 a.m., but the next reading never came. Later, authorities sent SMS alerts to more than 600,000 people, yet the flood was already moving downstream.
Climate justice also demands that Nepal learn from this. Federal, provincial and local governments must join forces to protect remote mountain communities, where a few minutes can mean the difference between life and death. Better monitoring, faster communication and safer infrastructure are now crucial. International help can provide resources, but protecting people will depend on how seriously Nepal prepares before the next warning.
When Prime Minister Balendra Shah speaks at the United Nations, he should turn the Bhotekoshi disaster into more than a story of loss. Nepal contributes less than 0.1 percent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, yet its mountain communities are paying a heavy price as the Himalayas become more dangerous and unpredictable.
That does not mean Nepal can avoid its own responsibilities. We must improve our monitoring, warning systems, disaster preparedness and infrastructure. But Nepal also has to ask why a country that contributes so little to the climate problem is left to bear so much of its cost.
Shah should push for easier access to grant-based climate finance, support from the Loss and Damage Fund, stronger early-warning systems, real-time monitoring and better sharing of information across the Himalayas, especially with China and India.
Before going to New York, Shah should speak with climate scientists, glaciologists, hydrologists and disaster-management experts and take their evidence with him. Nepal does not need another speech asking the world to feel sorry for it. It needs a speech that makes the world understand what is happening in the Himalayas—and why waiting for the next disaster is no longer an option.
The Bhotekoshi disaster should not end with another round of promises after the water has gone down. Prime Minister Balendra Shah now has an opportunity at the United Nations to take Nepal’s experience to the world and turn it into a stronger call for climate action.
Nepal needs international support, but it must also show that it is ready to do its part by improving preparedness and protecting people at home. If Shah can bring both sides of that argument to the UN, the Bhotekoshi disaster can become more than a tragedy. It can become a warning to the world that the Himalayas are changing—and that waiting for the next disaster will cost far more than preparing for it today.
The author is a youth advocate, researcher and content creator focusing on climate change, social issues, current affairs and youth participation in public discourse and decision-making.
