The recent flood across Nepal-China border that caused massive destruction of human lives and physical infrastructure in Nepal has proved to be a great setback for Nepal’s journey toward economic prosperity. It has hampered three sectors of the Nepalese economy. First it has huddled Nepal’s journey of self-dependency and exporting hydro energy, second it has hampered the major root of China-Nepal trade, and third the developing area of tourism, both religious and adventure, has been crushed.
Therefore, the impact of this flood is not short term but going to be long lasting in Nepalese history. This massive devastation has brought forward multiple questions in discussion. Among them, some crucial ones are discussed here. What caused the flood? Is it related to climate change? Who is responsible for the devastation? Should Nepal solely bear the burden? Who should share it? What future strategy should Nepal follow in global forums to get climate justice? These ethical questions have dominated academia at present.
The cause of the flood is the glacier collapse that blocked the Lhende River in China and caused a massive surge of water and debris that traveled downstream into Nepal’s Bhotekoshi and Trisuli rivers causing great devastation of lives and property. Although debated, its direct link with global warming and climate change cannot be rejected. The media note issued by the prime minister of Nepal has claimed it. So climate change is directly associated with the devastating flood.
The major cause of the global warming that leads to climate change is the industrial emission causing increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Before the industrial revolution the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere was 280 ppm (part per million) and while coming to present it has reached 422 ppm. This increased amount functions as a heat trap and causes global warming. The increased temperature invites a break in the climate cycle or causes climate change.
The increased global temperature of average 0.2 degree Celsius in every decade is inviting great threat to human civilization. It is believed that the 1.8 degree Celsius temperature of Himalayan region has increased after industrialization. The glacier collapse, extreme weather, melting polar ice and increasing sea levels are some global consequences. The Rasuwa flood comes under the same outcome of the increased temperature.
The developed countries are responsible for the problem of climate change but the less developed or developing countries are being victims. Nepal as a mountainous country is highly vulnerable to the climate change problem though least responsible for causing it. It has contributed less than 0.1 percent (0.027-0.1 percent) of the total emission but falls in the top ten highly vulnerable countries of the world. Therefore, this is the problem solely caused by developed countries because of their long run industrial emission and that invites suffering to underdeveloped countries. Scholar Rob Nixon in his book Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of Poor (2011) calls the problem of climate change as ‘slow violence’ that indicates the “calamities that are slow and long lasting, calamities that patiently dispense their devastation while remaining outside our flickering attention span.” It is slow violence because this crisis does not kill anyone directly as in wars but slowly in an invisible way.
Present Rasuwa flood is also the same type of slow violence where perpetrators are not involved directly. This concept of slow violence is very appropriate to answer the question of responsibility. The real cause of the devastation is the climate change caused by the long run industrial emission of the industrial nations. The neo-liberal policy of ‘internalizing profit and externalizing risk’ is responsible for the disaster. Therefore, they are the real perpetrators and culprits of the devastation.
The reality that the least contributing nations like Nepal are suffering much from the climate crisis but the most contributing developed nations are in a protected position has raised the issue of ethics and justice. The Rasuwa flood is related to the same justice issue. Relating the ethical and justice issue with climate change, climate justice theory advocates for the responsibility of the developed countries for causing climate crisis, and allocates their duty to help those suffering from the crisis, as it is the consequence of their misdeeds. Mary Robinson, a leading justice campaigner, has clarified the issue of climate justice in her book Climate Justice: Hope, Resilience, and the Fight for Sustainable Future (2018) linking it with the disproportionate impact of climate change and its ethical aspect.
Robinson stresses, “This injustice, that those who had done least to cause the problem were carrying the greatest burden-made clear that to advocate for the rights of the most vulnerable to food, safe water, health, education, and shelter would have no effect without paying attention to our world’s changing climate.” Her take is that until climate injustice is tackled, advocacy for other rights is less significant.
Moreover, climate justice theory advocates for protection, compensation and recognition of the victims of the climate crisis. The rich countries that caused global warming with their high emission, have to contribute financially as compensation in loss and damage fund and the vulnerable countries like Nepal should get financial support. This theoretical account of climate justice clarifies that Nepal should get financial, technical and technological assistance from developed countries to tackle present Rasuwa loss as well as avoid future possible climate crises as one of the most vulnerable nations. It is not on their mercy but as compensation for their misdeeds and as Nepal’s right.
The developed nations are still refusing to take responsibility for the climate crisis. The fear of losing global financial control has led them to neglect emission control and create certain narratives to reject the reality of climate change. American president Donald Trump is an example of such a rejecting trend. Those corporate minded representatives from developed countries, who question the reality of climate change, argue ‘nature and time will heal’ in support of their greedy exploitation of nature and continuity of emission. Amitav Ghosh in The Great Derangement: Climate Change and The Unthinkable (2016) unfolds another ugly reality of modern corporations that fund scholars for their ‘denial’ writing.
He claims that, “the funding of climate change denial in the United States and elsewhere, by corporations like Exxon” is the common practice to continue the unethical task of industrial emission. The fact brought forward by climatologists and the devastating incidents faced by the vulnerable nations like Nepal have proved the reality of the climate crisis and the truth that failure to act in time is sure to invite fatal consequences. Rejecting the climate change problem at present is like rejecting the essentiality of death. There is no way out than accepting its reality and taking responsibility.
Nepal’s positionality as one of the least contributing and the most vulnerable nations in case of climate crisis is very crucial. It is a serious issue of the violation of climate justice. That is why Nepal should have its active participation in UNFCCC, COPs and other international forums for revealing this injustice. Advocating for climate justice, Nepal should demand compensation and protection of the Rasuwa flood victims and their resettlement and at the same time, the participation of its representatives in the international climate policymaking process. Due to the lack of a permanent body to deal with this issue in international forums and more importantly lack of strategic climate diplomacy, Nepal has had partial success.
Therefore, the Rasuwa flood has a strong financial impact on the Nepali economy and its direct link with climate change cannot be denied. Nepal is not responsible for the devastation but the real cause is the long run industrial emission of the industrialized countries that invited climate change. That is why they should take responsibility.
Nepal, as a victim of the crime not committed, should raise its strong voice in international forums for sufficient financial, technical and technological support to manage the climate crisis and promote sustainable development. To achieve this goal, Nepal should form a permanent body to deal with this issue in international forums and implement strategic climate diplomacy in an inclusive justice framework with the academic backing.
