Submit your Article

The events of the eighth and ninth September of this year (2025) were nightmares to Nepal. The first day showed the tyranny of our rulers who did not hesitate using excessive force on unarmed young demonstrators, just because they challenged government restrictions. The second day demonstrated how criminal minds could misuse popular demonstrations as camouflages, and carry out terrorist attacks on civilians, security forces, national institutions, public and private properties, destroy national archives, and loot.

The events, known as the GenZ movement, have taken at least 72 lives, and left over two thousand injured. Some are missing. Many families have lost their lifelines. Some have become homeless. Over ten thousand people have lost their jobs. Estimates are that the country has suffered an economic loss of Rs 3trn, 50 per cent more than the national budget of the current fiscal year. The mental trauma is beyond scale.

Illusion, disillusion, and illusion

Good governance, economic development, inclusive empowerment, and growth opportunity have remained core issues, at least since the 1951 Delhi Accord that ended the Rana dynasty’s direct rule. Dissatisfaction followed that and each of future settlements, ultimately leading to a cascade of political unrests or revolutions, at an approximate interval of one or two decades. Each time a new Constitution was promulgated, the proponents declared it as the “ultimate truth”.

To be brief, the 1951 Revolution pulled down the Rana family rule but consolidated the Shah dynasty while embracing plurality. While the multiparty system was taking root, the monarch scrapped the 1959 Constitution of the multiparty system, and introduced the 1962 Constitution institutionalizing Panchayati system—all in the name of the nation and good governance!

In due course, the multiparty system was reinstated through people’s movements and ultimate promulgation of the 1990 constitution. The disgruntled CPN (Maoist) waged a “People’s War” (1996–2006) against the system. The war and movements led by a seven-party alliance ultimately abolished the monarchy in 2008. After much debates, meddling from INGOs and foreign powers, formation of different caucuses of the Constitution Assembly (CA) members such as women, indigenous groups, and their training in foreign lands, failure of first elected CA, second CA election, collections of people’s suggestions and so on, Nepal was officially declared a federal republic through the 2015 Constitution. 

Article 4 of Part 1 of the Constitution clearly maintains that Nepal is socialism-oriented.

The Constitution is full of promises. It grants 31 fundamental rights to all citizens, including rights to equality, privacy, employment, health, education, food, housing, information and social security. Also included are many freedoms and rights of special groups. Then, why are people unhappy? Because people know that these promises are hollow. The Constitution promises mandatory free elementary education; the public discover the performance of most of the community schools very poor, and the haves are sending their kids to costly private schools. The book promises rights to health; the government sells poorly delivered health insurance to the ordinary, and pays for healthcare of the leaders in foreign hospitals. 

Leaders of parties who present themselves as “vanguards of democracy” issue dictating whips to their members in parliament to vote this or that way on national issues. Leaders, who brand themselves as communists, fail to show a role model, sometimes falling far below one practiced by an ordinary citizen.

Leaders show no shame. A leader tries to get an entry to the House through proportional pathway or direct nomination, after losing the first-past-the-post election. A leader tries to bring his wife, daughter or other relatives in the House, misusing the seats reserved for women. As in Bangladesh, resentments over these issues have built up in Nepali youths, which may foment further unrest in the coming days.

Profiteering has sucked. Schools do not pay the teachers even two-thirds of the fee students pay. Corporates and big houses do not pay their lowest paid worker even one-tenth of what the CEO receives. A doctor educated under government scholarship charges the patients the maximum possible in the market. 

Cartels are commonplace, from politics to business. In politics, the big parties have made provisions that only those receiving at least three percent of the valid votes are eligible to claim proportional seats. Denying healthy competitions based on quality parameters, MOE, MEC, and universities restrict or facilitate colleges, suiting their tastes. 

Policy corruption is rife at all levels: from land ownerships and use to tariffs to revenues to tax exemptions to biddings to clemencies.

Now to the most painful part. Look what happened on Sept 9. Some of those who hit the streets against corruption and for good governance were seen breaking and looting the private homes and markets. Chances are high that such hypocrisy is not limited to one age group.

Wake up, unite

It is time for introspection. People need to wake up, and so do the leaders. You put your voice; others, theirs. To count, let there be free, fair and secret voting. Let’s effectively ban vote-buying. Do not try to obstruct election campaigns of opponents.

Dear parties and leaders, refrain from selling populist slogans. If you mention, I mean it. You are free to propose any political system you like. If your votes allow, you can change the Constitution and laws. Deposit your election manifesto with the Election Commission, and make it public. Do not deviate from it. Do not make extra claims, do not entice the voters, explicitly or implicitly. Let the voters decide. Once the votes are counted, respect the verdict. If you are in a hung parliament, work as a team member, and support the majority. Obey the decisions, even when they are your antithesis. Unite within your party, or leave it. Unite within the parliament, not for the government but for national cause, or leave it. Do not seek external support against your fellow members in your party or parliament.

We need to move forward. We have destroyed our property, damaged infrastructure, caused human fatalities, and injured thousands. Let’s heal the wounds on our own. Let’s not seek external aid and donation. After destroying the economy equivalent to one and a half years’ national budget in just 10 hours, we should feel ashamed to beg and refrain from accepting external aid. Let’s all stakeholders, including different level governments, political parties, businessmen and workers, discuss together and frame a long-term, stable economic policy, encouraging domestic capital, brain and workforce to play their roles in the national reconstruction. Do not forget to include Nepali diaspora in the process. By virtue of their connections and exposure, they may offer far more to national pride than we can imagine.

For trade and development, 2025 is a year like no other. Tariff talks continue to grab headlines. But urgent action is also needed to stop the sun setting on trade development cooperation. This June in Sevilla, global leaders committed to scaling up Aid for Trade (AfT), including doubling AfT provision to the world’s least-developed countries (LDCs), by 2031. However, AfT—which accounts for about one-fifth of official development assistance (ODA)—remains highly exposed to some difficult development assistance challenges. 

ODA dropped seven percent in 2024. And this downward trend is accelerating, with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) predicting ODA declines of between 10 percent and 18 percent during 2027. LDCs are expected to experience the sharpest falls—of between 13 percent and 25 percent—in 2025. Statistics for AfT specifically are also sobering. In 2023, AfT disbursements fell six percent—from $53bn in 2022 to $50bn in 2023.

Meanwhile, trade needs—from addressing proliferating standards to deepening digital trade cooperation and finding ways to boost investment—are mounting. Targeted support is required to help developing economies, especially smaller ones, meet their trade needs, realize emerging trade opportunities and gain a greater share in global trade. 

Here are three ways we can help deliver on this, despite a challenging backdrop.

Maximum impact from resources

A wealth of knowledge on trade support has been generated over the years. So we have been working to capture experiences and lessons learned. One clear takeaway is that trade support should remain demand-driven, with tailored solutions helping translate global best practices into context-specific impact. For example, the Pacific Aid for Trade Strategy, which focuses on e-commerce, services and connectivity, has been helping to improve trade competitiveness in the region with limited available resources.

In addition, engaging local business remains vital for gaining real-time insights into the most pressing trade challenges, and tapping much-needed finance. For example, the Next Innovation with Japan Initiative has been providing venture capital to help startups in developing countries create new industries and jobs. Having access to information about best practices in trade negotiations and the implementation of trade rules can also be a game changer for policymakers in developing countries. 

Don Stephenson, trade and investment advisor to the Expert Deployment Mechanism for Trade and Development, made the point very well when he said: “Many trade development needs require large investments—to build trade infrastructure like ports and roads, or to increase productive capacity, such as through building factories. These investments must involve the private sector, where the big money is. But sometimes the development gap is knowledge. This is something that can be delivered through investments which are relatively small but that have a large impact.”

WTO’s trade support

The WTO’s technical assistance can play an important role here. Targeted and nimble trade support can help developing economies implement what’s been agreed and gain insights on the latest trade trends. Against a backdrop of declining resources, WTO members are exchanging ideas on how to do more with less, including by building strategic partnerships with international organizations, development agencies and academic institutions.

During my conversations with delegations, I often hear of the need for a one-stop shop for all trade support offered by the WTO. Another recurring suggestion is that we blend online training with face-to-face activities. Encouragingly, everyone agrees that focusing on the WTO’s most vulnerable members should remain central.

Rethink AfT

As we approach the WTO’s 14th Ministerial Conference and the 20th anniversary of the Aid for Trade Initiative next year, 2025 offers an excellent opportunity to reflect on where we are with trade development and where we would like to be. Australia and Barbados, for example, have put forward some ideas to revitalise Aid for Trade.

Over the past 20 years, $730bn has been invested in Aid for Trade to help developing economies, including LDCs, strengthen their capacity to trade. The vast majority of this—97 percent—has been directed at strengthening infrastructure and productive sectors. However, only three percent has been allocated to trade policy and regulations—areas that are crucial for helping create an enabling environment in developing economies for trade and investment. 

Focusing more on channelling trade support toward trade policy and regulations is therefore one practical way we can bolster the integration of developing economies into the multilateral trading system. To explore more ideas on how to help smaller economies boost their share of global trade, join the conversation at the WTO Public Forum on Sept 18.

Arundhati Roy goes:Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing. 

Social movements usually rely on collective imagination to claim that “another world is possible”. For the people involved in social and political movements, this “another world” is imagined as a just, fair, and equitable society, where everything is orderly and harmonious. The same idea I found while talking to a couple of GenZ during their recent demonstration against corruption, misgovernance and social media ban in Nepal.

Nepal has witnessed multiple social movements aiming toward a collective desire to sustain democratic values, freedom, equality, social justice and accountability. The people’s movement of 1990 ended the absolute monarchy and established a constitutional monarchy, whereas the popular movement of 2006 dethroned the monarch and established constitutional supremacy. These movements drifted the nation away from authoritarian control and toward self-determination and freedom.

However, despite these uprisings, Nepal has not got the corruption-free and just society that the citizens fought for. When one regime fails, another adopts the same old system instead of dismantling the corrupt system. Many leaders who rose from the movements later became a part of the institution, where the ideals of justice got absorbed into party politics. One prime example is the leaders of the Maoist revolution, who joined mainstream politics after the 2006 movement and eventually became enmeshed in political power struggles by forgetting the ethos of the revolution.

Despite the re-imagination of a corruption-free society, Nepal got caught in a downward spiral because Nepali politics has long run on corruption. When the political ideals enter the political realm, they encounter power hierarchies and systemic corruption. The collective dream of an ideal state cannot survive the messiness of governance. Corruption or inequality isn’t just in “bad leaders”—it’s embedded in political and economic systems, social hierarchies and even thought processes. It is because human behavior, vested interests, and cultural norms are tied to the very injustices they want to change. 

Another reason why corruption thrives in Nepal is because the supposed opposition is nothing more than the government’s shadow. There is an absence of genuine opposition. Instead of holding the government accountable, the opposition has colluded in the same practices, which leaves no real voice for the checks and balances essential for a healthy democracy.

Social movements, then, act as critical mirrors of society. They show what is intolerable, highlight the problems in the existing society and demand something radically different. These movements turn imagination into political energy and invite society to re-imagine itself. Moreover, they help people imagine a better world together and take action to make it happen. Yet, justice and corruption-free governance are not single-issue goals. They require transformation at several levels—economic, cultural, political and personal. Different movements emerge to tackle different angles of this complex problem.

When the political ideals of the 2006 movement failed, Nepali youths began questioning the lifestyles of politicians’ children. Their brandishment of wealth and an elevated lifestyle, while commoners were forced to migrate to other countries in the Gulf and beyond for meager earnings, were intolerable. The country ran on remittance, and the citizens struggled for a decent life with basic education, health and other services. In such a situation, seeing the children of politicians living a lavish lifestyle agitated the masses. Using social media as a liberal platform, #Nepobaby and #Nepokid started trending. The ban imposed on social media added fuel to the fire, paving the way for the protest to move from digital platforms to the streets. The death of 19 young people on Aug 25 escalated the protest. In the aftermath of the protest, the buildings of all three bodies of the government—legislative, executive and judicial—turned into ashes and Nepal got its first female prime minister.

Even after the appointment of a new prime minister, the struggle towards a corruption-free state is far from over. It is just a stepping stone. Prime Minister Sushila Karki, a former Chief Justice, has many challenges to tackle. To uproot corruption is not an easy task, as corruption isn’t only a top-level problem—it has normalized into everyday practices such as bribes for jobs, favors in bureaucracy and informal payments.

Despite multiple movements emerging for the same end, a corruption-free state remains elusive. As a result, the same “end” is pursued repeatedly—it is never final, but always in process. The “failure” is actually a part of the utopian condition. Ruth Levitas calls utopia a method: it continually critiques, imagines and pushes boundaries, but does not deliver a once-and-for-all solution.

The necessity of multiple movements shows that utopia is alive—it keeps re-emerging wherever injustice persists. Nepal may not achieve its dream of an ideal corruption-free nation anytime soon. But the repeated protests, movements and revolutions are democratic processes that keep the possibility of achieving that end alive. That utopian dream remains somewhere out there on the horizon. For now, the achievement of movements like this lies in realizing democratic values and unifying voices against injustice. It reminds us that the citizens are the watchdogs and protectors of democracy.

The International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) recent advisory opinion marks a historic moment in international environmental law. In this landmark ruling, the court recognized climate change as an “urgent and existential threat” and confirmed that states have “erga omnes obligations,” or duties owed to the global community. For Nepal, this ruling provides a critical legal foundation to demand that historical polluters honor their responsibilities under agreements like the Paris Agreement and related frameworks. Crucially, the ICJ affirmed that environmental protection is essential for human rights, underscoring that climate justice is inseparable from human rights protection.

Climate injustice

There is a saying in Nepali society ”The poison you have not consumed does not affect you.” However, the suffering that Nepal and the Nepali people have endured due to climate change appears to be exactly the opposite of this saying. Like being poisoned by a fault one did not commit.

In case of carbon foot print, Nepal, contributing just 0.027 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, faces severe climate impacts. These are not distant projections but realities in daily headlines and collective trauma: the devastating drought in Madhesh that crippled farmers; the Glacial Lake Outburst Flood (GLOF) in Thame, a warning from melting glaciers; the destructive floods in Bhotekoshi that swept away lives, homes, and livelihoods; and most recent a reported cholera outbreak in Birgunj, potentially linked to the warming climate, though sources remain unconfirmed yet.

This reality highlights the brutal arithmetic of climate change: its causes are global, yet its burdens fall disproportionately on nations like Nepal. Urgent action—through low-carbon policies, technological adoption, and societal lifestyle shifts—is essential to address this inequity.

Shared vulnerability

The consequences of climate injustice are evident in small island nations like Tuvalu, Kiribati, the Maldives, and the Marshall Islands, which face existential threats: rising seas, severe storms, freshwater scarcity, and infrastructure damage. These challenges threaten all four pillars of statehood—territory, population, governance, and the capacity for international relations. For instance, Tuvalu risks losing its entire physical territory within decades.

Nepal’s melting glaciers are part of this global catastrophe. These shared vulnerabilities unite Himalayan communities with sinking island nations in a collective fight for justice and survival.

Planetary boundaries

The landmark study Earth Beyond Six of Nine Planetary Boundaries (Richardson et al., 2023) confirms that humanity has exceeded safe limits for six of nine critical Earth systems: climate change, biosphere integrity, biogeochemical flows, land-system change, alteration of freshwater systems, and atmospheric aerosol loading. Ocean acidification nears its limit, while stratospheric ozone shows recovery.

These boundaries define the stable conditions supporting human civilization for 10,000 years. Exceeding them underscores a Malthusian reality—that societies are bound by natural limits—and overshooting risks destabilizing systems critical to Nepal’s survival.

Varsities as catalysts

A key barrier to climate action is pluralistic ignorance, where individuals privately worry about climate change but assume others do not, creating a spiral of silence that stifles debate and enables policy inaction. The UK’s Climate Barometer (April 2025) found 56 percent of adults rarely express climate opinions, and only 10% regularly share them. Though no similar surveys exist for Nepal, this pattern likely persists, with climate discourse dominated by technocrats, consultants, and experts, making it inaccessible to the public.

Universities can break this silence. In many Global South institutions like Nepal, students lack resources—computers, internet, and research materials. These future leaders must be empowered to tackle climate challenges. Knowledge-exchange programs between Global North and South universities can provide access to data, journals, professional development, and collaborative research, fostering grassroots capacity-building. NGOs and negotiation groups should prioritize local researchers, ensuring expertise grows where it is most needed.

Technology transfer

Bridging the technology gap between the Global North and South is a long-standing goal of climate negotiations. Yet many technology transfer programs fail due to insufficient local capacity-building. Renewable energy technologies, climate modeling software, mapping tools, and databases remain inaccessible to many in the Global South.

Progress requires local ownership and expertise, supported by Global North funding and collaborative programs. Universities are ideal platforms for these exchanges, ensuring sustainable, locally managed, and contextually appropriate technology adoption.

Transparency and accountability

Nepal has shown leadership in community-based climate adaptation. Its community forestry program empowers locals to manage over 25 percent of its forests, including women and marginalized groups in decision-making. Nepal’s policies align with the Paris Agreement, Kyoto Protocol, and UN Sustainable Development Goals. It aims for net-zero emissions by 2045 and has met its 45 percent forest cover goal. However, achieving these requires $33bn by 2030 for Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and $47bn by 2050 for its National Adaptation Plan (NAP).

Despite resource constraints, communities apply indigenous knowledge to protect forests, preserve water, and pioneer adaptation. For example, Poly Concrete Nepal transforms non-biodegradable polystyrene foam—packaging waste from imported goods not created by Nepal—into lightweight, insulating construction blocks. This circular economy solution cleans up waste, creates jobs, builds resilient homes, and reduces emissions, deserving wider celebration and scaling.International climate funding often operates as a “black box,” with resources diverted to consultants, workshops, and reports rather than reaching communities.

Climate justice as rights

The ICJ’s affirmation that environmental protection is a precondition for human rights highlights how climate impacts amplify inequalities based on gender, caste, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. For instance, a Dalit woman farmer in Madhesh facing drought encounters greater risks than a wealthy urban man, yet policies rarely address these realities. Climate justice must integrate equity, prioritizing the most vulnerable.

Moving forward requires reframing support as reparative justice, not charity. Resources should flow to community-led initiatives combining indigenous knowledge with innovation. The polluter-pays principle, reinforced by the ICJ, must guide climate finance.

Nepal can leverage international frameworks and local innovation. Directing funds to solutions like Poly Concrete Nepal’s waste-to-resource model, while holding polluters accountable, offers a path forward. The challenge lies not in solutions but in the political will to implement them.

The time for silence has passed

Nepal’s climate crisis is immediate, existential, and tied to global challenges. The ICJ has spoken, science has warned, and communities are innovating. What remains is the courage to act: breaking the spiral of silence, empowering universities, democratizing technology, ensuring transparency, and channeling resources to the frontline.

By combining local innovation with international accountability, Nepal can claim its right to climate justice and inspire the Global South. The era of passive suffering is over; Nepal’s voices must be heard, and global leaders and polluters must listen.