The Trump administration’s recent announcement of its <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2026/01/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-withdraws-the-united-states-from-international-organizations-that-are-contrary-to-the-interests-of-the-united-states/" target="_blank">withdrawal from 66 international organisations</a> has been met with a mixture of alarm and applause. &nbsp;While the headline number suggests a dramatic retreat from the world stage, a closer look reveals a more nuanced, and perhaps more insidious, strategy.&nbsp;
The move is less a wholesale abandonment of the United Nations system and more a targeted pruning of the multilateral vine, aimed at withering specific branches of global cooperation that the administration deems contrary to its interests. While the immediate financial impact may be less than feared, the long-term consequences for the UN and the rules-based international order are profound.
At first glance, the withdrawal appears to be a sweeping rejection of global engagement. <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/01/withdrawing-the-united-states-from-international-organizations-conventions-and-treaties-that-are-contrary-to-the-interests-of-the-united-states/" target="_blank">The list of targeted entities</a> is long and diverse, ranging from the well-known UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to more obscure bodies like the International Lead and Zinc Study Group. However, as <a href="https://casquebleu.substack.com/p/unpacking-the-results-of-the-review" target="_blank">Eugene Chen</a> has astutely observed, the reality is more complex.
The vast majority of the UN-related entities on the list are not independent international organisations, but rather subsidiary bodies, funds, and programmes of the UN itself. The administration is not, for now, withdrawing from the UN Charter, but rather selectively defunding and disengaging from the parts of the UN system it finds objectionable.
This selective approach reveals a clear ideological agenda. The targeted entities are overwhelmingly focused on issues that the Trump administration has long disdained: climate change, sustainable development, gender equality, and human rights. The list includes the UN’s main development arm, the Department of Economic and Social Affairs; its primary gender entity, UN Women; and a host of bodies dedicated to peacebuilding and conflict prevention.&nbsp;
The inclusion of the UN’s regional economic commissions, which play a vital role in promoting regional cooperation and development, is particularly telling. This is not simply a cost-cutting exercise; it is a deliberate attempt to dismantle the architecture of global cooperation in areas that do not align with the administration’s narrow, nationalist worldview.
The decision to remain a member of the UN’s specialised agencies, such as the World Health Organization (from which the administration has already announced its withdrawal in a separate action) and the International Atomic Energy Agency, is equally revealing. This is not a sign of a renewed commitment to multilateralism, but rather a cold, calculated decision based on a narrow definition of US national security interests.&nbsp;
The administration has made it clear that it sees these agencies as useful tools to counter the influence of a rising China. This ‘à la carte’ approach to multilateralism, where the US picks and chooses which parts of the system to support based on its own geopolitical interests, is deeply corrosive to the principles of collective security and universal values that underpin the UN Charter.
What, then, should be done? The international community cannot afford to simply stand by and watch as the UN system is hollowed out from within. A concerted effort is needed to mitigate the damage and reaffirm the importance of multilateral cooperation.
First, other member states must step up to fill the financial and leadership void left by the United States. This will require not only increased financial contributions, but also a renewed political commitment to the UN’s work in the areas of sustainable development, climate action, and human rights.&nbsp;
Second, civil society organisations and the academic community have a crucial role to play in monitoring the impact of the US withdrawal and advocating for the continued relevance of the affected UN entities.&nbsp;
Finally, the UN itself must do a better job of communicating its value to a sceptical public. The organisation must move beyond bureaucratic jargon and technical reports to tell a compelling story about how its work makes a real difference in the lives of people around the world.
The Trump administration’s latest move is a stark reminder that the post-war international order can no longer be taken for granted. It is a call to action for all who believe in the power of multilateralism to address our shared global challenges. The UN may be a flawed and imperfect institution, but it remains our best hope for a more peaceful, prosperous, and sustainable world. We must not allow it to wither on the vine.
Jordan Ryan is at the Toda Peace Institute and a former UN Assistant Secretary-General with extensive experience in international peacebuilding, human rights, and development policy.&nbsp;
This article was issued by the Toda Peace Institute and has been republished from <a href="https://toda.org/global-outlook/2026/the-uns-withering-vine-a-us-retreat-from-global-governance.html">the original</a> with permission.

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1250x600

1084x550

thumbnail

viewImage

The UN’s withering vine

Described by its founding king 260 years ago as a “yam between two boulders” pressed on both sides by the Chinese Empire and British India, the metaphor has metamorphosed in the new geopolitical reality that Nepal faces. The gradual withdrawal of a distracted West, the rise of India and China, and emerging power of the Gulf states is also changing Nepal’s foreign policy outlook, and forcing it to reimagine its place in a multilateral world. After Donald Trump became president for the second time this year, geopolitics is going through a tectonic shift. Washington’s relations with New Delhi have recently become strained after Trump took credit for the ceasefire between India and Pakistan in May, and Trump dining with Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir at the White House. Then, Trump threatened to impose an extra tariff on 10 members of the BRICS bloc, which includes India. “Recent developments between India and the US are a result of President Trump’s reactive approach that did not meet Indian prime minister Modi’s expectations,” explains international relations expert Prakash Bhandari. If this pushes India closer to China, it may tip Kathmandu’s precarious balancing act between Beijing and New Delhi. Although Nepal has not suffered punitive US trade tariffs like other Asian countries, the closure of USAID projects and imminent mass deportation of Nepali TPS migrants will have far-reaching consequences. “There are multiple global crises happening at the same time. Any attempt to change Nepal’s non-aligned principle during this complicated phase of world politics will push us into a deep quagmire,” warns foreign policy expert Nishchal Nath Pandey. Shifting geopolitics could force Nepal to review its policy of neutrality and equidistance between its two giant neighbours to pursue a more pragmatic economic diplomacy that focuses on foreign investment, trade, tourism, and labour export. Experts have often joked that Nepal is not “landlocked but India-locked” since trans-Himalayan connectivity is much more difficult than the open border to the south. This has historically made Nepal more economically and politically dependent on India. “Whether like it or not, we are likely to lean more towards India,” says Santosh Sharma Poudel from Nepal Institute for Policy Research. “Even Chinese leaders have told Nepal’s rulers to maintain friendly relations with India.” This may therefore be the time for Nepal to look beyond the ‘two boulders’ to promote foreign direct investment from countries like Japan, Korea, the Gulf states and Europe. Besides serving as a destination for Nepali migrants, countries like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Oman have untapped investment and tourism opportunities. “Sectors such as hydropower and trade have immense investment potential from countries beyond our neighbours,” says Poudel. Even so, the geopolitical reality is that India and China will always loom large. India has barely tolerated increased Chinese presence in Nepal’s hydropower and infrastructure, refusing to buy electricity and allow flights from projects with Chinese involvement. Nepal has felt squeezed by the two neighbours both when their relations are strained after border skirmishes, or when their relations are good.  <figure><img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2025072809074_febdc8038cb5d4bca3d6fe5abafd2d0aa79ab6b9cafec54b8b58037514908220.jpg" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="2025072809074_febdc8038cb5d4bca3d6fe5abafd2d0aa79ab6b9cafec54b8b58037514908220" data-rendition-name="original" width="2048" height="1365" loading="lazy" alt="Looking beyond two boulders"><figcaption>Chinese President Xi Jinping's visit to Nepal, the first by a Chinese head of state in 23 years. Photo: NEPALI TIMES ARCHIVE</figcaption></figure>  India’s post-earthquake blockade in 2015 still rankles. Nepalis remember that China did not support their claim to the Limpiyadhura region, and that Beijing retroactively announced that Pokhara airport was under its Belt Road Initiative (BRI) even though Nepal took a hefty loan for it. The Sino-US Cold War has also affected Nepal with the orchestrated opposition in 2021 to the $500 million Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) project to upgrade transmission lines and highways. After Trump, the MCC faced uncertainty but it has been continued possibly because it is seen in Washington as a counter to China’s BRI in Nepal. The lesson is that Nepal cannot expect magnanimity or charity from its big neighbours, or the United States. Every country is looking out for its own national interest, and so should Nepal by asserting its independence and improving its governance to develop the economy. “India has its own place and China has its own place in terms of their relations with Nepal,” says Indra Adhikari from Policy Research Institute. “But it is true that Nepal has not been able to leverage its relations with both neighbours.” This does not mean playing New Delhi off against Beijing, but to get both powers to be twin locomotives pulling Nepal’s economy in the same direction. What Nepal definitely cannot afford is to have the two engines tugging the country in opposite directions. Adhikari adds, “It is natural that each country sees its own interest while investing in Nepal. We should be able to establish an environment of trust for countries which want to invest.” With Nepal on the pathway to transitioning from a Least Developed Country to a developing country by November 2026, it will have to plan for loss of foreign aid and higher interest rates on loans from international agencies. This means greater emphasis on improving the foreign investment climate to create domestic jobs and boost the economy. This requires a change in the mindset of Nepal’s politicians to understand the transformed geopolitical reality, and strategise accordingly. But, says Nischal Nath Pandey: “We have changed our political system often, but our geography has not changed.”

Looking beyond two boulders

<img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221110141152/636d02729c7e80680e0a367fjpeg.jpg" alt="" width="876" height="1058"/>The course of Sino-Nepal relations is likely to enter a new historical phase in the aftermath of the US exit from Afghanistan, and the signing of the ‘Aukus’ security pact this week between Australia, the UK and the US.The associated decline in the importance of global terrorism is a defining feature of international politics. But there is also a sharper emphasis on great power rivalry, primarily in the context of China’s expanding role globally, specifically in Eurasia.The United States has now determined the Indo-Pacific as its core area of interest in this new period. How and to what extent the fundamentals of <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepal-now-has-to-balance-not-just-india-and-china-but-also-the-west/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepal-now-has-to-balance-not-just-india-and-china-but-also-the-west/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1632014551153000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEYFNNMAwSTBk1VdyCh78lb24goRg">Sino-Nepal relations </a>will be impacted by this structural change in geopolitics is yet to be determined.Neither the lessons of the Cold War nor the period of globalisation that followed, will serve as an infallible basis upon which to extrapolate about the future contours of bilateral relations between Nepal and China.What is now emerging as the principal fault line in international politics after the Global War on Terror is the question of hegemony in Asia. Is the US  prepared to tolerate a potential peer competitor that gains increasing primacy in Asia, and steadily erodes its options and maneuverability in Asia, including in capitals like Kathmandu?The vociferous and cacophonous debates in Nepal concerning the <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/power-politics-delays-mcc-in-nepal/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/power-politics-delays-mcc-in-nepal/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1632014551153000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFO1kQV8lbkjpb9vutFjmcxBu5jJA">MCC,</a> for instance, should be understood within this broader framework instead of deferring to an intellectually convenient position of arguing that bilateral relations (whether<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepal-now-has-to-balance-not-just-india-and-china-but-also-the-west/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/here-now/nepal-now-has-to-balance-not-just-india-and-china-but-also-the-west/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1632014551153000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEYFNNMAwSTBk1VdyCh78lb24goRg"> Sino-Nepal, Indo-Nepal or US-Nepal</a>) exist in an airtight vacuum.If there are any lessons to be learnt from the history of the Cold War or the period of globalisation that followed, it is that the bilateral relations between any two countries do not operate in a bubble.However, history does serve as an indispensable point of departure for any analysis that seeks to prognosticate the nature of Sino-Nepal relations in the coming near future. Some five months prior to the the 9/11 al-Qaeda attacks that prompted the US invasion of Afghanistan, tensions were rising between Washington and Beijing as the George W Bush administration labelled China as a ‘strategic competitor’.That was, of course, in marked contrast to his predecessor Bill Clinton’s policy of forging a strategic partnership with China, embodied most explicitly in the US Congress passing legislation to grant Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China and the US Senate’s vote to give China permanent most-favoured-nation status, both in 2000. This paved the way for China’s eventual accession to the WTO in 2001.George W Bush was laser-focused on shifting attention away from what was perceived as Clinton’s flawed and benign approach vis-à-vis Beijing, towards what was deemed as an emerging “near-peer” threat from China.But after the twin towers in New York were brought down by al-Qaeda operatives, this radically, abruptly, and almost completely, shifted US attention to West Asia. Washington first attacked al-Qaeda bases in Afghanistan to decimate the fulcrum of radical international terrorism. Events in Iraq, Libya and Syria would soon follow.Some analysts have argued that had the 9/11 attacks not reoriented US attention, the likelihood of China’s path towards great power status would have been considerably impaired, even curtailed. The logic is that the US would have shifted in its defence and economic posture towards China much earlier than when it actually did towards the end of the first term of the Obama presidency.Obama’s ‘pivot to Asia’ in 2012 and the ‘Indo-Pacific Strategy’, conceptualised by Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, was advanced vigorously by the Trump administration, and is being given continuity by President Joe Biden.In 2001 when the ‘Global War on Terror’ was launched, China had just been admitted to the WTO and was weakly linked to the world economy. Twenty years later, China has become the largest economy in the world measured in purchasing power parity terms, and is substantially interwoven within the global economy. It is now the largest export destination for 33 countries, and the largest source of imports for 65 countries.Did Washington’s inordinate concentration on Afghanistan accelerate China’s rise and significantly enhance its position in Asia today? The argument is counter-factual, and denies China, the Chinese people and the Communist Party of China, agency in chartering an adept grand strategy.As a young student in 2006 on a visiting scholar program in Beijing, I witnessed amorphous discussions on ‘China-SAARC relations’. Fast forward 15 years, and there has been a revolution in the landscape of China-South Asia ties encompassing every conceivable infrastructure program from oil pipelines to gas fields, seaports, highways, mega hydroelectric projects, ambitious railway proposals. Euphemisms such as ‘string of pearls’ have even entered the popular lexicon.And it is precisely due to this Chinese strategy to consistently expand its relations over the last two decades with not just Nepal but virtually all South Asian states, that has made alarm bells go off in Washington.This has led the United States to double down on politico-economic (even the military QUAD) initiatives in the Indo-Pacific. It is no coincidence that US Vice President Kamala Harris visited several countries in Asia just a week before the 31 August 2021 deadline set by the Biden administration for US troop withdrawals from Afghanistan.The purpose of her trip, according to senior White House officials, was to demonstrate that “America is back [and that] the administration is making clear that we have an enduring commitment to this region, that we are part of the Indo-Pacific and in this region to stay.This new ‘post-Afghanistan’ era with the American ‘Rebalance to Asia’ and a ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy’ is already having a considerable impact on the course of Sino-Nepal relations.<a style="font-size: 16px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/from-mt-everest-to-the-indian-ocean/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/from-mt-everest-to-the-indian-ocean/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1632014551153000&amp;usg=AFQjCNFR8k2w2ueYqoyHp-voXv75mdbVIA">Bhaskar Koirala</a> is the Director of the <a style="font-size: 16px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="http://www.niiss.org.np/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.niiss.org.np/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1632014551153000&amp;usg=AFQjCNGG-pgBvQpteFgDHSUGq-0s8Jrt3Q">Nepal Institute of International and Strategic Studies</a>.

Sino-Nepal ties in the ‘post-Afghan' era

<figure><img width="1400" height="856" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221108141116/636a57409c7e80680e0547cfjpeg.jpg" alt=""/><figcaption>ZERO CARBON TRIP: Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg, 16, sails into New York Harbour on 28 August. She will attend the UN Climate Action Summit, and sail on to Chile for another climate conference. Photo: UN PHOTO/MARK GARTEN</figcaption></figure>The United Nations will host six high-level plenary meetings during the start of the 74th session of the General Assembly in late September, including the <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Climate Action Summit</a>, in a bid to kickstart ailing multilateral diplomacy.The meetings are being viewed mainly as an attempt to revive multilateral diplomacy at a time when a rash of hard-right nationalist leaders, including US President Donald Trump, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines and Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary, are either rooting for authoritarianism, abandoning international treaties or undermining multilateralism — not necessarily in that order.Regrettably, they are joined by a fistful of other leaders, both from the North and the South, including from Russia, Italy, Burma, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Poland and Turkey.The UN is expecting over 180 world leaders, including foreign ministers and high-ranking government officials, to participate in the six-day mega event.<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/11/greta-thunberg-schoolgirl-climate-change-warrior-some-people-can-let-things-go-i-cant" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Greta Thunberg</a>, the dynamic young Swedish activist, will also be at the UN climate meeting, scheduled for 23 September, to dramatise the need for common action and to symbolise the essential role that the UN can play.The Climate Action Summit is intended to put world leaders on the hot seat so they reveal concrete, realistic plans to fulfill the pledges countries made in the Paris Agreement in 2016. Via the agreement, countries should reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 45% over the next decade, and to net zero emissions by 2050.<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=32849&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tourism, aviation, and carbon,</a> Sanghamitra Subba<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=32864&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Third Pole is warming faster than expected,</a> Kunda Dixit<a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=32872&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Protecting Kathmandu’s historic roofscape,</a> Anne Feenstra <img width="200" height="200" src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221108141116/636a57439c7e80680e0547d0jpeg.jpg" alt="">The multilateral bodies and global treaties that have taken a beating include the UN Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the Human Rights Council, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Trans Pacific Partnership agreement, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the Paris Climate Change agreement.As one delegate puts it: “It is either a resurrection of multilateralism or a prelude to an obituary for international order.”Scheduled to take place 23-27 September, the meetings will cover a wide range of political and socio-economic issues on the UN agenda, including <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/ipcc-report-and-nepals-food-security/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">climate change</a>, universal health care, sustainable development goals (SDGs), financing for development, elimination of nuclear weapons and the survival of small island developing states facing extinction from rising sea levels.Speaking to reporters last month, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that multilateralism is under attack from many different directions precisely “when we need it most”.“In different areas and for different reasons, the trust of people in their political establishments, the trust of states among each other, the trust of many people in international organisations has been eroded and … multilateralism has been under fire,” he complained.On the upcoming six summits, Guterres warned, “the people of the world do not want half measures or empty promises. They are demanding transformative change that is fair and sustainable.”But will the talk-fest produce concrete results or end up being another political exercise in futility?In an interview Jayantha Dhanapala, a former Sri Lankan Ambassador and UN Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, said: “As we survey the graveyard of multilateral security, environmental and economic agreements underpinning the mutually beneficial liberal order, fires burn 20% of the lungs of the world in the Amazon and even the Arctic has its tundra burning.”“And the numbers of refugees fleeing violence and persecution are the highest in recorded history.”With the unrivalled superpower under the quixotic leadership of Donald Trump, even developing countries like the Philippines, Brazil and others have abandoned global norms, Dhanapala says.“A rule-based international order is collapsing before our eyes and Britain is on the brink of a messy Brexit while trade wars ruin Sino-US trade and drive the world towards a ruinous recession <a href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/editorial/climate-damage/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">and the end of sustainable development.”</a>Read Also:<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=32805&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Climate-health emergency,</a> Sonia Awale<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=32868&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Mosquitoes move up mountains as the earth warms,</a>Sonia AwaleMartin S. Edwards, Associate Professor and Chair, School of Diplomacy and International Relations at Seton Hall University, says: “I think you’re right that the depth and breadth of the work that the UN is launching is more than just symbolic.”With Bolsonaro set to address the General Assembly right before Trump (on 24 September), their comments will mirror each other, and will be in stark contrast to many of the other delegates, he added.But the important thing, he pointed out, is that there’s needed substance here. “The US might well sit out the Climate Action Summit, and that’s fine. The work of the UN and the member countries will go on without it”.As for the SDGs, he said, this is a signature UN initiative that needs more attention and focus. “The world is not on track to reach many of these goals, and without greater commitment by member governments, they are not likely to be met by 2030. With the US disengaged from many of these discussions, it falls to the Secretary-General to recommit leaders to these goals,” Edwards noted.James Paul, a former executive director of the New York-based Global Policy Forum, says, “This is a time of great international uncertainty and instability. What does this mean for the UN as a cluster of high-profile meetings approaches? And what can we expect from these events?”“My sense is this: nationalistic enthusiasm is now waning at the popular level and posturing leaders are under increasing pressure from below to deliver more than rhetoric,” said Paul, author of the recently-released book, Of Foxes and Chickens: Oligarchy and Global Power in the UN Security Council.   (IPS)This story is part of <a style="background-color: #ffffff; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/latest/world-joins-to-cover-climate/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Covering Climate Now</a>, a global collaboration of more than 250 news outlets to strengthen coverage of the climate story.  Read Also:<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=32887&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tree-mendous,</a> Peter Gill<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=32877&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">It's a jungle out there,</a> Ajaya Dixit<a style="background-color: #ffffff; font-size: 15px; letter-spacing: 0.01em;" href="https://www.nepalitimes.com/?p=32887&amp;preview=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Trees, politics and greed,</a> Mukesh Pokharel

Climate Summit leads packed UN agenda

<img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221107171152/636937b89c7e80680e03fe57jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1500" height="1476"/>MADRID – Sadly, 2018 will not be remembered as a year of political and diplomatic success. Though the international order had already begun to erode in 2017, the global political environment became downright chaotic, combustible, and hostile this year. That is no coincidence, as these are perhaps the three adjectives that best describe the United States under President Donald Trump.Since January 2018, when the Trump administration announced tariffs on imported solar panels and washing machines, the year has been marked by an escalating “trade war,” waged primarily – but not exclusively – by the US against China. The ongoing tariff disputes have seriously <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/19/the-trade-war-has-claimed-its-first-victim/">undermined</a> the World Trade Organization and deepened mutual distrust in Sino-American relations.For its part, China this year <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/world/asia/china-xi-jinping-term-limit-explainer.html">eliminated</a> presidential term limits, raising fears that President Xi Jinping’s so-called <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/10/18/i-mastered-xi-jinping-thought-and-i-have-the-certificate-to-prove-it/">new era</a> will end the period of collective leadership ushered in by Deng Xiaoping’s reforms, which were themselves a corrective to Mao’s cult of personality. This move could also herald a further deviation from Deng’s trademark foreign-policy restraint.Similarly, Russian President Vladimir Putin was reelected in March, to no one’s surprise. Under Putin, Russia has been re-emerging as a geopolitical force. And yet, its economy is essentially stagnant, owing in part to its excessive dependence on hydrocarbons. In the absence of growth, Putin has relied on foreign policy to shore up his domestic popularity.For example, Putin’s campaign press secretary welcomed the British government’s response to the nerve-agent attack on Sergei and Yulia Skripal, because it may have <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/news/world/kremlin-thanks-britain-for-putin-s-landslide-victory-a3793546.html">mobilized</a> Putin’s supporters in the run-up to the presidential election. And the Kremlin’s recent decision to blockade Ukrainian ports in the Sea of Azov may also have been <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/11/26/is-there-link-between-putins-approval-rating-aggressive-russian-foreign-policy/?utm_term=.7f850b68f13d">designed</a> to boost Putin’s domestic approval rating, among other goals. The danger now is that both the US and Russia will cease to implement the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, posing a new and acute <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/12/13/will-europe-try-to-save-the-inf-treaty/">threat to Europe</a> in particular.Meanwhile, the Middle East has continued to serve as a battlefield for some of the world’s most violent conflicts. Though the Islamic State (ISIS) has continued to <a href="https://bigthink.com/strange-maps/22-months-of-war-condensed-in-a-1-minute-video">lose ground</a>, it is far from defeated – contrary to what Trump <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1075528854402256896">has claimed</a> – and the death toll in Syria’s civil war continues to climb. Likewise, the humanitarian calamity in Yemen has deepened, though negotiations that ran aground in 2016 have at least resumed and made <a href="https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/gulf-and-arabian-peninsula/yemen/making-yemens-hodeida-deal-stick">some progress</a>. In Afghanistan, what is widely regarded as the longest-running war in US history continues, and <a href="https://thenewsrep.com/109943/is-afghanistan-a-lost-cause-taliban-control-more-territory-since-2001/">it is estimated</a> that the Taliban now controls more territory than at any time since their government was overthrown in 2001.Despite some recent developments in the aforementioned conflicts, the underpinnings of the Trump administration’s general strategy in the Middle East remained intact in 2018. The US has reaffirmed its <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/06/18/donald-trumps-new-world-order">support</a> for the axis of Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, which it regards as a bulwark against Iran. In May, the Trump administration moved the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. That same month, it abandoned the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and announced an abusive re-imposition of extraterritorial sanctions, which reflects the increasing <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/trump-secondary-sanctions-eu-iran-by-mark-leonard-2018-10">weaponization of the US dollar</a>.Moreover, by siding with the Saudi government over his own intelligence agencies in the <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/confronting-saudi-policies-free-speech-yemen-syria-by-leon-willems-2018-12">murder</a> of journalist <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/columnist/jamal-khashoggi">Jamal Khashoggi</a> in October, Trump has made clear that opposing Iran and purchasing US arms is one of the quickest ways to his heart. The result of his broad approach to the Middle East has been to empower military hardliners throughout the region. In fact, Israel and Iran this year engaged in their first-ever <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/11/iran-israel-little-incentive-hurry-down-path-war">direct military encounter</a>.Trump has also contributed, in one way or another, to the advance of populism around the world in 2018. In Latin America, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) and Brazilian President-elect Jair Bolsonaro have shown that “<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/dec/03/what-is-populism-trump-farage-orban-bolsonaro">populism</a>” can encompass diverse ideologies. While both claim to speak for “the people” against “the elites,” the leftist AMLO was elected partly as a <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/01/mexico-election-trump-populist-lopez-obrador-664243">rebuke</a> to Trump, whereas Bolsonaro embraces a Trump-like brand of right-wing nationalism, and enjoys the <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/01/mexico-election-trump-populist-lopez-obrador-664243">support</a> of many Brazilian elites.The Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin, often regarded as one of the Kremlin’s main ideologues, <a href="https://www.politicaexterior.com/actualidad/trump-paso-hacia-objetivo-insuficiente/">argues</a> that “populism should unite right-wing values with socialism, social justice, and anti-capitalism.” This “integral populism,” he believes, is perfectly illustrated by Italy’s current governing coalition, which comprises the anti-establishment Five Star Movement and the nationalist League party.In October, Italy’s government instigated a conflict with the European Union (which has fortunately <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/19/italy-avoids-eu-sanctions-after-reaching-2019-budget-agreement">subsided</a>) by proposing a budget that defied EU fiscal rules. Italy’s leaders justified their policies in the name of an outdated interpretation of “<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/10/eu-rejected-italy-budget-populists/573742/">sovereignty</a>,” one similar to that of the United Kingdom’s Brexiteers, whose haphazardness has left the UK’s future shrouded in uncertainty.There were a few positive developments in 2018. Certainly, the easing of tensions between the US and North Korea, and the even deeper rapprochement between North and South Korea, should be welcomed. Much credit belongs to South Korean President <a href="https://www.project-syndicate.org/columnist/moon-jae-in">Moon Jae-in</a>, who used the occasion of the Winter Olympics in Pyeongchang to reach out to North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. Trump’s subsequent turn toward diplomacy – which led to his historic summit with Kim – should also be applauded, though his administration has <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/north-korea-rejects-denuclearization-unless-us-nuclear-threat-is-eliminated/2018/12/20/fcf642a2-0438-11e9-b5df-5d3874f1ac36_story.html?utm_term=.c0a8c770d20f">yet to achieve</a> anything more than symbolic progress toward denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.The result of the US midterm elections was also good news. Democratic control of the House of Representatives means that, from January 2019, there will be more checks on Trump’s policies. And there have been welcome developments in the Republican-controlled Senate, where a recent resolution condemning Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for the murder of Khashoggi, and another to end US support for the Saudi campaign in Yemen, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/13/us/politics/yemen-saudi-war-pompeo-mattis.html?module=inline">passed</a> with bipartisan support.In Europe, the prospects for 2019 will depend primarily on three factors: Brexit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron’s push for <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/826a4986-f7ac-11e8-af46-2022a0b02a6c">EU reform</a>, and the European Parliament election in May. In each case, one hopes that the supporters of democracy, the rule of law, European integration, and multilateralism will prevail.Those who oppose these principles have had a rather good year. But they would be mistaken to think that those who uphold them have lost the will – and the ability – to cultivate a spirit of cooperation and harmony.     © Project SyndicateJavier Solana was EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy, Secretary-General of NATO, and Foreign Minister of Spain.

Good riddance to 2018

At the stroke of the midnight hour, it finally came to something everyone in Nepal’s oldest and biggest party had been dreading — a split.
Not that this was anything new. The Nepali Congress (NC) had splintered twice before and the main protagonist both times was five-time prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba. After the GenZ uprising and being physically mauled and his house looted and set on fire on 9 September Deuba had said he was stepping aside, but it seems old ambitions die hard.
The showdown between the Gagan Thapa-Bishow Prakash Sharma camp and Deuba came to a head on Wednesday as the establishment leadership decided to suspend Thapa, Sharma, and Farmullah Mansoor for five years to punish them for daring to challenge the leadership and hold a special general convention.&nbsp;
Bhrikuti Mandap in the centre of Kathmandu is the venue for trade exhibitions, but this week it was where an exhibition of everything that is wrong with Nepali politics was on full display — lack of internal party democracy and an unaccountable gerontocracy clinging on to power.&nbsp;
Thapa and Sharma had gathered the support of 62% of the NC membership at their convention and chose Gagan Thapa as the new party leader and proposed him as a prime ministerial candidate after the 5 March election.
Deuba’s allies had refused to attend or endorse the special general convention, and were adamant about holding a general convention to choose a new party head after the election. Thapa, Sharma and their supporters argued that the party faced ignominious defeat in the polls if Deuba insisted on being prime minister again.
The events of September 2025 have cast a long shadow over Nepali politics, with many new parties and alliances pledging to represent the aspirations of the GenZ movement. However, that realisation does not seem to have dawned on the tried, tested and failed leadership of the NC, UML and the NCP where the party leaders have held on to power by sidelining all rivals. &nbsp;
Thapa and Sharma were NC general secretaries held multiple rounds of discussions to convince Deuba to accept their eight-point demand that for the party’s and the country’s sake his time was up, and he should cut and cut cleanly. Despite having already handed over the party leadership to Purna Bahadur Khadka in September, Deuba refused to step down.&nbsp;
‘What demands has the Nepali Congress been unable to reconcile that it is headed for a split? There is no ideological dispute, just a proposal to make it easier to go for the election,’ noted journalist and author Narayan Wagle. ‘If those who have been in politics for so many years cannot reach an agreement, what have they learned in life and what hope is there for the country?’
Gagan Thapa was elected unopposed as the new party president on Thursday midnight, with Sharma and Pushpa Bhusal appointed vice-presidents. Thapa has said backroom talks are still ongoing though mediators, but for all intents and purposes the split seems irreconcilable.&nbsp;
The million dollar question now is: who gets to be the real Nepali Congress? Who gets the NC’s tree election symbol at the polls?
Both the Thapa and Deuba factions have written to the Election Commission (EC) laying claim to the party and its symbol. Whatever the EC decides, with less than two months to go for the polls, the dispute over its legitimacy will almost certainly have to be decided in the courts.
Deuba and his counterpart K P Oli in the UML have been unwilling or unable to fathom the level of outrage that young Nepalis feel about their parties. They have shown an inability to heed the call for institutional overhaul within parties and in Nepal’s political culture post-September. Second generation leaders within those parties who have grown old waiting for reform, seem to have better internalised the need for internal restructuring.&nbsp;
Oli has managed to hold on to power after displaying increasing authoritarianism within his UML, while Deuba has shown an unwillingness to bow out of leadership with grace. Both have squandered away their legacy.
For Gagan Thapa, the events of Thursday was a culmination of his long-standing claim for leadership change within the NC coupled with a compulsion to address the demands of the youth movement to maximise gains for his party this election. Just like Deuba, Thapa’s house was also looted and torched during the September protests.
Thapa told Onlinekhabar on Thursday: “Our belief was that we cannot go into elections under the present circumstances under [Sher Bahadur Deuba’s] leadership and with him as the party’s prime ministerial candidate. We would lose.”
The special general convention has taken further steps for reform, endorsing amendments to the party statue, which has set term limits for key leadership positions, including a one-term limit for party president, two-term limit for prime minister, three for a ministerial position, and four terms for a directly elected member of Parliament. Meanwhile, party members are only allowed to become lawmakers through the Proportional Representation system for one term.&nbsp;
If Thapa’s leadership holds legitimacy, this new chapter for the NC might come as a welcome change to young Nepalis who have been calling for leadership overhaul and internal party reforms within the establishment parties. But it may also come at the cost of the NC’s core base. It remains to be seen which side tips the scale at the polls.&nbsp;
The NC’s infighting and institutional shake-up has also posed fresh concerns about how it will affect the election schedule just as it looked as though all the mainstream political parties were finally on board and preparing for the polls. With voting barely weeks away, Nepal’s political parties are still too busy cleaning up their own house to give too much time to work on their platforms, agendas and serious campaigning
Historically, political break-ups and make-ups in Nepal are not set in stone. Even the newest alliance between Rabi Lamichhane’s RSP and Kulman Ghising’s UNP did not even last 12 days. &nbsp;Balen Shah is set to resign from his mayor position in the next and has gotten into the thick of election preparation with the RSP. His next step will be to choose which constituency he is going to contest from.
Meanwhile, in the light of a new day, the two NC factions may still decide that breaking up is hard to do when they are so close to elections, and the political stakes are so high.&nbsp;

Grand split in Nepal’s grand old party

The India Art Fair (IAF) advertises itself as ‘the biggest event in India’s cultural calendar … a leading platform’ for art collectors who can discover modern and contemporary art from South Asia.&nbsp; For this year’s ticketed event on 5-8 February in New Delhi, more than 133 exhibitors from 14 countries will be representing top artists from their networks. Danfe Arts, a touring art space from Kathmandu, will participate in the Galleries Section of IAF’s 17th edition featuring a booth with works by six Nepali artists.&nbsp; One of them is Sanjeep Maharjan, Assistant Professor for Sculpture at Kathmandu University, who will showcase his claywork as part of Danfe Arts’ entourage. In 2024, Maharjan curated a show for Danfe Arts at Takpa Gallery titled, ‘Unfolding the City’. The IAF prefers to showcase skilled artists who have honed their practice over many years. Much like various biennales and residencies that have been popping up increasingly in Asia, the Fair delves into sociopolitical issues of the region such as many comissioned works including <a href="https://indiaartfair.in/exhibitor/yogesh-barve-supported-by-art-charlie" target="_blank">Yogesh Barve</a>’s installation entitled ‘I am not your Dalit’ featured at the feastival last year.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260115110136_13f262546fca46c0fe4d76f758a694afe7c0c1cfee5bf74eb4f257f78734f8f2.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="20260115110136_13f262546fca46c0fe4d76f758a694afe7c0c1cfee5bf74eb4f257f78734f8f2" data-rendition-name="original" width="989" height="1500" loading="lazy" alt="Nepali artists at India Art Fair"> <figcaption>Anil Shahi's Hand of Hope, Oil on Canvas, 36 x 60 inches. Exhibiting work at IAF.</figcaption> </figure>  As the name implies, it is a grand bazaar where artists and their agents show up, to be seen — a powerful regional platform where creativity merges with commercial interests. This is not necessarily a bad thing. Artists have a reputation for being weak at business.&nbsp; And in Kathmandu, where the contemporary art scene has been steadily expanding since the early aughts, more and more creatives are seeking platforms like IAF and collaborators like Danfe Arts in order to boost their portfolios. A NEW COURSE In 2022, I was invited to participate in a formal group discussion by founder of and curator at Danfe Arts Shivangi Bansal who was preparing to chart a new course with her Danfe Journal. The journal included photos of artworks as well as writings about art and helped bridge the gap between art and the Nepali public’s understanding of associated processes. Contemporary art and literature is considered a niche activity. Proper marketing and outreach is required to make the product accessible to the average consumer. Besides, consistency can also be an issue. Too often, energetic graduates might register organisations and launch initiatives only to burn out within a year or so. Nepali society would benefit more from a sustained effort with a long-term vision rather than trendy initiatives that look bright and shiny. Danfe Arts discontinued the journal but continued to engage with Nepal’s art community, like facilitating a commission for Mini Tamang by the India Art Fair (IAF) in 2025, as part of IAF’s Young Collector’s Program. Tamang’s artwork, ‘Evocative Waves’, was installed at New Delhi’s Stir Art gallery last year. In 2024, Danfe Arts had organised a group exhibition called ‘A Lake That Once Was’ in New Delhi’s Bikaner House to coincide with the India Art Fair, which listed the exhibition as part of its parallel programs. This meant the Nepali artists received more visibility and value among IAF’s much larger audience.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2026011804014_2a15d57a63c375503965a41396b22c006152368a018450d2617f4c8c076ccc74.jpg" data-media-id="editor_2" data-image-id="2026011804014_2a15d57a63c375503965a41396b22c006152368a018450d2617f4c8c076ccc74" data-rendition-name="original" width="1500" height="998" loading="lazy" alt="arts"> <figcaption>A Lake That Once Was, 2024 at Bikaner House, Delhi.</figcaption> </figure>  Since its inception, Danfe Arts has put out an eclectic mix of programs, demonstrating innovative thinking and effort. With its multi-platform approach, Danfe Arts has collaborated with restaurants like Mezze, putting up an exhibition in November 2025, ‘Bhoye - The Feast’. Danfe Arts is also cultivating relationships with specific artists based on synergies and sensibilities.&nbsp; The history of art practice in Nepal is long and illustrious, but due to political and geographical constraints, esteemed artists have been sheltered and confined within our national borders.&nbsp; By featuring these six artists for the 2026 edition of IAF, Danfe Arts is helping them make regional connections. And as our artists and gallerists show up on global platforms, they might in turn compel Nepalis to view more critically the value of art and how creative practices can contribute positively to society. As technology takes over and AI bots spam the Internet, the issue of originality might become tantamount to survival. We should take risks in our professional pursuits in order to design new communal models of exchange. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; India Art Fair New Delhi 5-8 February&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2026011804014_f226a31af8a33f8da5e7359886289de3fd1b2db17697b96b909404e582d75124.png" data-media-id="editor_3" data-image-id="2026011804014_f226a31af8a33f8da5e7359886289de3fd1b2db17697b96b909404e582d75124" data-rendition-name="original" width="1500" height="1875" loading="lazy" alt="arts"> </figure>

Nepali artists at India Art Fair

The series <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/multimedia/looking-good-by-doing-good">Nepal Made</a> profiles world-class Nepali products and the people behind them. Deepak Acharya was born and raised in Simara, before his uncle took him to Pokhara when he was only in sixth grade. After class, he helped sell jackets and outdoor gear at his uncle's Lakeside store. &nbsp; Twenty-two years later, &nbsp;Acharya is still selling jackets. Not international brands like he used to, but products of his own outdoor gear company, DOLPO.&nbsp; Acharya and his brother-in-law, Krishna Ammai, started making and selling jackets and gear for international companies out of Thamel. After losing his business partner in the 2015 earthquake, he was done selling imported items. He launched his own line of outerwear, named after Nepal’s rugged and remote district, known for its stunning arid landscape. The careful selection of the name DOLPO paid off. It took off, providing a high-quality, affordable Nepal-made alternative to foreign companies.&nbsp; “A lot of work went into choosing the name Dolpo,” says Acharya, who considered what came into people’s minds when they heard the name of a place with double-O sound. “I wanted a brand that local customers would instantly relate to toughness and mountains.” The elegant logo reflects this as well, made up of two overlapping rounded triangles denoting mountains with a third peak in the middle. Underneath is ‘DOLPO’ in upper case sans serif.&nbsp;  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260116120148_968d9354094049265372d851d0e44e16ae4fc86b5631481e365e6e977f13d37d.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="20260116120148_968d9354094049265372d851d0e44e16ae4fc86b5631481e365e6e977f13d37d" data-rendition-name="original" width="854" height="1280" loading="lazy" alt="Dolpo NT"> <figcaption>Photo: DOLPO</figcaption> </figure>  RIGHT QUALITY, RIGHT PRICE “Our philosophy is Right quality, Right price,” says co-founder Deepak Acharya, adding with a smile that the pricing strategy of a particular competitor has made business easy: “The employees at North Face may sell North Face, but they wear Dolpo.” The rebranding was so successful that Acharya regrets not launching it sooner. The reason for the success is that the outdoor gear market in Nepal has taken off with more and more domestic tourists trekking in the high mountains to share their adventures on social media.&nbsp; Nepalis seem to be consciously choosing sustainable, Nepal made products of international quality. Acharya says: “Of course, there will always be a demographic that only wears North Face, or Sonam. But we have the right design, right price philosophy.”&nbsp; DOLPO uses fabric and material mainly from Japan, and adheres to strict quality control. The reversible down jackets, windcheaters, shorts, fleece-lined pants, trekking trousers, backpacks, and polo shirts can be bought through its website, or two exclusive flagship stores in Sorakhutte and Thamel Chok. “After the rebrand, we slowly made a digital platform, marketed online, and worked with a delivery company to get items directly to buyers,” says Acharya. “We have no brokers or middlemen to keep prices low for the consumer.” DOLPO is a family business with Acharya’s mother and sister also involved, and nephew Nishant Ammai driving digital sales. Acharya points out that there is a lot of business opportunity in Nepal, as there are too many low-quality products being sold at too high a price. &nbsp;“The market is begging for an auto-correction,” he says. For Nepal’s pessimistic youth who are fleeing the country, Acharya urges patience: “The younger generation wants shortcuts. The mindset is to set up a venture and in three years they will be set for life. But this is not how success works.” “Choose a field, put in ten years of effort, really learn about it, and then you will see the vast possibility present in Nepal,” he continues.&nbsp; Last month, the DOLPO logo was seen on the jerseys of the Biratnagar Kings in NPL 2. The company made hats, jackets, and jerseys for star-studded cricket players including Lokesh Bam, Sandeep Lamichhane, Faf Du Plessis, and Martin Guptill. The Kings finished second in the group, and although Acharya is a football fan, he is happy to contribute to the rise of cricket in Nepal. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Proud to wear DOLPO

Only a handful of people who witnessed the 1934 megaquake as children are still alive. And the memories of 2015 are fading fast.&nbsp;
We were shaken, but have not stirred into action. We have not even started preparing to be prepared for the inevitable, for it is not a question of ‘if’ but ‘when’.&nbsp;
Thursday 15 January was National Earthquake Safety Day commemorating the 1934 disaster that killed 10,000 people in Kathmandu Valley at a time when its population was barely 100,000.
Nepal is in an active seismic zone, and a really big one is overdue in the seismic gap in western Nepal where there has not been a megaquake for 500 years. The 7.8M quake in 2015 did not completely release the tectonic stress below Central Nepal.
An 8M+ earthquake epicentred in western Nepal will be even more violent than the 2015 one in Kathmandu and will be powerful enough to cause destruction across northern India as well.&nbsp;
We Nepalis are resilient, but we are also complacent and fatalistic. How else does one explain the unsafe and unplanned building construction in Kathmandu, Pokhara and other towns despite frequent reminders of what quakes can do?&nbsp;
Most designs are ad hoc and follow no engineering logic. Reinforced Cement Concrete (RCC) is now widespread across the country since such structures mostly withstood the 2015 event. But structural engineers say most concrete buildings are substandard, and can be death traps. Also, the country lacks equipment and training for search and rescue in cement houses.&nbsp;
FIRE HAZARD
If an earthquake struck Kathmandu on a windy winter evening, there is the added risk of fires from gas cylinders in collapsed buildings spreading across the densely packed city core. Fire trucks will not be able to reach those areas because the streets will be blocked.
Seismic risk is now amplified by climate breakdown. Nepal now needs to factor in the co-hazard of massive avalanches and Glacial Lake Outburst Floods (GLOFs) triggered by future earthquakes. There are 41 potentially dangerous glacial lakes in the region, and 27 of them are in Tibet feeding rivers that flow into Nepal. A megaquake there could cause multiple simultaneous GLOFs.&nbsp;
If the 2015 earthquake had not happened on a Saturday, tens of thousands of children could have been killed in the 7,000 schools that were flattened. More than 2,500 government buildings came down, and would have killed and trapped many if it had not been a weekend.
Schools and health facilities retrofitted before the disaster were unscathed, and served as shelters for survivors. Chhatrapati Free Clinic (CFC) was reinforced three years before the earthquake for Rs5.2 million, and with support from National Society of Earthquake Technology (NSET), 800 community members were trained in search and rescue.
Bhuwaneswori Secondary School in Bhaktapur and Bal Bikas Secondary School in Kathmandu both survived 2015 because they had been retrofitted. Singha Darbar, the Supreme Court and the Department of Roads buildings were also made seismic resistant after 2015 quake, but the arson attacks on 9 September gutted them.
While many private residential homes built after 2015 continue to flout building codes, municipalities are now stricter. New schools and colleges, hospitals and high rises now have to meet stringent requirements for seismic resistance.
Nepal is a hotspot for many types of disasters — earthquakes, floods, droughts, glacial outbursts, wildfires. These are not ‘natural’ disasters, they are human induced. Earthquakes do not kill people, poorly-built buildings do. Climate breakdown is anthropogenic.&nbsp;
Waiting for a disaster to strike means we have waited too long. Search and rescue readiness are well and good, but much more important is preparedness — seismic resistance structures especially of public buildings, strict zoning to establish open spaces, pre-positioning supplies and simulated drills.
We do not know how much time we have before the next one. But it is not too late to start preparing. &nbsp;
Sonia Awale

multilateralism