Sabnam Lama: “We Don’t Want Loans; We Demand Unconditional Grants That Do Not Create Debt”

Waseem Ahmad Siddiqui: There has been a very important call from Nepal recently. A representative of Nepal's delegation said that COP31 cannot end without the mountain agenda being made a priority. Speaking to the media on the ground, Sagar Dhakal, a Member of Parliament, said the country had lost roughly 10,000 people in the space of 10 minutes following a glacier collapse. The scale of the disaster, he said, was unprecedented in the country, with 10% of its GDP wiped out.

To discuss this further, we are joined by two guests. Sabnam Lama is a young Indigenous woman from the Tamang Nation in Nepal. She is an intersectional feminist researcher and community organizer working at the intersection of climate justice, Indigenous land rights, youth participation, migration, and just transition.

And we also have Soumya Dutta, whom we have already interviewed twice, including just after the devastating floods in Nepal. Hello! He is a climate activist and co-coordinator of South Asian People's Action on Climate Crisis.

Sabnam, let's begin with you. When it comes to the people living in these challenging and almost inhumane conditions in Nepal, what is the situation on the ground, and what are their demands? This is particularly important in light of Nepal's call to prioritize the mountain agenda, as I mentioned earlier.

Sabnam Lama: First of all, thank you so much for having me. I would like to begin by expressing my full support for and agreement with our Member of Parliament, Sagar Dhakal, and his call. I think it's very important and, in fact, a separate mountain agenda should be a top priority for COP31. Although it's still under discussion and has been delayed, I think COP31 should not end without a separate mountain agenda or a very strong decision on it.

That's what I'm expecting, especially as this is also my first time at COP31.

And regarding the statistics that have been given, I think the figure was 10% of GDP. That's huge. But I think we should also humanize these statistics and go beyond physical loss and damage. This is something my group and I have been raising, especially as discussions around loss and damage have intensified, particularly concerning the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage (FRLD). We have also welcomed the positive response to mobilizing the fund for Nepal.

But these concerns go beyond physical losses. Reducing what we are experiencing to 10% of GDP is very reductive. Especially for Indigenous communities, we have to consider what people feel they have lost and what they will never be able to regain. Even community relationships, the knowledge and languages that may no longer be passed down through generations, important sacred community sites, and the gumbas, or Buddhist monasteries, in our areas—these are things that simply cannot be counted in numbers.

And there is a lot of fear that the conversation around loss and damage has been reduced to just lives and infrastructure. So I think that's a very important point I want to share.

Another issue is financing. Initially, there was a lot of concern that the World Bank might offer us loans. It said it was ready to provide loans, but we don't want loans. We want unconditional, debt-free grants.

So that's the situation in terms of climate finance and global climate diplomacy.

On the ground, as you said, the situation in the affected areas is very dire. For example, there are holding centers in Kathmandu where my friends, youth groups, and I have been spending almost all our time helping community members who have been brought to Kathmandu from the affected areas.

There are about four holding centers in Kathmandu. Although we've been using the term "holding centers," they are actually just shelters that community members have made available. For example, some are monasteries, while others are buildings offered by community members for survivors to stay in.

These are not government-established or government-assigned holding centers.

Even two months after the disaster, more than 500 people, especially elders, children, young people, and mothers, are still staying in these shelters. Many of them have not seen a single government official visit.

Even when some officials have visited and collected data, God knows who they are. We don't know which government department they represent. They just come, collect information, and leave. There's no follow-up, nothing. And we don't know where the data they've collected is going either.

Everything from food and sanitation to menstrual hygiene and healthcare is a concern. Some survivors are also suffering from various illnesses. Their food, shelter, water, and even their specific well-being needs are all being taken care of by young people, youth-led networks, volunteers, my friends, my brothers, and other community members.

So we feel that the state, the government, is completely absent. It's simply not there.

One positive development is that we were able to meet with the Parliamentary Committee on Climate Justice, which I think is a great initiative Nepal established after the floods.

We met with them as the People's Movement for Climate Justice, another network we're part of. They told us they had received many concerns about the holding centers and claimed to have visited them multiple times.

But our committee members, the survivors, and the volunteers who have been there 24/7 don't know anything about these visits. Even if someone supposedly from the government has visited, they don't know who that person actually was, what their purpose was, or what happened to the information they collected.

On the day we met with the parliamentary committee, they told us they would be visiting the holding centers the following day.

So that's the situation. There is no meaningful state presence, and nothing is happening.

The children are particularly uncertain about their futures. Nepal is going through two major holiday festival seasons, but what happens after the festivals?

Will the children return to their schools in villages where conditions are no longer livable? Will they enroll in new schools? Will the government arrange alternative schooling?

These are very serious concerns, and people are really frightened about rehabilitation and relocation.

They're asking, "Where will we go?"

Some young people are saying, "We don't want to go back. We can't even set foot on the mud and the land that has been destroyed or washed away."

But our elders are deeply attached to their villages and their land. They're saying, "No matter what happens, I will go back to my village. I want to stay there. I want to die there."

And another very, very important issue is the Prime Minister's Relief Fund, the official government bank account established to receive donations. So far, it has collected 18.7 billion in funds.

Immediately after the disaster, the government encouraged everyone to donate exclusively through this account. They established a one-door policy for donations.

Many communities, including Muslim and Dalit communities, as well as numerous civil society organizations, donated money and charitable funds to this account.

But the funds have not been mobilized.

Even immediate rescue operations, such as deploying helicopters and heavy equipment, were not adequately carried out.

And even now, the survivors staying in the holding centers have received nothing.

That's why we're running a right-to-information campaign, demanding to know where this money has gone.

What happened to the fund? Where is the money? We're talking about 18.7 billion.

W.A.S.: Soumya, Nepal is responsible for less than 0.1% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Could you talk about the disproportionate impact of climate change on the people of Nepal, particularly Indigenous communities?

Soumya Dutta: You see, this is not something that has just begun. These events have been happening for years. If you go back 13 years, to 2013, there was a massive disaster.

The impact extended across multiple countries. This was a disaster clearly driven by climate change because the monsoon traveled almost 1,500 kilometers in just two days. This was unprecedented. Southern Nepal, western Nepal, southwestern Uttarakhand in India, and parts of southern Tibet were devastated.

If you look at Pakistan in 2022, one-third of the country was underwater because of unprecedented, extremely heavy rainfall. These are all examples of extreme weather events. India is a huge country, and these impacts are occurring multiple times every year.

Given what climate science tells us—and I am a scientist, so I also do the calculations—and given the current state of the climate, there will be no relief for the next 50, 60, or 70 years. These impacts will continue to intensify.

What we need, first of all, as you said, is an immediate response. But responding to disasters is never enough. We can continue addressing loss and damage, and we can continue investing in adaptation, but unless emissions are reduced, there will be no relief. Adaptation needs will increase astronomically, and so will the need for loss and damage funding.

Why are mountain communities facing even greater damage? When we talk about 1.5°C or 2°C of warming, we are talking about the global average. In the Himalayas, temperatures are rising much faster because of elevation-dependent amplification. The higher the altitude, the faster the rate of warming. There is also the effect of latitude-dependent amplification.

In the Himalayas, the rate of temperature increase is more than 1.6 times the global average.

And it is not just the disaster in Bhotekoshi, Nepal, on August 26. Across the Himalayas, the Indian Space Research Organisation has been monitoring glacial lakes through satellites for the past 30 years. There are more than 3,000 glacial lakes that could potentially burst. Of these, 863 are considered dangerous, and 197 are in an extremely dangerous condition.

These lakes could burst at any moment, and the risks will continue to increase.

I believe we need clear action on three fronts, not just one. We cannot focus solely on climate finance. Finance is essential, but unless developed countries and major emitters reduce their emissions, it will never be enough.

First, we need immediate and rapid emissions reductions.

Second, we need existing climate finance commitments to be fulfilled. These commitments go back to COP16 in Cancún, which I also attended. That was the COP where the Green Climate Fund was established.

Commitments were made at that time, but if you compare their value with today's prices, they are worth less than half as much. And even that money is not being delivered.

Developed countries have clearly abandoned their commitments. They have betrayed the cause. They are trying to protect themselves while leaving poorer countries behind.

At the same time, there are enormous injustices in the global financial system, including harmful tax laws and tax havens that allow money to flow from poorer countries to wealthier ones. Look at Amsterdam, for example. It receives substantial financial flows from developing countries because of its tax regulations.

On the one hand, money is being siphoned away from poorer countries. On the other hand, even the minimum climate finance commitments are not being fulfilled.

We should also remember that climate finance was originally supposed to be provided primarily through grants. That is not what is happening today. Instead, much of the financing is provided through loans, increasing the debt burden of poorer countries.

So we need action on three fronts: first, immediate and rapid emissions reductions; second, the fulfillment of existing commitments; and third, a reassessment of the current situation, followed by stronger action on emissions mitigation, climate finance, and technology transfer.

Developed countries have failed on all three fronts.

And one final point. I remember that at COP28 in Dubai, we had a mountain agenda. I participated in a meeting alongside Nepal's minister and other representatives, and I spoke at that meeting.

There was a strong push for the mountain agenda at the Dubai COP, but ultimately, it went nowhere. Nothing concrete materialized.

At every COP, we see new proposals being introduced, but they are not implemented. Then another proposal comes along, and that too fails to materialize.

Instead of being a Conference of the Parties, it has become a circus of parties.

What we really need is action. We have had enough dialogue and discussions about consensus. Yes, consensus is important, but even more important is taking action on the agreements that have already been reached.

We need to move beyond words and start implementing what has already been agreed upon.

Thank you.

W.A.S.: My last question is for Sabnam. This year, we are in Antalya, Turkey. What do you expect to happen this time? As Soumya has also mentioned, we need a roadmap. Will the people of Nepal and Tibet finally get justice? There have been 31 climate summits, and many people say that no meaningful agreements have been reached and that people are dissatisfied. What would you say to that?

S.L.: First of all, I would like to humbly and frankly share that this is my first time attending COP31. As a young person, I'm also navigating the landscape of climate governance for the first time. So I think it's important to remind all our listeners, especially young people, that we don't have to have everything figured out. What matters is that we are here and that we are listening.

Likewise, my expectations and goals are to learn, to try to understand the dynamics, and to bring values such as justice and feminism into the negotiations. There are a lot of conversations happening around these issues.

But I think, as Soumya has strongly emphasized, what we really need is action. Even if something new emerges from this COP, perhaps another Antalya work plan or something similar, I don't know. Every COP seems to introduce something new, right? So perhaps we'll have another initiative named after Antalya or Turkey.

But I think concrete action is extremely important.

And the main thing is direct access.

Frankly, I agree with Soumya that this feels like a circus of parties. It's all about money. Who gets the money? Who gets what?

Even Nepal seems to be forgetting, or has become very detached from, its responsibility to deliver justice to its own communities. So I think there are many struggles for justice that need to take place at home as well.

It feels as though everything revolves around money, who gets how much, and what financial commitments are negotiated.

Even with something like the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage, at its extraordinary meeting, it was made clear that the money has simply been set aside. That doesn't necessarily mean anything in practice. It's basically saying, "Here's the money. We might give it to you, or we might not."

But accessing these agreements and commitments involves extensive bureaucratic procedures. Financial institutions, including multilateral development banks, will be involved, along with many other intermediaries.

And in the end, communities may receive nothing at all.

Perhaps an organization or an NGO representing the survivors will receive the money, but the communities themselves may not have direct access to it.

So many things might happen, and many things might not happen.

But what is really important, at the heart of all this, is how climate finance is distributed and how these funding mechanisms can directly reach Indigenous peoples, frontline communities, and marginalized communities.

W.A.S.: Sabnam Lama, a young Indigenous woman from the Tamang community, and Soumya Dutta, climate activist and co-coordinator of South Asian People's Action on Climate Crisis. Thank you both so much.

_{Who is Sabnam Lama? Sabnam Lama is a climate activist, researcher, and community organizer from Nepal’s Indigenous Tamang community. Her work focuses on intersectional feminism, climate justice, Indigenous peoples’ rights, migration, and just transition.}

_{Who is Soumya Dutta? Soumya Dutta is an Indian climate activist, researcher, and scientist. He is the co-coordinator of South Asian People's Action on Climate Crisis (SAPACC). His work focuses on climate justice, phasing out fossil fuels, climate finance, and the impacts of the climate crisis on vulnerable communities in South Asia.}