The greatest injustice of the 21st century
The greatest injustice of our time is this: the poor countries, which have contributed the least to climate change due to their low energy consumption, are the hardest hit. And the rich industrialised nations, with their high energy consumption, have caused climate change and are – at least so far – getting off relatively lightly.
This global injustice has just been tragically confirmed by the glacier disaster in the Himalayas. Nepal, with over 1,000 dead, 4,000 missing and thousands injured so far, is one of the poorest countries in the world, yet has been brutally affected and devastated by the glacier melt brought about by climate change. This global injustice is unsustainable in the long term.
The flash flood in the Himalayas was not a ‘normal’ disaster, but the result of changes to the natural environment. These changes have been caused by the large and wealthy industrialised nations, including Germany. But China, India and the USA – the three largest emitters of greenhouse gases – are also among those responsible. Nepal is now demanding compensation from them. This is a courageous, timely and just demand made by a small country against the ‘big players’ – at last!
A ‘Himalayan tsunami’
Nepal’s Foreign Minister, Shisir Khanal, described the disaster in his country as a ‘Himalayan tsunami’. It is unprecedented in human history. The demand is only logical. It is logical that poor Nepal should ask the richer and larger countries to foot the bill. Those who cause the damage must also pay. That is a principle of the market economy.
The Foreign Minister said: “If our glaciers in the Himalayas disappear, the water security of over two billion people in South Asia will be compromised.” The glaciers are natural water reservoirs, whose meltwater feeds Asia’s ten largest rivers, such as the Indus, the Ganges and the Brahmaputra.
The *Süddeutsche Zeitung* writes on this: “Nepal’s announcement that it intends to seek recourse against other states is not a desperate act in the face of disaster – quite the contrary. In July last year, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague laid out precisely this course of action in a remarkable legal opinion.”
Lawyer Roda Verheyen, an experienced climate lawyer, told the *Süddeutsche Zeitung*: “Nepal could take action before the ICJ against states that have submitted to its jurisdiction.” The list comprises no fewer than 75 states. The US and China are not among them, but it does include Germany, Japan, India, Pakistan, Italy, Spain, France and the UK.
In 2025, the ICJ ruled that its member states have “legally binding duties of care” under international treaties such as the Paris Climate Agreement to reduce their emissions. This is also required by “customary international law”. This clearly supports Nepal’s claim for damages.
The resistance of small countries such as Nepal against the perpetrators of climate change also offers hope in the global struggle for greater climate protection. The Süddeutsche Zeitung: “Hats off to this courage” – (SZ, 1 September 2026).
