Nepal and Bhutan are again seeking a dedicated COP31 agenda item, "1.5°C Warming in Mountains." Their proposal calls for a scientific assessment, an annual high-level dialogue and a process towards a UNFCCC Mountain Work Programme. Parties will decide whether to include it at COP31, the 31st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, in Antalya, Türkiye, from 9 to 20 November 2026. The supplementary provisional agenda issued on 28 October lists Kyrgyzstan's proposal to institutionalise an annual mountain dialogue under the subsidiary bodies. Nepal and Bhutan submitted their proposal on 30 October, two days later; it is not listed in that earlier addendum, and its consideration remains undecided.

Make the mountain case global: The case extends beyond the Himalaya. Mountain regions across the Andes, Alps, Central Asia and Africa face distinct but connected risks to glaciers, ecosystems and communities. Many rivers begin in mountains and supply water for drinking, farming and hydropower downstream; changes in snow, ice and rainfall can affect those supplies. A global agenda must reflect regional differences and attract support beyond South Asia.

COP30 exposed the divide. Bhutan and Peru backed an annual dialogue. The Mountain Group, Georgia and Nepal supported a separate COP item; Switzerland, Japan and Chile opposed it. Switzerland and Japan favoured existing workstreams, while Chile supported the dialogue but not a separate item. The European Union warned that an annual dialogue could prompt similar calls from other ecosystems. COP30 mandated a dialogue but left the dedicated proposal unresolved.

Show what a new mandate adds-and costs: Kyrgyzstan's proposal would make the mountain dialogue a standing item under the subsidiary bodies. Nepal and Bhutan seek a broader process, including an assessment, high-level dialogue at COP sessions and work towards a Mountain Work Programme. Nepal must show what this process adds to existing work.

The published proposal gives no cost estimate or funding source for its assessment, annual dialogue or work programme. Draft Rule 15, which the COP applies, requires the Secretariat to report administrative and budgetary implications of substantive agenda items. COP30's mountain dialogue was subject to available financial resources. Without a financing plan, the proposal risks becoming an unfunded mandate.

The June 2026 UNFCCC dialogue in Bonn brought together 121 participants to discuss mountain risks, climate plans, support needs and future engagement. The report records differing views on annual engagement and duplication; it did not establish the proposed work programme. Nepal should use the findings to specify added value: improved monitoring, early-warning systems, local adaptation support and clearer routes to finance.

Turn diplomatic activity into explicit support: Nepal's consultations with Switzerland included climate change and multilateral cooperation; its foreign minister met Japan's counterpart in September. Public readouts do not record a request for their support. The Geneva mission's Bern "Mountains and Peoples" event was presented as a friendship and cultural programme. Public records reviewed do not document targeted outreach to Chile. Nepal should clarify whether it has approached these countries since COP30, what concerns they raised and how it responded.

A COP31 side event scheduled for 9 November on adaptation finance, organised by Nepal, Bhutan, Kyrgyzstan, ICIMOD and ZOI Environment Network, includes speakers from Pakistan, Andorra and regional organisations. Its value depends on whether it yields negotiating support, regional evidence and finance work. Participation is not endorsement.

To build support for the agenda request and prepare for negotiations on an outcome, Nepal and Bhutan should circulate draft decision text, costed options and explicit requests for co-sponsors before negotiations begin in Antalya.

The proposed Himalayan Climate Resilience Mechanism with India and China offers a parallel test of Nepal's regional diplomacy. Announced by Prime Minister Balendra Shah at the United Nations in September, it had not yet advanced to a formal proposal to either neighbour by 30 October. COP support, too, will depend on turning announcements into concrete commitments.

Apply climate justice at home: The Sagarmatha Call for Action linked mountain protection with climate justice. Nepal's small share of global greenhouse-gas emissions strengthens its international claim. But low national emissions do not remove domestic responsibility. Kathmandu's traffic, brick kilns and waste burning contribute to local air pollution and also have greenhouse-gas impacts, though the two problems are distinct. I examined these responsibilities in my recent article in The Himalayan Times.

Earlier, my reporting on the Bhotekoshi disaster in The Himalayan Times raised questions about what authorities knew and did. My reporting on Devighat's elderly residents for Annapurna Post documented their ordeal and questions about warning, evacuation, rescue and aftercare. Older residents and schoolchildren were among those killed or missing. The government's scientific investigation into the flood's physical trigger and possible climate links remains ongoing. Nepal must pursue climate justice abroad while holding authorities accountable at home.

That standard should guide Nepal's domestic mountain strategy. Plans need budgets, local monitoring, accessible warnings and public reporting on whether adaptation reaches women, Indigenous peoples, children, older people and persons with disabilities. The Sagarmatha call will carry weight when communities see it reflected in decisions, not only declarations.

On 22 October, the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage's Board decided to grant Nepal US$20 million from the US$21.6 million available under its Barbados Implementation Modality, following Nepal's 31 August request. Nepal still needs to submit a project proposal through its national focal point. The grant is modest beside the government's preliminary US$4.7–4.75 billion recovery and reconstruction estimate. The test is whether funds reach communities promptly.

Measure success in results: Parties will judge the proposal by whether it offers a clear mandate, practical links to finance and implementation, and support beyond its two sponsors. Parties should set measurable outputs, name responsible bodies, agree timelines and costs, and require reporting on whether mountain communities gain better monitoring, timely warnings and accessible adaptation finance over time. Without that, COP31 may recognise mountain risks again without establishing a dedicated process.

Ghale is a former member of WHO's Governance Team in Geneva, with interests in global health, policy and diplomacy.