KATHMANDU, Sept 4: Prime Minister Balendra Shah on Wednesday addressed the House of Representatives, responding to questions about the search for people still unaccounted for after the devastating Bhotekoshi flood in Rasuwa and the rescue of those trapped inside hydropower project tunnels.
The prime minister’s remarks sought to explain the difficulties faced by the government in conducting rescue operations. Yet, when compared with complaints from victims at the disaster site and questions raised by families, significant gaps remain between the government’s claims and the reality experienced by those affected.
Shah said the main obstacle to tunnel rescues was not the lack of manpower but the massive volume of mud, silt, and debris that entered the tunnels with the flood. He explained that unlike a conventional landslide blockage, the absence of safe space for rescue workers and excavators created extraordinary challenges.
While the government’s explanation highlights technical difficulties, victims’ families have raised broader concerns: how prepared the state was for rescue, how quickly mechanisms were mobilized after receiving information, and whether available resources were fully utilized.
Bhotekoshi disaster raises questions over speed and scale of re...
Shah claimed that local residents were alerted about half an hour before the flood and that warnings were disseminated through 1.1 million SMS messages and telephone calls. Security personnel were also deployed to alert residents, some of whom went missing themselves.
But families continue to ask: if warnings were widely disseminated, why did many not receive them in time? Why were rescue operations delayed, and why were missing relatives not searched for immediately? The government has yet to provide clear answers.
Sending warnings and ensuring they are effectively received are not the same. The figure of 1.1 million SMS messages may demonstrate activation of the warning system, but it does not prove that every person at risk was reached or able to act. What matters is not how many warnings were sent, but how many lives they saved.
Shah also said technical teams from China and India conducted aerial reconnaissance from the first and second days, but helicopters could not immediately land or safely transport equipment and personnel. While this points to geographical and technical difficulties, residents question why rescue operations could not advance despite terrain challenges long familiar to those living in the area.
The incident of workers trapped inside hydropower tunnels raises deeper questions about disaster preparedness. What emergency rescue plans, alternative exits, communication systems, equipment, and drills were in place for such projects? Is it sufficient to conclude only after the disaster that tunnel rescues present extraordinary challenges?
Shah pledged that the government would take responsibility for searching for the missing, treating the injured, and providing temporary and long-term rehabilitation to displaced families, stressing that “no one will be left behind.”
That commitment offers reassurance, but for families waiting to find loved ones or identify bodies, the situation remains unbearable. Government claims will ultimately be judged by results, not announcements.
On body identification, Shah said those not immediately identified had been preserved with DNA and other scientific evidence and would be handed over once identities are confirmed. For grieving families, transparent information about where and how bodies are managed is as important as scientific preservation.
The government has also claimed coordination among federal, provincial, and local authorities from the outset. But during a disaster, what matters is not coordination on paper but who assumed responsibility on the ground, how quickly decisions were made, and what difference those decisions made to rescue and relief.
Technical and administrative difficulties may have been real, but they do not fully answer questions about early warnings, immediate rescue, preparedness, resource mobilization, and coordination.
The Bhotekoshi flood has revealed more than the destructive force of a river. It has tested the state’s disaster preparedness and rescue capacity. The debate now should not be about whether the government or victims are “right,” but about narrowing the gap between official claims and victims’ reality—and ensuring the state responds to their suffering with action.
