Himalayan Disasters Highlight Urgent Need for Regional Cooperation
NEW DELHI: The mighty Himalayas stretch across borders, and natural disasters respect no boundaries. Recent flooding near the Nepal-Tibet border starting on August 26 has underscored this reality. A glacier and rock collapse triggered a powerful flow of water, mud, and debris that swept through the Bhotekoshi and Trishuli river systems, devastating communities, infrastructure, and energy projects along the way.
By early September, tragedy struck as reports emerged of over 1,300 lives lost across Nepal and Tibet, with many more missing. The flooding trapped workers in hydropower tunnels and severely damaged the Gyirong border crossing, complicating trade and connectivity.
In the wake of such destruction, Nepal’s immediate focus is on rescue efforts and rebuilding. However, the bigger question that looms is how prepared the region was for this disaster. What warning systems were in place? Who had critical information, and how swiftly could this be communicated? Addressing these questions requires collaboration beyond Nepal’s borders.
India, which shares river systems that flow from Nepal, must also consider these concerns. The Trishuli river feeds into the Narayani and enters India as the Gandak, meaning disasters in the mountains can have far-reaching effects downstream. Northern India has faced similar challenges with natural calamities in Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, and Sikkim. The recurring pattern of washed-away roads and collapsing infrastructure calls into question whether current designs are suitable for the increasingly severe weather conditions predicted for the region.
This is where discussions within BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) regarding disaster risk reduction become crucial. As India prepares to assume the chairmanship in 2026, disaster resilience has been placed on the agenda, sparking conversations about early warning systems and resilient infrastructure. However, the challenges faced in the Himalayas extend beyond the borders of BRICS.
Nepal and Bhutan are not members of BRICS, but they are significantly exposed to these risks. This disparity shouldn’t hinder collective action. India has the opportunity to foster cooperation beyond membership frameworks.
The recent disaster reveals a series of challenges faced by Nepal’s authorities—from landslides to damaged monitoring stations and ongoing rescue operations. The pace at which the disaster developed outstripped the capacity of emergency response teams. Effective early warning involves more than just detection; it requires timely and actionable information reaching those in need—whether they be local officials, police, or engineers.
While BRICS countries have access to advanced technologies, including satellites and disaster management tools, the real challenge lies in ensuring that critical information flows quickly across institutional and national lines. Instead of establishing a new organization, a more feasible approach could be a cooperative disaster information network among India, China, Nepal, and Bhutan. Such a network could facilitate the sharing of rainfall data, monitoring of glacial lakes, and the issuance of coordinated alerts during extreme weather events.
Political hurdles undoubtedly exist, particularly regarding data sharing with China. However, not all information needs to be shared in real-time for security reasons. Public hazard information can remain accessible while sensitive details are kept within restricted channels. During emergencies, the priority is ensuring that vital information reaches those who need it most.
Bhutan faces similar risks, containing numerous glacial lakes that could potentially burst, threatening communities below. Past disasters, like the 1994 Luggye Tsho incident, have shown the devastation that can occur. Bhutan has made strides in monitoring and early-warning systems, but as a smaller nation, it cannot shoulder the risks alone.
India’s connection to Bhutan is significant; shared rivers and infrastructure mean that disasters in Bhutan can have direct repercussions for India. Therefore, fostering a cooperative stance with both Nepal and Bhutan, despite their non-BRICS status, is crucial.
When discussing climate diplomacy, the focus often remains on broader targets. However, in the Himalayas, climate change raises immediate questions about infrastructure resilience and emergency preparedness. During its BRICS chairmanship, India has a unique opportunity to advance discussions beyond mere declarations, aiming for actionable plans that can be practically tested.
Initiating a collaborative pilot project among India, China, Nepal, and Bhutan could create a blueprint for effective disaster response, featuring shared monitoring and agreed-upon protocols for information exchange. Success should be assessed based on whether warnings reached vulnerable communities and whether information flowed smoothly across borders during crises.
The Himalayas will continue to change, sometimes slowly and sometimes abruptly. While countries may not be able to prevent all disasters, they can certainly work towards sharing the knowledge they possess. For India, promoting a robust warning system in neighboring countries is not just an act of goodwill; it’s in its own best interests. Enhanced cooperation around disaster risk can provide security for all involved, ultimately leading to a safer and more resilient future in the region.
