STRENGTHENING INTEGRATION: BIMSTEC as a Regional Pivot in Disaster Management

By Amasha Fernando

Disaster Management and Mitigation have become an essential concern within the littoral states of the Bay of Bengal, as many states face a rapid increase in climate catastrophes in the region. From powerful cyclones such as Fani (2019) and Fengal (2024) to the 7.7 magnitude earthquake in March 2025, which resulted in the loss of more than 3000 lives up to date in Myanmar, the region has faced alarming natural disasters, significantly, in the post-COVID-19 era since 2020. This has not only challenged the ecological balance of the region but also paved the way for massive damage to the regular lives of people.

These adversities, which escalate day by day, are a prominent concern addressed at national and regional levels within organizations such as ASEAN, BIMSTEC, and international coalitions like the G20. However, the frequency of the occurrence of natural hazards and their rising intensities calls for the need for practical and sustainable solutions at the national, regional, and international level.

In this context, the role of BIMSTEC in disaster management has increased considerably, as the changes in natural weather systems, particularly in the Bay of Bengal, create a significantly adverse impact on economic growth within the region. This article aims to discuss the latest developments of the climate catastrophes while exploring the effectiveness of current disaster mitigation mechanisms and offering suggestions to enhance the quality of assistance and humanitarian aid provided.

State of Nature Hazards within the Bay of Bengal littorals

The Bay of Bengal region, comprising Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, has experienced multiple climate-related disasters in recent years, including cyclones, earthquakes, floods, and landslides. Renowned as the ‘Kalapani’ or the Black turbulent waters (Bose, 2023), the Bay of Bengal region faces at least 5 to 6 cyclones per year, while annual floods in states such as Bangladesh and India affect millions of lives. These directly result in deaths, infrastructure damage, and displacement while affecting livelihoods and economic functions of the region on a broad scale. According to National Cyclone Risk Mitigation Project (NCRMP) reports, 7, 516 km of India and 716 km of Bangladesh are exposed to nearly 10% of the world’s tropical cyclones. (Dhruba, 2023)

In comparison with the West, these cyclones possess unique characteristics and effects of wind speeds and rough seas, mainly affecting the weather conditions of states such as India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. An often-highlighted event among these is the Indian Ocean Tsunami, which occurred in 2004, resulting in over 30,000 fatalities, along with a US$1.5 billion economic loss in Sri Lanka alone, marking the most devastating natural disaster the island nation has faced to date. Simultaneously, over 10, 000 lives were lost within India due to this, followed by deaths in Myanmar and Thailand, and economies in all these states were affected as well, with the damage caused to agrarian lands. (Bose, 2023)

Many cyclones, such as Komen (2015), Roanu (2016), Amphan (2020), and Fengal (2024), which occurred during the past few years, affected communities largely in Myanmar and Bangladesh, in the following years marking a series of cyclones in between. These resulted in floods, rough seas, and torrential downpours, which worsen situations in the nations in the Bay of Bengal. As a result, floods become a frequent occurrence in these nations annually. According to government reports, floods in Kathmandu, Nepal, in September 2024 have killed more than 60 people, while 66 have gone missing. (OCHA, 2019) Moreover, scientists predict that Bangladesh, India, and China will be among the top 10 nations with the highest risks of facing the highest rainfall changes by 2100. (OCHA, 2024)

The latest alarming disaster occurred in March 2025 with the 6.4 and 7.7 magnitude earthquakes, which devastated Myanmar, affecting nearly 9 million people who belong to 58 townships. The disaster resulted in nearly 3, 600 deaths, while 4, 800 people are reported to have suffered injuries. (UNICEF, 2025) Severe infrastructure damage, which includes 2, 311 schools and 193 healthcare facilities, has been reported, while vulnerable groups such as women and children face shortages of medication and other essential items.

In addition, states in the Bay of Bengal are prone to the novel developments of climate change, such as rising sea levels, extreme heatwaves, and loss of land, with coastal erosion. World Heritage sites such as the Sundarbans Mangrove Forest, the Sinharaja tropical rainforest, and their ecosystems are significantly affected by such conditions, worsening the ecological balance within the region. According to World Bank reports in 2000, the rise of sea levels by one metre tends to destroy the whole Sundarbans region. (Jabir et al., 2021) Meanwhile, island nations in the Indian Ocean, such as the Maldives, are at risk of being completely submerged by the rising ocean levels.

Climate Actions Taken as a Regional Hub

The 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami was the primary catalyst that sparked discussions on disaster management within the region at the BIMSTEC level, shifting the irregular patterns of disaster mitigation from occasional aid provision for disasters such as cyclones. Following the 1994 Oslo guidelines on “The Use of Foreign Military and Civil Defence Assets in Disaster Relief”, Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) was introduced to the region, creating action plans at state and BIMTEC levels. The evolution of participation in disaster management comprises several stages. (Bose, 2023) They can be identified as follows. 1. Passive Phase (1997-2005) 2. Provisionally Responsive Phase (2005-2006) 3. Phase of Dormancy (2007-2014) 4. Proactive Phase (2015 to the present)

The passive phase consisted of the initial level agreements within the organization, where the groundwork for natural disaster mitigation and management was introduced. However, disaster management within the region was not considered a prominent concern at that juncture until the Tsunami of 2004 became the wake-up call to cooperate in disaster management. In the aftermath of the Tsunami, ‘Environment and Disaster Management’ was considered a fundamental area of concern within the region through the introduction of many collaborative efforts, with other organizations such as the SAARC Meteorological Research Centre (SMRC) and the Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre (ADPC) were pivotal in creating institutional solutions in disaster response.

Mechanisms such as conducting workshops, knowledge sharing, emergency response and the establishment of early warning systems were done, with the aid of foreign nations and international bodies such as the United Nations. Creation of the BIMSTEC Centre on Weather and Climate Change was prominent in this regard, as it nurtured frameworks to sign agreements at bilateral and multilateral levels, creating room for discussions in the sectors of multinational cooperation in managing disasters. (Cook & Chen, 2021) Predominantly, India led these initiatives as a regional powerhouse, in creating relevant policy frameworks and responsible institutions.

However, with the absence of substantial financial cooperation within the region, BIMSTEC’s unity in disaster management was largely dormant from 2007-2014. (Bose, 2023) Disaster management was limited to emergencies and early warning mechanisms during this time, while documentation efforts such as approving a Memorandum of Association to establish a Centre of Weather and Climate Response were made in strengthening preventive measures. Reasons such as the impending change of chairmanship in the organization, the need to establish a permanent secretariat in Dhaka, and the change of India’s maritime cooperation doctrine, paving the way for a prolonged era of inaction.

The change of political leadership after the election of 2014 marked a positive change in the activities of BIMSTEC. The Modi government focused on fostering cooperation through multilateral collaborations, establishing India’s role as the “net security provider” in the region. (Cook & Chen, 2021) However, the significance of India within the BIMTEC as a regional power and an emerging world power has created points to ponder, as the power imbalance may create a situation where climate issues of small nations are rejected.

The unity of BIMSTEC nations was further strengthened with the introduction of India’s “Act East policy.” Disaster risk prevention policies, such as the Sendai Framework (2015-2030), aim to establish common information systems to track disasters within the region and exchange best practices. (Bose, 2023) Capacity building was a spotlight in discussions redefining the bounds of environmental governance and disaster response. Measures such as Disaster Management Exercises (DMXI), Field Training Exercises, and After-Action Reviews were introduced in this regard, finding creative ways to address the rapid changes of climate change. The first BIMSTEC DMXI exercise was held in India in 2017, while the initiative’s latest workshop involved five member states. (Cook & Chen, 2021)

Moreover, the importance of the Indian Ocean sea lanes was identified while discovering potential paths for integration in transportation in trade, and managing diverse security interests. While the strategic importance within the region increases daily with China’s presence in the Indian Ocean, with initiatives such as the BRI, BIMSTEC has a pivotal role in strengthening integration and capacities of disaster prevention measures.

When considering the present-day context, many measures, such as capacity-building initiatives and strengthening mechanisms, are followed within the organization. These were suggested through the joint declaration issued by BIMSTEC leaders who gathered at the 6th BIMSTEC summit on 4th April 2025. Collaborating with the Indian Ocean Rim Association and encouraging maritime transport cooperation within the littoral states further creates opportunities. Such collaboration in preventing natural hazards and common measures will address the economic losses and infrastructure damage while creating a secure environment for people, ensuring their safety and medication.

Future of Disaster Management within the Organization

The responsibility to prevent future disasters within the region is undoubtedly bestowed upon regional organizations such as BIMSTEC, as the solutions for these should be institutionalized and implemented sustainably and practically. While the organization has gained commendable progress in building a stable foundation for disaster management, growing intensities of natural hazards within the region demand immediate action while encouraging integration in collective disaster prevention methods.

Thereby, maintaining consistency in disaster prevention methods and maintaining coordination between disaster management centres within littoral states and authorities are crucial in efficient disaster management. India’s 2025 proposal to establish a BIMSTEC Centre for Excellence in Disaster Management Secretariat would be an active measure to create disaster readiness in the region. This centre would act as the central point of contact for managing disaster-related data, conducting risk assessments, and coordinating cross-border disaster response (Bhatt & Garge, 2023). In order to address the existing gaps in financial emergencies, the centre needs to have sufficient funding from a regional disaster relief fund and the authority to make its own decisions (Chaudhary, 2023).

Moreover, it is crucial to develop climate surveillance technologies and transboundary early warning systems. Initiatives like the BIMSTEC Centre for Weather and Climate (BCWC) offer an essential platform, but they need to be expanded and technologically improved in cooperation with regional and international partners like the United Nations, WMO, and ADPC (Cook & Chen, 2021; Bose, 2023). The European Meteoalarm system is an example of a real-time, shared warning protocol that BIMSTEC could use.

Measures should be followed to reach the grassroots of society in creating disaster awareness, bridging the gap between policy formulation, institutionalisation and practical implementation of disaster management methods. Frequent trends of climate catastrophes should be identified in preserving danger-prone environments such as the Sundarbans (Jabir et al., 2021) while ensuring an inclusive space for all nations. The importance of the Indian Ocean as a strategic hub should be rediscovered while promoting inter-organizational endeavours for disaster prevention.

Thus, it is crucial to strengthen regional cooperation through BIMSTEC because the Bay of Bengal region is becoming increasingly vulnerable to climate-related disasters. The growing frequency and severity of natural hazards—ranging from cyclones and floods to earthquakes—have not only exposed ecological fragility but also tested the social and economic resilience of millions. Even though the organization has advanced significantly since the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, its framework for disaster management still needs strong institutionalization, funding, and inclusivity to keep up with new threats.

BIMSTEC has the potential to become a key player in regional disaster governance through improved cooperation, scientific innovation, and people-centred policies. BIMSTEC can genuinely fortify the ties by integrating disaster preparedness into the larger framework of economic and humanitarian integration.

References

Bhatt, R., & Deepali Mohan Garge. (2023). Unifying in Crisis: An Exploratory Analysis of Organizational Structures for a Regional Disaster Framework in BIMSTEC. The Journal Institute of Public Enterprise, 46(1), 49–68. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375003509_Unifying_in_Crisis_An_Exploratory_Analysis_of_Organizational_Structures_for_a_Regional_Disaster_Framework_in_BIMSTEC/download

Bose, S. (2023, May 24). BIMSTEC and Disaster Management: Future Prospects for Regional Cooperation. Orfonline.org; OBSERVER RESEARCH FOUNDATION ( ORF ). https://www.orfonline.org/research/bimstec-and-disaster-management-future-prospects-for-regional-cooperation

Chaudhury, R. (2023, June). Disasters without borders: Strengthening BIMSTEC cooperation in humanitarian assistance. Orfonline.org; OBSERVER RESEARCH FOUNDATION (ORF). https://www.orfonline.org/research/disasters-without-borders-strengthening-bimstec-cooperation-in-humanitarian-assistance?amp

Cook, A. D. B., & Chen, C. (2021). Disaster Governance in the Asia-Pacific: Future Pathways to South and Southeast Asia (pp. 4–16). Nanyang Technological University, Singapore and S Rajaratnam School of International Studies. Death toll climbs as torrential rains pound Nepal - Nepal. (2024, September 30). Relief Web. https://reliefweb.int/report/nepal/death-toll-climbs-torrential-rains-pound-nepal

Dhruba, B. (2023). The Solar Influence on Tropical Cyclones Occurring over the Bay of Bengal and Arabian Sea. ECAS 2023, 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/ecas2023-15123

Jabir, A.-A., Hasan, G. M. J., & Anam, Md. M. (2021). Correlation between temperature, sea level rise and land loss: An assessment along the Sundarbans coast. Journal of King Saud University - Engineering Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksues.2021.07.012 Mahida, R. (2024). BIMSTEC: BAY OF BENGAL INITIATIVE FOR MULTI-SECTORAL TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC COOPERATION: SWOT ANALYSIS FROM INDIAN PERSPECTIVES. International Journal of Management, Public Policy and Research, 3(4), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.55829/ijmpr.v3i4.247 OCHA. (2019). Relief Web - Informing humanitarians worldwide. Relief Web. https://reliefweb.int/

UNICEF Myanmar Earthquake Flash Update No. 6 - 09 April 2025 - Myanmar. (2025, April 9). Relief Web. https://reliefweb.int/report/myanmar/unicef-myanmar-earthquake-flash-update-no-6-09-april-2025

SILENCE IN THE NAME OF DEMOCRACY: A GLIMPSE AT MYANMAR AND THE NOBEL PRIZE

‘Democracy is hard to love’ expressed Iris Marion Young in her seminal work on Inclusion and Democracy, in which she looks at social exclusion and attempts to understand justice and its relation to democracy, inclusion and identity politics. While the nature of democracy has been the inclusion of all people in a country within the decision making process, in keeping with the notion of inclusivity, questions have been raised at varied periods over the actual exclusion of minorities, with many examples dotting the planet. 

Myanmar was reborn in the democratic world following the ending of decades of military rule and the gradual return to a civilian administration was hailed in many quarters. Freedom fighter, democracy advocate and long time house-arrest detainee Aung San Suu Kyi, not only emerged into the political sphere once again but her party received a mandate to lead the country. 2015 marked her re-entry having already won the general election of 1990 which the military refused to recognize. With her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD) securing 392 of the 492 seats that were contested at the time, her victory was an almost unanimous message from the people of Myanmar that they wanted change, from a military run junta to a democracy. Yet their voices went unheeded.

The failure of the military to respect the verdict did not result in countries trying to enforce the result by bringing about regime change or even using force against Myanmar. Messages were issued and speeches made but the democratic rhetoric appears to have been in its infancy in comparison with what countries in the Arab world experienced in the last decade. There was to be no ‘Asian Spring’ in Myanmar. The people had to wait for nearly three decades to go by before they could see positive change and the election of the NLD leading to the establishment of a government in which Suu Kyi would be State Counsellor and Foreign Minister, owing to her being barred constitutionally from holding the highest office.

A retrospective glance at the last seven decades since Myanmar received independence on January 04th 1948 shows very little in terms of progress as a democratic nation. Whilst General Aung San is hailed as the chief architect for Burmese independence he never lived to see it dawn. The subsequent years of civilian and military rule did little to support the democratic movement within the country, which had its name changed from Burma in 1989 by the ruling military junta, and the renaming of the capital from Rangoon to Yangon.

The country though steeped in history, mainly through its Buddhist connections with many countries in South Asia, is today facing criticism, over its handling of a minority community - the Rohingya - which is surprisingly not widely heard. Amounting to roughly two million, both within and outside Myanmar, the Rohingya community, is facing ethnic cleansing, and is not one of one of 135 distinct ethnic groups that have been recognized by the authorities. Falling outside the eight major national ethnic races of Bamar, Chin, Kachin, Kayin, Kayah, Mon, Rakhine and Shan, the Rohingya continue to face attacks. Whilst 1978, 1991-1992, 2012 and 2015 are some occasions on which the community was tortured, killed, forced to flee their homes and lost their loved ones and belongings, the suffering doesn’t appear to subside, despite the people having lived in the country for centuries.

Internationally, Turkey, their nemesis Saudi Arabia, as well as their protégé, the Maldives, and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has now been joined by India in condemning the violence that is raging in the parts of Myanmar, but global attention is elsewhere. This is not a nuclearised country nor is it of critical importance to most. Babies who are being washed ashore are on the beaches of an unknown beach. Images of torture and violence are limited to certain media outlets and widely ignored by more mainstream western media. Hence the attitude adopted at present is not surprising. Having praised the democratic transition that took place and the replacement of the military with civilian administrators, the international community prefers to remain silent than criticize that which they praised just a few years ago.

Today that transition appears cosmetic as the new leadership though having undergone immense hardship during decades of military rule, fail to realize the oppressive nature of its own administration. The Minister of Defence, Lt Gen. Sein Win, was formerly the Chief of Staff of the Bureau of Air Defence of the Myanmar Army. His deputy Minister is another general while the Ministries of Home Affairs and Border Affairs also have generals occupying the highest seats. Attention has been continuously focused on Aung San Suu Kyi, though presidential powers are retained by the little known Htin Kyaw.

Hence it is the Nobel laureate who has received condemnation for her stoic silence on the issue of ethnic cleansing. Whilst calls have been made for the award to be rescinded and withdrawn, the Committee awarding the Nobel Peace Prize has not been known for having ever revoked a prize and it is not likely to make an exception in support of the Rohingya. The irony lies in the fact that the Nobel prizes are named after a man whose premature obituary in a French newspaper read, ‘Le Merchant de la mort est mort’ (the merchant of death is dead).

Alfred Nobel realized, at least at the last stages of his life that his discovery of nitroglycerin, which was more powerful than gunpowder, as well as his invention of dynamite in 1867, gelignite in 1875 and ballistite in 1887, among 355 other patents he had been issued internationally, all brought about destruction. Coming from a family which had produced armaments in the Crimean War, Nobel even lost a younger brother and four others in the preparation of nitroglycerin in 1864 in Stockholm, yet at the time of his death had established 90 armament factories.

Though advancements made by individuals in varied fields have been hailed and rewarded in history, in the spirit of encouraging such feats and nurturing the growth of greater interest in the specified sector, the Nobel Prizes for peace, chemistry, medicine, physics and literature, have drawn criticism especially in the category of peace. 

In 1973, Henry Kissinger and Vietnamese leader Le Duc Tho were awarded the prize for negotiating a ceasefire between North Vietnam and the United States, but Tho rejected it owing to ongoing hostilities. Another American was Barack Obama who won the Prize in 2009, having been nominated just 11 days after assuming duties as President. Bringing about regime change in many Arab countries, Obama goes down in history as possibly the only recipient to have ordered the bombing of cities through the US drone programme.

Personalities such as Mahatma Gandhi and U Thant, a Burmese national to hold the post of United Nations Secretary General who was due to receive the award in 1965 for his role in defusing the Cuban Missile Crisis, seeing the end of the war in the Congo and mediating in the Vietnam War, are just two who were ignored by the Committee.

Irrespective of whether the Prize laureates have made a positive contribution or not, the Prize awarded to Aung Sang Suu Kyi will not be rescinded. A member of the 1991 Nobel Peace Prize Committee was quoted as saying that “the principle we follow is the decision is not a declaration of a saint. When the decision has been made and the award has been given, that ends the responsibility of the committee.” Her stance throughout these incidents of violence have been to claim that ‘no, it is not ethnic cleansing’.

Although the UN Secretary General has condemned the incidents, UN teams are unable to visit the affected areas owing to the non-issuance of visas for entry. The effectiveness of the United Nations is called into question once again as teams from countries wishing to act unilaterally have been able to enter Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya even without authorization from the UN, or any form of internal sanction. Yet the UN is unable to enter a country which pledged to uphold the UN Charter just months after independence in 1948.

From confusion over whether to still call the country Burma or Myanmar; the absence of a strong expatriate community; its location on the world map and the inability for most to find it; and the democratic transition the country faced in recent years, have resulted in a general silence being maintained. Condemning those who were praised remains a tough call, and one that most are unwilling to make. The question that thus arises is whether Myanmar is living up to the democratic values it yearned for years, or is the country still stuck in its autocratic past.

- AWARELOGUE EDITORIAL