Different Hazards, Same Corridor: Warning‐Time Inequality and Critical‐Infrastructure Interdependencies at Rasuwagadhi, Nepal, 2025–2026

ABSTRACT

Two different high‐mountain processes struck the same Nepal–China border corridor within 13 months: drainage of the Purepu supraglacial‐lake system in July 2025 and, according to preliminary assessments, an ice‐rock avalanche and debris‐rich flood in August 2026. This structured comparative documentary case study reconstructs both warning chains and traces documented dependencies among transport, electricity, telecommunications, hydropower, border operations, and emergency access. Government situation reports, scientific studies, and institutional assessments were interpreted through the World Meteorological Organization's end‐to‐end warning framework and an all‐hazards infrastructure‐resilience lens. For the 2026 event, the interval between the 09:15 official alert and reported flood arrival increased from 73 min at Galchhi to 365 min at Devghat. The gradient identifies potential time for downstream action, but the public record does not establish handset‐delivery times, receipt or protective action. No comparable positive interval can be calculated for the source‐proximal corridor. Both events disrupted assets concentrated in the upper corridor; in 2026, restoration and response used satellite communications, portable power, and air or alternative transport. The policy problem was therefore not simply whether an alert was issued, but whether detection, communication, and essential services could remain functional long enough to convert it into protection. The resulting three‐zone architecture prioritizes automatic and structural protection near the source, verified impact‐based warning downstream, and redundant service‐continuity arrangements across the wider corridor.