BBMP officials remove Optical Fibre Cables (OFC) which were hanging at Avenue Road, Bengaluru in 2018.
| Photo Credit: File Photo

The story so far: The Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI), a multilateral organisation launched by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in 2019, put out a report earlier this month studying Indian telecom networks’ preparedness in the event of disasters. The report suggests ways in which State governments can better prepare for calamities that may impact telecom networks.

Why is it important?

Telecom networks are crucial to handling disasters, because they allow the State and National Disaster Management Authorities to communicate quickly with local municipalities and the State and Union governments; something that is important when lives and property are at stake. Telecom networks are particularly vulnerable, as they comprise cabling that may not be fully underground, towers that may not be able to withstand high wind speeds, and because they rely on a steady flow of electricity, which is frequently disrupted by disasters like cyclones and earthquakes.

How are they impacted in disasters?

On top of towers being hit by high-speed winds, overland cables — as opposed to underground ones, which can be protected from many disasters — can snap. Coastal regions face elevated risks, as that is where undersea cables connect India with the global internet. If the landing stations of these cables are impacted, there can be massive network disruptions as telecom operators try to reroute traffic through other cables.

The lack of power during disasters remains a major issue. “When I first joined here, I did my own analysis of data of telecom outages since 2016, and found that the real issue was power,” Sanjay Agrawal, deputy director general of disaster management at the Department of Telecommunications said.

What can be done?

Severed undersea cables have a time-consuming repair process that involves a repair vessel arriving near the coast and rejoining the cables. However, since much of the disruption is attributable to power failures, much can be accomplished during a disaster by maintaining or restoring power supply to telecom towers and the network operating centres to which they’re connected. Telecom operators have typically never deployed towers assuming 24/7 power supply — with the possible exception of Mumbai — and have battery as well as fuel backup.

Pradeep Kumar Jena, former Chief Secretary of Odisha, said, “sometimes a tower operator may not have enough power available at a time of disaster for whatever reason — one can’t [pass around] blame at that point of time,” and when this happens, “we decide, let’s give every telecom operator 50 litres of fuel.” Even if the fuel is wasted, the ₹50 lakh spent on it goes a long way in keeping networks online, he said. This is complemented with information from the DoT. “We get data from all telecom operators on damages to their assets for every disaster,” Mr. Agrawal said. “We have software to monitor in real time what telecom assets are down.” As such, resources can be deployed quickly to bring sites back online.

How can networks be protected?

The CDRI report recommends a few measures to develop a resilient telecom network These include greater data collection and more coordination among officials, a more robust power infrastructure (resilient power infrastructure is also an area where CDRI focuses an enormous amount of effort on), and requiring cell towers to withstand higher wind speeds, especially in coastal States and districts where hurricanes make landfall. The CDRI also advocates for a dig-once policy, which recommends building as much underground civil infrastructure, like water and gas supply lines, drainage and fibre optic cables simultaneously, reducing the risk of cables being damaged when other infrastructure is built. Existing damage to underground cables can greatly exacerbate disruptions when other parts of a network go down.

“The short- to medium-term roadmap suggests the need to update disaster damage and loss data format, mainstream disaster risk modelling into telecommunications infrastructure planning across all miles, strengthen telecommunications asset design based on local and regional hazard vulnerability profiles,” and other steps to plan ahead, the report says. There are also commercial interventions that the report touches on. A key one is parametric insurance, a system where telecom operators are not left to bear the commercial burden of a disaster all by themselves, and are thus financially incentivised to bring networks back online rapidly (and presumably to nudge them to disaster-proof their infrastructure well enough to keep premiums down).

Telecom resilience comes down to a mix of both massive interventions as well as small investments that can have an outsize benefit. For instance, during heavy rains, diesel generators can stop working even at knee-level flooding. One simple intervention that can go a long way in keeping towers online is by simply installing the generator a little higher up the tower, so that the backup power can kick in even during flooding.

‘The budget for the Ministry of External Affair deserves closer scrutiny’
| Photo Credit: The Hindu

When the Union Budget is presented every year, most of the public attention often centres on taxation, infrastructure, and defence. In this, however, the budget for India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) deserves closer scrutiny. Last year, the MEA budget saw a rare 23% spike, up from the modest 4% annual increase between 2017 and 2023. Despite efficient Budget utilisation, exceeding 96% of the revised estimates, the MEA remains one of the least-funded Ministries. The MEA’s allocation not only reflects the government’s foreign policy priorities but also its capacity to deliver on its global ambitions and commitments.

The vision of a ‘Viksit Bharat’ by 2047 hinges on sustained global partnerships. Here, India is positioning itself as a global leader: from leading the Global South; strengthening ties with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations; enhancing regional connectivity, engaging with the Quad (India, Australia, Japan and the U.S.) and creating institutions such as the International Solar Alliance and the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure.

Impact on plans

Partner countries also expect more from India, requiring a stronger MEA. Countries anticipate timely project delivery, financial support, and diplomatic follow-through. Yet, the MEA’s current budget — just 0.4% of India’s overall expenditure — falls short to deliver on these plans. In 2022, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs suggested raising this to 1% of the total budget. While such an increase (approximately 63%) seems unlikely, even a gradual increase to 0.6% or 0.8% would signal intent.

Two areas demand greater budgetary resources to beef up India’s diplomatic clout: economic tools for regional integration and cooperation, and the MEA’s institutional capacity by expanding human resources and research expertise. India’s regional connectivity faced new challenges in 2024, including Bangladesh’s regime change, Myanmar’s instability, strained ties with Nepal, and the Maldives’ “India Out” stance. But visits by Sri Lanka’s President and Bhutan’s Prime Minister bolstered commitments in cross-border projects. Sustaining momentum under the ‘Neighbourhood First’ policy requires economic support, amid China’s growing influence. Enhanced financial backing is crucial for advancing connectivity initiatives in South Asia.

Foreign aid and shifts

Budgetary trends reveal nuanced shifts. India’s aid to foreign countries declined by 10% in 2024-25, while loans to foreign governments, increased by 29%. Approximately 50% of India’s grants is directed to its neighbourhood. Bhutan remained the largest recipient of Indian aid, reflecting historical ties and a new impetus on energy interdependence, including hydropower development and sub-regional grid connectivity. Aid to Bangladesh declined from ₹200 crore in 2023-24 to ₹120 crore in 2024-25, while Sri Lanka saw a 63% increase in budgetary allocation.

A notable shift is the move from outright grants to lines of credit (LoCs), with 45% of the LoCs directed to the neighbourhood, Bangladesh being the largest recipient at $7.86 billion. While LoCs enable sustainable infrastructure financing, they also demand robust disbursement and oversight mechanisms, stretching India’s diplomatic machinery.

Another critical indicator is MEA resources to build institutional capacity. These are less visible but critical catalysts to enable long-term growth, including through a stronger Indian Foreign Service (IFS), supported by an expert research ecosystem.

While the MEA’s training budget saw a 30% increase in 2024-25, overall capacity-building allocations remain insufficient. The IFS remains a chronically understaffed diplomatic corps. Coordination challenges, delayed expansion plans, and limited lateral entry efforts hinder progress.

Last year’s MEA budget allocation for its foreign missions, training programmes, and cultural diplomacy grew by only 7% but key academic institutions such as Nalanda University and South Asian University experienced cuts of 20% and 22%, respectively. While the MEA has invested massively in convening international conferences and dialogues to foster India’s image as a bridging and argumentative power, it must also find more budgetary resources to support policy-relevant and evidence-based research at Indian universities and think tanks.

Need for declassification, digitisation

According to the External Affairs Minister, S. Jaishankar, “Track 1 has been consistently ahead of Track 2 when it comes to diplomacy, foreign policy, and keeping up with the world.” If this is the reality, and “needs change” as the Minister beckoned, the MEA could lead by example by allocating specific resources in the next Budget to accelerate the declassification and the digitisation of hundreds of thousands of its records. Public e-access will help scholars map India’s rich diplomatic history, contest deeply-held myths and get a better grasp of the underappreciated context and constraints that regulate Track 1 decision-making. And in turn, such Track 2 research may also help current MEA decision-makers to learn from past successes and failures, avoid reinventing the wheel, and articulate India’s uniqueness based on the power of historical record, rather than mere political proclamation.

Riya Sinha is Associate Fellow at the Centre for Social and Economic Progress (CSEP), New Delhi. Constantino Xavier is Senior Fellow at the Centre for Social and Economic Progress (CSEP), New Delhi. The views expressed are personal