On Aug. 26, 2026, a disaster in Nepal involving floods and landslides was triggered by a glacier breaking off, according to the account. It was also described as a foreseen event caused by global warming. As a result, people around the world are being exposed to and becoming familiar with unfamiliar specialised disaster terms such as “landslide-dammed lakes,” natural lakes formed when soil and rock block rivers after collapses such as landslides, earthquakes and glaciers, and “glacial lake outburst floods” (GLOF).

Disaster news around the world spreads and is shared regardless of time and place. But when it comes to the situation just before such disasters occur, many theories circulate rather than decoding it with data. It is not technically impossible, but from Nepal’s standpoint it may sound like someone else’s story.

If you cannot use a technical idea even when it is right in front of you, it is no different from salt on the hearth. When I served as head of IBM’s new technology business division, I remember briefing a new administration’s transition committee on global new-technology trends at its request. That included smart water-management measures for the stable operation of inland canals. It cited cases in which the Netherlands installed sensors on dikes to prepare for heavy rain and built data-based models of dike collapse, and the United States installed data-collection devices around the Hudson River for water management while underwater drones moved constantly to collect underwater data.

My proposal was assessed as novel, and it appeared that a responsible institution was designated and the work would proceed. In the end, such a sensor-based disaster-prevention system was not built on South Korea’s dikes, and flooding from heavy rain continues to occur. I also recall that South Korea introduced a few fish-shaped underwater drones, but they did not spread on a large scale. If it had begun full-scale research and production of underwater drones about 20 years ago, it would have accumulated tremendous capability by now and, in a situation where war has broken out globally, would have become another national competitive strength.

Efforts are emerging to help Nepal on humanitarian grounds. Traditional and direct support includes rescuing lives, supplying immediately needed materials, dispatching volunteer teams for urgent medical support, and later providing assistance in architecture and construction for recovery. But similar natural disasters are likely to recur repeatedly unless the problem of global warming is resolved.

Mountaineer Hong-gil Um (엄홍길), who has climbed the Himalayas several times, says in the EBS documentary “One and Only Earth” that a Nepal glacier disaster had already been foreseen for decades. He also says analysis of satellite images taken since the 1980s shows glaciers have visibly shrunk, while the number and size of landslide-dammed lakes formed from glacial meltwater are rapidly increasing. And this is no longer new news.

If it is possible to secure data on the process by which such phenomena lead to disaster and to model it for use in residents’ advance evacuation, casualties could be minimised. If current IT technology is combined with drones, IoT, cloud and AI, it could play a meaningful role at the diplomatic level as well as in technical support.

For example, if sensor-equipped drones are installed at multiple points on glaciers and location-based data are continuously collected, it is possible to detect in advance glacier collapse or movement caused by minute vibrations or motion. The collected data can also be monitored in real time from remote South Korea. Along with providing personnel and supplies on humanitarian grounds, I believe that if South Korea builds and continuously monitors a system that mobilises new technologies to prepare for the recurrence of similar disasters, another close cooperative relationship between the two countries can naturally be formed.

In fact, what humans know is only an extremely small part. In “Factfulness” (2019), Hans Rosling showed through various statistics that most people’s perceptions differ considerably from actual data. In “Apocalypse Never” (2020), Michael Shellenberger also points to cases in which the impact on migratory birds’ routes and ecosystems was not sufficiently considered during the expansion of wind power, noting a significant gap between what humans think they know about nature and the environment and what they actually know.

When it comes to glaciers, what we know may be even more limited than for other natural environments. In the near future, the likelihood of similar cases occurring is growing day by day in many parts of the world that have glaciers. From the perspective of technology convergence in this situation, I believe the meaning of South Korea’s capabilities can be found more in connecting and integrating multiple technologies than in the level of each individual technology.

Let us think of Nepal’s case as a metaphor. If South Korea is the “hearth” and South Korea’s capabilities are the “salt,” then if it only stops at lamenting the misfortune that occurred in someone else’s house, it will literally remain “salt on the hearth.” For “salt on the hearth” to properly play its role, it is necessary to think beyond simple support about what long-term and strategic role can predict and prevent disasters and respond to similar situations in the future. I hope that this case will serve as an opportunity to jointly explore ways to strengthen local disaster-response systems by using South Korea’s technology and capabilities, while also laying the foundation for sustainable cooperation between the two countries.