Thirty-two earthquakes in 13 months.
That is not a line from a dystopian novel. It is the recent seismic record of Bangladesh. From mid-February 2025 to late February 2026, the Earthquake Monitoring Centre has logged 32 tremors within the country and along its borders. Since systematic records began in 2016, there has been no comparable 13-month period with so many events.
The latest jolt, a magnitude 5.4 earthquake with its epicentre in Satkhira, has shaken more than buildings. It has unsettled a national assumption. Satkhira sits in what we have long called a low-risk zone. Yet the southwest has experienced multiple tremors in recent months. A 4.1 magnitude event struck Kolaroa on February 3. A 3.2 magnitude earthquake hit Kaliganj in Jhenaidah days before the Satkhira shock. Monirampur in Jessore recorded a 3.5 magnitude event last September. These are not catastrophic numbers. But their clustering in a region historically labelled as comparatively safe has forced a reconsideration of complacent maps and comfortable narratives.
Bangladesh is wedged at the junction of three major tectonic domains. To the east lies the Indo-Burman subduction zone. To the north runs the Dawki Fault, stretching along the Shillong Plateau. Further northwest, the Himalayan Frontal Thrust connects the tectonic violence of Nepal and Arunachal to the broader South Asian plate system. The Indian Plate continues to move northeastward at roughly 4-5 centimetres per year, colliding with the Eurasian Plate and sliding beneath the Burma microplate. This relentless motion stores immense strain energy in the crust.
Historically, the most destructive earthquakes affecting this region have originated along these major boundaries. The 1897 Great Assam earthquake measured an estimated 8.1 magnitude. The 1918 Srimangal earthquake was 7.6. The 1950 Assam earthquake reached 8.6. These were not abstract geological events. They reshaped landscapes and killed thousands across the wider region. The silence of recent decades has not erased those tectonic forces. It has only allowed memory to fade.
What makes the present moment disquieting is not merely the count of 32 earthquakes, but their distribution and context. Of these recent events, 10 originated in the greater Sylhet region near the Dawki Fault. Others have been scattered across Narsingdi, Mymensingh, Satkhira, Jessore, and border areas adjoining India and Myanmar.
A 5.7 magnitude earthquake in Narsingdi on November 21 last year was one of the most significant inland tremors in recent memory. Seismologists now suggest that some of the southwest events could be aftershocks linked to a newly mapped 400-kilometre fault stretching from Kolkata through Jamalpur to Mymensingh, with a hinge zone extending about 30 kilometres on either side.
If this mapping is accurate, it introduces a new variable into Bangladesh’s seismic equation. For decades, hazard zoning divided the country into high, medium, and low-risk areas. The belt from Lalmonirhat to Khagrachhari was marked high risk. The north-central region including Dhaka was medium risk. Barisal and Khulna divisions were categorized as low risk.
But tectonic systems do not respect administrative convenience. Fault lines evolve, reactivate, or reveal themselves through new instrumentation. A region once deemed peripheral can become unexpectedly active.
Some argue that the apparent increase in earthquakes may partly reflect better monitoring. Over the last decade, Bangladesh has improved its seismic network, installing more digital stations and enhancing data transmission. Globally, the detection threshold has lowered as technology has advanced. Small magnitude events that once passed unnoticed are now recorded and catalogued. This is a legitimate consideration. An apparent spike in frequency may not always mean a spike in actual tectonic activity.
Yet that explanation cannot be an excuse for inaction. Seismic swarms and moderate events are reminders of a larger tectonic budget. The Earth’s crust does not dissipate its stress politely or predictably. When 32 measurable events occur within 13 months, including multiple tremors above magnitude 4, it signals an active stress regime.
Globally, earthquakes of magnitude 5 to 5.9 are categorized as moderate. They can cause damage to poorly constructed buildings and create panic in densely populated areas. Bangladesh, with more than 170 million people living in a deltaic plain, is uniquely vulnerable. Dhaka alone houses over 20 million residents within a metropolitan sprawl that has expanded vertically and horizontally with alarming disregard for structural integrity.
Studies by the Comprehensive Disaster Management Program have previously estimated that a magnitude 7 or higher earthquake near Dhaka could result in tens of thousands of fatalities and widespread building collapse. The World Bank has warned that a major earthquake in a South Asian megacity could cause economic losses exceeding 10% of national GDP.
Bangladesh’s building stock amplifies the risk. According to Rajuk surveys, a significant proportion of residential buildings in Dhaka do not fully comply with the Bangladesh National Building Code. Informal constructions, unauthorized floor additions and substandard materials are common. In older parts of the capital such as Old Dhaka, narrow roads would severely hinder rescue operations. Fire incidents in recent years have already exposed the fragility of emergency response in congested neighbourhoods. An earthquake would magnify those vulnerabilities exponentially.
The southwest adds another dimension. Satkhira and adjoining districts are not only tectonically intriguing but also climatically fragile. This region borders the Sundarbans and faces recurrent cyclones, storm surges, and salinity intrusion. Infrastructure there is often built with climate resilience in mind, not seismic resilience.
If moderate earthquakes become more frequent in a zone already battling rising sea levels and subsidence, the compound risk multiplies. Disaster management in Bangladesh has earned global praise for cyclone preparedness, with mortality rates drastically reduced over the past three decades. But earthquake preparedness lags behind.
Public awareness remains episodic. Each tremor triggers momentary alarm. People rush into the streets. Social media fills with speculation. Then normalcy returns. Earthquake drills are rare in schools and offices. Open spaces in urban centres are shrinking, converted into commercial plots and apartment blocks. Emergency assembly points are not clearly designated in many neighborhoods. Hospitals, which would bear the brunt of casualties, often operate at or near capacity even in normal times.
A serious national conversation must move beyond the binary of panic versus denial. On one side are apocalyptic predictions of an imminent “big one.” On the other are reassurances that moderate tremors in low-risk zones are nothing to worry about. The truth lies somewhere in between.
Bangladesh is tectonically active by virtue of its geography. The recurrence interval of major earthquakes along regional faults may span decades or centuries. That does not make them hypothetical. It makes them overdue in probabilistic terms.
Data-driven planning is essential. The country should accelerate microzonation studies in major cities to map soil conditions and amplification effects. Soft alluvial soils, common in the delta, can significantly increase shaking intensity compared to rock foundations.
Updating and strictly enforcing the building code is not a bureaucratic luxury but a life-saving imperative. Retrofitting critical infrastructure such as hospitals, bridges, power plants, and communication hubs must be prioritized. Financial incentives could encourage private building owners to strengthen vulnerable structures.
Investment in seismic instrumentation should continue. More stations mean better understanding of active faults and stress patterns. Collaboration with regional research institutions in India, Nepal, and Myanmar could enhance data sharing, since tectonic systems do not stop at political borders. Public education campaigns should be institutionalized, not improvised after each tremor. Earthquake drills, emergency kits, and clear evacuation protocols must become as routine as cyclone warnings.
A nation that has learned to outrun cyclones through preparedness can also learn to coexist with seismic uncertainty. The choice is not between fear and indifference. It is between foresight and regret. The ground beneath us is shifting, sometimes subtly, sometimes abruptly. Whether we treat those tremors as warnings or as passing inconveniences will determine the scale of our next disaster.
HM Nazmul Alam is an academic, journalist, and political analyst based in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Currently he teaches at IUBAT.