Let’s imagine for a moment that the huge tidal waves had hit the western shores of Europe,that more than a hundred thousand English, Irish, Dutch, Belgian, French, Spanish andPortuguese had fallen victim to the tsunami, and that the east coast of the United States hadalso suffered.
How the world would have sprung into action! How the governments would have beengalvanized! What huge sums of money would have materialized within hours to save what could besaved and prevent the epidemics that threatened millions!
But it did not happen in Europe . It happened to remote, poverty-stricken Asiaticcountries. And that makes all the difference.
Was this bound to happen?
The earthquake could not have been prevented and sufficient warning of it could not havebeen given. But the moment an earthquake under the sea was registered, the tsunami was to beexpected. When it started its amok race across the ocean, there was enough time to warn moredistant shores. After all, a few minutes were enough for tens of thousands to run to higherground or climb to higher floors. Such a warning was not given.
Mankind has reached the moon. Spaceships explore far-away stars. Billions uponbillions have been invested in these efforts. But the human genius is not sufficient to savehundreds of thousands of human beings from such a natural disaster.
It can always be argued that this is wisdom after the fact. But where are the experts whosejob is precisely to warn of dangers before they arrive? The media are full of stories aboutexperts who slept on their watch, about monitoring-centers that received a warning in timeand did not transmit it to where it was needed, about scientific institutes that were shut downfor the weekend and therefore could give no warning, about the lack of a minimal emergencycommunications system for such contingencies.
We are told that on the shores of the Pacific the situation is better as far as this specificdanger is concerned, After all, “tsunami” is a Japanese word (a combination of “harbor” and“wave”). Are the shore-dwellers of other seas less privileged?
The reaction of the Western world was scandalous.
The British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, continued to enjoy his holiday in Egypt . KofiAnnan broke his holiday only on the fourth day of the disaster, and then just to deliver one ofhis oily speeches. The President of the United States stayed on his Texan ranch and made aroutine statement, and then used most of it to denounce the United Nations “reliefcoordinator”, Jan Egeland, for attacking the “stinginess” of the Western governments. Thehapless bureaucrat apologized at once. Colin Powell, by now a pathetic caricature ofhimself, rejected the accusation that the United States had not done its duty when it donated15 million dollars (!) for aid.
And indeed, the practical responses were ludicrous. Within a few hours it was alreadyevident that many billions were needed to save, prevent disease and rebuild. Washingtondonated one million, then 15 million, then increased that to all of 35 million – less than thebill for President Bush’s second inauguration party. (Later, under pressure, this wasincreased tenfold.) The United Kingdom offered a similar sum. Other countries donatedvarious amounts. Even the Israeli government donated some money, with such a fanfare you’dthink it was saving the world.
All this together was not even a drop in the ocean – perhaps an unfortunate metaphor thesedays.
One can try to excuse this with the shock that overcame the world during the first few days.It took time for the political system in the countries of the world to grasp the full extent ofthe catastrophe. Television, a medium that is especially suited to such situations, broughtthe pictures into every home, activating public opinion and exerting pressure on thepoliticians. But even this was not enough to ensure a suitable response. Especially as themedia concentrated in a few accessible areas, but did not reach the hundreds of other affectedplaces in remoter regions. This created a completely false image of the extent of theassistance; tear-jerking stories were broadcast instead of reports on the real situation.
It can be argued that there is no way to foresee a catastrophe of such huge dimensions and beprepared for its coming. That may be true. But the world was not even ready for a disaster on amuch smaller scale.
Some years ago, after the big earthquake near Istanbul , the International HeraldTribune published an article of mine, appealing for a mental revolution in this field. Iproposed the creation of an International Rescue Force.
I called for the setting up of a standing force, with a General Staff and a chain of command,that would be able to respond to a major disaster within hours and to mobilize within a matter ofdays all that is necessary for dealing with a large international catastrophe.
What is needed for this purpose is a permanent staff in perpetual readiness, 24 hours aday, every day of the year. This staff must have at its command rescue forces in many countriesthat can spring into action on very short notice. It must be able to provide the logisticinfrastructure for rushing in aid by air, land and sea, even when the disaster destroysairports, roads and harbors. It must be able to call on trained teams of experts for rescue workand logistics, as well as medical staff. It must have access to dedicated resources that areavailable at short notice. If all this is ready in advance, massive rescue and aid operationscould be set in motion within hours and scaled up in the following days as necessary.
Such a body could also coordinate a world-wide warning system for natural disasters ofvarious forms, using all available means, including satellites, and ensure that thewarnings reach the threatened population in time.
The International Force would not replace the voluntary aid organizations that aredoing a wonderful job. It must function as the command and mobilization center, ready to actimmediately.
Such a force could contribute something to the unity of mankind. A large-scale disasterunifies nations and moderates conflicts, as can be seen this week. I believe that the creationof an International Rescue Force can constitute a step in the direction of world-widecooperation.
My proposal aroused some positive reaction but ran immediately into the reflexiveopposition of the international bureaucracy. At the United Nations, somebody declared in aninjured tone that there was already a group of officials in charge of this matter etc. etc.Nothing, of course, was done. This week we saw the consequences – days passed before the firstsignificant aid operations started rolling, and they were on a pitifully inadequate scalecompared with the disaster itself. But on TV, well-groomed bureaucrats in suits and tiesexplained that everything was being done according to established procedure.
The International Rescue Force must be set up in order to be ready for the nextcatastrophe. To command it, an authoritative personality should be appointed, a person withimagination, mental agility, organizational talent and a penchant for improvisation. Wehave such people in Israel , too. I am sure they are to found in other countries. What is lackingis the international will.
As before, mankind can be satisfied once again with clicking the tongue and with actionswhose sole purpose is to do the very minimum – and forget the whole business within a few days.