Watching this week’s coverage of the earthquake in Haiti, I couldn’t help but flash back to New Orleans and the throes it went through in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. How could the aftermath of such disasters be so similar in countries so different?
True, the Haitian government was suspect on its best days and our leadership seems, by and large, to be well equipped to deal with anything that might crop up unexpectedly. Could it be that the only difference is our faith in Washington D.C. and our state or local officials while casting a doubtful eye on other nations? Maybe the same can be said for everyone, regardless of the country, as they trust their leadership.
Both nations (Haiti and the US), in their own way, had departments and officials and contingency plans in place for disasters that might one day come to pass. Let’s say, for the sake of this discussion, that both nations had equally viable mechanisms ready to go at a moment’s notice.
The problem lies within those plans and with those tasked with implementation. Were they deficient in some way? Not necessarily. But they were drawn up within the confines of bureaucratic organizational charts and the associated near-sighted objective of protecting one’s department and employment prospects. To insinuate that anyone could carry out the mandate of “my” organization invites the dissolution of “my” career and I just can’t have that, can I?
So now we have a great plan and great people to carry it out should it ever become necessary. The i’s are dotted and the t’ crossed. And, then: WHAM! Here comes the flood or the fire or the quake or the tsunami or whatever nature might have in store. The damage is widespread and severe. OK, let’s get going with those contingency plans. But wait: where’s the guy who’s going to start the process? We need him for step A before going to step B, but he’s nowhere to be found. And, until we find him, the process simply stops. I know, let’s call him. Ah, the landlines are down and what cell service there is will probably be overwhelmed. Didn’t think about this when we drew up the plan in our nice, air-conditioned office, did we? Combine this with the fact that those depended upon to effect the rescue, etc. may well be victims themselves. The New Orleans police were scarce as officers took care of their families before their citizens. Who can fault them, or anyone else in similar straits, for that? Other lynch-pins could well be among the dead or injured. Basically, command and control are non-existent with little to fill the void.
The Port-au-Prince airport ramp is covered with supplies. The local government, however, has not designated drop-off sites and the aid agencies haven’t set up distribution at those sites because they don’t know where they go yet. And when the sites are finally designated, security must be established to prevent riots and panic. It sounds a lot like the trucks of water and ice to be delivered to New Orleans, but idling in other locations awaiting a specific destination. Reports indicate that today (Sunday) such sites, supplies, and security are initiating operations. The quake occurred last Tuesday.
So here’s the bottom line, I’d say: despite everything your government says to the contrary, should disaster strike, you’re on your own for the foreseeable future. Do not expect water, sustenance, shelter, or medical care of any substantive degree. Folks died in Louisiana awaiting supplies or rescue and the same scenario is playing out in Haiti as I write.
Should we recoil at such a miserable response from those charged to minimize our discomfort in times of disaster? Only at the rosy predictions made by those same folks. San Francisco Bay residents are told to plan on a 72 hour period of self-reliance before aid may be expected to arrive. Well, in the event of a major quake most roads will become impassable. Bridges may become unusable further limiting access to certain areas. Many may be away from their homes should the quake occur during the work day and communication networks would be rendered moot as they become unable to cope with the demand. Seventy-two hours? That’s only three days. How about something more like a week and maybe more as one moves out from population centers.
Why don’t they tell us to plan on a week? Why, that would create some serious questioning over their plans and their effectiveness to serve the public. Wouldn’t it be better to provide a false sense of security so as to maintain the perception of competence and forethought (not to mention the continuation of the paycheck)? In that way, the public would be secure in the thought that everything would be fine until, of course, it wasn’t, and then we could explain why everything went to hell in a hand basket.
It’s happened before within this country and is happening now in Haiti. It has happened elsewhere, too, and there is no reason to believe that your community or your state or your federal government is any better equipped than those that preceded it. It is not inherently good nor bad. It is simply a fact of dealing with disasters. What to do? Be a good Boy Scout: be prepared.
No comments:
Post a Comment