The earth is spinning at about 1,000 miles an hour at a speed of about 66,000 mph in its elliptical journey around the sun. Its speed and angles are constantly changing while its land surface moves over a hot molten core. In a modern society people learn there is a rhythm to nature, and also a science. They design their activities accordingly.
Shift to the news anchors hired by affluent TV channel owners in Pakistan proclaiming the wrath of God has unleashed massive floods in the country. They show snapshots of villages like Katcha Bunder, leaving a global audience wondering why the reporters think viewers will know where Katcha Bunder is, especially when the report does not bother to name the river in flood or the province. For the week before last weekend, news reports of the floods were, to many people, like the challenge of playing Scrabble with only four alphabets. The language of modern disaster management was missing. It was like talking to an out-of-towner who does not know the names and directions of your city. This is the contemporary Pakistani approach (henceforth ‘contemp-pak approach’) as opposed to the global approach.
I should add a disclosure about original research. I have worked in three international disasters in diverse capacities and trained in multiple disciplines that are required for disaster management. The notion that millions are in misery and that this misery has nothing to do with social values and individual actions or planning is a concocted hyper-reality and the latest form of escape from responsibility. Two beliefs of the ‘contemp-pak’ approach are at work. One, that nature is static and any movement is an aberration. The second, that money can be made in quick, easy ways without doing hard work. For example, instead of donating to develop knowledge we will hand out food after the damage is done. The force of these two beliefs will undermine and waste aid efforts. This hypothesis was tested with over a hundred of the best educated in the Pakistani diaspora, from business families and top professional jobs. No one said we need a modern global approach to disaster management. People voted for the ‘contemp-pak approach’ with limited language/variables, and activities couched in simple kneejerk reactions. People prefer to call their “contacts” regardless of competence — let’s do a few fundraisers and send clothes, food and medicines on a hired truck. In contrast, in a modern approach groups donate to develop knowledge and analysis.
In 2005, I remember trucks left new clothes on the streets of Balakot where there was little need for them; they turned dirty and were eventually burnt for waste disposal. The office buildings of rich, educated Pakistanis in affluent areas of Karachi have cracks, their drainage pipes are falling onto electric wires and there is no running water. Imagine giving these people aid money for a disaster — it would be like feeding a virus instead of curing it. This is what is happening with the current flood disaster.
The myth of ignorance about this disaster would be better replaced by an obstinate rejection of progress. Warnings and planning have been proposed in critical groups during and after the earthquake period — including universities, media, and cultural organisations. People in the educated diaspora and local groups have requested for space to discuss alternate paradigms of looking at society to prevent disasters for which the signs are obvious to experts. Because the contemp-pak approach is viral, there is no public space left to present new modern approaches. It’s like asking an alcoholic or smoker to give up their addiction; they will fight you tooth and nail even though you are saying it for their own good. The priority to avert frequent disasters is to have alternative spaces for discussion; like building healthy cells in a diseased body. Without this space, we suffocate and die. Last call.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 22nd, 2010.
COMMENTS (5)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ