The horror in Haiti was tragic, but unfortunately all too reminiscent of past images from a decade with one unthinkable disaster after another. In a storybook world, this earthquake would be the final event in a 10-year stretch of bad fate, but it is more likely that we have simply entered a new era where rampant development and population growth means that losses will be increasingly frequent. As we forge ahead, we can either learn from the past or blindly hope the future will get brighter on its own. But hope alone is not an option. Only through better disaster planning and catastrophe response will we be able to mitigate the damage dished out by Mother Nature.The January earthquake that destroyed Port-au-Prince was not only the worst natural disaster in Haiti's tortured history but the worst natural disaster in Western Hemisphere history. While the final death toll will never be known, tens of thousands were crushed instantly by falling metal and concrete, and estimates from the Haitian government have eclipsed 200,000 dead.
Not only did the magnitude 7.0 quake strike the most impoverished and vulnerable nation in the hemisphere, but in flattening Haiti's capital city, it effectively extinguished any hope that the nation's government would be able to do anything to prevent many survivors of the initial destruction from needlessly dying in the hours to come. The presidential palace collapsed, leaving the president, Rene Preval, homeless and unsure where even he himself would sleep. Countless other public officials were less fortunate still, dying beneath rubble, and those who did survive had little to no way to initiate adequate rescue efforts. The necessary infrastructure, equipment and communications capabilities were nonexistent.
For its part, the international community banded together quickly and compassionately. The outpouring of donations, benevolence of volunteers, and call to action by global leaders was truly heartwarming. But unfortunately, "quickly" is a relative term after a catastrophe, and while the coordination of recovery teams was noble, it was not fast enough. In these situations, it rarely is. As impressive as it may be from a logistical standpoint to get a team of trained rescue workers in-country just 24 to 36 hours after the disaster, too many people died well before then.
Those experienced with major post-disaster environments know the somber reality: if a person is not saved within the first 48 hours, they probably never will be. Thankfully, this is only a general rule and miracle tales reflecting the endurance of the human spirit reached the news to provide small silver linings amid tragedy. From Port-au-Prince, CNN's Anderson Cooper and others were able to recount many stories of survivors being pulled from the wreckage up to a week -- and one man, even 27 days -- after the city was demolished. We heard of those who survived inside a market because they lay in close enough proximity to water and food to survive the ordeal until they were rescued.
None of this reflects the fates for most of those trapped under concrete, however. In the overwhelming majority of cases, help never came. For tens of thousands, the end came painfully and alone, turning collapsed buildings into tombs.
But now, the immediacy of the initial -- and largely unsuccessful -- rescue efforts and disaster response in Haiti has waned, and the focus has rightly begun to turn to long-term relief, recovery and reconstruction. The United Nations, the U.S. military, the Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders and scores of other organizations are now collectively carrying out the difficult tasks of finding adequate water supplies, nutrition, medical care and shelter for the wounded, psychologically scarred, orphaned and homeless.
Figuring out a way to get survivors and other displaced Haitians out of tents and into solid structures comes next and will be an incredibly long and arduous task -- but one that absolutely must be well underway before hurricane season arrives to again imperil a population vulnerable to weather and disease. And due to rampant deforestation, hurricanes are not the only threat. Any heavy rain could cause catastrophic landslides as debris flows down Haiti's barren, mountainous landscape.
Then, of course, comes the long-term process of rebuilding a city, an economy and a government. For Haiti, recovery probably seems impossible right now, but it is achievable. And as many have said, the nation may now have the opportunity to create what has eluded it ever since 1803 when its people fought for, and won, their freedom from France to become the first independent Latin American nation: a flourishing society.
But for the rest of the world, this unfathomable tragedy -- especially so soon after major disasters in Southeast Asia, China, Burma and even in the developed world in New Orleans -- offers an opportunity to seriously re-evaluate catastrophe preparedness and response.
Thinking About the Unthinkable
The mismanagement and collective failure of all the bureaucracies that responded after Hurricane Katrina to save the helpless, dying citizens of New Orleans was an unforgivable violation of public trust. But it was more than just a failure to respond. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in addition to many experts throughout Louisiana and New Orleans, had been aware of structural problems in the city's levees since the 1980s. Beyond concerns surrounding substandard flood walls, many credible agencies had warned -- for decades -- that the barrier islands and wetlands that had historically mitigated storm surge in the Mississippi Delta region had been disappearing since the 1930s, leaving the entire city more susceptible to rapid sea rise than ever before.
Such warnings did not exist solely in unread academic reports or engineering studies; both the local newspaper, the Times Picayune, and the Houston Chronicle had published stories that foretold the future damage, and experts had communicated the potentially dire repercussions of inaction to nearly all levels of government, from the local parishes to the Washington Beltway.
As we learned in August 2005, the levees were never properly fortified and no formalized, post-breach response was properly enacted. And, of course, the theoretical fail-safe, FEMA, failed. Colossally.
Haiti and New Orleans alone should be enough to prompt an outcry for better disaster preparedness management, both globally and in the United States. But the past decade has given us so many other wake-up calls: 9/11, the Bam earthquake in Iran, the Southeast Asian tsunami, the Sichuan earthquake, the typhoon in Burma. And these are only the tragedies in which the devastation was truly unthinkable.
But at what point do these unthinkable tragedies cease to be unthinkable? At what point do we admit to ourselves as a global society that such tragic events will inevitably continue to happen? At what point do we say to ourselves, we should have seen this coming?
In places like Haiti, Burma, Sumatra and rural China, there is obviously a ceiling on what more could have been done to save lives. Building codes are nearly nonexistent, infrastructure repairs go largely neglected and the local governments are simply not capable, both in terms of resources or prioritization of public need, to plan for an event that may occur on a one-in-one-hundred-year time line -- if ever. Providing basic nutrition, health care, development and employment to raise the general standard of living sadly remain much more urgent endeavors in many areas of the world.
Still, there are certainly things that the global community can do to recognize that these types of large-scale disasters will occur, and the response to the Haitian earthquake illustrates how the questions of command and jurisdiction detract from the on-ground operations.
The UN, which has maintained a near-constant deployment of peacekeeping personnel on the ground in Haiti since 1993, were the first responders. Though its operations building collapsed in the quake, killing many, some of those who survived were able to supply initial damage assessments and help the quick-arriving UN Disaster Assessment and Coordination (UNDAC) team begin rescue efforts. By January 14, less than 48 hours after the initial quake, this global crack squad of disaster experts were joined by UN personnel from the World Food Programme, the World Health Organization and UNICEF, with officials from the Red Cross and other nongovernmental agencies also arriving to assist with health care, water/food distribution and other efforts. Soon after, a major influx of UN peacekeepers landed in-country, providing much-needed security and transport capabilities. The Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA), a regional natural disaster response team as part of the CARICOM Caribbean community of states, also sent more than 300 people to help in various ways.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Defense's Southern Command, which operates out of Miami, immediately flew planes over the island to help with damage assessments, and within 24 hours of the earthquake, at least 30 soldiers joined the 60 troops permanently stationed in Haiti. The Coast Guard arrived soon after and thousands of troops were later deployed, with the U.S. military taking control of the airport and managing all air traffic shipments into Haiti. Military personnel also met with State Department officials and discussed operations with the U.S. Agency of International Development (USAID), an independent agency in Washington funded by the State Department, which sought advice from countless experts in its network, both in the private sector and in agencies including FEMA.
This arrival of thousands of qualified people from an alphabet soup of organizations goes to show that poor mobilization was not what led to so many reports of organizational in-fighting, mismanaged aid distribution, ineffective security and supply planes being turned away from the airport. The boots were on the ground as quickly as could be expected. The confusion and frustration centered around who should be running the show.
While the U.S. military clearly has the resources, manpower and distribution expertise for large-scale operations that the State Department lacks, some have suggested that disaster response should not ultimately be run by those wearing camouflage. Just because the military can do it, does that mean it should be taking charge over what should logically be a civilian-led operation in another country run by the State Department? Perhaps even USAID or FEMA should have ultimate authority given their expertise in the field. Given its proximity and familiarity, the United States seems a natural fit for commanding disaster response in Haiti, but where does the UN factor into the chain of command in future, more distant disasters?
These are all questions that should be answered before the disaster occurs. Whoever gets there first should of course take charge and do all they can, and even the best planning might quickly turn to ad-hoc, disjointed action if communication proves impossible, but some expectation of overriding jurisdiction should be clearly in place. The decisions that the coordinating organization must make often revolve around questions such as whether to prioritize distributing water or medicine, so there are no easy choices. But when you are trying to beat the clock to save lives, a bad decision might be better than indecision.
Preparedness Starts at Home
Even with better coordination, the concept of efficient global disaster planning is likely a pipe dream. The scope and challenges are just too great. Groups like UNDAC for the global community and CDEMA in the Caribbean have been evolving and may eventually become de facto international or regional versions of FEMA, but the opportunity for real, immediate progress lies in the developed world and, specifically, in the United States.
The country faces catastrophic threats from coast to coast, many of which have the potential to become "megadisasters" with $100 billion losses and thousands of deaths. New Orleans remains ill-prepared for the next major storm. People believe Katrina was a worst-case scenario. Hopefully it was. But Katrina did not even hit New Orleans directly, and stronger hurricanes on a straight collision course with the city are possible, particularly if sea-surface temperatures in the Gulf continue to rise.
Houston, too, faces extreme windstorm risk. Hurricane Ike provided another near-miss and even the damages seen there were considerable. If a powerful storm actually hits Houston, or even Galveston, head on, the economic losses will be considerable, and the loss of life, if evacuations are not properly headed, may also prove tragic.
Those living in the Northeast remain largely unaware that a category 3 hurricane will inevitably beat the odds and batter coastlines from New Jersey to New Hampshire. A storm of that strength raced up the Eastern Seaboard at record speeds in 1938, and a similar rogue hurricane is overdue.
Miami is the softest target for windstorms. Hurricane Andrew in 1992 actually sidestepped South Beach, where one-third of the people failed to evacuate, and was still the most expensive pre-Katrina hurricane in U.S. history. Losses of more than $100 billion are estimated if the same winds hit today given the uptick in development, both inland and coastal, over the past two decades.
We are all keenly aware of the inevitable "Big One" that will hit California. Yet somehow, retrofitting buildings in earthquake country is still seen by many as a nuisance to be pushed back as far as possible, just as levee fortification in some below-sea-level communities remains underfunded and delayed, despite a commendable statewide call to action to bolster many of these vital defenses.
A potentially worse seismic threat dwells in obscurity in the Midwest. In 1812, an estimated magnitude 7.0 quake in the area reportedly struck with such force that it rang church bells in Boston and made the Mississippi River run backwards. Two hundred years ago, the affected populations in Memphis and St. Louis were tiny compared to the four million-plus who now live in the two cities' greater metro regions. Add in the fact that the New Madrid Seismic Zone also runs through six other states, and that the building standards, earthquake preparedness and citizen awareness are all well below the levels present on the West Coast, and this is arguably the most dangerous disaster threat facing the nation.
None of these are mythical scenarios that may or may not occur. The exact date of their arrival cannot be predicted, but, in time, we know they almost certainly will happen. Every morning that we awake to find out that we are still safe is a dodged bullet. It is hard to believe that complacency has set in after a decade that included both September 11 and Katrina, but many areas of the nation remain dangerously underprepared.
Given the recession, people might wonder where the funding for improved preparedness will come from. Rebuilding levees, retrofitting buildings, launching public awareness campaigns, conducting tabletop modeling exercises and creating evacuation plans are not free. But historically, money has always been abundant for homeland defense if needed. Terrorism and asymmetric warfare are grave dangers that also deserve public financial backing, but in a post-Cold War world, there are few threats to local populations and economies on the U.S. mainland greater than these natural disasters.
Thousands of lives may be in the balance, and as we have seen in both New Orleans and Lower Manhattan, catastrophes are just as possible domestically as they are abroad. The longer we go without taking the necessary steps to increase preparedness, the sooner we will have to stop calling these natural disasters and start calling them man-made catastrophes.