Comparison of Cyclone Nargis and Cyclone Sidr - Term Paper Example

Natural Disasters result from natural occurring events that affect human lives and the wider environment. Throughout the world natural disasters usually occur in the form of earthquakes, fires, floods, tsunamis, tornados, volcanoes and hurricanes. Hurricanes, referred to as cyclones if they originate around the Indian and South Western Pacific Oceans are yearly occurrences. Cyclones are associated with strong winds that can cause damage to buildings and trees resulting in loss of life and property. Heavy and continuous rain can also lead to floods and submergence of low lying areas. In May 2008, Cyclone Nargis made landfall over Burma killing approximately 140,000 persons. This has been described as the worst natural disaster in the country’s history. Similarly, in Bangladesh in November 2007 Cyclone Sidr struck the country, resulting in the loss of a little over 10,000 lives and causing severe damage to housing and livestock. This essay will compare and contrast five different aspects of both natural disasters. The Burmese government response to the disaster was very slow and ineffective. Immediately after the storm the military government was refusing international aid even when it was obvious that they lacked enough facilities to deal with the disaster. The government was also accused of withholding information from the citizens and failure to warn them of the approaching storm. ABC News quoted then First Lady Bush as stating that, “Burmas state-run media failed to issue a timely warning to citizens in the storms path." They were also criticized by other world leaders as well as spokespersons from donor agencies that cited their slow emergency response as exhibiting little or no regard for human lives. It has also been reported that meteorologists in India that they informed Burma of the approaching cyclone and gave specific location of the landfall (CRS Report, May 15). Many blamed the government’s response on the country’s political situation. The military junta did not have normal relations with many international communities. The Bangladeshi’s response to Cyclone Sidr on the other hand helped to reduce the humanitarian impact of the disaster. Owing from past experiences it would seem that the government was adequately prepared and responded as early as possible. Approximately 3.2 million people were evacuated and there was stockpiling of relief and other basic items. At the time of the cyclone Bangladesh also had a military backed government, but in contrast to the Burmese government they were given credit by both domestic and international interests for their disaster-relief efforts ( Economist, Nov 20, 2007). The army helicopters distributed high-protein cookies to survivors in distant areas. Although the cyclone arrived November 17, by the 20th of November army relief and rescue teams with the help of international agencies were able to reach approximately seventy percent of the affected areas (Associated Press). International response to both natural disasters was swift and decisive but the time line of events regarding aid and help for the general population differed in both countries. This was due to the political stance and their response to international help. In the case of Bangladesh help was allowed into the country immediately and there was easy access to people in all areas. In a matter of days after the cyclone struck the UN World Food Program announced that it had distributed to 650,000 persons so far. They were able to deliver food even to those persons who were in isolated areas after being cut off by floods and broken roads (Economist). The USAID was also instrumental in forming an early recovery team. By December 11, the UN World Food Program in collaboration with other non-governmental agencies were able to report that all immediate food security needs were being met and there were no severe instances of malnutrition or any evidence of scarcity of food. The International Federation of Red Cross together with the Red Crescent Society was instrumental in distributing food and other items to persons in many different locations. On a long term basis the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization distributed seeds and other agricultural products to farmers. Bangladesh also benefitted from generous donations from many foreign government and others in the international community. The United States pledged 2.1 million dollars, the European Union 2.2 million dollars and the Roman Catholic Church Bishops’ Conference 2.9 million dollars. In addition the French, German, Japanese, and the Philippine governments also promised monetary donations and relief items such as medical supplies. Poverty has always existed in Bangladesh but the response of international agencies and the willingness by the Bangladesh government to accept the assistance helped in a far away in preventing what could be a major world crisis. In comparison to Bangladesh’s response the Burmese government made life more difficult for its citizens in refusing immediate aid from the international community. The United Nations were only able to offer help to the Irrawaddy Delta five weeks after the disaster struck. Many volunteers of international agencies experienced problems obtaining visas to travel to the country. The government finally realized the seriousness of the situation however, and after much time has elapsed finally allowed international humanitarian assistance. Burma received substantial assistance from the international community. Countries such as Indonesia, Norway, United Kingdom, and U.S.A pledged large monetary donations while countries such as Sweden and Thailand sent generators, food, and medical supplies. International organizations that were operating in Burma before the cyclone had to depend on local staff due to the visa restrictions. Immediate relief during Cyclone Sidr was more a reality than for the victims of Cyclone Nargis although there were a number of obstacles in Bangladesh as well. It was the intention of the Bangladesh government as well as international agencies to bring immediate relief to as many persons as possible but according to a BBC report of November 19, two days after the arrival of the cyclone, although rescue and relief teams have reached many of the remote areas many survivors were still short of basic necessities of food and drinking water (BBC News). The topography of Bangladesh, together with the havoc brought on by the storm made it extremely difficult and in some instances impossible for the transportation of aid. Reporter Alastair Lawson of BBC summed up the immediate relief situation of Bangladesh when he stated that, “Rarely do communities have no help at all, but often they have received too little, too late.” In the case of Burma the tardiness of the political directorate, the complicated guidelines imposed by the government on relief workers painted an even gloomier picture than the situation in Bangladesh. To add insult to injury much of the aid and relief was diverted to army and other officials instead of going directly to benefit the numerous victims. Many feared that the death toll would rise because relief was not immediate enough and diseases and illnesses were imminent. The rescue of survivors in Bangladesh was made easier and possible with the help of military helicopters and ships. There were also personnel on the ground who tried to reach survivors that were more accessible to get to by roads. Although roads were blocked by power lines and debris many survivors received help in time. In the case of survivors of Cyclone Nargis many had to take it upon themselves to provide help. Realizing that they were being ignored by government many survivors ignored makeshifts huts along the road sides. They were ordered to dismantle these buildings. The callousness of government was again displayed as they sought to continue with constitutional referendum amidst the suffering of so many persons. As time went by and aid was slow to reach the survivors especially in Burma, both the local and international showed concern and fear over the threat of possible diseases resulting from the storm. Water borne diseases such as cholera, typhoid, dysentery and other diseases such as dengue fever and malaria were possible consequences. The Secretary General of the United Nations voiced his fears that thirst, starvation, untreated injuries and infectious diseases posed an increasing threat to population health (John Hopkins Bloomberg school of Public Health). Although cyclone activity can produce certain diseases these were prevented from happening in past instances due to humanitarian assistance. In the case of Burma however, the reluctance of the government was reason to believe that diseases would thrive under the storm ravaged conditions. In the case of Bangladesh relief workers and health officials’ main concerns were diseases resulting from lack of running water. Government agencies provided purification tablets but there were still concerns for persons located in very remote areas. International aid agencies such as Save the Children also helped as they distributed basic medicinal treatment for diarrhoea. Although the magnitude of the two natural disasters was different, the suffering and possibly loss of life could be minimized if international aid was allowed to come in as soon as the cyclone struck Burma. Many of the contrasting aspects of the two cyclones came as a result of the different responses by the two different governments. The response of the international community in both cases was very quick but at times their eagerness proved fruitless because they were not allowed to carry through with their work. It is evident that the efforts of the government and international agencies in Bangladesh helped to ease the suffering of the people albeit psychologically as they witness the assistance that was being provided. In any natural disaster everyone won’t be able to receive aid as quickly and as they should but the efforts made towards helping the survivors can make a substantial difference. Although the international community voiced their frustrations with the Burmese government they still showed little or no emotions in helping the people. The natural disasters that happened in these two countries should be a lesson for other countries. Disaster Preparedness should be an integral part of every governmental as well as non governmental agency. Since it is still impossible for man to avert natural disasters such as these the next best thing is to be prepared through implementation of proper systems and facilities as well as educating the masses on how to avoid some of the problems during the aftermath. Cyclone Devastates Myanmar, 10,000 Feared Dead. May 5, 2008 ABC News The international response to both natural disasters was swift and decisive although in comparison to Burma, Bangladesh welcomed them from the initial stages. Within a couple of days the government of Bangladesh were able to issue reports as to the number of casualties, damages, injuries and the areas that were worst affected. Approximately four days after the disaster struck the UN World Food Program had reported that it had already delivered food aid to 650,000 people. Another international agency in the help of USAID formed an early recovery team in helping with other agencies. In early December the USAID together with several other non-governmental organizations reported that food security needs were met and there was no evidence of severe malnutrition or instances that would indicate a scarcity of basic food items. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Society relief teams have been instrumental in the distribution of food items to people in many different districts. On a long term basis the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization also distributed seeds and other agricultural items. The US military was also present in Bangladesh assisting people who were affected from very early after the cyclone struck. Among the foreign governments and international groups that immediately pledged to help were the United States with 2.1 million dollars, the European Union 2.2 million dollars, the British government 5.1 million dollars, Roman Catholic Bishop’s conference 2.9 million dollars, Germany, France, Japan, with monetary donations as well as medical and other supplies. The international community responded in a similar fashion to the Burmese crisis but they were not given easy access to respond to the survivors. The problem was compounded with the non issuance of visas to international aid workers. Unlike the situation in Bangladesh it took five weeks before the United Nations helicopter carrying relief supplies were allowed to travel to the badly affected Irrawaddy Delta (Top of Form CRS report number: RL34481 May 15, 2008 Yet another calamity Bangladeshs cyclone Economist.com / Global Agenda. London: Nov 20, 2007. pg. 1 http://www.usaid.gov/locations/asia_near_east/cyclone_sidr Sidr Leaves Thousands Dead in Bangladesh http://www.npr.org/ Aid battle for Bangladesh victims. BBC Monday, 19 November 2007 Cyclone Nargis: 3.2 Million Burmese Affected, Limited Humanitarian Assistance Poses Health Threat as Conditions Worsen. John Hopkins Bloomberg school of Public Health. May 14, 2008. Read More