Premium
This is an archive article published on October 23, 2005

Another disaster, same old story

A Pakistani friend called me a few days ago to say relief workers she knew in the earthquake affected areas were appealing desperately for m...

.

A Pakistani friend called me a few days ago to say relief workers she knew in the earthquake affected areas were appealing desperately for medicines and tents. She used the word desperately twice and said the death toll was going to be at least twice as high as reported because there were villages in the high mountains that nobody had been able to reach yet. I said I knew people in India (non-governmental) who would be able to help but how would they send the relief materials since General Musharraf had made it clear that Indian help was unwanted, and she said they could find a way to get permissions and clearances. This conversation took place in London a few days ago and I write today from New York where the New York Times has a picture on its front page with a caption that conveys the impression that all is well in Pakistan but on the Indian side relief has not reached victims. ‘‘In Pakistan, Awaiting a Meal; in India, Awaiting Relief’’, said the caption under a picture of Pakistani victims in Balakot eating a meal.

Puzzled, I turned to the ‘‘Letter from Asia’’ that accompanied the picture and found that the New York Times correspondent who wrote it was impressed with Pakistan’s relief efforts and disapproved of India because the Indian government had refused international aid. ‘‘In short, India has been anxious to portray itself as a giver, rather than a receiver.’’ Implication: how dare India get so uppity.

Almost the whole of this ‘‘Letter from Asia’’ was a complaint about India’s attitude with several paragraphs devoted to victims in ‘‘Indian-administered Kashmir’’. The ‘‘disputed’’ nature of Kashmir incidentally extended only to the part administered by India because according to the New York Times, Balakot is in Pakistan.

Story continues below this ad

I am not usually chauvinistic or overly patriotic but confess to being irritated by the unfairness of the attack on India in one of the world’s most respected newspapers. In the face of such a terrible tragedy you would imagine that at least the Press would stay away from playing petty politics. But, politics appears to be the name of the game for everyone. When India offered aid on day one it appears to have been a political move since the government has been unable so far to provide tents for our own victims. This is outrageous considering that the Army alone should be able to supply tents in sufficient numbers.

When Pakistan refused India’s help but asked instead for helicopters unmanned by Indian pilots we see evidence of more politics at play. And, when Kashmir’s separatist leaders like Mirwaiz Umar Farooq complained on almost the first day about the lack of response from India Inc we see more politics at play. When terrorists continued their murderous attacks, last week, it was again a matter of politics (we are still alive and killing) and when they distribute relief it seems also to be a matter of politics. Then, we have the politically connected vultures in Srinagar already contacting businessmen in Mumbai to alert them about big pickings in the reconstruction process.

The Kashmir earthquake exposed South Asia at its worst. It exposed the basic lack of compassion on the part of those who rule us and it exposed the hopelessly inadequate infrastructure that most Indians and Pakistanis are forced to suffer because our governments have been too busy spending money on war machines. On the Indian side it is outrageous that journalists and TV crews should have been able to reach remote villages before relief did. And, outrageous that even after last December’s tsunami the government has been unable to put in place a disaster relief mechanism that goes into immediate effect in a crisis.

What is the problem? Is it so hard to put together a team of people who organise relief as soon as disaster strikes? The requirements are always the same — medical assistance, food and shelter — and yet every time disaster strikes we see the same hopelessly inadequate response. And, the same resort to empty gestures. What is the point of the Prime Minister and Sonia Gandhi ‘‘rushing’’ to Kashmir if they cannot ensure adequate relief?

Story continues below this ad

India is right in refusing international aid. We do not need it. We have more than enough supplies of medicines, food and tents. What our officials lack is the ability to respond quickly and compassionately to a crisis. And this shames us time after time after time.

Write to tavleensingh@expressindia.com

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement