Get help when you need it

A much less intense earthquake in December 1974 that hit Pakistan8217;s northern areas, including some regions damaged again by the latest tremor, caused widespread damage. Almost 100 villages and small towns were flattened. An international rescue effort and worldwide fund-raising ensued. By the time rescue crews reached remote villages and towns and the casualties were actually counted, 5200 people were found to have died, thousands injured and a quarter of a million rendered homeless.

This time, too, in addition to burying the dead and locating survivors, massive humanitarian assistance will be needed to rehabilitate those affected by the natural disaster. Rebuilding destroyed towns and villages, reviving their economy and planning for the future would require far more resources than Pakistan can muster on its own.

President Bush8217;s announcement of U.S. help for the earthquake victims and the generous assistance provided by Britain and the UAE, among others, reflects the international community8217;s humanitarian concern over the consequences of this natural disaster. As was seen during the aftermath of hurricane Katrina that destroyed New Orleans, even the world8217;s greatest military and economic power was not fully equipped with the unanticipated fury of nature. Countries such as Pakistan, where one-third of the population lives on less than 1 a day cannot be expected to deal with the consequences of a large-scale emergency without considerable international assistance. Pakistan has asked for, and should get, help in the form of transport helicopters, blankets, food supplies and medicines.

One cannot ignore the comments by some Pakistani Islamist politicians calling for 8220;rejection8221; of American and British aid as 8220;peanuts.8221; The phrase invokes General Ziaul Haq8217;s rejection of President Carter8217;s first offer of aid immediately after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. But humanitarian assistance, much needed by the earthquake victims, should not be treated the same way as foreign aid or rent collected for political services rendered for outside powers by the Pakistani establishment. The generosity of governments and citizens of all countries, motivated by concern about unfortunate fellow humans, should be gratefully acknowledged without engaging in political polemics.

India8217;s offer of help should help the stalled peace process in South Asia and should be reciprocated by a Pakistani offer of assistance to Indian victims in areas where Pakistanis might have better access. The U.S. willingness to allow its military personnel, stationed in Afghanistan, to assist with disaster relief in Pakistan should similarly be appreciated. Given the scale of the disaster, humanitarian considerations should rump political ones. At a time when Pakistan8217;s own fleet of helicopters appears to be inadequate, the decision to turn down India8217;s offer of helicopters for relief work reflects a knee-jerk reaction. In a day and age of satellite imagery, the fear that relief helicopters could be used for espionage is ill-founded. Fears about compromising Pakistan8217;s political stance over Kashmir by allowing free access across the Line of Control reflect insecurity not necessarily founded on ground realities.

While mobilizing manpower and resources to deal with the earthquake8217;s aftermath, Pakistanis should not overlook the structural shortcomings that have exacerbated the destruction caused by this act of nature. Wide swathes of Pakistani Kashmir, the Northwest frontier Province and the Northern Areas had no first aid infrastructure. Apparently no lessons were learnt from the 1974 earthquake and there was no disaster relief contingency plan in place for an earthquake of greater intensity. Even in the federal capital, Islamabad, it took soldiers two hours and forty five minutes to reach the collapsed Margalla Towers, notwithstanding the building8217;s central and accessible location. Once the troops arrived, they had no equipment or training to deal with disaster relief. Several days after the major tremor, reports indicate survivors being pulled from under rubble with bare hands and shovels. There was only one crane in all of Islamabad to deal with the massive debris of steel reinforced concrete.

Compare the army8217;s reaction time in reaching Islamabad8217;s collapsed Margalla Towers building with its swift execution of the October 1999 coup d8217;etat that brought General Pervez Musharraf to power and Pakistan8217;s fundamental problem becomes apparent. Then, army units moved swiftly to take control of Islamabad8217;s key buildings within 35 minutes of Musharraf8217;s removal from his position as army chief by the civilian prime minister. The army claimed that its swift movement was made possible by its preparedness for various contingencies. Quite clearly, the Pakistani establishment prepares for political contingencies but not for natural disasters. Perhaps it is time to include exercises for dealing with adversities such as last Saturday8217;s earthquake in the military8217;s repertoire of contingencies.

The writer is Director of Boston University8217;s Center for International Relations. He is author of the book Pakistan Between Mosque and Military Carnegie Endowment, 2005