T Thomas: Disaster response - A study in contrast

Soon after Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans earlier this month, I happened to be in Holland and was reminded of what the Dutch had gone through during the great floods of 1953""how the government and the people of that country reacted to it. Holland had suffered very badly during World War II. Its main port city of Rotterdam had been reduced to rubble by the German Luftwaffe.

The Dutch were slowly rebuilding their ports and cities and clearing the aftermath of Nazi occupation. They had a hard time erasing memories. A Dutch friend of mine described how German soldiers raped young women in front of their parents just to humiliate and torment them.

The Diary of Anne Frank is a frank account of how the Dutch Jews and those who sympathised with them were treated. When I visited Holland in 1956, the memories of World War II were fresh in the minds of my Dutch friends.

Their anti-German feelings were so high that some of them refused even to shake hands with Germans. There was a restaurant called the Pipe in Rotterdam, which did not entertain German guests then. Today it is refreshing to see how relationships have changed with the passage of time and the economic integration of Europe.

Even the Dutch recognise and accept that in some ways their economy is a subsidiary economy of Germany, which is the economic engine of Western Europe. It is a telling example of how countries overcome bitter conflicts, memories and prejudices. In the not too distant future, it can happen between India and Pakistan.

Part of Holland was carved out of the sea by a system of dykes (dams) and canals by the hardworking Dutch. Much of the country is located below the sea level--hence the name "the Netherlands". It has survived because of these dykes.

In the 1953 floods, the dykes collapsed in 500 places and people had nowhere to take shelter because Holland has no hills or mountains. Almost 2,000 people died; tens of thousands of their cattle were drowned; thousands of houses were destroyed or damaged. One lakh people out of a population of 1.2 crore had to be evacuated.

After the floods, the Dutch government resolved that their country should never again be as exposed to the sea and floods. They prepared a master plan relating to dams, lakes, and inter-connecting waterways in the southwestern part of the country. The largest such barrier at Oosterschelde is about 9 km long and rests on concrete pillars over 40 metres in height.

Its massive gates are normally left open for the flow of water between its lake and the sea downstream. But whenever there is a threat, the gates can be closed. They are electrically operated. This dam is part of a very complex system of barriers and lakes known as the Delta Works. The whole project is as impressive as the pyramids of Egypt.

In sharp contrast to US President Bush, who took three days to go from Texas to New Orleans for an on-the-spot visit, the Dutch royal family was on the scene of the disaster the next day.

Princess Juliana and her mother Queen Wilhelmina waded through flood waters in their rubber boots to visit the affected areas and opened up one of their palaces to accommodate the victims of the floods! Their very presence among the distressed people gave hope.

The equivalent action by Mr Bush could have been to fly out to New Orleans immediately after the hurricane, put on his fatigues, get on a boat and go out on a rescue mission with volunteer agencies, keep company with the victims in the football stadium, and assure rehabilitation. But the "compassionate Conservative" Mr Bush could not manage to leave his Texas ranch for three days.

Unlike the situation in the US in 2005, communications and warning systems were not so well developed in Holland in 1953. The Dutch meteorological department had predicted the storm. Only three out of the 1,000 water boards, which were responsible for the maintenance of the dykes, subscribed to the radio warning systems.

Secondly, the Dutch at that time were strongly Calvinistic. No public activity was allowed on Sundays. Accordingly, the radio station stopped broadcasting at midnight on Saturday! So the Dutch population was totally unprepared for what hit them on Sunday!

In sharp contrast, the approach of Hurricane Katrina was widely broadcast on television and radio and a major part of the population of New Orleans was able to drive out of the city. Those left behind were mainly the poor blacks who did not have cars, and the sick who could not be moved out.

In comparison, the reaction of the authorities in India to the Mumbai floods was rather slow. It took them almost 48 hours to ask the army to come to the rescue. The other difference was the absence of a charismatic national leader who could inspire confidence by his or her presence among the distressed people.

In India the only person who could express such commiseration was Indira Gandhi. Despite all her shortcomings, she had genuine feeling for people in distress. The nearest symbol of such mass sympathy today is Sonia Gandhi. Perhaps the Congress should use her more frequently. It will also neutralise much of the criticism about her nationality.

Fortunately for the Congress, the BJP does not have anyone with a soft image. A leader ought to have an inner personality which people can see, especially in times of emergency. Some leaders do it with their words, as Churchill did during the Battle of Britain.

His inspiring speeches were one of the key factors that kept up the morale of the British people in their darkest hours. Some do it with a hug and an embrace, as Bill Clinton does. Manmohan Singh does it adequately by his posture and gesture, which fit very naturally with his humility and gentleness.

A leader has to have genuine feeling for people in distress. Any "put on" will be seen through. It also has to be an extension of his or her overall image. Often, the faith that your leaders care for you when you are in trouble is more important than any specific relief measures.