Himalayan Tsunami

In mid June the Indian Himalayan state of Uttarakhand north of Delhi was devastated by floods killing thousands of people and making many more homeless. On the 9th July 2013 the Chief Minister of Uttarakhand said that at least 1,000 had died but that more than 4,000 were still missing. The causes were an early monsoon which caught out many pilgrims, the sheer weight of rainfall, and the unrestrained building that has taken place in recent years to cater to the influx of pilgrims. While some elements of the Indian state, such as the Indian Air Force, have acquitted themselves well, others such as disaster planning have not. The disaster also raises questions about governance and corruption.

The monsoon rains started on the 12th June, and then intensified on the 16th with the capital of Uttarakhand, Dehra Dun, recording in one night more than half the rainfall of Delhi in a year. This rain melted the snow on glaciers and the mountains. On the 17th Chorabari Lake, near the town of Kedarnath, burst its banks and water descended into the town along rivers, and took bankside buildings with it. It is thought the water levels rose by 10 metres. A number of smaller towns were almost completely overwhelmed by water. Refugees told of climbing onto the upper floors of a building and finding those on the lower floors were swept away. Landslides happened along the course of rivers in the area. Such was the force of the water that a town 250km from Kedarnath felt the effects. Parts of Delhi were also flooded as a result of the initial lake burst.

The state of Uttarakhand contains some of Hinduism’s most sacred sites including sources of the Ganges. Sites such as the Kedarnath Shrine are difficult to reach, either by trekking (it is 14km from the nearest bus-stop) or helicopter, but despite these logistical issues the number of pilgrims to this shrine increased from 87,000 in 1987 to 600,000 in 2012. More broadly it is believed 30 million pilgrims and tourists visited the four shrines in the area in the last year. These visitors put immense pressure on transport and hotels in particular. There have been suggestions that the numbers of visitors are limited but this has been rejected by local politicians who are conscious of the income that visitors bring.

Getting clarity on numbers has been difficult but it is believed that over 100,000 people were originally trapped. Many managed to get out by themselves, and perhaps 30,000 have been rescued by the Indian armed forces. The Indian Army had 8,500 soldiers involved in the operation and reportedly fed 10,000 people between 15 and 21 June. The Indian Air Force reported that they had flown 1,400 sorties, both helicopters and fixed-wing, dropped supplies and rescued more than 12,000 people. Two thousand vehicles were utilised in ferrying people to safety. Refugees waited at Dehra Dun Airport for information and their relatives. Google launched apps in both Hindi and English, and the state government its own website, to enable relatives to get in touch with those rescued.

Concerns have been raised about the conduct of the state government of Uttarakhand. The Comptroller and Auditor General reported in April 2013 that the State Disaster Management Authority (SDMA) had never met, had no dedicated funding, and had no plans in place despite there being numerous landslides in the past few years and it being mandatory under various legislation. There had been no analysis of previous disasters. It was also found that the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), headed by the Prime Minister, had never followed up to ensure that India’s States were preparing disaster plans. There have been many complaints about the slow pace of the rescue and relief effort, and also the fact that many refugees had been gouged for water and food by local entrepreneurs. This ignores the fact that it should be the local and national authorities that provide basic supplies in this instance. The Home Minister admitted there had been issues in co-coordinating the different agencies.

It was revealed that the Geological Survey of India had identified over 100 villages as being vulnerable after a previous disaster but no action had been taken. Furthermore, the Ministry of Environment and Forests declared a 135km building free zone, which would ban new hotels and hydro projects alongside the main rivers in Uttarakhand. However, the Chief Minister made representations to the Indian Prime Minister and the ban was never enforced

The environmentally unsound development of the Uttarakhand region has been partially blamed for causing the disaster. These include deforestation, which denudes the river banks and enables soil to silt up the rivers, sand mining, stone quarrying, excessive construction, and dams. It is believed that more than 70 dams have been planned for the region. While it is recognised that some dams are necessary environmentalists in India complain that there is no clear strategy on the numbers and where they should be built.

Time and time again when referring to the government one comes across the phrases, themes, and terms “poor planning”, “lack of strategy”, “uncontrolled” and “corruption”. All of these elements come together. One does not pretend that everything in the West works well always. The poor disaster management response to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans is one example, but the US appears to have learnt and there was seemingly little criticism of the authorities after the recent New Jersey hurricane. The politicians in India seem to make limited public pronouncements, information is difficult to come by, they impede the rescue efforts by making numerous VIP visits – various Chief Ministers visited and tried to get their own people out - and in their refusal to arrest development they may contribute to the disaster. “Development” means building new hotels and dams, from which politicians may get kick-backs, while schools are often decrepit and lack teachers.
********************************************************************************
Postscript: While not directly related to the Uttarakhand disaster the case of Narayan Pergaein is instructive in how the Indian educated classes think. Pergaein was, repeat was, a TV reporter for a Hindi news channel, News Express. He was filmed reporting to camera sitting on the shoulders of a man in a flooded river in Uttarakhand. This incident outraged Twitter opinion in India and Pergaein was sacked. His “defence” was that the man had offered to hoist him on his shoulders and that Pergaein had given him 50 rupees. What is saddening is that the upper and middle classes expect that the lower classes (and castes) have no dignity and are there just to serve them. In “Days and Nights in Calcutta” it is said that a pilot was fired for not getting to work during a flood; the pilot’s response was that it was the airline’s fault for not sending a peon to carry him across the water.... plus ça change.