Disasters have overwhelmed mankind all the time in the past. The potential for disaster is increasing ubiquitously in the globe, but the types of events experienced are based on each country's geography, capacity, resilience and many other factors. Politics is an integral element of disaster management. Political scientist Harold Lasswell defined politics as 'who gets what, when, and how.' It is a process by which groups of people formulate decisions. Politics has been observed in all human interactions. A politician is a person who is involved in influencing public policy and decision-making. They include people who hold decision-making positions in government, and people who seek those positions, whether by means of election, inheritance, appointment, electoral fraud, conquest, divine right, or other means. Politics is not limited to governance through public office. Political offices may also be held in corporations, and other entities that are governed by self-defined political processes.
Disaster management requires human perception and intervention which necessitates decisions. Who will decide and define what a disaster situation is? Which institutions will deal with disasters? What will be the financial resources to be allocated for disaster preparedness and response? Where will structural and not structural risk reduction take place? Who will implement activities and coordinate? All these can vary according to scenario and characteristics of the disaster, the character of the public authority and related duty-bearers and circumstances of the community. Political considerations are a significant factor in the preparation for, response to, recovery from and mitigation of disaster events. In normal times, disasters are not the main or even the secondary theme of interest and discussion for most of the politicians. Politicians generally pay attention to disasters only when they occur. They pay visits to the disaster sites, making general statements that the government will do whatever at its disposal and will enhance relief works. For most countries, traditional security concerns have precedence over disasters. Military weapons are in priority list instead of procuring disaster management equipment. Public can admonish in the next elections a local or national government due to its lack of ability to handle a disaster. On the other hand, their success in disaster management may pay off in the elections. Sometimes, disasters may create leaders or increase the popularity of political figures.
In times of natural disaster, people often count what government does or did for them after the disaster. In any disaster involving major losses of lives, injuries, and serious damage, the authorities are faced with the following major politicising questions: 1. what happened? This question appears innocent but it starts the process of defining the event and constructing its meaning.2. Why were the losses high and/or the response inadequate? This combination question becomes political very rapidly because it focusses attention directly on basic pre-event as well as post-event public policy decisions and their effects.3. What will happen when emergency operations stop? People turn their attention to recovery and reconstruction, which always involve (a) fund and (b) decisions about that fund. This combination is politics.4. What will be done in reducing future disaster risk which again includes well-thought-out political commitment and strategy?
Within minutes after any major disaster, politics starts. It seems across the globe that politicians use disasters to further their political careers. The mayor of a Japanese island Izu Oshima, devastated by a deadly typhoon apologised on October 17, 2013 for failing to issue an evacuation order, as rescue workers combed through mountains of debris searching for the missing. Regional civil defence chief Minda Morante said after a powerful earthquake (death toll climbed to 198) in the Philippines: "I hope, the people will understand. While we want to bring aid to them, our main adversary is accessibility. We acknowledge that there are still gaps in the emergency response. We cannot address the many needs all at the same time."
The then Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi undertook an aerial survey of the flood disaster affected areas in Uttarakhand in June 2013 even when Union Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde asked VIPs not to visit the area lest relief operations be hampered. The BJP called for declaring the event a national calamity. While different states announced aid, the authorities in Uttarakhand seemed clueless about how to handle the situation. The banner of one of the well-maintained pandals reads: 'BJP Rahat Shivir' [BJP relief camp]. In this time of adversity while there is food, water and biscuits, there is also politics (The Hindu).
Throughout China's long imperial era natural disasters were treated as signals that Heaven was worried about what humans were doing. The natural environment and political order were seen intertwined, so disaster events could lead some to wonder if Heaven was uneasy, perhaps even ready to transfer the mandate to rule to a new dynasty. This in turn could inspire groups which were already aggrieved but had refrained from rebelling to take up arms. Emperors struggled to respond appropriately to disasters at the ritualistic and pragmatic levels, knowing their continuing in power depended on them conveying their concern to the populace and their officials finding efficient ways to provide material relief.
In the United States when a natural disaster strikes, only the president has the power to declare the site a federal disaster area, making it eligible for a variety of assistance. Thomas Garrett of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and Russell Sobel of West Virginia University found that from 1991 to 1999, states that were more politically important to the president had a higher rate of natural-disaster declarations. Further, the average number of disasters declared in election years was 66 per cent higher than the number in non-election years. Yet there is little reason to believe that bad weather mimics political cycles. The Economist magazine called the Katrina disaster the "Shaming of America," but it got it wrong. The outpouring of private charity has been remarkable and Americans should be proud. What has been shameful is our government's catastrophic handling of disaster relief (Matt Ryan, Duquesne University).
Bangladesh is one of the most disaster-prone countries in the world. Natural and human-induced hazards such as floods, cyclones, draughts, tidal surges, tornadoes, earthquakes, river erosion, fire, infrastructure collapse, high arsenic contents of ground water, water logging, water and soil salinity, epidemic and various forms of pollution are frequent occurrences. Over the last three decades particularly under the democratic governments, Bangladesh has invested a huge amount in disaster management and has now gained considerable ability to manage natural disasters, in particular, floods and cyclones in better way. The disaster management vision of the government of Bangladesh is to reduce the risk of people, especially the poor and the disadvantaged, from the effects of natural, environmental and human induced hazards, to a manageable and acceptable humanitarian level, and to have in place an efficient emergency response system capable of handling large-scale disasters There are political elements in the vision which needs continuous political and administrative commitment and risk-informed actions from parties in power now or will be in future to improve people's livelihoods, capacity and resilience for facing/avoiding next hazards in Bangladesh. The success in reducing disaster risks and consequences of disasters effectively could be politically comforting to the position of any politician or any political authority in any place of the world.
The writer, holding Ph.D, is a fellow of EPFL, Switzerland and
disaster risk reduction and
climate change adaptation
expert and lawyer.
farid.hasan2008@gmail.com
© 2026 - All Rights with The Financial Express
