By Jehan Perera –

Jehan Perera

Cyclone Ditwah was the most destructive natural disaster to strike Sri Lanka since the 2004 tsunami. More than 640 people lost their lives, over 170 remain missing and more than 2.2 million people throughoþut the country were affected. Estimates placed the economic cost at over US$4 billion, equivalent to about four percent of Sri Lanka’s Gross Domestic Product. Sri Lanka could not cope with a disaster of this scale alone. International assistance was essential and it came quickly. India was the first country to send emergency relief, technical expertise and assistance to restore damaged infrastructure. Other South Asian countries also contributed humanitarian assistance. The Maldivian people collected and gave more than their government. This response was significant for reasons that went beyond humanitarian relief. It showed that person-to-person sympathies in South Asia can transcend nationality and religion.

South Asia is more often associated with political rivalry than regional cooperation. Relations between countries in the region have been shaped by wars, border disputes, security concerns and political mistrust. These divisions have also prevented the region from developing effective institutions for cooperation. The experience of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) illustrates this problem. Established in 1985, SAARC was expected to promote cooperation in trade, agriculture, education, health, poverty reduction and disaster management. Four decades later its record has been disappointing. Political disagreements between member states have stalled summit meetings with the last being held in 2014 and prevented many regional initiatives from moving beyond declarations.

The contrast with ASEAN is striking. Southeast Asia has also experienced territorial disputes, ideological divisions and political differences. But ASEAN chose to separate economic and functional cooperation from political disagreements wherever possible. As a result, trade within ASEAN today accounts for around one quarter of the region’s total trade. In South Asia the equivalent figure remains about five percent. The economic cost of this failure has been borne by every country in the region. Climate change offers an opportunity to adopt a different approach. It is not a substitute for resolving political disputes, but it provides an area in which cooperation is both necessary and politically possible. Floods, cyclones, droughts and heatwaves do not recognise national boundaries. Countries may disagree on political issues while still recognising that they face the same environmental risks.

Ditwah Effects

A conference on Climate, Peace and Security held in Kathmandu organized by the Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC) this week reflected a growing recognition that climate change is no longer only an environmental issue. The meeting of practitioners, academics, government officials and youth from the South Asian countries was a meeting of hearts and minds that transcended national differences. It also highlighted another important point. Effective responses to climate change cannot come from governments alone. They need to be informed by the experiences of the communities that are most directly affected. One of the case studies was Sri Lanka’s experience following Cyclone Ditwah which illustrates why community participation needs to be part of climate policy. Recovery is not simply about rebuilding damaged infrastructure. It is also about restoring livelihoods, resolving land issues and rebuilding confidence between affected communities and public institutions.

In their presentations at the conference, the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS) and the National Peace Council (NPC) provided the experiences in Sri Lanka of communities affected by Cyclone Ditwah to identify lessons for future disaster responses. Their work was presented at the Kathmandu conference and brought community voices into a discussion that is often dominated by technical experts and policymakers. The research focused on communities that had experienced severe flooding and landslides. Rather than looking only at the physical destruction, it examined the impact on livelihoods, land ownership, relocation, compensation and social cohesion. The findings showed that recovery is often slowed not by a lack of humanitarian assistance but by unresolved social and administrative issues.

Many of those surveyed had lost crops, farming land and sources of income in addition to their homes. Some families continued to live in schools, temporary shelters or with relatives months after the disaster. Although most accepted that relocation from high risk areas was necessary, they wanted assurance that they would not lose their livelihoods or become separated from their communities. For many, the greatest concern was not the move itself but uncertainty about access to farmland, schools, health services and places of worship after relocation.

The survey also highlighted weaknesses in the decision making process. More than half of those interviewed said they had not been consulted before relocation decisions were taken, while only a very small minority believed their views had been properly considered. The strongest message from the communities was that relocation should take place with their participation and, wherever possible, keep existing communities together rather than dispersing them.

Beyond Lanka

Another issue brought out by the research was the particular vulnerability of plantation communities in Sri Lanka. Families whose homes had been damaged found that they could not always receive the full compensation available because they did not possess legal title to the houses they had occupied for generations. Climate related disasters therefore exposed long standing issues relating to land ownership and equal access to state assistance that had existed long before the cyclone. Based on these findings, recommendations included that relocation programmes should preserve community networks and livelihoods, that plantation families should receive greater security of land tenure, that compensation procedures should be simplified, and that communities should participate more fully in disaster planning. They also called for stronger early warning systems, better communication in both Sinhala and Tamil and greater transparency in the management of disaster recovery funds.

These problems are not unique to Sri Lanka. Across South Asia, climate related disasters are exposing similar weaknesses. Whether it is flooding in Bangladesh, glacial melting in Nepal, heatwaves in India or coastal erosion in the Maldives, governments are finding that recovery depends as much on effective public institutions and community participation as on financial resources. There is considerable scope for countries to learn from one another’s experience. This is where SAARC could regain some of the relevance it has lost. It already has agreements and institutions dealing with disaster management, food security and regional cooperation. Rather than allowing broader political disputes to prevent progress in every area, member states could focus on issues where cooperation benefits everyone. Joint disaster preparedness, regional early warning systems, scientific collaboration, humanitarian assistance and climate adaptation are practical areas where progress is possible. As a recent beneficiary of South Asian solidarity and concern, Sri Lanka has a special obligation in this regard.

As a friend of all South Asian countries, Sri Lanka can play a facilitative role in the revival of SAARC cooperation. By sharing their experiences and lessons learned with counterparts elsewhere civil society organisations can help to strengthen regional cooperation from the ground up, complementing cooperation between governments. Climate change will not remove the political disagreements that divide South Asia. But it does create a compelling reason for governments to work together where their interests coincide. Cyclone Ditwah demonstrated both Sri Lanka’s vulnerability and the willingness of neighbouring countries to respond when disaster struck. The next step should be to convert that humanitarian response into sustained regional cooperation. Climate cooperation could become an initiative in which South Asian governments and civil societies work together.