Historians have interpreted the various forms of human struggle for survival. Not only individuals, but also collectives, both locally, nationally and globally. Threats to human existence come from various forms: violence, war, to natural disasters. Violence and war have even become one way of fighting over natural resources (Lele, 2008).
Violence, war, or disaster is really an “extermination program”. Disasters can occur because humans mismanage nature. That is, war or disaster is a choice with the same result: death. Also, by choice, both can be avoided.
Then a real disaster occurred in the political space. Although there are types of disasters beyond human control, such as floods and droughts due to El Niño and La Niña, people are required to be able to cope with them. The most effective collective action is through the state. A government that is not ready will find it difficult to handle a disaster.
When writing this article, I was attending an online meeting with the team that prepared the Strategic Environmental Assessment (KLHS) for the Kendeng Mountains, Rembang, Central Java. This team was formed on the orders of President Joko Widodo in 2017 to respond to the demands of the Sedulur Sikep community who are struggling to defend the natural resources around them from the exploitation of a cement factory.
The latest problem in the Kendeng community is flooding. By increasing the value of the land, the community covers the culverts so that their land is dry. But as a result, water overflowed into other areas. Spatial and political conflicts at the local level, it seems, are as serious as political feuds at the central level, namely the weak power to respond to such conflicts on the ground.
In other words, a disaster is a non-military war program with the same end result, namely a tool to seize natural resources or as a way for a group to dominate another human group, as the conclusion of Ajey Lele that I quoted above. In The Political Economy of “Natural” Disasters (2008), Charles Cohen and Eric Werker show another problem with a disaster, namely the presence of various forms of aid that distort and increase the likelihood that the government will reduce investment to prevent it. First, the negative effect politically. If a disaster receives direct help, political conflict will decrease, because the population who is victimized does not take a stand against the state. Direct assistance to victims also erodes financial benefits for local governments.
Second, there is moral hazard in disaster relief. This is because, if donors can contribute to dealing with disasters, they should also be able to help prevent it through regional authorities or institutions that are responsible so that the disaster does not occur. There are regulations on preparedness, insurance is also formed, but the people responsible for disaster prevention often do not follow the principles. According to Cohen and Werker, omission is a big and powerful design in the destruction of natural resources. 20 years ago, the United Nation Environment Program (UNEP) stated that global warming will cause natural shocks. The prediction is now proven correct. The problem is that when there are more disasters, international assistance will also increase. Why was this assistance not given to prevent disasters so that the victims could be few?
Robert Mandel (2002) in Security and Natural Disasters writes that geopolitically and ecopolitically, disasters show that nature is still in control. This means that various engineering technologies are unable to control environmental shifts. Geopolitically, environmental development can boost a region’s resilience to disasters. But ecopolitically, this natural ability has limits. In other words, human activities are far more deadly than the natural changes in the environment. So disasters can be prevented as long as the authorities regulate them by compelling regulations or take quick responses to prevent disasters from happening. As the Chinese saying goes: the way to win a battle is to know yourself and your enemy’s strength. Since the source of the disaster is humans, through exploitation of natural resources, the war should have been prevented before it exploded.
Hariadi Kartodihardjo
Professor of Forestry Policy, Faculty of Forestry, IPB. His book, which was published in 2018, “Constructing the Stanza of the National Anthem”, contains reflective essays on policies, politics of natural resource management, and the power of knowledge.
No Responses