The December 2004 tsunami

The Indian Ocean tsunami of 26 December 2004 caused devastation on an almost unprecedented scale, killing an estimated 200,000 people and leaving hundreds of thousands more homeless and in urgent need of water, shelter and medical treatment throughout south-east Asia and as far away as east Africa.

The intervention conducted under the Community Civil Protection Mechanism in response was the biggest since its creation in 2001, with offers of help from a majority of participating states and civil protection operations in four different countries.

Chronology

Aid sent

Intervention by country

Added value

After the tsunami: lessons learnt

Chronology

The Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC) in Brussels was immediately warned of the disaster by automatic earthquake alert in the early hours of 26 December. By 08:30 CET the first contacts had been made with UN OCHA (United Nations' Office for the Coordination of Human Affairs), the then Netherlands Presidency of the EU and other Commission services, to assess the situation and the appropriate response. At 10:30 CET, following an international request for assistance from Sri Lanka, the MIC activated the Mechanism and broadcast details of the aid required to its network of 24-hour contact points in member states.

Over the following days a further three countries (Thailand, Indonesia and the Maldives) requested help through the Mechanism. During the course of the operation, the MIC facilitated the sending of assistance to the disaster-stricken countries, issued regular updates on the situation and changing aid priorities, and matched offers to needs. Activity in the MIC remained intense until the second half of January 2005, when civil protection efforts were gradually wound down in favour of the long-term reconstruction phase.

Aid sent

The aid sent through the Mechanism after the tsunami included “traditional” civil protection assistance - such as search and rescue teams, pumping and water purification equipment, medical aid, shelter and food - and help specific to the circumstances. For instance, the MIC assisted local and consular authorities overwhelmed by the needs of European tourists. It encouraged member states to use planes sent to carry aid to the region for repatriation on their way back. It also launched a call for forensic experts to help with body identification, leading to the dispatch of several specialist European teams to Thailand.

Six EU assessment and coordination experts were appointed on site to facilitate the civil protection operation from the ground. They played a crucial role in liaising with local and UN authorities leading the relief operation, and reporting back on aid requirements and logistical bottlenecks.

The emergency assistance sent through the Mechanism complemented the rapid response work of the European Commission’s Humanitarian Office (ECHO), which immediately released €3 million on the day of the disaster to enable partners in the region to deliver fast relief to the victims. By early February 2005 over €100 million had been committed in reconstruction aid.

Mechanism interventions by country

• Sri Lanka: call for assistance on 26 December 2004, expert arrives on site on 27 December, emergency relief speedily dispatched
• Thailand: MIC participates in inter-consular conference calls and issues call for help with forensic identification to member states after local authorities  are overwhelmed, resulting in the dispatch of specialist teams and equipment from the Community
• Indonesia: call for assistance launched on 28 December 2004 following UN advice that situation had been under-estimated and was extremely serious. MIC appoints assessment expert, who plays valuable role in coordinating aid to Banda Aceh in Sumatra
• Maldives: early reports of only limited damage prove over optimistic; MIC dispatches expert on site and emergency relief is sent by member states.

Added value

The flow of accurate, constantly updated information between the MIC, national headquarters and the disaster zone was essential to efficiency. Using the MIC as a communications and coordination hub cut down on the administrative burden of liaising with each European donor state individually that would otherwise have fallen to the local authorities, and ensured aid could rapidly be found where available.

For instance, cases of tetanus in Indonesia increased rapidly in the days following the disaster. The EU coordinator on site informed the MIC that the country was in urgent need of a large number of high-dosage anti-tetanus immunoglobulin. Through the network of national contact points, the MIC was able to locate a large stock of 4,000 anti-tetanus doses in Denmark, as well as a medical plane about to leave for Asia and able to transport it.

After the tsunami: lessons learnt

Overall the Mechanism performed well and speedily after the tsunami, helping to muster resources from member states and avoiding duplication between them. However, the intervention also highlighted a number of gaps, namely relating to:

• Insufficient transportation means
• Lack of access to information about military resources
• Different conceptions of the role of EU coordination among member states

Following the experience of the tsunami, civil society gave a clear signal that it wished to see a stronger and more effective European response to disasters. A number of initiatives have been taken to address limitations in the system. In April 2005, the Commission issued a Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Rapid Response and Preparedness Instrument for major emergencies, to fund actions contributing to preparedness and response in case of disaster, as well as a Communication on Improving the Community Civil Protection Mechanism. This was followed in January 2006 by a Proposal for the COUNCIL DECISION establishing a Community civil protection mechanism (recast).