I was just going through the newspaper, and came up perusing through a journalist's opinion on the marked difference in the manner in which Mumbai and London reacted in near "similar" situations. And I am shocked. Just where the journalist concerned even managed to make a connection between the two cities was beyond me.
Admitted, London faced the twin terrorist attacks of 7/07/2005 and 21/7/2005 remarkably well, and in truth, having visited it just two days prior to the first attack, the entire British administrative system is very much efficient, and for such an administration to react so very effectively to such an event is not something unusual. That police, fire personnel, medical crews, etc. emergency efforts were immediately deployed on a war footing may have lessened the casualties in these dastardly acts goes without saying. And yet, there is no scope to compare Mumbai with London.
Mumbai has a predominately middle class population, residing in areas with semi-effective, or in some areas, completely ineffective drainage systems, something that one is hardly going to encounter in London. Then again, the garbage disposal habits of the average Mumbaikar aren't comparable to any of the average Londoners. The average administrative worker in Mumbai isn't enjoying as luxurious and as stress-free jobs as in cities in the developed countries. The moot point however is that Mumbai wasn't attacked by terrorists. The city was the victim of nature's fury, something no man can ever forecast, nor can one ever prepare adequately for it. The intensity of the rains, combined with the rising tidal waters and the garbage- clogged drains completely disrupted the water disposal systems of the city, causing massive flooding in major sections of the city.
A friend of mine wrote in his blog recently that the government shouldn't be deplored for its inability to do anything in such a case as in such situations, we observed that where people themselves found it hard to reach places, expecting the government or emergency workers to reach such locations is preposterous. Maybe, if Mumbai would have been, (God forbid), been afflicted with bomb blasts, as it has been in the past, and the government would have dealt with it as before, then these pesky journalists would comprehend the plans that this city has in place. London had the unfortunate luxury of suffering from just terrorist attacks. Mumbai suffered nature's wrath, and when nature's cross with you, not even the Gods can save you.
1 comment:
BTW, spking of London's 'skillful' handling of the situation, shoot-to-kill isnt exactly skillful.
Its something abt these terrorists, they somehow manage to make a relatively civilised society stoop to their levels while responding to terror.
Since we are comparing London and Mumbai ,wrt response to terror, Mumbai has simply moved on without any rhetoric.
Its the best way to deal with it. And this mind u when Mumbai has repeatedly faced much larger attacks..
Post a Comment