Hard to do, easy to criticise: How (not) to respond to a humanitarian crisis 

THE world continues to watch in horror as the aftermath of the Turkey-Syria earthquakes unfolds in the media. In the early days, reports of the “failed humanitarian response” to the disaster were already circulating, with journalists on the ground reporting that “aid has not yet arrived” to remote areas. Such reports elicited emotional reactions from viewers, some outraged by the lack of immediate humanitarian response in delivering aid to huge populations in distress.

But this is no ordinary disaster, and the reality is that “immediate” does not come easy for humanitarian organisations.

The sheer magnitude of the earthquakes (measuring 7.7 and 7.6 on the Richter scale), combined with the extremely shallow epicentres, led to the deadliest natural disaster in the region in modern times. The first quake’s impact is estimated to be equivalent to 130 atomic bombs. The affected area is over 135,000 sq km (about twice the size of Belgium and the Netherlands combined) and is a region experiencing political tensions (both within and between countries). The area was home to more than 18 million people. The affected population within Turkish territory alone is larger than the population of entire countries such as Austria, Belgium, Greece, Portugal, Serbia, Sweden and Switzerland.