Modern societies face a dizzying array of threats, from cyberattacks on critical infrastructure to global pandemics and increasingly extreme weather events resulting from climate change. Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine has even thrust conventional military aggression back into the heart of Europe, and atop the spectrum of potential threats.
Ukraine´s fierce resistance to the Kremlin´s aggression, however, offers important lessons on how modern societies can better prepare to counter the growing threats they face.
Certainly, the Ukrainian people’s mental resilience and iron will to defend their country serve as an inspiration for democratic societies everywhere. Not surprisingly, the citizens in many European countries — especially those in the east and bordering Russia — are showing a renewed interest in disaster preparedness and civil defense training, capabilities that largely atrophied in the post-Cold War decades.
To respond to today’s complex threats better, Western governments should capitalize on this renewed impulse toward stronger national defense and civic responsibility to build more resilient societies. Those efforts, in turn, would strengthen national unity.
Many European nations as well as NATO and the European Union (EU) are already understandably focused on increasing civilian capabilities to respond to disasters, whether natural or man-made. Increasingly, strong civilian capabilities are considered essential for a credible military defense. These efforts must go far beyond the “duck and cover” drills of the Cold War. Individuals, civil society organizations, academia and the private sector should all be enlisted in renewed national preparedness efforts.
What is urgently needed is a holistic approach to national preparedness that emphasizes more resilient communities and individuals — one that approaches crisis response not just from a whole-of-government, but rather from a whole-of-society perspective.
In building resilience, the United States could borrow valuable best practices from like-minded countries, for instance, from prospective NATO allies Sweden and Finland. For example, Nordic countries have highly developed preparedness systems involving all sectors of society. NATO is already working on and updating resilience guidance for allies and partners. Similarly, the EU is finalizing binding legislation on strengthening the resilience of critical infrastructure.
Crisis-proofing critical functions such as transport, energy, medical services and food supply must be done before the next disaster strikes.
Other recent disasters and crises such as the global coronavirus pandemic and Hurricane Ian exposed additional vulnerabilities in preparedness. During the pandemic we have learned once again that many shortcomings in national preparedness are systemic, originating in a lack of adequate inter-agency coordination and a dearth of material preparedness, for instance, in the healthcare sector. In both crises, it was once again apparent that when disaster strikes, clear and unambiguous communication from federal, state and local governments is absolutely essential.
Information to the public on security and safety threats must be balanced and non-alarmist, but at the same time candid and realistic. For example, it is not often clearly communicated by authorities that in severe emergencies, they must prioritize whom they help first. If citizens understand this triage approach and know what is expected of them in a crisis, the ability of a society to withstand emergencies is strengthened.
This emphasis on communication highlights the critical role of the individual in national preparedness. In the battle against cyberattacks or malign disinformation campaigns, for instance, individuals are our first line of defense. Resilience training can teach them cyber best practices and “media literacy” to counter disinformation. Such individual awareness of risks and threats is the foundation of a resilient society. Many countries already integrate individuals and their communities into overall preparedness planning. Over time, this creates a “preparedness mindset” where individuals understand their role and part to play if and when disaster strikes.
Such a preparedness mindset, for example, might lead citizens to stockpile supplies or equipment to survive a hurricane for several days without relying on the help of authorities. It could incentivize individuals to update their first aid skills, coordinate an emergency response plan with their neighbors or determine in advance the location of the nearest civil defense shelter.
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to creating a preparedness mindset in the citizenry. Yet people can be empowered to work as ambassadors for resilience in their own communities. Trusted “preparedness ambassadors” could be encouraged to volunteer to articulate risks that the community might face. Many good examples of this “culture of preparedness” approach already exist in the United States, including the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) programs training volunteers and communities to identify risks, locate resources and take other preparedness actions.
A resilient society is one that bounces back even after confronting a severe crisis. Government at the federal, state and local levels needs to think strategically about future threats, and clearly articulate the danger and needed responses to an informed citizenry. Communities can then empower resilient, preparedness-minded citizens. If people work together on preparing and training for emergencies in our communities, it can only strengthen the ties that bind us together in order to face adversity — and, perhaps, bolster trust and national unity.
Veera Parko is a visiting fellow at the Center for the Study of the Presidency & Congress and is on leave as director of International Affairs at Finland’s Ministry of the Interior, where she is responsible for disaster management and civil preparedness. She is Vice-Chair of NATO Civil Protection Group.