The two powerful earthquakes that struck Venezuela on June 24 once again underscored the enormous challenges countries face when a catastrophe overwhelms national response capabilities. Beyond the scale of the disaster itself, such events also test the speed, coordination, and effectiveness of regional and international cooperation.
In an exclusive interview with Diálogo, retired Chilean Army General Ricardo Toro, former director of Chile’s National Emergency Office (ONEMI) former deputy force commander of the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH), and current director and co-founder of NeoAnticipa, a consulting firm specializing in disaster risk management and organizational resilience, discusses the lessons learned from the Haiti and Chile earthquakes, the evolution of international disaster response mechanisms, and the challenges Latin America faces in strengthening preparedness for future catastrophes.
Diálogo: You experienced the 2010 Haiti earthquake firsthand and later led Chile’s national emergency management system. What is the most important lesson those experiences taught you about the role of international cooperation during the first hours after a major disaster?
Retired Chilean Army General Ricardo Toro, former director of Chile’s National Emergency Office (ONEMI) and former deputy force commander of the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH): I believe it’s important to share these experiences because the lessons they offer can help improve preparedness for future emergencies. I had the opportunity to experience two of the most devastating earthquakes of 2010 just six weeks apart: Haiti in January and Chile in late February. Both profoundly shaped my perspective on disaster risk management and international cooperation.
The Haiti earthquake, in particular, was deeply personal. Two minutes before the earthquake struck, I had left the United Nations headquarters building, which completely collapsed. I narrowly escaped. Shortly afterward, I received the devastating news that my wife had disappeared beneath the rubble. Days later, her body was recovered. Emotionally, it was an experience that changed my life forever. At the same time, it also showed me the importance of the United Nations and the tremendous impact a well-coordinated international response can have during a disaster of that magnitude.
At the time, I was serving as deputy force commander of the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH). Because most U.N. personnel lived in container housing, those structures were among the few facilities that remained operational after the earthquake. During the first three days, I was responsible for leading the response until international reinforcements arrived.
That experience confirmed that international assistance is indispensable when a disaster overwhelms the affected country’s response capacity. Without rapid international support, the situation would have been far more critical.
Haiti also provided important lessons. One of the most significant was the need to professionalize and better coordinate international urban search and rescue (USAR) teams. Before that earthquake, teams from different countries often arrived without common standards or effective coordination. In many cases, they gravitated toward areas receiving the most media attention rather than following a centralized plan that ensured coverage across all affected areas.
That experience helped strengthen the United Nations’ International Search and Rescue Advisory Group (INSARAG), which establishes accreditation standards for international USAR teams. Today, coordination is far more organized, as demonstrated during the recent response to the earthquake in Venezuela.
Another major lesson was that international assistance must respond to the actual needs of the affected country — not simply to what individual countries are prepared to send. I remember receiving aircraft loaded with blankets when temperatures in Haiti were close to 40 degrees Celsius. Although well intentioned, that aid simply did not meet the needs of the emergency.
As for Chile’s 2010 earthquake, I was not directly involved in the immediate response because I had just returned from Haiti with my wife’s body. Two years later, in 2012, I became director of Chile’s National Emergency Office (ONEMI), where I had the opportunity to lead the modernization of the country’s disaster management system.
At that time, the United Nations sent an international assessment team to conduct a comprehensive review of Chile’s response to the 2010 earthquake. The objective was to identify the main shortcomings and challenges encountered during the emergency. The commission ultimately issued 75 recommendations, which became the roadmap for strengthening national capabilities and modernizing Chile’s disaster risk management system.
Many of the improvements focused on communications, operational protocols, institutional coordination, and the management of international assistance. Chile received support from abroad, but it also received resources that exceeded actual needs, including field hospitals that ultimately were never used.
The fundamental difference between Chile and Haiti was institutional strength. Although Chile experienced significant shortcomings, the government continued to function, maintaining a command structure capable of coordinating both the national response and international assistance. That institutional capacity greatly facilitated the management of a disaster of such magnitude.
Diálogo: The region recently faced another major earthquake in Venezuela. Based on your experience, what capabilities and mechanisms are most critical to ensuring that international assistance has a meaningful impact during the first days after a major catastrophe?
Gen. Toro: The first step is learning from previous disasters. Preparation for international cooperation cannot begin when disaster strikes — it has to begin long before.
Today, many international organizations exist, but the region still lacks an up-to-date assessment of each country’s response capabilities.
We should already know which countries have helicopters, certified USAR teams, field hospitals, strategic airlift, logistics capabilities, and other specialized resources. If that information were already organized and readily available, we would not waste valuable time asking who can provide what after an emergency occurs. Instead, we could identify the type of disaster and immediately activate the most appropriate capabilities.
In an earthquake, for example, the absolute priority during the first few days is saving lives. Every effort must focus on search and rescue operations and emergency medical care. Specialized international teams need to arrive as quickly as possible because the first five days offer the greatest chance of finding survivors. After that period, survival rates decline significantly.
In both Haiti and Chile, many countries were eager to help immediately, demonstrating genuine solidarity, although political considerations inevitably exist in international affairs. The challenge is not a lack of support but ensuring that assistance arrives at the right time and responds to the affected country’s actual needs.
In addition, after a disaster of this magnitude, national authorities themselves may be overwhelmed and unable to accurately assess what they need. Governments may even delay requesting assistance for political reasons in order to project an image of control. That is why this process needs to be far more institutionalized rather than depending solely on the affected country’s ability to request assistance in the middle of chaos.
Strengthening regional capabilities is also essential. In many cases, deploying teams from neighboring countries is much more efficient because they can arrive far more quickly than resources coming from other continents. That level of advance coordination — based on shared information and a clear understanding of regional capabilities — would enable faster responses and ultimately save more lives.
Diálogo: You are proposing creating a regional map of capabilities and vulnerabilities to identify, before an emergency occurs, what each country is likely to need and which nations are best positioned to provide support. How should such a system be developed?
Gen. Toro: It should begin with a regional information database that is available before any emergency occurs.
The first point to recognize is that not every country requires the same type of assistance. Chile, for example, would likely need fewer international USAR teams than other countries because it has earthquake-resistant building standards and several internationally accredited USAR teams.
In contrast, after a major earthquake, we might need assistance in other areas, such as logistics, supply distribution, specialized medicines, or certain technical capabilities.
The region should develop an assessment that identifies available capabilities for different disaster scenarios — earthquakes, floods, wildfires, landslides, and other emergencies. Then, when a disaster occurs, there would already be a plan identifying the resources each country is likely to need and who is best positioned to provide them.
The recent earthquake in Venezuela also offers an important lesson. Depending on geography, assistance may arrive more quickly from North America — or even Europe — than from some South American countries. Those kinds of variables also need to be incorporated into regional planning.
Ultimately, the greatest challenge, and where we should focus our efforts, is systematically identifying both the capabilities each country can provide and the resources it is likely to need for different types of disasters. That level of preparation can make an enormous difference when every hour counts.
Diálogo: From your perspective, how has Latin America and the Caribbean’s ability to respond collectively to major disasters evolved? Is the region better prepared today than it was a decade ago?
Gen. Toro: Yes, we have made significant progress. The work carried out by the United Nations, together with global and regional coordination mechanisms, has incorporated lessons learned from every major disaster and improved many aspects of emergency response — from preparing rescue teams to strengthening international coordination.
Venezuela is an excellent case study of how international assistance was mobilized and coordinated on the ground. The country has experienced years of institutional deterioration, making it very difficult to respond to a disaster of this magnitude using only its own resources. While there may initially have been a perception that it could manage the crisis independently, the reality demonstrated that international cooperation was essential to mounting an effective response.
The United States played an important leadership role because it already had capabilities in place and was able to contribute from the earliest stages of the response. Venezuela also benefited from having logistical assets and personnel already on the ground, which helped accelerate and organize relief operations. I can’t imagine what the response would have looked like had the United States not already been present when the disaster struck. Something similar happened in Haiti, where the rapid arrival of U.S. capabilities demonstrated the importance of having partners with the logistical and operational resources needed to support large-scale humanitarian operations.
At the same time, I believe our greatest remaining challenge is creating an integrated regional platform that clearly identifies each country’s capabilities and keeps that information continuously updated.
Today, valuable time is still lost gathering information that should already be available. The region needs to move toward a more integrated system in which countries understand not only their own capabilities but also where the capability gaps exist and where outside assistance will be needed.
Diálogo: You have emphasized the importance of coordination and having capabilities identified in advance. In that regard, the United Nations’ INSARAG has played a key role in establishing international standards for USAR operations. How important has this initiative been in improving interoperability among countries?
Gen. Toro: INSARAG has been transformative. I witnessed its importance firsthand because, after the Haiti earthquake, rescue teams arrived that were not certified and were not necessarily prepared to integrate into an international response operation.
That experience led to the strengthening of INSARAG, which established common standards, accreditation procedures, and a classification system that distinguishes teams according to their capabilities — light, medium, or heavy.
Today, when an emergency occurs, certified teams do not simply deploy independently. There is a coordination structure that assigns them to the areas where they are most needed and prevents duplication of effort.
We saw that recently during the response to the earthquake in Venezuela. I spoke with members of the Chilean USAR team who participated in the operation, and they told me the deployment was well organized, with clearly defined responsibilities and deployment timelines that followed international protocols. As is often the case during major disasters, there was some confusion in the initial hours, but coordination improved rapidly thanks to the structures and procedures already in place.
In Haiti, for example, we had to draw maps ourselves and manually determine where each incoming team should be deployed. Today, INSARAG has institutionalized that process through coordination teams that organize the arrival and assignment of international rescue teams. That has significantly improved the efficiency of disaster response.
It is also important to understand that while emergencies generate tremendous solidarity, they can also create confusion. That is why common standards and procedures are so important.
I remember there was considerable debate in Chile about allowing uncertified rescue groups to participate. My position was clear: certification is essential. Good intentions alone are not enough. In an emergency, responders need the training, discipline, and ability to operate within a coordinated system.
INSARAG has helped transform international solidarity into effective, organized assistance.
Diálogo: Chile has developed internationally recognized USAR capabilities through decades of responding to earthquakes and other disasters. How important is it for countries to strengthen their own national capabilities before participating in international operations?
Gen. Toro: The first thing to understand is that no country should permanently depend on international assistance to respond to its own emergencies. Disaster risk management must be a national priority. Every country needs to assess its principal hazards and develop the capabilities required to respond initially with its own resources.
International assistance should complement those capabilities when an emergency exceeds what a country can handle — not replace the responsibilities that each nation must assume beforehand. This is especially important because the risk environment is changing. Extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and more complex as a result of climate change, increasing the likelihood that countries will face emergencies that exceed their normal response capacity.
Preparedness has to begin at home. Every country should have a basic response capability and then, when necessary, receive international assistance to reinforce it.
International cooperation works best when it strengthens well-prepared national systems rather than attempting to replace them.
Diálogo: During major disasters, the armed forces often provide capabilities that few civilian agencies possess, including strategic transportation, engineering, communications, field hospitals, and logistics. From your experience, what role do military capabilities play in complementing civilian and humanitarian response efforts during an international disaster response?
Gen. Toro: The armed forces play a fundamental role because they are among the few state institutions that retain organized capabilities, discipline, logistics, and a nationwide presence even when many other structures may have collapsed.
During a major disaster, particularly in the first hours, military capabilities can be decisive in supporting transportation, communications, the establishment of air bridges, aid distribution, security in affected areas, and overall logistics.
However, it is important to understand that the armed forces do not replace the national emergency management system. They are one component of a response structure that should already be organized before disaster strikes.
Experience shows that coordination is the key. It is not enough to have resources. Everyone must know who is in charge, who requests support, how civilian and military capabilities are integrated, and what responsibilities each institution has.
In Chile, for example, the major earthquakes led to stronger coordination among civilian agencies, the armed forces, police, local governments, and international partners.
A large-scale disaster requires a comprehensive response. It is not simply a rescue operation. It also involves restoring communications, ensuring transportation, maintaining public order, reestablishing essential services, and ensuring that assistance reaches those who need it most.
Diálogo: Once the initial search and rescue phase ends, countries enter a much longer period of recovery and reconstruction that can last for years and affect millions of people. Based on your experience, how should international cooperation evolve during this second phase, and what capabilities are most valuable in supporting long-term recovery and reconstruction?
Gen. Toro: Reconstruction is one of the greatest challenges countries face after a major disaster. The first priority is establishing a clear governance structure. Ideally, there should be a high-level body — such as a ministerial committee or a specialized agency — responsible for defining reconstruction priorities and identifying the country’s needs.
Based on that work, a technical secretariat should be established, either nationally or with international support, to develop the procedures needed to ensure continuity throughout the process and monitor implementation.
An executive body is also essential to oversee reconstruction projects and ensure objectives are achieved effectively. Reconstruction should be organized in phases — short, medium, and long term — with clear planning, dedicated resources, and oversight mechanisms to ensure implementation.
That organization should also identify any legal, regulatory, or administrative changes needed to facilitate the process. Reconstruction is not simply about rebuilding damaged infrastructure. It is about restoring productive capacity, reestablishing essential services, and creating the conditions that allow communities to rebuild their livelihoods sustainably.
Diálogo: After your experiences in Haiti and Chile, and in light of the lessons emerging from the recent earthquake in Venezuela, what shift in thinking is most important if the region is to be better prepared for future large-scale disasters?
Gen. Toro: The greatest lesson these experiences have taught me is that disasters will always occur. What we can decide is how prepared we will be when they do. We cannot prevent an earthquake, a flood, or a wildfire, but we can significantly reduce their consequences through preparedness, planning, and cooperation.
Experience shows that no country can face a major disaster alone. It also shows that international cooperation is far more effective when there is advance planning, when each country understands its own capabilities and vulnerabilities, and when assistance is directed toward actual needs rather than improvised responses.
The challenge for the region is to move from a reactive approach to permanent systems of preparedness. International assistance should be part of long-term planning. To achieve that, we need a more systematic regional approach, with clear inventories of available capabilities, identified vulnerabilities, and mechanisms that make it possible to determine what resources will be needed under different scenarios and who is best positioned to provide them.
Latin America faces a particular challenge because it is one of the world’s most disaster-prone regions while also becoming increasingly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. That makes it essential to strengthen regional coordination and build on successful initiatives such as INSARAG, whose urban search and rescue standards demonstrate the value of common procedures and interoperable response mechanisms.
We also need to clearly understand when the emergency phase ends and when recovery begins. That transition is essential for making sound decisions and ensuring that international cooperation continues to support the affected country’s evolving priorities. Preparedness is not simply about responding faster — it is about responding better, through planning, coordination, and a long-term strategic vision.
