Doomsday prepping makes economic sense
When European governments start advising citizens to stockpile food, secure backup power, and locate the nearest bunker, it may sound like doomsday prepping that can be easy to dismiss as paranoia. It's not. It's strategic planning — and a signal that citizen-level resilience is becoming part of smart policy.
The continent-wide push for emergency preparedness represents a rational economic response to demonstrated vulnerabilities — and other nations would be wise to take note.
The European Commission recently urged every EU citizen to maintain a 72-hour emergency kit. Norway has told its population to prepare to manage on their own for a week. Germany has a large number of shelters and bunkers left over from World War II and the Cold War, but many of them are in need of repair or renovation. These are not isolated policies but components of a strategic push to acknowledge a fundamental truth that modern infrastructure is extraordinarily efficient yet catastrophically fragile.
Five years after COVID-19 exposed how quickly global systems can unravel, Europe has made a calculated decision: investing in citizen resilience costs far less than managing cascading system failures. This deserves careful consideration in the Gulf, where hyper-connected smart infrastructure presents its own form of risk.
What comes next?
Are the Europeans paranoid, or simply paying attention?
Madrid's power outage last month told us everything we needed to know about modern vulnerabilities. What began as a local power failure quickly cascaded into system malfunctions, telecom disruptions, and payment network outages. A modern capital city found itself partially rewound to the 19 th century – no electricity, limited water, and cash quickly becoming the only viable currency. This was a predictable consequence of our increasingly interconnected systems.
According to the World Bank, COVID-19 triggered the largest global economic crisis in over a century. It widened inequalities, cut output and jobs, and caused global GDP to fall by 3.4 per cent in 2020 — a $2 trillion loss. For Europe, the pandemic cost around €2.3 trillion. Against that backdrop, even major investments in civil defense are fiscally sound.
For Gulf nations, the stakes are different but equally high. When drinking water depends on energy-intensive desalination and air conditioning becomes a lifeline in summer, disruptions to critical infrastructure pose existential risks. A coordinated attack on critical infrastructure could be catastrophic.
The critical 72 hours
European nations have identified what emergency management experts call the 'vulnerability gap' – those critical first 72 hours between disaster onset and effective government response. The Dutch government recently updated its guidance, recommending households prepare for three days without assistance. Justice and Security Minister David van Weel made the rationale clear: in a crisis, government help may not come immediately.
This shift doesn't absolve governments of responsibility. It acknowledges logistical reality by acknowledging the physical limitations of centralised response. If even the Netherlands — wealthy, compact, and efficient — says it can't guarantee rapid response, others should take note.
Finland offers a powerful example. It maintains enough bunker space for its entire population and promotes citizen readiness through platforms like the 72tuntia.fi website. Its model blends institutional readiness with citizen responsibility — a hybrid approach with proven effectiveness.
By this summer, every French household will receive a 20-page 'survival manual' outlining how to handle everything from natural disasters to cyberattacks and war. The message is consistent: be ready to manage alone, at least at first.
The cyber tipping point
The vulnerability of critical infrastructure is no longer hypothetical. In 2023 alone, over 200 cyber incidents targeted the energy sector, with more than half specifically directed at European facilities. The 2021 Colonial Pipeline attack in the US caused fuel shortages across the southeast — a reminder that digital breaches can have immediate physical consequences.
For Gulf states, where smart city initiatives are rapidly advancing, these risks are heightened. Projects like the UAE's smart infrastructure or Saudi Arabia's NEOM offer extraordinary potential — and new surfaces for cyber threats.
The pandemic fundamentally changed how we think about these risks. Before COVID-19, preparedness was often seen as alarmist; now it's increasingly recognised as basic prudence. A global health crisis exposed how quickly supply chains could collapse, how rapidly hospital systems could be overwhelmed, and how dependent modern societies are on uninterrupted essential services.
Beyond pandemic thinking
But the next crisis may not look like COVID-19. It might stem from cyberattacks, infrastructure failures, or geopolitical conflict. European strategies now pair digital tools — like Germany's shelter-finding app — with physical investments, striking a balance between innovation and fallback.
The European Commission's 'Preparedness Union' frames these efforts not as panic, but as risk management. For Gulf states — with strategic energy roles and global connectivity — the logic applies. Resilience isn't pessimism; it's planning for the inevitable.
Across Europe, citizens are being advised to stock basic supplies, including:
Non-perishable food (canned goods, energy bars, dried meals)
Potable water (at least 6 litres per person)
Essential medications and first aid kit
Flashlights and extra batteries
Battery-powered or hand-crank radio
Cash in small denominations (when payment systems fail)
Copies of important documents in waterproof containers
The list extends further, but the principle remains consistent: be prepared to function when digital systems fail and centralised assistance is unavailable.
The Gulf's advantage
Gulf countries don't need to copy Europe. Their unique governance structures, geographic challenges, and strategic positions demand tailored solutions. But the focus on the 72-hour window offers a useful framework.
The UAE has already established an enhanced Civil Defence Authority under the National Emergency Crisis and Disasters Management Authority (NCEMA), implementing updated regulations covering disaster response and emergency management. Saudi Arabia has updated its civil defence regulations to standardise emergency responses across sectors. These institutional approaches provide excellent foundations.
Still, as European models show, institutional readiness must be matched by individual preparedness. The UAE's active role in last month's World Crisis & Emergency Management Summit — themed 'Together Towards Building Global Resilience' — reflects a willingness to evolve.
Saudi Arabia's upcoming NCT Middle East 2025 conference in Riyadh, focused on chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive risks, points to a growing strategic focus. Complementing this with citizen-level readiness would strengthen resilience further.
The economic case
The math is simple. Small investments in preparedness help avert massive losses. Finland's long-standing readiness once seemed excessive — now, it feels visionary.
COVID-19 doubled global levels of severe food insecurity to 276 million people and triggered widespread stockpiling. Mental health took a hit too — depression and anxiety rose by 25 per cent globally in the first year alone, adding to the economic toll.
As Gulf countries continue developing emergency frameworks, Europe's evolving playbook offers valuable insight. Preparedness is about recognising that resilience is always a smart investment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
39 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Iran tells UN Israel ‘destroyed diplomacy' ahead of nuclear talks
Iran's ambassador to the United Nations, Ali Bahreini, has told the UN Security Council that the Israeli and US strikes on Iran were not isolated events but the outcome of what he called 'politically motivated actions' by Washington and its European allies. Speaking during a session on escalating tensions, Bahreini said Israel had 'destroyed diplomacy' by launching an attack just two days before scheduled nuclear negotiations between Tehran and Washington. He challenged Western expectations that Iran should return to talks, asking how it could return to something 'it never left'. Bahreini also accused Western powers of distorting the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), saying it had been 'manipulated into a political weapon … exploited as a pretext for aggression and unlawful action'.
Gulf Today
3 hours ago
- Gulf Today
South Korea and Japan now face political uncertainty
Japan and South Korea marked the 60th anniversary of the normalization of their diplomatic relations on Sunday. The two Asian powers, rivals and neighbours, have often had little to celebrate, much of their rancor linked to Japan's brutal colonial rule of Korea in the early 20th century. Things have gotten better in recent years, but both nations — each a strong ally of the United States — now face political uncertainty and a growing unease about the future of their ties. Here's a look at one of Northeast Asia's most crucial relationships, from both capitals, by two correspondents from The Associated Press. South Korea's new liberal president, Lee Jae Myung, is determined to break sharply from the policies of his disgraced predecessor, Yoon Suk Yeol, who now faces a trial on charges of leading an insurrection over his imposition of martial law in December. Relations with Japan, however, are one area where Lee, who describes himself as a pragmatist in foreign policy, may find himself cautiously building on Yoon's approach. Before his removal from office in April, the conservative former president tried to repair relations with Japan. Yoon wanted to also tighten the countries' three-way security cooperation with Washington to counter North Korean nuclear threats. In 2023, Yoon announced a South Korea-funded compensation plan for colonial-era forced laborers. That decision caused a strong backlash from victims and their supporters, who had demanded direct payments from Japanese companies and a fresh apology from Tokyo. Yoon's outreach boosted tourism and business ties, but there's still lingering resentment in South Korea that Japan failed to reciprocate Seoul's diplomatic concession by addressing historical grievances more sincerely. While advocating for pragmatism and problem-solving in foreign policy, Lee has also long criticized Japan for allegedly clinging to its imperialist past and blamed that for hurting cooperation between the countries. Some experts say the stability of the countries' improved ties could soon be tested, possibly around the Aug. 15 anniversary of Korea's liberation from Japanese colonial rule at the end of World War II, when Lee is expected to publicly address the nation's painful history with Japan. Some in Seoul want Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba to mark the anniversary with a stronger statement of remorse over Japan's wartime past to put bilateral ties on firmer ground. While wartime history will always linger in the background of Seoul-Tokyo relations, Lee and Ishiba may face a more immediate concern: US President Donald Trump's rising tariffs and other America-first trade policies. South Korea's Hankyoreh newspaper in an editorial this week called for South Korea and Japan to "collaborate immediately" on a joint response to Trump's policies, arguing that the proposed US tariffs on automobiles pose similar threats to both countries' trade-dependent economies. Ishiba, eager to improve ties with Seoul, has acknowledged Japan's wartime aggression and has shown more empathy to Asian victims than his recent predecessors. His first encounter with Lee seemed positive, despite worries in Japan about South Korea's stance under a liberal leader known for attacks on Japan's wartime past. Lee, in that meeting with Ishiba at the G7, likened the two countries to "neighbors sharing the same front yard" and called for building a future-oriented relationship that moves beyond their "small differences and disagreements." Ishiba and Lee agreed to closely communicate and to cooperate on a range of issues, including North Korea's nuclear and missile development. Under a 1965 normalization treaty, Japan provided $500 million in economic assistance to South Korea, saying all wartime compensation issues were settled. However, historical issues including forced labor and sexual abuse of Korean women during the war have disrupted ties over the decades, while South Korea has become an Asian power and a rival to Japan, and while Tokyo, especially during the late Prime Minister Shinzo Abe 's rule, has promoted revisionist views. Japan has since offered atonement money twice for the so-called "comfort women," an earlier semi-private fund and a second one unilaterally dissolved by former South Korean President Moon Jae-in's liberal government. Associated Press
Middle East Eye
4 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel dismisses EU rights report as ‘moral and methodological failure'
Israel has slammed a European Union report accusing it of potential human rights violations in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, calling the assessment flawed and baseless. In a note seen by Reuters and shared with EU officials ahead of Monday's foreign ministers' meeting, Israel's Foreign Ministry rejected the findings outright. 'The Foreign Ministry of the State of Israel rejects the document ... and finds it to be a complete moral and methodological failure,' the note said, urging the EU to disregard it entirely. The EU's diplomatic service compiled the report, which Israel claims ignored the security challenges it faces and relied on what it called inaccurate sources. Tensions between Israel and Europe have grown in recent months, with several European governments voicing concern over the rising civilian death toll from Israel's military offensive in Gaza, launched in response to Hamas's 7 October 2023 attacks.
