A powerful earthquake in Colombia has revived painful memories for Venezuelans who experienced devastating tremors less than two months earlier. But while both countries faced major search-and-rescue challenges, the initial government responses have highlighted striking differences in preparedness, institutional capacity and emergency coordination.
A magnitude 7.4 earthquake struck Colombia on Monday, damaging buildings across several regions and leaving hundreds dead or missing, according to authorities. The disaster came only weeks after two major earthquakes hit Venezuela on June 24.
The contrasting responses have become a subject of discussion across the region, particularly among Venezuelans who witnessed rescue efforts struggle amid limited equipment and deep public distrust of government institutions.
Colombia moves quickly after earthquake
Colombian President Abelardo de la Espriella had been in office for less than three days when the earthquake struck. The conservative former criminal defense lawyer, who had no previous political experience, was sworn in at a ceremony in Cali shortly before the disaster.
Within about an hour of the earthquake, de la Espriella announced that he would personally oversee the emergency response and established a command structure to coordinate rescue operations.
Government officials and humanitarian agencies quickly mobilized personnel and equipment. Rescue crews used cranes, excavators, drones, thermal cameras and search dogs to examine collapsed structures and locate possible survivors.
The speed of the response has been especially notable because Colombia was undergoing a politically difficult transition. De la Espriella had narrowly defeated predecessor Gustavo Petro, who initially disputed the election result and alleged irregularities.
Despite those tensions, humanitarian officials said the country’s emergency institutions continued operating.
“Institutions have continued to function despite the change in government,” María José Torres Macho, the United Nations’ senior official in Colombia, said in describing the response.
Venezuela faced criticism after June earthquakes
The situation was markedly different in Venezuela after the June 24 earthquakes.
Acting President Delcy Rodríguez took several hours to address the country following the disaster. Government officials initially released casualty figures that did not include La Guaira, one of the hardest-hit areas.
Rescue efforts were also hampered by shortages of heavy machinery and other emergency resources. In some locations, civilians were reportedly forced to search through rubble themselves while international rescue teams helped fill gaps in the country’s response.
Rodríguez remained in Caracas during the first day before traveling to La Guaira to inspect the destruction. Officials subsequently revised the number of deaths over several days but did not initially provide a detailed figure for missing people.
The government’s handling of the disaster further intensified longstanding concerns about transparency and the reliability of official information.
Political tensions shape public trust
Venezuela’s prolonged economic and political crisis has weakened confidence in state institutions, while years of repression have also restricted access to independent news and information.
Gabriel Bastidas, a Venezuelan journalist based in Argentina, said residents struggled to obtain timely information about the emergency, including where to find assistance and how to reach safer areas.
The situation has also produced conflicting estimates of the scale of the disaster. More than six weeks after the earthquakes, opposition-linked figures claimed that tens of thousands of people remained unaccounted for, while the Venezuelan government reported a substantially lower official death toll.
Experts caution that casualty and missing-person figures can change considerably in the aftermath of a major disaster, particularly when communications are damaged and remote communities are difficult to reach.
Colombia’s response also faces criticism
Colombia’s emergency operation has not been free of controversy.
De la Espriella’s decision to limit the involvement of foreign rescue teams has prompted criticism from some international officials. China, in particular, questioned the coordination of international assistance.
The country’s rugged terrain, damaged infrastructure and disrupted communications have also complicated efforts to determine the full extent of the destruction.
Government figures have differed significantly from local estimates, while independent databases have reported much larger numbers of missing people. Authorities have warned that the situation remains fluid as search operations continue.
The circumstances of the two disasters are also different. Venezuela’s earthquakes struck densely populated areas around nightfall, making rescue and initial assessment more difficult. Much of Colombia’s destruction occurred in rural areas during daylight, allowing emergency teams to begin operations more quickly.
Venezuelans see a lesson in institutional strength
For many Venezuelans watching events unfold in Colombia, the most striking difference has been the visible presence of emergency equipment and coordinated rescue teams.
Juan Mogollon, a Venezuelan living in the United States, learned through television coverage that his teenage cousin and grandparents were trapped in a collapsed apartment building in Cali.
After witnessing the difficulties surrounding Venezuela’s earthquake response, Mogollon feared that rescuers in Colombia would face similar obstacles. Instead, he saw heavy machinery, firefighters, search dogs and drones deployed to the disaster zone within hours.
The experience, he said, demonstrated the importance of emergency preparedness and functioning institutions.
Colombia’s response remains in its early stages, and thousands of people are still missing. Authorities are expected to revise casualty figures as rescue and recovery operations continue.
For Venezuelans familiar with the aftermath of their own earthquakes, however, the disaster has already become more than a comparison between two emergency operations. It has underscored how political stability, public trust, institutional continuity and access to resources can determine how effectively governments respond when lives are at stake.