Nick Cater is a British-based writer and consultant on aid and humanitarian issues.

The December 26 earthquake in the southern Iranian city of Bam is proving a major opportunity for the growing phenomenon of disaster diplomacy, in which governments with strained relations use crises to improve communications.

Natural hazards, from earthquakes to floods or drought, have often been political occasions rather than merely seismic, hydrological or meteorological events, either putting governments under pressure if they fail to respond well or creating new ways for icy international relations to be improved.

Earthquakes in particular have helped bring down rulers (Nicaragua 1972), accelerated political liberalisation (Armenia 1988) and opened communication channels (Greece and Turkey 1999). This may be partly due to the fact that earthquakes are extremely newsworthy and televisual disasters that attract public interest and demands for action.

Such issues are highlighted on the Disaster Diplomacy academic website, which investigates and analyses crisis-related dialogue from Cuba to Sudan, even embracing such risks to the Earth as asteroids and meteorites.

HELP FROM 'GREAT SATAN'

The Bam emergency has already prompted around 40 countries to offer assistance, from Russia, Italy, France, Turkey and Jordan to the Czech Republic, Germany, Spain, Belgium and Britain.

On the list is the United States, which broke off diplomatic relations with Iran after the Islamic revolution and the Tehran embassy hostage crisis more than 20 years ago.

In 2002, U.S. President George W. Bush declared Iran part of the "axis of evil" he said was aiding extremist violence, along with Iraq and North Korea. Yet two U.S. aircraft have already delivered medical supplies and staff to assist the relief effort.

Egypt, another country without diplomatic ties to Iran, has also sent relief aid, while President Hosni Mubarak extended his condolences to Iranian President Mohammad Khatami, and Culture Minister Faruq Hosni offered Egypt's help to restore Bam's ancient citadel, destroyed in the earthquake.

The U.S. move has prompted headlines along the lines of "Iranian earthquake may bury the idea of the axis of evil" and "U.S. relations with Tehran begin to thaw in the aftermath of disaster".

The United States has responded to Iranian needs before, supplying aid for the far smaller earthquake in 2002 near Qazvin in northern Iran, although on that occasion supplies were delivered by UNICEF in a low-key operation.

Disaster diplomacy often allows countries that are caught in long-standing disputes or confrontations to use the excuse of the crisis to open discussions without being perceived as weak, as happened between Pakistan and India after the Gujarat earthquake in 2001.

Even when two states are normally hostile to each other, diplomatic efforts may go down well with certain domestic political audiences, such as the many Iranians now living in America.

Israel has made a significant effort to use disaster diplomacy to improve its often pariah status through international relief efforts and by sending search and rescue teams.

In recent years it has been active in dozens of crises, including disasters in Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Jordan, Russia and Turkey, although after Bam, Iran insisted it would take aid from any country except Israel.

FACTIONS

Factional issues can also be important in disaster diplomacy, such as the way moderates wanting more openness in Iran, including President Khatami, may use the disaster to highlight the international support as a way of changing internal political opinions.

Some U.S. commentators have noted that direct contact with Iran came from the State Department of Colin Powell rather than the Bush White House, where neo-conservative hawks are believed to see Tehran as the next target after Baghdad for the threat or use of military force.

While disaster diplomacy can help cut through bureaucracy to speed up relief and then offer channels for discussing how to adapt existing rules for international relief efforts – on visas, importing supplies or using communications -- it should also ring warning bells for humanitarian agencies.

The short-term opportunism of disaster diplomacy can be a worry, since agency commitments to maintain independence, neutrality and impartiality, especially in terms of focusing on priority needs, may be put under pressure by political expediency.

Aid agencies might be advised to monitor the political rhetoric of recent days so that they can remind their government paymasters in months to come when financial support for reconstruction operations in Bam will need to be sustained, including the building of earthquake-resistant homes, schools and health centres.

Any views expressed in this article are those of the writer and not those of Reuters.