I blame the Swiss

[chickenfeet]

Watching flame wars break out all over LJstan about who should be donating more or less to tsunami relief I am minded of two thoughts; one entirely cynical and one entirely serious.

1. If the Swiss banks would free up the money they are holding on behalf of politicians or ex politicians from the affected countries and their families, no foreign donations would be needed.

2. In our rush to help the people affected by this latest disaster, let's take a moment to think about how the world could/should be doing more about the long standing humanitarian disasters in, e.g., the DRC and the Sudan which have left millions homeless and which kill thousands every day. I don't want to get into a numbers game but the estimated death toll from the civil war in DRC is three million and the world community is basically doing bupkis.

Comments

[oursin.livejournal.com]

the long standing humanitarian disasters
Yeah, when I went to the International Red Cross website to donate I decide to check 'where it is most needed' rather than specify.

[badasstronaut.livejournal.com]

I think those are all fair comments. I guess the 'rush to help' is about the sudden violence of this disaster. It's hard to miss, compared to disasters that sneak up on people and linger on and on. And internet people know people, and people who know people, and they know people who are in the vicinity of the problems. I suppose at least one positive thing is that people get reminded that they might want to support/publicise various agencies which are dealing with crises continually. I shouldn't be surprised if the response to the current disaster yields additional revenue which will help people other than those caught up in the current earthquake/tsunami aftermath.

When it comes down to it, however well informed we think we are, we've no way of having a true sense of the extent of need and suffering everywhere, and which ought to be dealt with first. There's probably plenty of need and suffering in the suburb I live in, but it doesn't frequently present itself to me. Generally, I tend to think the 'act locally' principle is most sensible, because at least then one has some context.

Re international disasters though, all I feel I can do is pick an organisation to support which I think I can trust to make those kinds of decisions. And much of that has to do with alleviating my own feeling that I ought to be doing something about something, and feeling impotent to do anything beyond that.

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

I think you are right about the suddenness/shock aspect. I think too, it's a question of a limitation on our imagination. We can imagine that we might have been at Phuket or in the Maldives. We can't imagine being a refugee in the Sudan.

[msconduct.livejournal.com]

I think it's also about blame or the lack of it. There's clearly nobody to blame for the tsunami (try as I might to pin it on George W). But when it comes to civil war, I think people are less likely to donate/exert political pressure because they see the tragedy as avoidable (unfair as that is on the victims). Which is why Michael Buerk when reporting on the famine in Ethiopia that kicked off the whole Live Aid effort made a deliberate decision not to say in his report that the cause of the famine was the civil war there.

[angeyja.livejournal.com]

Other things too.. I thought this was a good post, a good reminder.

One of my newer coworkers is from Zimbabwe. I keep thinking that I'm paying better attention. Or maybe it's wider attention. This is something I want to do. Thanks.

[rahael.livejournal.com]

Well in civil wars there is always the difficulty of who is going to get the money. Money that ends up in certain places may just entrench injustice and human rights abuse. I know that international agencies work within conflict regions is not always helpful.

The Tsunami is garnering this reaction becuase the relevant countries cannot cope with the level of this disaster. I don't think Britain could cope that easily - and when you think that these countries are already overstretched and dealing wiht other urugent problems, such as civil wars, the lingering aftereffects of this is going to be massive. As it is, I can't even conceive how long its going to take to recover. And I'm happy donating money in this circumstance because I trust the relevant agencies to concentrate solely on much needed relief efforts. It is a much better alternative to the terrorists collecting money abroad, which they had had started to do.

There is corruption in Sri Lankan politics, and the levels have gotten bigger with increased economic liberalisation, but it isn;t the major problem in the country politically. Moral corruption is far, far worse and more urgent, deppressingly enough. It just doesn't generate enough income, especially with a war to feed, to do that. Now if the terrorists opened up their private funds........

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

You raise some good points. I wasn't thinking so much about Sri Lanka with the corruption point, more Indonesia.

Ultimately I think your argument leads into the broader debate about how rich countries and international agencies should relate to poorer ones, especially badly governed ones. As you rightly say, in certain cases aid does more harm than good.

So is it reasonable to expect developed countries to shell out in cases of famine and earthquake and then step away to allow gangsters and thugs to recreate the conditions that make sure the next disaster will be worse?

Is it rational and moral to rush to the aid of the victims of a 'natural' disaster like the tsunamis but ignore the victims of a man made disaster like famine in Zimbabwe?

[rahael.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, I completely agree. I donate to Amnesty every month becuase of this very principle. The thing about natural disasters is that the situation isn't a decade long, complicated situation. I would be wary of how people responded to man made humanitarian disasters with only a cursory look at the issues. I think the rational and moral response to the Tsunami disaster is an easier one to arrive at, then the rational and moral response to immensly irrational and immoral situations.