Of the $460 million in international aid requested by the UN for Pakistan, only half has been pledged. The response from Western countries has been noticeably muted. In the large donor state of Germany, who gave over US $8 million in the same period following the Haitian earthquake, a mere 150,000 Euros in donations have been collected for Pakistan (Augsburger Allgemeine). The Pakistani floods have a hard time competing on the local agenda in Germany alongside high waters at home and the threat of nuclear contamination from the wildfires in Russia. More importantly, in Germany as in other Western countries, the issue is whether or not to support a country so connected in the popular imagination with the Taliban (Tagesschau).
International donors fear that the money they give will end up flowing into the hands of the insurgents that are hell bent on killing foreign soldiers stationed across the border in Afghanistan. That is not a concern easily dismissed, as Western governments and aid agencies are forced to work with the highly corrupt Pakistani Government to try to get aid to the needy. Given the Pakistan intelligence service's close ties with the Taliban, there is no guarantee that monies will not end up being diverted (Spiegel).
On the other hand, not helping may also not be an option for the West. For one, many believe that it is a moral imperative to help a fellow man in need, irrespective of whether one reads the Bible or the Koran, or nothing at all. Secondly, the reality on the ground is such that if Western aid remains conspicuously absent, that will only play into the hands of the Taliban. Already now, fundamentalist charities have made great strides by providing essentials where aid agencies failed to do so. By allowing the Taliban to increase their appeal to ordinary Pakistanis, Western governments risk turning a humanitarian catastrophe into a political one that will further destabilize an already volatile region (Tagesspiegel).
Please weigh in with your assessment of the situation – or with any ideas you might have on how to resolve this dilemma. Here are some questions to think about:
- How is the public reacting to calls for donations in the country in which you live?
- What stances do the various politicians espouse on the topic?
- Do you think there is a relationship between a country having troops stationed in Afghanistan and the willingness of its citizens to come to the aid of the Pakistanis? Is that relationship a positive or a negative one?
- Do you think that, faced with such a multitude of calamities lately, "disaster fatigue" is setting in?
Photo: Staff Sgt. Horace Murray, License: Public Domain
- 2
August 17, 2010
Daren Adam Cheatham, New York University, Bronze Contributor (15)
I believe that the fear that donations will be diverted to the Taliban, disaster fatigue, and the poor economic state of the U.S. are all working against humanitarian aid for the people suffering from the floods.
Disaster fatigue and the affiliation with Pakistan and the Taliban almost work together to hinder humanitarian aid. With the earthquake in Haiti still fresh in people's minds and such close proximity to the U.S., combined with all of the media (and let's not forget Hollywood) attention that it received, I feel that it receives priority over the disaster in Pakistan. Haiti has not been affiliated with harboring terrorist and supporting terrorist organizations and there are no celebrities in Pakistan demanding that we reach into our pockets and media coverage has been much less than during the Haiti earthquake. Add to that the signs that our economy is still a ways away from recovering, and you've got a recipe for complacency.
That said, I don't think we can afford to sit back and do nothing. We must do whatever we can to prevent a nuclear state like Pakistan from approaching total failure. A failed Pakistan could create the nuclear worst-case scenario that we've all been hoping we'd never have to deal with.