海角大神

Scientists and aid organizations gave the world plenty of time to prepare, but a late response by the world鈥檚 donor nations cost 50,000 to 100,000 lives during last year鈥檚 drought in the Horn of Africa region.

That is the message of a joint report by Oxfam International, Save the Children and other charities, released today, during the global meetings at Davos, Switzerland, and at the African Union in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Now, with a new drought looming in the West African nations of Mauritania, Niger, Mali, and Chad, the joint report, 鈥淭he Dangerous Delay,鈥� is calling for an overhaul of the world鈥檚 aid delivery system to avoid more preventable deaths from starvation.

鈥淭he humanitarian community needs to come together and raise its voice louder so governments and donors know the gravity聽of聽crises such as the one in the聽Horn聽of聽Africa,鈥� said Carolyn Miles, President and CEO聽of聽Save the Children in a statement. 鈥淏y the time the world sees starving children on TV, it鈥檚 too聽late. Tens聽of聽thousands聽of聽deaths could have been prevented had aid groups and governments received funding earlier to scale up programs.鈥澛�

Aid groups estimate that 50,000 to 100,000 people died of hunger between April and August 2011, more than half of them children. Even today, the UN warns that as many as 750,000 Somalis could die in the ongoing food crisis in Somalia.

What makes the deaths in the Horn of Africa so galling for many activists is the fact that the world had advance warning. Unlike the , which caused an estimated 1 million deaths in Ethiopia alone, aid organizations had received alerts from a massive computerized system called the Famine Early Warning System, which is comprised of ground sensors, satellite imagery, and field observations. FEWS-Net and other systems alerted aid groups as early as August 2010 that drought conditions were worsening, but slow funding from international donors meant that aid groups could not mount a full-scale response until July 2011, when the drought was in full force.

A famine warning and a global economic crisis

It鈥檚 logical to point fingers at the governments of rich nations such as Britain, France, the United States, and Germany for the slow donor response, because they are the nations who tend to give the most aid in times of emergency. As of 2002,, followed by Europe with 13.8 percent, Japan with 3.2 percent, and China with 1.7 percent. When these nations respond slowly, that hampers the ability of aid groups like Oxfam and Save the Children to send out extra personnel or emergency relief to a disaster zone.

But the truth is that 2011 is the year that the global economic crisis came to a head. The US Congress contemplated massive spending cuts to curb the US鈥檚 historic $14.7 trillion debt. The European Union appeared, at times, close to breaking up, as debt-strapped nations Greece, Italy, and Portugal veered toward insolvency.

Ordinary voters in the US told pollsters during this time period they thought that the US should scale back foreign aid spending. 聽In a 聽conducted by聽WorldPublicOpinion.org 补苍诲听Knowledge Networks, Americans were asked what percentage of the US federal budget was spent on foreign aid, and what amount was 鈥渁ppropriate.鈥� The most common answers were 25 percent and 10 percent, respectively. The US actually spends only 1 percent of its federal budget on foreign aid.

Oxfam's director emphasized the dangers of delayed responses.

鈥淲e all bear responsibility for this dangerous delay that cost lives in East聽Africa聽and need to learn the lessons聽of聽the聽late response,鈥� said in a joint statement. 鈥淚t鈥檚 shocking that the poorest people are still bearing the brunt聽of聽a failure to respond swiftly and decisively. We know that acting early saves lives but collective risk aversion meant aid agencies were reluctant to spend money until they were certain there was a crisis.鈥�