海角大神

Pakistan floods, Haiti earthquake: unprecedented 1-2 punch for US aid

About $76 million has already been carved out in civilian and military US aid for the Pakistan floods. But some are concerned that other donors may be holding back because of 鈥榓id fatigue鈥� after Haiti.

This is shaping up to be an exceptional year in terms of the US response to natural disasters, and the reason 鈥� at least until this month 鈥� could be found in one word: Haiti.

Now, Pakistan is facing what could turn out to be the biggest natural disaster in its history in the continuing and worsening flooding there. That means America鈥檚 鈥渇irst responders鈥� to international disasters are coping with an unprecedented one-two punch.

鈥淚t鈥檚 a normal year in terms of the number of disasters we鈥檙e responding to,鈥� says Mark Ward, acting director of the Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA), part of the US Agency for International Development鈥檚 (USAID). 鈥淲hat鈥檚 not normal and has been changing is the amount of money we鈥檙e spending: That鈥檚 been going up and up.鈥�

The main reason for that is the magnitude of Haiti鈥檚 earthquake in January. Mr. Ward鈥檚 office spent almost a third of its $1.3 billion budget 鈥� nearly $370 million 鈥� on emergency response to the Caribbean country鈥檚 temblor. In fact, OFDA鈥檚 budget includes a $460 million supplemental that Congress approved in light of the spending on Haiti.

The Haiti total dwarfs what has been earmarked for the Pakistan floods so far in terms of total emergency response 鈥� about $76 million in civilian and military aid. But, Ward says, the $30 million that OFDA alone has provided will grow in the days and weeks ahead as the flooding spreads southward. Also, demand will shift from search-and-rescue to food delivery, shelter, and disease control.

The United States is also responding to China鈥檚 deadly flooding and mudslides. And so far, it has provided about $4.5 million in emergency aid 鈥� mostly firefighting clothing and other special equipment 鈥� to Russia to help fight the unprecedented fires there.

Just the emergency portion of the US response to Pakistan鈥檚 earthquake in Kashmir in 2005 ended up totaling $70 million. But this year鈥檚 monsoon flooding has already affected 14 million people, according to the United Nations, and is spread over a much wider region.

Both the Pakistan floods and Russia鈥檚 massive fires have led to speculation about a cause-and-effect relationship with global warming. USAID steers clear of global-warming polemics, but Ward says his office has witnessed a shift in the kind of disaster it has been called on to respond to.

鈥淲e can safely say to the Congress that we are responding to a great number of disasters of different types these days,鈥� Ward says. Typically the bulk of OFDA spending has been on addressing the impact of conflict and other man-made crises in places like Iraq, Sudan, and Congo, he notes. In more recent years (think the tsunami in December 2004), spending on natural disasters has continued to grow.

Whatever lies behind Pakistan鈥檚 flooding, the country鈥檚 leaders are bemoaning what they consider to be a slow and inadequate international response.

Even President Obama鈥檚 special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, suggested earlier this week that other nations have not yet stepped up to the plate to aid Pakistan as the US has. In addition to the $76 million in financial and humanitarian assistance so far, the US has dispatched more than a dozen heavy-capacity helicopters, plus water-purification units, ready-to-eat meals, shelter materials, and field hospitals.

Haiti, Ward says, may also help explain the 鈥渄isappointing鈥� international and private donations for Pakistan. 鈥淎id fatigue post-Haiti is very real,鈥� he says. For example, a State Department donate-by-cellphone campaign (you can text 鈥淪WAT鈥� to the number 50555 to donate $10) has so far come up short.

Saying there is 鈥渘o comparison鈥� to the outpouring of private money after the tsunami and the Haiti earthquake, Ward speculates that 鈥減eople may be tapped out.鈥� And the global financial crisis may be holding back some countries and private companies.

Another explanation for weak private donations to Pakistan may be concerns over where money might end up, especially given publicity about some Muslim charities鈥� entanglement with the Taliban and other militant organizations. 鈥淚 think there are real concerns out there,鈥� both in the Pakistani 鈥渄iaspora鈥� and among other would-be philanthropists, Ward says, 鈥渢hat some of these organizations might have ties to some bad guys.鈥�

That鈥檚 one reason USAID is listing the nongovernmental organizations it鈥檚 working with on the Pakistan page of its website.

Some would-be donors may also be thinking that Pakistan鈥檚 government is shunning help from the US or that Pakistanis are anti-American and don鈥檛 want US help.

But the floods have changed sentiments and have opened the door to improved relations between the two countries, says Lisa Curtis, a South Asia expert at the Heritage Foundation in Washington.

鈥淯nlike during the refugee crisis following the Pakistani military operations in the Swat Valley last year, the Pakistan government is publicly welcoming a US role in helping to mitigate the impact of the flood disaster,鈥� she says. 鈥淭he US response can help bolster the Pakistan government鈥檚 grip on the situation and strengthen the overall bond between our two countries.鈥�