When disaster strikes

In the wake of the devastation caused by the earthquake in Haiti, it’s easy to forget about developments occurring elsewhere in the world—hundreds of deaths in Nigeria due to ongoing clashes between Muslims and Christians, continued hostilities across the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and a festering counterterrorism situation in Yemen are just a few examples. When major stories break, news outlets capitalize on every tidbit of information available to provide viewers and readers with comprehensive coverage 24-7. All eyes focus in on one area, and the rest of the world presumably stands still. This is, arguably, a good thing. When all we see is chaos in Haiti, we are naturally prompted to sympathize with the victims of the catastrophe and hopefully to contribute to their recovery efforts. The ability of a telethon to raise more than $58 million in one evening for Haiti is a testament to the media’s ability to garner public awareness through focused coverage. But how long do we expect this spotlight on Haiti to last? What happens to the relief effort when the next big story breaks?

There is something inherently flawed with the way we approach wide-scale disasters–from the earthquake in Haiti to the humanitarian tragedy that resulted from the incursion into Gaza last January. In both situations, the media rushed to show images of decimated buildings, injured children, and angry protesters around the world questioning the agility and efficacy of international relief efforts. In both situations, numerous op-eds were written criticizing governments for their failure to take action. In both situations, civilians died perhaps not because of the immediate effects of the initial catastrophe—be it a natural earthquake or planned invasion—but because of failed infrastructure.

But this week, few remember that we are marking the one-year anniversary of the Gaza invasion that left upwards of 1,400 Palestinians dead and prompted war crime investigations into members of Hamas and the Knesset alike. The war on Gaza, referred to as Operation Cast Lead, left close to 60,000 Gazans homeless and 400,000 without running water. Twenty-five thousand homes were either destroyed or severely damaged by Israeli air strikes and ground raids. What happened in Gaza last year can be seen as a small scale version of the devastation that has occurred in Haiti, which has left an estimated 200,000 Haitians dead and three million homeless.

Our shortsightedness in disaster response and concern is not only due to concentrated media coverage—it is also attributable to a lack of disaster prevention. The earthquake in Haiti was certainly not the first instance of a natural disaster ruining the nation. A series of tropical storms in 2008 battered the lands of the agriculturally dependent majority and ravaged the transportation infrastructure within the nation. The poorest country in the Western Hemisphere, Haiti was already in humanitarian crisis. The earthquake was the only thing that caught our attention. Had the U.S. and NGOs around the world assisted Haiti in poverty alleviation efforts and helped fix its ruined or outdated infrastructure, the ramifications of the earthquake would have surely been limited and contained.

The same goes for Gaza. Prior to Cast Lead, the strip was already under a debilitating blockade, one that allowed a limited amount of humanitarian supplies to enter the coastal region daily and which continues to prevent aid from reaching ailing Palestinians. Basic infrastructure providing water, irrigation, health services, and electricity has been either damaged or completely missing from regions of the strip. The blockade has prevented the shipment of tools necessary to repair ruined sewage plants, not only exacerbating an already abysmal health situation for Gazans but also putting Israelis at risk of contamination from waste flowing ashore from the sea. With stronger infrastructure, constructed with shipments allowed into the strip, civilian casualties in Gaza would have undoubtedly been lessened.

Another factor also contributes to the general failure of our approach to disasters: political accountability. In the case of Haiti, when it comes down to it, the disaster was not President Obama’s ultimate responsibility. Obama was lauded when he pledged aid to the country, but he by no means could or would be held accountable for the catastrophe in Port-au-Prince as former President Bush was in New Orleans. And this lack of accountability is worrisome. The U.S. is and will continue to be the most crucial player in the reconstruction of the ravaged Caribbean nation. But since Obama is not directly responsible, who will ensure that American disaster aid continues a year down the road? Will the American public hold Obama accountable?

Since the attack on Gaza last January occurred during the interregnum, neither President Bush nor Obama could be held accountable for the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Palestine. Bush’s silence on the Gaza humanitarian situation was an effective carte blanche for the Israel Defense Forces to undergo the offensive, and all Obama could do was offer a call for peace in the region. Because there wasn’t any U.S. involvement in the conflict, the American public had little to no reason to remain attached to the Gaza cause beyond the month-long intrigue in the media.

There are obvious reasons why the catastrophes in Haiti and Gaza aren’t a perfect comparison, but I would venture to say that the politics in the Gaza case are irrelevant: Disaster relief, prevention, and assistance should be uniform, regardless of alliances or the nationality of those affected. This admittedly unusual comparison presents us with the opportunity to re-evaluate and improve disaster relief moving forward.

Rhonda Shafei is a Columbia College sophomore. She is the publisher for the Columbia Political Union and the director-general for the Columbia Model United Nations Conference and Exposition.