Tsunami Relief-- Just Some Thoughts

1: Every minute of the day, I can get updates on the numbers dead, displaced, and at risk. I can find out how many are from Sri Lanka, how many were tourists, how many are children.

2: Reporters aren't telling me what I want to know about foreign aid. There are many reports of the pledge totals from Germany vs USA vs Australia. But try to found out how much is gift, and how much is loan. Try to find out the totality of aid from our country (including privatemoney) compared to that of other countries. Try to find out if the reported pledges include all forms and expenses of aid (for instance ships, military personnel). USA pledged $350 mil. We also sent 12 ships--is that part of or in addition to the $350 mil?

3: Jan Egeland bemoaned that if stingy Americans were taxed enough, we could have pledged more aid. Did he wonder if that would reduce the amount of private money donated. Furthermore, private citizens can access their money very readily, as opposed to govnt. money which has to be budgeted by congress.

4: Does Egeland imagine that USA should have been taxing its citizens and building a massive relief fund in anticipation of an unprecedented natural disaster that no one could have foreseen?

5: Numerous editorials have criticized Bush for remaining at his Crawford ranch for three days before giving a statement. But for whose benefit did they demand a statement? The people hit by the Tsunami wouldn't have heard it. Did the UN need to see G.W. on CNN to know what was going on? This criticism only exists for the opportunity to criticize, it has no real merit. Indeed, Bush haters are exploiting this tragedy for political talking points.

6: Bill Clinton said publicly that some one needs to take a leadership role in the relief effort. Does he think that should be the UN, or the US, or maybe him? Bush participated in a small core group (USA, India, Japan, Australia) for relief, and though this core group was quicker with results Bush was criticized for trying to undermine the role of the UN.

7: My personal experience with helping people is that there are some who never are appreciative , no matter what you give or how hard you work. Others are extremely appreciative for every small thing. I think we're hearing a lot from the first group.

8: I've seen criticism in the form of comparing Florida hurricane relief to the Indonesian Tsunami relief. Possibly, there is a good point here. I think it's interesting that Bush critics blame him for allowing too many jobs to go overseas, then also for spending less on Indonesians than Floridians.

9: Get a load of this quote. "The Americans have to understand our culture here," said Hilmy Bakar Almascaty, vice-chairman of the Jakarta-based Islamic Defenders Front, which is mobilising relief efforts of its own.
"If they are not sensitive to local issues then there will be problems. If American women come to Aceh, they must wear dilbab for example. There is Sharia law in Aceh and that is what is dictated."

Seems to me that people who want help should tolerate the cultural practices of those helping them. The people who actually need the help probably do. I think this guy Almascaty is likely speaking out of turn (did he lose his home or family?) and wants to prevent western influence, even if it hinders the relief effort. Here's more from the same article:

USAid's Bok said it was unlikely US service personnel would adhere to a Muslim dresscode.

"I don't think the practice of Islam in Aceh is such that it forces all people to wear dilbab," said Weiss. "This is not Saudi Arabia."

As I said, these are just thoughts. I'd be happy to know what the rest of you think.