G
Guy Macon
Guest
Tsunami must be fault of the US
The Australian Times 31 Dec 04
INEVITABLY, confronted with a tragedy of unimaginable scale, the
human mind looks for someone to blame. In the Dark Ages,
disasters were ascribed to the wrath of God. Now, in an odd
inversion that we like to think of as progress, they are adduced
as evidence of no God.
In the absence of a deity to decry or appease when the earth
moves in such devastating fashion, humankind reaches for the next
best thing - worldly authority. Authority should have known it
was coming. Authority didn't do enough to prevent it. Authority
was too preoccupied with its own nefarious priorities to care.
There is plenty of authority to blame for the devastation caused
by the Sumatran earthquake this week. Governments in Bangkok,
Jakarta and Colombo will shoulder some of it. Governments farther
afield will be inculpated for the poverty of their response.
Media organisations will be attacked for being too callous and
too mawkish. Unsurprisingly, perhaps the most inviting target is
the US.
In the past three days I have been impressed by the originality
of the latest critiques of the evil Americans. The earthquake and
tsunami apparently had something to do with global warming,
environmentalists say, caused of course by greedy American
motorists. Then there was the rumour that the US military base at
Diego Garcia was forewarned of the impending disaster and
presumably because of some CIA-approved plot to undermine Islamic
movements in Indonesia and Thailand did nothing about it.
To be fair, even the most animated America-hater, though, baulks
at the idea of blaming George W. Bush for the destruction and
death in southern Asia. But the US is blamed for not responding
generously enough to help the victims of the catastrophe. A UN
official this week derided Washington's contribution as stingy.
It is a label that fits the general image abroad of greedy,
self-absorbed Americans. They neither know nor care much about
the woes of the rest of the world, do they? Did the tsunami even
get a look-in on US TV news between the holiday schmalz and the
football games, I have been sneeringly asked once or twice this
week by contemptuous British friends.
The answer is yes, it did. News coverage of the event has been
extensive, and for the most part intelligent and mercifully free
of the sort of parochialism about holidaymakers that
characterises so much of the European press accounts. There have
been some lapses -- the New York newspaper that carried on its
front page the Manhattan supermodel's harrowing tale of survival
as her boyfriend was swept away by a tidal wave. There has
perhaps been a little too much "what if it happened here?"
alarmist self-absorption.
But for the most part Americans have watched a sobering,
heartbreaking tale of unimagined calamity unfold halfway across
the world. You get a sense of the heterogeneity of this country
when something such as this happens. Every newspaper in every big
city has been carrying stories about local Sri Lankan,
Indonesian, Thai and Malaysian communities traumatised by the
long-distance search for relatives and friends.
Further, in financial terms, it is not at all clear that the US
is shirking its responsibilities, pledging an initial $US35
million ($45.1million) in aid, with the prospect of much more to
come, and offering military assistance. You can be sure that the
private US response will be even more impressive. Don't
misunderstand me. I am not suggesting that Americans are any more
generous than anyone else -- simply that they, too, are moved to
mercy by the plight of others.
But even as we seek to apportion blame when catastrophe strikes,
we are gripped too by a kind of fatalism. We stand in awe of
nature and feel helpless before its apparently insuperable power.
The rising death toll in Southeast Asia seems to mock our
pretensions to progress. We may have been to the moon, eradicated
smallpox and created eBay, we think, but when the tectonic plates
move we are no more secure than were the barefoot citizens of
Pompeii.
Yet the truth is not so grim. For centuries, steady progress has
been made in the struggle to limit the effects of natural
disasters. Last year, an earthquake that measured 6.6 on the
Richter scale killed more than 40,000 people in the Iranian city
of Bam. In 1989, a more powerful earthquake struck outside San
Francisco. The death toll was fewer than 100. Of course there
were demographic and geologic differences that contributed to the
disparity. Of course there will never be a fail-safe protection
against the most destructive efforts of nature. But it is within
our reach to build systems that can mitigate their effects.
Years of scientific effort and technological investment have
given the world seismic sensors; early warning systems; buildings
that can bounce up and down on stilts buried deep in the earth;
flood barriers and other techniques. We can discern the outlines
of a strategy for preventing, or at least limiting future
disasters.
As we contemplate nature's fearful capacity for destruction and
our apparent helplessness, we should not forget the greater
tragedy that is humankind's potential for self-destruction. It
was humanity, not nature, that killed tens of millions in the
wars and genocides of the 20th century. Even as we master
techniques to protect us from the earth's violence, we perfect
new, more effective means of delivering our own.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,11813903,00.html
The Australian Times 31 Dec 04
INEVITABLY, confronted with a tragedy of unimaginable scale, the
human mind looks for someone to blame. In the Dark Ages,
disasters were ascribed to the wrath of God. Now, in an odd
inversion that we like to think of as progress, they are adduced
as evidence of no God.
In the absence of a deity to decry or appease when the earth
moves in such devastating fashion, humankind reaches for the next
best thing - worldly authority. Authority should have known it
was coming. Authority didn't do enough to prevent it. Authority
was too preoccupied with its own nefarious priorities to care.
There is plenty of authority to blame for the devastation caused
by the Sumatran earthquake this week. Governments in Bangkok,
Jakarta and Colombo will shoulder some of it. Governments farther
afield will be inculpated for the poverty of their response.
Media organisations will be attacked for being too callous and
too mawkish. Unsurprisingly, perhaps the most inviting target is
the US.
In the past three days I have been impressed by the originality
of the latest critiques of the evil Americans. The earthquake and
tsunami apparently had something to do with global warming,
environmentalists say, caused of course by greedy American
motorists. Then there was the rumour that the US military base at
Diego Garcia was forewarned of the impending disaster and
presumably because of some CIA-approved plot to undermine Islamic
movements in Indonesia and Thailand did nothing about it.
To be fair, even the most animated America-hater, though, baulks
at the idea of blaming George W. Bush for the destruction and
death in southern Asia. But the US is blamed for not responding
generously enough to help the victims of the catastrophe. A UN
official this week derided Washington's contribution as stingy.
It is a label that fits the general image abroad of greedy,
self-absorbed Americans. They neither know nor care much about
the woes of the rest of the world, do they? Did the tsunami even
get a look-in on US TV news between the holiday schmalz and the
football games, I have been sneeringly asked once or twice this
week by contemptuous British friends.
The answer is yes, it did. News coverage of the event has been
extensive, and for the most part intelligent and mercifully free
of the sort of parochialism about holidaymakers that
characterises so much of the European press accounts. There have
been some lapses -- the New York newspaper that carried on its
front page the Manhattan supermodel's harrowing tale of survival
as her boyfriend was swept away by a tidal wave. There has
perhaps been a little too much "what if it happened here?"
alarmist self-absorption.
But for the most part Americans have watched a sobering,
heartbreaking tale of unimagined calamity unfold halfway across
the world. You get a sense of the heterogeneity of this country
when something such as this happens. Every newspaper in every big
city has been carrying stories about local Sri Lankan,
Indonesian, Thai and Malaysian communities traumatised by the
long-distance search for relatives and friends.
Further, in financial terms, it is not at all clear that the US
is shirking its responsibilities, pledging an initial $US35
million ($45.1million) in aid, with the prospect of much more to
come, and offering military assistance. You can be sure that the
private US response will be even more impressive. Don't
misunderstand me. I am not suggesting that Americans are any more
generous than anyone else -- simply that they, too, are moved to
mercy by the plight of others.
But even as we seek to apportion blame when catastrophe strikes,
we are gripped too by a kind of fatalism. We stand in awe of
nature and feel helpless before its apparently insuperable power.
The rising death toll in Southeast Asia seems to mock our
pretensions to progress. We may have been to the moon, eradicated
smallpox and created eBay, we think, but when the tectonic plates
move we are no more secure than were the barefoot citizens of
Pompeii.
Yet the truth is not so grim. For centuries, steady progress has
been made in the struggle to limit the effects of natural
disasters. Last year, an earthquake that measured 6.6 on the
Richter scale killed more than 40,000 people in the Iranian city
of Bam. In 1989, a more powerful earthquake struck outside San
Francisco. The death toll was fewer than 100. Of course there
were demographic and geologic differences that contributed to the
disparity. Of course there will never be a fail-safe protection
against the most destructive efforts of nature. But it is within
our reach to build systems that can mitigate their effects.
Years of scientific effort and technological investment have
given the world seismic sensors; early warning systems; buildings
that can bounce up and down on stilts buried deep in the earth;
flood barriers and other techniques. We can discern the outlines
of a strategy for preventing, or at least limiting future
disasters.
As we contemplate nature's fearful capacity for destruction and
our apparent helplessness, we should not forget the greater
tragedy that is humankind's potential for self-destruction. It
was humanity, not nature, that killed tens of millions in the
wars and genocides of the 20th century. Even as we master
techniques to protect us from the earth's violence, we perfect
new, more effective means of delivering our own.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,11813903,00.html