INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS - LOOKING GLASS NEWS | |
One year after the Asian tsunami: an indictment of the profit system |
|
by Wije Dias World Socialist Web Site Entered into the database on Sunday, January 01st, 2006 @ 12:01:39 MST |
|
Comment by Wije Dias, General Secretary of the Socialist Equality Party
(Sri Lanka) A year has gone by since the December 26 tsunami devastated the coastal belts
of 12 countries from north Sumatra in South East Asia to Somalia and Kenya on
the west coast of Africa. But a man-made disaster of massive proportions continues
to blight the lives of the millions of survivors who still languish in appalling
conditions without proper shelter, jobs, health care or education facilities
for their children. The initial destruction was a consequence of natural forces beyond mankind’s
control, although magnified and exacerbated by the lack of a tsunami warning
system, of adequate planning or of a co-ordinated emergency response. There
can be no justification, however, for the social catastrophe that continues
to exist twelve months later. The callous treatment of the tsunami victims expresses
the indifference and contempt of the profit system for the plight of the world’s
impoverished masses. The Asian tsunami was one of the worst disasters of the past 100 years. Officially,
the overall death toll is estimated at 226,000. The majority occurred in Indonesia
where 165,708 people died, followed by 35,262 deaths in Sri Lanka and 16,389
in India. Another 8,240 people were killed in Thailand, 108 in the Maldives
and another 227 in other countries. The statistics for the number of people left homeless are even more staggering.
The official number of “displaced persons” was 532,898 in Indonesia,
519,063 in Sri Lanka and 647,599 in India. Another 21,663 lost their homes in
the low-lying Maldive Islands, 6,000 in Thailand and 13,000 in other countries. Millions more people were affected in other ways through the loss of their
livelihoods, damage to their homes, loss of personal effects, injury and psychological
trauma. Overwhelmingly the victims were poor—those least able to recover
from the calamity. Many were fishermen or day labourers who had no choice but
to settle near the sea, usually in makeshift accommodation that offered no protection
from the huge waves. It should be recalled that the initial response of “world leaders”
to the tragedy was an undisguised lack of interest or concern. President Bush
remained at his ranch, only issuing a perfunctory statement of sympathy some
days later. The first US offer of financial assistance—$15 million—was
derisory, about $1 for each of those affected. Only after an outpouring of public
support, sympathy and donations from ordinary people around the world threatened
to expose the official disdain did the tune change. Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga was enjoying a holiday in Britain
and failed to return to the island for three days after the disaster, let alone
oversee the immediate relief work, which was ill-organised and inadequate. In
many cases, it was the bare hands of workers, young people and other volunteers
who cleared the debris, attended to the injured and homeless and rescued hundreds
who would otherwise have perished. The political establishment regarded this
spontaneous response not simply as an embarrassment, but as a threat to its
authority. Kumaratunga imposed a state of emergency and placed the entire relief
effort, including volunteers, under military supervision. Nearly two weeks after the tsunami, various political leaders gathered in Jakarta
to stage a show of concern and to hypocritically offer sympathy and aid. The
representatives of the world’s wealthiest countries paraded as great benefactors
of the oppressed Asian masses, while the governments of Sri Lanka, Indonesia
and Thailand expressed gratitude for the pitiful amounts on offer. Behind the
façade, each of the major powers was calculating how best it could exploit
the tragedy for its own purposes. One year later, the world’s politicians and media have been at pains
to paint the international aid effort in the brightest of colours. One of the
more shameless attempts was an article in the Foreign Policy magazine
entitled “The Tsunami Report Card”. Its three authors, including
former assistant secretary of state for South Asia Karl F. Inderfurth, declared
that “full reconstruction may take five years or longer” but then
hailed the operation in glowing terms: “[I]f the level of commitment demonstrated by the international community
is maintained, the tsunami will be remembered as a model for effective global
disaster response, not just as a disaster. Because of the speed and generosity
of the response, its effectiveness compared to previous (and even subsequent)
disasters, and its sustained focus on reconstruction and prevention, we give
the overall aid effort a grade of ‘A’.” It may well be true that the effort to assist the tsunami victims has outshone
the response of the major powers to other disasters. But if that is the case,
the comments are a devastating indictment of the entire capitalist order. The
millions of victims throughout Asia are also entitled to pronounce judgement:
if this is the best you can do, you have failed and the social system you represent
deserves to be abolished! According to UN data, a total of $13.4 billion was pledged in relief and long-term
reconstruction aid for the tsunami-affected countries. Government promises accounted
for less than half—$6 billion—while nearly as much, $5.1 billion,
came from private individuals and companies. In the US, donations from private
sources—$1,480 million—were nearly double the official government
pledges of just $857 million. Much of the government money has yet to be realised. The US has paid only 38
percent of the aid that it promised. The EU pledged 1.3 billion euros for reconstruction,
and has disbursed only 367 million. Likewise individual European countries,
including Britain, France and Italy, have failed to honour their pledges. Reviewing the conditions of the survivors, a UNDP report stated: “Tens
of thousands have found temporary accommodation with friends or relatives, but
many thousands of people remain in tent camps and shelters. Living conditions
in those centres deteriorated during the year, and tens of thousands more durable
temporary housing units will be needed until permanent housing is built.” According to an estimate by the Australian SBS documentary program “Dateline,”
more than two million Asians are still living in tents or temporary accommodation
despite the presence of hundreds of aid agencies and promises of billions of
dollars. Much of the “temporary housing” is nothing more than a
small one room wooden box, without any basic amenities such as clean water and
electricity. The housing figures indicate the magnitude of the social problems. In Indonesia,
out of 141,000 houses destroyed, only 5,000 permanent houses have been rebuilt
or repaired in the last year. In Sri Lanka, 6,179 houses have been completed
to replace the 103,836 homes destroyed. In the Maldives, where 7,223 homes were
washed away, only 836 have been rebuilt. The number of new houses would be far
less but for the work of a multitude of local and international aid organisations. The survivors, many of whom lost everything, need more than a temporary roof
over their heads. Fishermen lost their boats, small traders and hawkers lost
their stalls and transport, and farmers lost their crops and equipment. Many
were heavily indebted even before the disaster and have no money to reestablish
themselves. Most have received scant assistance, with many families completely
dependent on small, sporadic handouts from the government or aid agencies. In
most areas, work is yet to begin on restoring health, education and other services
even to the inadequate pre-tsunami levels. No one should be surprised by this state of affairs. Having decided it was
impossible to simply ignore the tragedy, the major powers made commitments of
money and personnel, not to help the victims, but to advance their own political
and strategic agendas in the region. Eben Kaplan, writing in the Foreign Policy magazine, explained that
the US had already begun reaping the dividends. “US aid has fostered very
positive sentiments towards the United States in tsunami-affected areas, reports
show. One survey found as many as 65 percent of Indonesians now hold a more
favorable view of the United States.” But the US aid operation was more than just a PR exercise. Washington used
the opportunity to put US troops on the ground for the first time in Sri Lanka
and Indonesia, setting an important precedent for future operations. The US
military presence in Aceh brought the Bush administration one step closer to
its ambition of reestablishing links with the Indonesian armed forces. US aid
also helped forge closer ties with the ruling elites throughout a region that
has become an important focus for American foreign investment and geo-political
interests. Not to be outdone, America’s imperialist rivals in Europe and Asia have
also exploited the disaster. According to the UN “report card,”
Japan was the only country to meet and surpass its official pledge of $500 million.
Germany, in collaboration with the Indonesian government, pledged to finance
the installation of a regional tsunami early warning system but, while it has
yet to meet even half of its promised aid, the major German aid agencies, organised
under the banner “Germany Helps”, are busy pressing German national
interests in the region. All of the major powers have come together, however, to push for an end to
two longrunning civil wars—in Sri Lanka and Indonesia. For both countries,
the granting of aid was made contingent on progress in the so-called “peace
process”. The push for peace was motivated, not by concerns for the suffering
these bloody conflicts have inflicted on ordinary people, but because of their
destabilising impact throughout Asia. Both war zones lie adjacent to key naval
routes and both have the potential to become lucrative new cheap labour platforms.
Aceh also has significant reserves of oil and gas. In the case of the Sri Lankan conflict, the international arm-twisting has
proven a dismal failure. The ruling elites are so mired in communalism that
even the effort to get the Colombo government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil
Eelam (LTTE) to agree to a limited, temporary arrangement for the distribution
of tsunami aid collapsed. No sooner had President Kumaratunga signed the Post
Tsunami Operational Management Structure (P-TOMS) in June than her Sinhala chauvinist
allies pulled out of the minority government. The Supreme Court put the final
nail in the coffin by declaring the central features of P-TOMS unconstitutional.
Far from bringing the government and the LTTE together, the disaster has heightened
the danger of war. In response to growing social unrest, including protests
over the lack of tsunami aid, both sides have stirred up communal hatred to
divert attention and to shore up their own bases of support. The one apparent bright spot was Aceh. Prior to the tsunami, the Indonesian
military had been engaged in a brutal secret war involving 50,000 heavily armed
troops and paramilitary police units. A state of emergency had been declared
and, despite a media blackout, numerous stories emerged of torture, rape and
extra-judicial killings. In the wake of the disaster, the Indonesian military
continued its operations and turned the refugee centres into concentration camps
to choke off support for the Free Aceh Movement (GAM). Hit by military setbacks as well as the devastation of vast areas of coastal
Aceh, GAM leaders dropped their demand for an independent Aceh and agreed to
disarm. Although the peace deal has been hailed as a great breakthrough, there
is no guarantee it will hold. With the Indonesian military already pressing
to put more troops in the province under the pretext of providing humanitarian
aid, the agreement is just as shaky and uncertain as the present ceasefire in
Sri Lanka. Perhaps the most graphic exposure of the irrational character of the profit
system is the fact that the whole terrible tragedy could happen again tomorrow.
A year after the disaster there is still no tsunami warning system for the Indian
Ocean, even though the technology involved is neither complex nor expensive.
What is required is a coordinated international system of pressure sensors and
water level gauges linked by reliable communications to a centre for the rapid
processing, analysis and release of alerts. International co-ordination, however, is precisely the problem. From the outset,
the project has been plagued by national rivalries, with Indonesia, Thailand
and India insisting on developing their own systems. “It is a sensitive
issue”, said Ulrich Wolf, program specialist at the UN’s Intergovernmental
Oceanographic Commission, on December 16. He added: “There is no total
trust for others to analyse data.” The mutual suspicion arises out of national interests and prestige, not technical
issues. India plans to spend $28 million on its own early warning network, scheduled
to be ready by September 2007. Indonesia is investing $125 million on its own
project, while Thailand plans to have a system ready by the end of 2006. Three
badly coordinated national systems will inevitably be less effective and more
costly than a single international warning system. The tsunami itself respected no national boundaries. Moreover, those millions
of ordinary working people throughout the world who selflessly donated aid,
and the locals who did everything humanly possible to rescue and support the
victims, gave no thought to national or communal divisions. The humanitarian
instincts of ordinary people stood in marked contrast to the reaction of the
political establishment. They provide a small glimpse of what would be possible
if the vast resources created by the international working class were utilised
to meet the social needs of the world’s population. One year after the tsunami, the failure of the international aid operation
and the desperate conditions facing the majority of survivors demonstrate that
the spontaneous sentiments of ordinary people must be given conscious expression
in a political movement that sets out to replace the outmoded system of capitalist
nation states with one based on international socialism. That is the perspective
of the International Committee of the Fourth International and the World
Socialist Web Site. |