http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1968576,00.html
The recent 8.8 earthquake in Chile left fewer casualties and destruction, that Haiti’s 7.0 quake while had left millions homeless and 200,000 dead. Many have been left questioning why the quake in Chile that was 500 times stronger than the quake in Haiti had caused less destruction rather than more. The obvious answer is that Chile had adhered to construction regulations and committed to earthquake-proofing new buildings, while corruption in Haiti led to construction of cheap buildings and government inspectors were bribed to look the other way. Along with the monetary aid going into Haiti are demands for government reform. Haiti also needs to encourage education, accountability, administration, and entrepreneurship. The international community also needs to do more than provide money and resources to the devastated nation, they need to provide help that would promote long-term progress and reform.
When we think of development in the 21st century, there are nations that take national reform into their own hands, and other nations that have made little progress. Nations that have been the most successful at development have done so by increasing their own productivity and reforming government and society. Korea is now a wealthy and developed country when they had been under-developed only a half century ago. Chile is also the model example of progress in South America, while Haiti and similar nations deal with high levels of poverty and corruption. State sovereignty is something that other nations respect when progress is being made by the people and government. While tons of aid from around the world is being sent to Haiti, Chile has tried to deal with the aftermath of their earthquake with their own resources. Humanitarian aid and military interventions in the modern era are commonly found in nations that lack stability, and need societal and government reform. However, which countries need aid or government reform is subjective. People disagree on eradicating the Taliban in Afghanistan, there are many Afghan civilians who thought their lives were better under Taliban rule. People also disagree on the types of humanitarian aid we should give to poor nations, to send them food we grow or teach them how to grow their own food.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think Tiffany is right to say that Haiti needs more than money and resources from the international community. However, I do not see what nations could provide them that would truly promote long-term progress and reform. In my economics course last week, we discussed the forms of aid that nations are willing to provide other states, namely food, human capital (i.e., doctors), physical capital (i.e., wind turbines), and money. Each of these can be beneficial in certain situations to help in the aftermath of some disaster, but none produce long-term changes. These forms of assistance are only quick fixes to the problem, and ultimately it is up to members of the distressed state to find a true solution.
ReplyDeleteAn article by BBC points out that because an even stronger earthquake hit Chile in 1960 they have been more earthquake conscience when developing new infrastructure since.
ReplyDelete(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8543324.stm)
It would be an absolute tragedy if Haiti doesn't have the aid and resources to re-build their infrastructure, the second time around, with earthquakes in mind.
BBC also explains how the epicenter of the Haitian earthquake was ONLY 8 miles underground and IN Port-au-Prince, where as the Chilean earthquake’s epicenter was 21 miles underground, located off-shore, and SEVENTY miles from a big city (Conception).