Crib Sheet: Pakistani Earthquake

The Bush Administration is offering a paltry initial aid package. Here’s why the UN and Pakistan say much more is needed, and why Bush should be racing to give it.

By J.R. Lentini, New College of Florida
Friday October 14, 2005

Some perspective on the recent earthquake that hit Pakistan, India and Afghanistan is in order, because when massive, Bible-sized disasters hit with the frequency they have over the last few years, it becomes easy to just say, "oh shit, it happened again" and take no real action when the enormity of these things isn’t brought home. (The Seattle Times makes this point in this article from Thursday.)

So, to help us put the enormity of this disaster (and the paucity of the Bush Administration’s response so far) into context, let’s examine the disaster, the resulting emergency needs, and what America is doing and can do to assist the region with rescue and recovery efforts.

The scale of the disaster

First, let’s look at just how bad this earthquake was. Roughly put, this is one of the worst disasters we’ve seen in our lifetimes:

• The earthquake registered 7.6 on the Richter scale, and was followed by around 67 aftershocks, at least two of which were over 5.0.
  


• The official count at the time of this writing is 33,000 confirmed dead and tens of thousands injured or missing, with 15 to 20 percent of affected areas still out of contact with authorities. However, as CNN reports, “Local government, police and hospital officials, however, put Pakistan’s death toll at more than 41,000. [Foreign Minister Khurshid Mahmud] Kasuri told CNN that the national government ‘can only give the number of the people actually certified as dead.’"
  


• More than 2 million people have been displaced or left homeless by the quake right when winter is about to hit the region. Food, clothing, water, blankets, heating fuel, and emergency shelters are needed immediately across the entire region to avoid a second massive loss of life.
  


• In Muzzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), the damage is enormous. Over 30,000 homes have been destroyed outright, with damage to every other structure. Reports are now emerging that the city has simply run out of places to bury the dead. Rioting and looting have taken place—even some relief trucks carrying supplies have been looted upon arrival.
  

The Politics of Kashmir and Pakistan

The CIA describes Kashmir as, quite simply, “site of the world’s largest and most militarized territorial dispute.”

There are a lot of territorial disputes in the world, and many of them are large and militarized: this is quite a statement for the CIA to make and it can’t be taken lightly. The region is volatile, the terrain is dangerous, and access to affected areas is limited.

In most places, a massive disaster would stop insurgent and militant activities. After war-torn Aceh province was ravaged by the tsunami in Indonesia, CBS reported:

“Several militant groups are assisting the relief efforts in Aceh, among them the Saudi-based International Islamic Relief Organization. The group is alleged to have acted as a cover for al Qaeda operations in the Philippines. Indonesian hardline groups the Laskar Mujahidin and the Islamic Defenders’ Front have also set up base in Aceh.

“The province is also home to a three-decade long war between secessionist rebels and the government in which more than 10,000 people have been killed. Aid work has so far been unaffected by the conflict.”

The conflict in Kashmir, sadly, has continued unabated since the earthquake. Indian press outlets are widely reporting the massacre of ten to twelve people by Islamic militants following the quake.

Moreover, since these groups are officially banned by the Pakistani government, their presence and assistance to earthquake victims could serve to erode regional support for the Musharraf regime, especially as the direct aid of militants contrasts sharply with the admittedly slow response of the Pakistani government, which is hindered by the remote locations and damaged roads around the province.

The historic Pakistani-Indian animosity is further slowing the response to victims. While India has a helicopter fleet available for immediate use in search-and-rescue operations, and while the UN and humanitarian groups have been calling for additional helicopters, the Musharraf government is understandably concerned about the security risk of allowing Indian military pilots to fly over potential battlegrounds and military installations.

The Need for Immediate American Disaster Aid

Getting a reasonable level of direct aid to Kashmir, including financial and military resources, is essential for both saving lives and protecting American security. However, the initial response from the Bush Administration, $50 million, is woefully inadequate for the scale of this tragedy.

To put the $50 million figure in perspective, while the initial aid to the tsunami-ravaged areas was $15 million, that figure was raised to $35 million and then $350 million to match the enormity of the disaster and to restore the image of the United States as a benefactor state.

Four million people were affected by this earthquake. Over two million need shelter. Tens of thousands require medical attention. With the oncoming winter weather, providing shelter, blankets and equipment to clear debris is now a matter of life and death.

American aid has long been accepted by this Administration as a way of improving our nation’s image around the world, something often referred to as “helicopter diplomacy.” Colin Powell was a proponent of this idea while serving as Secretary of State, believing that tsunami aid could seriously improve America’s image as a force for good and reduce the perception that we were a militaristic, self-interested society. Other experts outside the government echoed that idea.

After Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana, a few scattered incidences of gunfire managed to delay the entire search-and-rescue operation while order was restored. We’re now talking about a region with ongoing hostilities and numerous armed individuals with conflicting agendas. The likelihood of violence directed at aid workers and rescue personnel is therefore uncomfortably high. A U.S. military presence could go a long way to alleviating some of the concerns international groups might have about sending workers to the region.

Beyond peacekeeping, the U.S. military possesses disaster relief abilities that no civilian relief agency could hope to match. Some of the U.S. military relief efforts currently underway include water purification, establishing mobile hospitals, and staging relief supplies for shipment.

Moreover, President Musharraf is in a tight spot, being a supporter of the Administration’s War on Terror while trying to prevent the spread of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism in his own country. Gen. Musharraf, who seized power from an elected government, isn’t Campus Progress’s favorite national leader. But the alternatives could be much worse for the Pakistani people, for peace in the region, and for combating terrorism. Musharraf’s rule could hinge on his government’s response to the earthquake. Professor Juan Cole says it best: “The geopolitical outcome could be significant. Governments have been shaken by poor response to smaller catastrophes than this one, e.g. Turkey’s in the late 1990s. Gen. Musharraf’s future may depend in part on how well he can turn his military and government to disaster relief. Likewise, the future of Kashmir, a global flashpoint, may be affected. If Pakistan cannot show it cares and can come to the aid of the Kashmiris it rules, it will very likely forfeit all claim on the region (in opinion polls, few Kashmiris want to join Pakistan, anyway).”

The political implications of the Musharraf regime being replaced by an Islamist one is no trifling matter. Both India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, and if an extremist group gained control of Pakistan there could be an increased risk of a nuclear exchange, or that the new regime would pass nuclear materials to terrorists.

When the Bam earthquake struck Iran in 2003, it was in a country holding charter membership in President Bush’s “Axis of Evil.” This recent earthquake, however, occurred in territory controlled by an allied government that, against the popular will, has supported the U.S. war in Afghanistan and efforts against Islamic militants. The public will in Pakistan, and especially in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, is volatile, and could tip far enough away from Musharraf’s camp to propel the Kashmiri insurgency into a national force capable of rivaling the government in popular support.

India and Pakistan are now cooperating in an unprecedented, though still guarded, way. Whatever the U.S. can do to eliminate friction between the two and further the region’s prospects for recovery should be done immediately if we want to see this current teamwork blossom into an actual partnership between the two perpetually-warring countries.

If this Administration is serious about fighting terrorism and improving America’s image overseas, then it should be offering serious assistance to the victims of this earthquake, and not dropping paltry “initial” amounts that make a mockery of the obvious level of destruction. This earthquake was a massive disaster that requires a massive response, and $50 million just isn’t going to cut it.

J.R. Lentini is a third-year political science major at New College of Florida, the President of Florida for Peace Inc., and an instructor with the Democratic Leadership Development Council.