Is the US too 'stingy'?
Experts say response to tsunami could hurt or help US image in SE Asia.
The question was first raised by Jan Egeland, United Nations undersecretary-general for humanitarian affairs, when he said that he couldn't understand why 'rich nations' were being so stingy when it came to giving aid to those affected by the tsunami that devastated parts of Southeast Asia and Africa.
Although Mr. Egeland didn't
single out any country in particular, his remarks were
taken personally by US officials. On Wednesday, US Secretary of State Colin Powell appeared on numerous US TV shows to angrily denounce the remarks,
as did President Bush at his Wednesday press conference.
Egeland later said that his remarks had been "
misinterpreted" and that they had "nothing to do with any particular country or the response to this emergency in the early days. The response so far has been overwhelmingly positive." But Egeland also said it was "his job to point out that the wealthiest countries are
making too little effort to meet goals adopted by all 191 UN member states at the Millennium Summit in 2000 to reduce poverty and illiteracy and improve health care."
But the remark has stirred up a debate about the generosity of the United States. In an editorial Thursday,
The New York Times said "yes," the
US is stingy both in terms of giving aid for tsunami relief and in general. "We hope Secretary of State Colin Powell was privately embarrassed when, two days into a catastrophic disaster that hit 12 of the world's poorer countries and will cost billions of dollars to meliorate, he held a press conference to say that America, the world's richest nation, would contribute $15m. That's less than half of what Republicans plan to spend on the Bush inaugural festivities." But the
Washington Times on Friday
vigorously disagreed.
The truth is, the
New York Times and Mr. Egeland are political opportunists of the highest order. They gleefully seized upon tragedy to promote a political agenda. They're not alone: Global-warming theorists, debt-relief enthusiasts and others have been doing the same. It's a disservice to the truth and a shameful commentary on their attitude towards the dead.
But as Sonni Effron of the
Los Angeles Times points out, the answer to the question of stinginess
depends on who does the counting.
By total money, the United States by far donates more than any other country in the world. This is the gauge preferred by most US officials. But when aid is calculated per US citizen or as a percentage of the economy, the United States ranks among the least generous in the industrialized world. As US officials and foreign aid experts debate which measure is more apt, the issue is another example of how Americans' views of themselves differ from those around the world. The reason the question is important, writes the
Detroit News, is that one of the country's hardest hit by the tsunami is Indonesia, home to the world's largest population of Muslims. And the News argued that President Bush "blew an opportunity in his
relatively slow response to the disaster," to "to improve America's ugly, arrogant image abroad."
But the
Financial Times writes that the
image of US soldiers "lending a helping hand could go a long way towards improving the battered US image in the region."
For Washington, the tsunami has brought an opportunity to reach out to wary Asian populations - to build bridges and project the message that the US is a loyal friend to be counted on in times of need. "The focus is on helping anywhere we can," said Lieutenant Colonel Dave Mobley, a member of the US Air Force 353rd special operations group at Bangkok's Don Muang airport yesterday. "These are our friends throughout this theatre with a lot of history and allegiances." The
Globe and Mail reports that President Bush, "slammed for a slow and niggling response to this week's devastating tsunamis," now wants the US to take a leadership role. As a result, the Pentagon has pledged $100 million, and Mr. Powell said he hopes people around the world see that the US is eager to "reach out to the Muslim world in this time of need."
Earlier this week, the Seattle-based
Global Market Institute released a study about the US image abroad. Its survey of 8000 international customers showed the Bush administration's foreign policies may be costing US businesses overseas.
One-third of all consumers surveyed study in Canada, China, France, Germany, Japan, Russia, and the United Kingdom said their
strongest impressions of the US were shaped by US foreign policy, particularly the "war on terror" and the occupation of Iraq. Twenty percent of those surveyed in Europe and Canada said that they made an effort not to buy American products as a "protest against those policies." Half of those surveyed believed the invasion of Iraq was "motivated by a desire to control oil imports" while only 15 percent said it was related to terrorism.
Also...
•
World reins in New Year festivities after tsunami (
ABC News
•
Powell to visit tsunami-affected countries (
China View)
•
Tamil Tigers grapple with disaster (
BBC)
•
The truth about terrorism (
New York Review of Books)
• Feedback appreciated. E-mail
Tom Regan
.
|
RSS feed
