Beyond the Bubble

Florida is underwater. People are standing on their roofs calling for help. In some areas the water has risen to 18 feet above the ground. 17 million people have been affected. 2,000 people have died. 700,000 people have been forced into makeshift camps after being displaced from their homes.

This is not true. At least, not in Florida.

Six weeks ago Pakistan experienced monsoon rains in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Sindh, Punjab and Balochistan regions of the nation. It has been reported that at the peak of the flooding, one-fifth of the nation was underwater. This represents an area of land just slightly smaller than the entire sunshine state. More people have been affected by this catastrophe than were as a result of the combined effects of the Asian Tsunami in 2005, Hurricane Katrina and the Haitian earthquake of 2010 combined.

Now that I have your attention, let’s review the response on the part of the international community. According to The New York Times, the United Nations has appealed for $460 million from the international community for relief. Thus far, only 20 percent of that figure has been donated.

In Canada, one week after a coalition of Canadian charities launched a fundraising effort for victims of the floods, they have received just $200,000. One week following the Haitian earthquake using a similar campaign, they had raised $3.5 million dollars.

Why the difference? Why the apathy on the part of the international community?

Many have been quick to use this incident as a clear indication of the Islamaphobia and racism that are present in the Western world. Analysts have argued that many in the West believe that Pakistan harbors terrorists. They say that Western citizens have decided as a matter of principle hat they will not aid a country that directly seeks to harm them.

While it is undeniable that this belief does factor in to the equation that has left Pakistan in a dire state, it is not the only reason why donations have been underwhelming. There are a host of other reasons that need to be examined to understand the whole story.

Firstly, it has been argued that the level of donations to Pakistan have been below those of the other aforementioned disasters because a flood is a slower building problem than an tsunami, hurricane or earthquake. These natural disasters are instantaneous events. The flooding in Pakistan occurred over many weeks, providing less dramatic headlines and photo opportunities.

The second proposed rationale is that fewer people have been killed by the flooding than were killed as a result of the other three disasters. While this is true, the number of people affected by the flooding is much greater than in those events. This means that there are still 17 million people alive, who have been directly affected by the natural phenomenon who still need to be helped. There is still time to prevent many deaths.

Furthermore, it has also been argued that the most potent effects of the flooding will be caused by disruption to the infrastructure in Pakistan. Hunger, disease and violence have all been worries of those close to the nation as crops have been destroyed, water has been contaminated and looting has occurred. This crisis will only get worse in the months to come.

Western donors have also witnessed the ineptitude of the Pakistani leader’s response to his own nations’ disaster. Articles have highlighted President Asif Ali Zardi’s week-long European voyage following the floods (cynically suggested as a trip intended to positively influence his son’s political career). It is probable that Western citizens have been reluctant to provide aid to a government that seems unable to help itself.

Finally, as The Globe and Mail argued, Pakistan is several time zones away, a fact that directly affects the rate of the distribution of information. It is also a non-English speaking country (unlike Haiti), directly affecting the difficulty of gaining reports from the region.

I want to be clear that I have not written this article in order to minimize the other disasters, nor to justify the lackluster level of donations, but rather to highlight the complex set of factors that one makes when they decided whether or not to give.

It is important to understand the other reasons why donations have been underwhelming so that that we, in the West, are not labeled simply as racists. With such hatred towards those of the Muslim faith being one of the main stories highlighted at present by The New York Times (in the reaction to a proposed Mosque at ground zero, and in the suggestion by a pastor in Florida that a Koran be burned to highlight his displeasure with this development) it is important to know that we do not all harbor resentment towards those of the Muslim faith.

After taking a trip to Pakistan, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon stated, “I have witnessed many natural disasters around the world, but nothing like this,” as he pleaded with the international community to increase their support.

Try and imagine — overand imagine-  17 million people have been affected by this disaster.

I am unable to picture that. I am however, able to visualize my family on the roof of my home, calling for help.

I just made my donation online. Maybe you should too.