As we have discovered in the past few weeks the subject of
humanitarian aid is a very sensitive one. Being a donor from half way
across the world it is convenient to avoid the negative consequences
of humanitarian aid. It is pretty easy to walk through
Speaker's circle and donate to an organization and feel that you have done a
good deed. But for me it has been very eye opening to see the other side
of the coin. It never even crossed my mind to think that in a situation
where humanitarian aid is required that the aid is dispersed to both
sides of the issue. In the perfect world that my brain creates I imagine
that the aid is given to the "good guys." But in war-torn areas
that could not be further from the truth. Both sides are
helped, but often times at a cost.
(The American Red Cross is one of many
humanitarian aid organizations)
I think that a main issue that Polman observes in
her book is how much of the aid is wasted. It is crazy that humanitarian aid
organizations are charged to enter war torn areas. These aid groups are
coming to help! The war chiefs that are setting the prices to enter must
have no regard for human rights, and be incredibly selfish. A chief is
supposed to serve as a leader, and look out for what is best for their people.
A chief should not be charging someone to enter to give help! Some
of the negotiations that Polman mentioned were ridiculous.
Polman mentioned one negotiation where a general wanted a promise
for a shopping spree and helicopter ride to the capitol for his wife.
Who thinks of such a thing and expects a humanitarian aid to actually
pull through with that? These men must be out of their mind, and full of
greed.
(Huts guard the entrance to an African village)
Another issue that Polman points out in regards to
humanitarian aid is that it has created an entire branch of the war economy
both for those in the war torn areas and the aid organizations themselves. She
mentions landlords jacking up prices in the places where the caravan needs to
stay. The housing market is just another way to create avenues for money to
travel to the wrong hands. On the other side of the issue is the aid organizations themselves
needing money. When Polman says, "Aid organizations are
businesses dressed up like Mother Teresa" I think that she is
making the claim that the organizations are no different from any
other business. Aid organizations are constantly trying to get money so
they can fund both the current issue, and the next issue. They use the
same tactics any other business would, and are often successful because
of the positive stereotypes that surround them. Pullman’s quote
simply brings this to light.
In order to make Humanitarian Aid successful a lot
needs to happen. For Journalists, they simply need to ask more questions.
If we get aid groups to be more transparent with where the money is going
this could get the ball rolling on some regulations for humanitarian aid.
The public needs to become more informed. I personally had no idea
that any of these issues were present until the past few weeks. I feel
this is probably a common theme among the majority of my peers. Finally,
the government needs to put regulations on aid. Aid should properly be
dispersed and be disallowed to countries that will steal aid money. I
think that currently humanitarian aid should be halted until something is done. It is an easy opinion to have given the current situation, but I think that if aid is halted it will provide a bigger incentive for everyone to pay more attention to the issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment