The world has been horrified at the US' response to Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath in New Orleans. Four years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, and with billions of dollars allegedly spent on "preparedness" for emergencies, the US has shown the world that it was not prepared -- even for an event that came with ample warning.
The difference between the Asian tsunami last December and what is coming to be called the Black Tsunami in America -- because it brought so much devastation to the poor, mostly black, people of Louisiana -- is striking. The Asian disaster showed the ability of those affected to overcome long-standing rifts, as Aceh rebels put down their arms in common cause with the rest of Indonesia. By contrast, the disaster in New Orleans -- and elsewhere along the US' Gulf Coast -- exposed and aggravated such rifts.
The response of US President George W. Bush's administration to the hurricane confirmed the suspicion among blacks that, while they might send their boys to fight the US' wars, they had not only been left behind in the US' prosperity, but that there was neither understanding nor concern when they needed it. An evacuation was ordered, but no help was provided for the poor. When help came, it was, as the New York Times noted, like the Titanic: the rich and powerful got out first.
I was in Thailand right after the tsunami, and I saw that country's impressive response. The Thais flew consular and embassy officials to the affected areas, aware of the sense of helplessness among those stranded far from home. The US kept foreign officials from coming to the aid of their nationals in New Orleans -- embarrassed, perhaps, at what they would see.
Even the richest country in the world has limited resources. If it gives tax cuts to the rich, it will have less to spend on repairing levees; if it deploys the National Guard to fight a hopeless war in Iraq, there will be fewer resources at home to cope with a domestic crisis.
Choices must be made, and choices matter. Shortsighted politicians like Bush often skimp on long-term investments in favor of short-term advantage. He recently signed a lavish infrastructure bill that included, among other payoffs to supporters, a bridge to nowhere in Alaska. Money that could have saved thousands of lives was used to win votes.
Seldom do the "chickens come home to roost" as quickly as they have in recent years -- an ill-conceived war, attempted on the cheap, has not brought peace to the Middle East. Now the US has paid the price for ignoring loud warnings about the weakened levees of New Orleans. Clearly, nothing could have spared New Orleans completely from Katrina's impact, but the devastation could certainly have been lessened.
Markets, for all their virtues, often do not work well in a crisis. Indeed, the market mechanism is often revolting to behold in emergencies. The market did not respond to the need for evacuation by sending in huge convoys of buses to get people out; it did respond by tripling hotel prices in neighboring areas, which, while reflecting the marked change in supply and demand, is reviled as price gouging.
Such behavior is so odious because it brings little allocative benefit -- no significant increase in supply in the short run -- and carries a huge distributive cost, as those with resources take advantage of those without.
The Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen has emphasized that most famines are associated not with a shortage of food, but the failure to get food to the people who need it, largely because they lack purchasing power. The US, the richest country in the world, clearly had the resources to evacuate New Orleans. Bush simply forgot the poor -- the tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands, who simply could not pay for their own evacuation.
When you're poor, you don't have a credit card, and most were especially strapped for funds because it was the end of the month. But even if they had had the money, it is not obvious that markets would have responded quickly enough to provide the needed supply; in times of crisis, they often simply don't. That's one of the reasons why the military does not use a price system to allocate resources.
In January, after the tsunami, in response to widespread calls for an early warning system, I observed that the world had had an early warning on global warming. The rest of the world has begun to take heed, but Bush, having ignored warnings about al-Qaeda's plans prior to Sept.11, and having ignored the warnings about New Orleans levees, has not led the US to do likewise.
Scientists increasingly believe that global warming will be accompanied by larger climatic disturbances. Recent evidence is at least consistent with that hypothesis. Perhaps Bush had hoped that the consequences of global warming would be felt long after he left office -- and would be felt more by poor, low-lying, tropical countries like Bangladesh than by a rich country astride the temperate zones.
Yet there is perhaps a silver lining in the clouds over New Orleans. Perhaps the US, and especially Bush, will be persuaded to join the rest of the world in the fight against poverty and to protect our planet's environment. In facing and planning for disasters, whether natural or man-made, we must do more than hope and pray for the best.
Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics, is professor of economics at Columbia University and was chief economist and senior vice president at the World Bank.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
US President Donald Trump on Thursday issued executive orders barring Americans from conducting business with WeChat owner Tencent Holdings and ByteDance, the Beijing-based owner of popular video-sharing app TikTok. The orders are to take effect 45 days after they were signed, which is Sept. 20. The orders accuse WeChat of helping the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) review and remove content that it considers to be politically sensitive, and of using fabricated news to benefit itself. The White House has accused TikTok of collecting users’ information, location data and browsing histories, which could be used by the Chinese government, and pose
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) at a ceremony on July 30 officially commissioned China’s BeiDou-3 satellite navigation system. The constellation of satellites, which is now fully operational, was completed six months ahead of schedule. Its deployment means that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is now in possession of an autonomous, global satellite navigation system to rival the US’ GPS, Russia’s Glonass and the EU’s Galileo. Although Chinese officials have repeatedly sought to reassure the world that BeiDou-3 is primarily a civilian and commercial platform, US and European military experts beg to differ. Teresa Hitchens, a senior research associate at the University of
There are few areas where Beijing, Taipei, and Washington find themselves in agreement these days, but one of them is that the situation in the Taiwan Strait is growing more dangerous. Such a shared assessment quickly breaks down, though, when the question turns to identifying sources of rising tensions. Several Chinese experts and officials I have consulted with recently have argued that Beijing’s increasingly belligerent behavior in the Taiwan Strait is driven mostly by fear. According to this narrative, Beijing is worried that unless it puts a brake on Taiwan’s move away from the mainland, Taiwan could be “lost” forever. They
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) this week came under fire over his speech at a Rotary Club meeting in Taipei on Monday, when he said that Beijing’s military strategy toward Taiwan was “to let the first battle be the last.” If China started a cross-strait war, it would end quickly, without time for other nations to react, he said in his “Cross-Strait Relations and Taiwan Security” address, criticizing President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for saying that she hoped other nations would come to Taiwan’s aid in Beijing’s first wave of attacks. A president should prevent war from happening, not talk about how