shannonsays.com

The UN Passes the Buck... again

Is it any wonder that western governments are becoming more obstructive and skeptical about the UN.  They are the kings of flip-flop-ing, changing their minds and shifting the blame whenever they held to account for their (in)actions.

Take this report for example, (via the Captain) that  blames the corruption endemic in their assistance programs on the huge amounts of money and resources provided for these rebuilding and assistance programs:

The ravages of modern warfare are too often compounded by ill-conceived and expensive post-war reconstruction projects that fuel a "feeding frenzy" of corruption and profiteering.

The report, citing graft from Liberia and Bosnia-Herzegovina to Lebanon and Afghanistan, said the overwhelming international response after wars was simply to pump large amounts of money into rebuilding programs without proper control.

"What is difficult enough to try to manage in times of peace becomes even more problematic in post-war situations where the sheer scale of works...and the weakness of public oversight create opportunities for the corrupt of historic proportions," it said.

So what to do?  If we give heed the UN's request to give more money and aid resources, we fanning the flames of "corruption and profiteering; don't give enough, and we are branded as being stingy.  Go figure. 

Do they want our money or don't they?  I think they do, but they appear to want to avoid being held accountable for how it is spent.  If we give too much and it ends up in the wrong hands, the UN can blame us!

Maybe instead of blaming those who generously open their wallets, the UN should have produced a report that examined the reasons it can't run aid programs without everyone in creation sticking their snout the trough. It is classic UN accountability-avoidance.  Where there is no accountability and large sums of money, corruption is never far behind.

So is it any wonder that countries like Australia are bypassing the UN when it comes to providing aid for the victims of the Asian tsunami, demanding a greater presence on the ground and direct personal input on how our money is spent.  We are better off working out what to do and how to do it with the big, ugly bureaucrat.  Especially given Indonesia's appetite for corruption.

I dunno why Australia even bothers to remain one of the 191 UN Member states. As the Captain points out:

"It answers to no one and controls billions of dollars in various aid programs. To blame the resultant corruption on the money clearly demonstrates what an ethically bankrupt organization the UN has become, and why we should endeavor to make it a financially bankrupt one as a result."

Riding the wave of Conspicuous Compassion

I have been thinking about the huge outpouring of compassion and care that we are all showing over the tsunami devastation.  I mean, we are watching hour after hour of news footage, digging deep and donating (or at least "pledging") money (in excess of $100million so far) to our favorite aid agencies, and talking about how "awful" it all is.   And tonight, in a Australian first, all three commercial television networks will hold hands and broadcast an aid concert and telethon.  The performers will look good, the television networks will look good, the advertisers will look good an no doubt we'll all feel really good about it all (from the comfort of our lounge chairs).  Me included.

Why such an outpouring of emotion?  What has caused it?  Why is it continuing at such an unprecedented rate?  It's not like the December 26 tsunami was the world's worst ever natural disaster, in terms of statistics anyway.  Other earthquakes have killed many people; Tangshan (1976, 650 000),Tokyo (1923, 140 000), an even Iran has lost 75 000 people due to recent earthquakes (1990 and 2003).  And of course there was an cyclone that killed about 500 000 people in Bangladesh in 1970.

I think two key elements have caused what is happening at the moment; the first helped to light our compassionate fires and the second is continuing to fan the flames.

What makes this tsunami special and different from those I listed above is the geographical extent of the devastation and the number of poor countries affected.  These countries were (are) also popular resort destinations favoured by tourists from rich western countries and wealthy Asians from the north-east.  This has helped to give the horrors of the disaster much more prominence than they would have otherwise, or if they had occurred in a single country.  It's a selfish distortion, but it is a real distortion, and it was exploited to help kick of the biggest aid donation exercise in history.

And then the whole thing just snow-balled. We heard about all the generosity out there, and we all wanted in on the giving, we wanted to give more than our neighbours. Call it Conspicuous Compassion; "showing that we care is about feeling good, not doing good, and illustrates not how altruistic we have become, but how selfish."

Patrick West had a shot at the concept of conspicuous compassion this week, but did have this to say with respect to the tsunami:

"A consequence of one of the worst natural disasters in human history has been to initiate one of the most conspicuous bouts of compassion that the Western-style democracies have ever seen. National governments give the impression of attempting to outbid one another in funds committed to disaster relief. Independent of this, citizens seem to be donating generously to international charitable organisations. There have also been calls for manifestations of public empathy."

But just how much good are we all doing, and what exactly is our motivation for wanting to do good; even The Age seemed skeptical about what is going on:

"First came water, then compassion. But the new wave threatening to swamp the tsunami-affected nations of Asia is aid. Australia late on Thursday gazumped other donors by pledging $1 billion, comprising $500 million in cash and the balance in program-based aid stretching over several years. An hour earlier, Germany had trumped Japan's $643 million commitment by upping its contribution to $867 million. Globally, the total promised is already around $5 billion.

“There is no question global politics is at play here, at least in some quarters…”

Not only global politics, but neighbourhood and workplace politics.  The longer this goes on, the more convinced I become that many people are donating for no other reason that to make themselves feel good, or to keep ahead of the Jones'.

(And I was just reminded (via Tom) each month (!!) more people die of AIDS (240,000) and Malaria (165,000) than did in the tsunami. (Another 140K ... PER MONTH ... die of diarrhea))  Think about it.

Latham. Swept away by the tsunami?

Has Mark Latham been another victim of the Asian tsunami?  Correct me if I am wrong, but we haven't heard "boo" from good ol' Iron Mark since the disaster struck ten days ago.

Where is he?  Anyone seen him since the ALP pulled him from the streets before Christmas?  (He looks like this)

Now whilst the ALP strategy of yanking their beleaguered leader away from the public over Christmas seemed like a good idea,  it appears as though it is turning into a gamble that has gone horribly wrong. 

Latham, you might remember, was hit by a different sort of tidal wave back during the October 9 election, and was hopelessly clinging to the wreckage before Christmas.  So why not give him a rest over the break?  Then "relaunch" him when business in Canberra returns?  New and Improved!

But I would have thought that he would have crawled out from under his rock following recent events, or at least be pushed by the party machine stick.  But nope.  The only one talking is the dull and bland (but intelligent and competent, all the same) Kevin Rudd.  But Latham has curiously maintained a staunch public silence on the disaster. 

I don't understand why.  Surely this would seem like an appropriate time for Latham to showcase his credentials as our alternate Prime Minister?  An appropriate time to stand next to PM Howard and thank the Australian people for their generous and overwhelming support of the tsunami victims? But he obviously has no intention of interrupting his four-week summer holiday for anything or anyone.  Pathetic.

If he wasn't already, this surely leaves Mark Latham "dead in the water."