Beyond the Bubble - 5/6

After re-reading my column from last week in conjunction with the SHOUT piece written by Features writer Rafferty Parke, I was struck by the differing tone of both articles. For those of you who did not read both pieces, I will quickly summarize.

The article I wrote chronicled the surprising repercussions of too much aid in Haiti. The Haitian government has asked that the international community stop providing free health care and curb donations of food aid. Officials felt that Haitian citizens were becoming reliant on the aid, stalling the economic progress of the recovery. They were also noticing levels of corruption within their own law enforcement sector in relation to the distribution of aid.

Parke’s article on the other hand, highlighted the extremely praiseworthy efforts of Middlebury College students who have worked on a variety of fundraising initiatives for Haiti. They stressed the need of both the Middlebury community, and international community at large, to not let fundraising momentum fade. They note that there is still much work to do in rebuilding the struggling nation, and Haitian citizens continue to suffer from the devastation of the natural distaster.

While our articles seem to be in direct opposition, I believe that the message that can be taken from both pieces is actually closer than it appears. I think the key point that can be taken from both articles is the extreme difficulty that faces those within the humanitarian paradigm.

I hope that it is obvious that I would never condemn individuals for trying to raise funds for suffering individuals in another country. However, I do believe that way forward is not as beneficial as it may seem.

When I hear of resources being placed in storage in Haiti for future conflicts (because the over-allocation is causing looting and corruption), I wonder if the citizens of the Congo, or of Sudan who have been ignored by the international community.

If there are sites where an overabundance of aid is actually detrimental to the rebuilding effort, does it not seem reasonable to divert some of those resources to states in greater need?

While this is a gross oversimplification of the issue, I believe that its usefulness can be found in the ethical dilemmas it brings to light. Firstly, is it acceptable for NGO’s or government organizations to divert aid from one conflict to another when individuals donated believing that their money would be put toward the initial conflict?

Secondly, can one state ever receive too much aid? As Parke’s article rightly points out, Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. It was this way however, before the earthquake struck in January. Is it the ‘job’ of the international community to help this national become, “better than it was before”?

How unsatisfying it feels to close an article with no answers to the questions posed within it. I hope however, that the divide between the two articles in the last issue may have been somewhat resolved. Though the Haiti disaster is undeniably important, I feel it is important to recognize that it is not the only crisis that the international community should focus on.