Hurricane Katrina turned the relationship between the United States and humanitarian aid on its head, according to Tufts professor Larry Minear.
Minear, the Director of the Humanitarianism and War Project at the Feinstein International Famine Center at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, wrote an essay for the Sept. 13 Reuters Foundation's AlertNet.
"Hurricane Katrina has turned the world's preeminent aid donor into an aid recipient," Minear wrote in the Reuters section on humanitarian emergencies.
Over 100 countries and international organizations have pledged $1 billion in cash and relief assistance programs.
Among the countries are Sri Lanka - which donated $25,000 while feeling the effects of last year's tsunami - and Iran - whose offer of ten million barrels of crude oil was turned down because it came with the caveat of lifting U.S. sanctions.
On the other hand, Minear wrote, much of U.S. aid to other countries is tied to politics.
"U.S. aid now flows more generously to Afghanistan than to more desperate African countries and Iraq now upstages Niger in per capita U.S. assistance," he said. "Despite the humanitarian principle that emergency aid should be granted solely according to need, aid is often used to applaud or embarrass, to reward or sanction."
According to Sociology Professor Paul Joseph, though, much of the response to the hurricane from within the country may not have been purely humanitarian.
In the push to rebuild New Orleans, Joseph said, construction contracts are given without a bidding process - a step that would ensure efficiency and accountability. Joseph currently sits on the executive board of the Peace and Justice Studies Program.
Labor wage standards are being waived as well, which puts hurricane victims desperate for work at risk of being exploited, Joseph said.
In his article, Minear challenged the U.S. to put aside defensive, commercial, and short-term foreign policies. A system that bases aid on need will serve the U.S. self-interest best in the long run, he wrote.
The U.S. aid relationship with Niger illustrates the dilemma, Minear said in a phone interview.
Severe food shortages, induced by a poor harvest last October, are now affecting at least 2.5 million people, according to a July 20 BBC News article. Though the UN has been seeking pledges of up to $30 million, only a tenth of that has been received.
While the aid shipments have begun to arrive, they have coincided with this year's better-than-expected harvest. Local farmers now have to compete at the market with the food donations.
In the interview, Minear said it would have been better to purchase food from as close a source as possible to help the local economy, rather than shipping Western food. Monetary donations are generally considered by economists to be more cost-effective than shipping food or clothing, he said.
For aid to accomplish humanitarian goals, Joseph said, monitoring is crucial. This would prevent instances such as the former country of Zaire, where the U.S. gave the anti-communist government aid that did not serve the people.
"We'll look at the people and not the governments," Joseph said should be the goal of humanitarian aid. But politics may never be removed from aid, he said.
According to Joseph, the U.S. gives just 0.1 percent of its gross domestic product in foreign aid, though the United Nations asks First World countries to give 0.7 percent. Joseph said a poll revealed Americans believe the U.S. gives 20 percent in aid - a misconception he attributed not only to a lack of information, but to the prevalence of misinformation on the subject.
