Yes

by Mark Deboer

Created on: March 08, 2011

The United States Should Provide Humanitarian Relief To Hostile Nations

Irrespective of one's world view, the issue of whether the United States should provide humanitarian aid to hostile countries should clearly be in the affirmative. To fully address this issue, it is important to view it from multiple perspectives. Individuals can see themselves as either a member of the world community, or more narrowly, a member of the United States. Although they are not necessarily mutually exclusive, as a member of the world community we are likely to see ourselves on a par with each other as human beings, sharing similar interests and concerns. From the perspective of a United States citizen, the national interests move to the forefront. 

From a national perspective, costs and foreign relations enter into the equation. At a time when the global population is arguably pushing the bounds of sustainability, and great masses exist along flood plains and earthquake zones, the magnitude of such disasters equates to considerable costs. Those costs are both short and long term. While many private relief agencies exist to help survivors, their ability to do so is limited by the generosity of the donations they receive. The United States possesses significant expertise, to go along with significant economic aid which exists above and beyond those of private relief agencies. 

At a time of record deficits, those consumed by a cost benefit analysis would ask whether the benefit would exceed the cost. They might proclaim that such a disaster would stretch the resources of the hostile nation and may even lead to the fall of that government. To do nothing would save us considerable expense and manpower and we would not have to alter or temporarily suspend any economic or diplomatic policies put in place prior to the disaster. But even if some citizens have the luxury of seeing themselves apart from the world, the country of the United States lives in a community of countries and is evaluated by what it does on the world stage. It has consistently taken a position to give disaster aid and offer it even when the affected country initially refuses aid such as Burma did in 2008. A change in policy now would set a different tone in global public relations. Good will is an intangible asset that cannot easily be calculated. Its benefits extend beyond relations with the hostile nation. It extends to the global community. 

On a human level, when a natural disaster strikes unexpectedly, innocent survivors are subject to the trauma caused by immediate loss of family, friends, homes and jobs. While the disaster itself may not be avoided, the aftermath can be addressed. Those still trapped or injured by the disaster can be saved and given treatment towards recovery. Those displaced can be given temporary shelter until better options are provided. Those without food and water can be supplied the nourishment to sustain them until they can begin to fend for themselves. From a world perspective, the issue is not one of arbitrary borders but empathy and compassion for fellow human beings. At the end of the day, the question is whether we are our brothers keepers. The answer is yes.

Learn more about this author, Mark Deboer.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.