Max Lane
On December 26, one of the worst earthquakes in a century sent a massive tsunami travelling at 800 kilometres per hour out from an epicentre off the island of Sumatra. This tsunami hit a series of countries around the Bay of Bengal and down to the tip of Sumatra, Aceh. The devastation and death caused by this natural phenomenon has been massive, with more than 150,000 dead. This scale of death and devastation, however, does not actually reflect the scale of the event of nature but rather the monstrous scale of the human-made situation that allowed so much horror to befall so many human beings.
Yes, the movement of tectonic plates does unleash massive forces and, yes, an earthquake registering nine on the Richter scale is big. But with the technology available to humankind in the 21st century, the loss of life should have been minimal. The absence of a warning system for the Asia-Pacific rim is one issue that people have pointed to. This was certainly criminal, especially given that it turns out that there are already seismology centres in most countries. They are obviously not difficult to establish.
But this is the secondary crime perhaps. The devastation and death was so great because the tsunami hit the coasts of impoverished countries that had no defence against the tidal surges. In Aceh, for example, where I have been myself, the vast majority of people live in bamboo or other poorly constructed huts. Most have no phone, no mobile, usually no TV, occasionally only a radio. They have no vehicles - there is no personal car ownership as in the rich countries.
The material infrastructure of their existence stood no chance against anything like this. Of course, in addition, the gross underdevelopment of their country's economy means that there is no industrial development of any significance. Many Acehnese live at a subsistence level or just above it.
Underdevelopment in countries across Asia is a direct consequence and a continuation of centuries of colonial exploitation and oppression. While the peoples of these countries waged great and heroic struggles to win political independence from their colonisers, they did not win economic independence. Their economies and societies are semi-colomnial in nature and their governments are neo-colonial governments, of one sort or another, especially those of Sri Lanka and Indonesia.
These neo-colonial governments have been kept in power with the support of one or other, or a combination of different imperial powers, who have armed them, funded them and defended them from political criticism and opposition internationally. As political, military and bureaucratic elites that have acquiesced to their neo-colonial status their character is corrupt, rent-seeking and oppressive. They sit at the top of a state apparatus that is distrustful of, alienated from and often hostile to the mass of ordinary people. They serve their own immediate financial interests, mainly those of their pockets, and those of international big capital.
We now have plenty of glimpses of the operations of this state apparatus in Aceh, from the Indonesian journalists in Aceh and from the hundreds of activist volunteers from around Indonesia as well as members of the Acehnese Peoples Democratic Struggle Front, the FPDRA.
The Indonesian army has declared that only half of its forces in Aceh will be used for humanitarian relief, the rest will continue attacks on villages supporting the Free Aceh Movement. In fact, with between 20,000 and 40,000 troops in Aceh, there is little sign of even half of these being allocated to this work. On top of this, there are reports coming in from FPDRA comrades in Aceh, consistent with reports from all the other volunteer activists now in Aceh, that the bureaucratic and elitist nature of the state apparatus hampers the relief movement at every turn, especially in the remote areas.
Supplies are only released to people with so-called correct papers, refugees can't get aid without their ID cards - most of which were lost in the tsunami. Volunteers are stopped in their work to have the ID cards checked again and again. Refugees are charged for aid parcels or to cross rivers.
Aid goods pile up in Indonesian army posts and civilian district head offices or at military-controlled airports. Sometimes even civilian state officials cannot get access. I received one report from an FPDRA comrade in Medan, who witnessed a senior regional government official who had driven across to Medan from West Aceh seeking aid break down and cry when the army people at the airport turned him away for not having the right paperwork.
In First World countries, the citizenry has formal democratic rights, a longer history of modern class-struggle organisation and hugely more developed material base from which to try to hold the apparatus accountable. Also, the socio-economic status of the vast bulk of public servants is more or less the same as most other workers. In semi-colonial countries, the layers of privileged civil servants is much greater due to the heritage from feudal and colonial times and the abject poverty of the peasants and workers. So when a disaster happens, there is still a huge barrier.
The difference this makes can be seen by contrasting the natural disaster mobilisations in a workers state - Cuba, where more than 100,000 people can be evacuated in three hours, and 2 million in total, as was shown when Hurricane Ivan hit last year. Cuba is just as poor as Indonesia, but it has prioritised public infrastructure, its people's interests and, most importantly, in many cases the people themselves are the state apparatus. In 2002, Oxfam prepared a 48-page report on Cuba's disaster management, widely acknowledged as the best in the region. It concluded: "[The Civil Defense Force, early warning system, well-equipped rescue teams, emergency stockpiles and other resources] are impressive, but if they were the only determining factor, then other wealthier countries such as the United States would have lower disaster death tolls. Thus, it is equally important to consider the role played by other 'intangible' qualities in making the Cuban system work so well.
"These include community mobilization, solidarity, clear political commitment to safeguard human life and a population that is 'disaster-aware' and educated in the necessary actions to be taken in the event of a disaster."
The alienation between state apparatus and people in Cuba is so much less. And so the government trusts the people. In Indonesia and Aceh, the people are the enemy.
And so several poor, underdeveloped countries see the impact of an natural phenomenon on the lives of their people multiplied horrifically over what it should be. And then it is screened on television for audiences around the world.
There are contradictions in the response. There is a massive outpouring of solidarity and donations from the mass of ordinary people in the rich countries and disgusting miserliness on the part of corporations and government. You will have all read stories in the papers of the tens of millions donated by ordinary people in Australia, and the miserly donations by the banks and the big corporations.
Now, of course, after an obviously stingy set of initial commitments, the Australian and US governments, have changed tack. In Jakarta on January 9, Australia's Prime Minister John Howard announced "the biggest ever aid program in Australia's history" - $1 billion for relief and reconstruction in Aceh.
Of course, it is not the biggest ever aid program in Australia's history. It pales into insignificance to the cost of the Australian aid program to the US military in Iraq, and to the US military in Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s and the British military in Malaysia in the 1960s. In any case it is $1 billion Australian dollars over five years, i.e. $200 million a year.
And then, $500 million of this is a loan. Most of the rest is made up of the cost of the Australian military deployments already in place in Aceh. And, chiming in with the US policy, it is a real part of the "war against terror".
It will enable the Australian ruling class to say that the "ingratitude" of much of the world's peoples toward imperialist countries is not because of its policies. "look how generous we are", Howard, US President George Bush and friends are saying.
The imperialist leaderships have seen the opportunity here. For just a few hundred million dollars over several years, sold as a new Marshal Plan, they want to repackage themselves in the eyes of the peoples of the world. The imperialist leaders can see that the massive, incredible donations by ordinary people around the world is indeed a potential threat if it ever developed from sympathy and empathy to political solidarity.
A billion dollars for Aceh will sound a lot to many Australians. And we will face the question from people: how much aid is enough - $2 billion? $3 billion? How much?
The reality is of course that no amount of aid can do away with fundamental inequality. No amount. The only thing that will make a real difference is an end to the continuing imperialist exploitation. There is one key step towards this that we must demand now: the cancellation - not a temporary freeze - of Third World debt. The original amount borrowed has been repaid many times and represents the most obvious and immediate way that the First World sucks the life out of underdeveloped countries. Its cancellation is just one step to overthrowing a world order that condemns most humans to despair and poverty.
[This is abridged from a talk given to the Marxist Summer School held by the Democratic Socialist Perspective, an affiliate to the Socialist Alliance, in Sydney in January.]
From Green Left Weekly, January 19, 2005.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.