Report details US refusals of foreign aid after Katrina
Source: Nick Juliano, Rawstory.com
27 Jul 2007

A new report reveals the US government turned down offers of help from across the globe in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, telling one diplomat “human assistance of any kind is not on our priorities list.”

The report from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington relies on a review of 25,000 documents obtained from the State Department. The report reveals the US was interested mostly in cash assistance and materials, rather than direct aid from foreign relief workers and doctors, after Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast in 2005.

“A review of the State Department documents reveals distressing ineptitude,” CREW’s executive director Melanie Sloan said in a prepared statement. “Countries were trying to donate desperately needed goods and services, but as a result of bureaucratic bungling and indifference, those most in need of these generous offers and of aid never received it.”

Offers to help came from 145 countries and 12 international organizations. The US did accept help from its top allies around the globe, but CREW’s report shows it left unclaimed hundreds of thousands of prepared meals, water pumps, doctors and medicine.

Many of the offers were turned down because of a strict adherence to bureaucratic regulations, the report reveals. For example, questions about medical licensing prevented foreign-trained doctors from helping in the Gulf Coast.

“All, The (sic) word here is that doctors of any kind are in the ‘forget about it’ category,” read an e-mail from the State Department responding to an offer of assistance from Argentina. “Human assistance of any kind is not on our priorities list … It’s all about goods, not people, at this point.”

A ban on British beef in place over fears of Mad Cow disease prevented Meals Ready to Eat from the UK being given to Katrina refugees. The uneaten MREs were kept in a storage unit at a cost of $16,000 per month, according to the report.

The disorganization that plagued Katrina cleanup efforts also strained diplomatic relations, when the US ignored offers of aid from other countries.

“It is getting downright embarrassing here not to have a response to the Estonians on flood relief,” Jeffrey Goldstein, a U.S. Embassy official in Estonia, wrote in an e-mail to several State Department officials. “… We know that what the Estonians can offer is small potatoes and everyone at FEMA is swamped, but at this point even ‘thanks but no thanks’ is better than deafening silence.”

An Israeli plane filled with supplies for the relief effort sat fully loaded on an airport tarmac for more than 48 hours because of a lack of communication from the US, according to another e-mail released with the report.

“The vendors are getting restless. They offered this stuff 48 hours ago, and the government hasn’t responded,” wrote an unidentified State Department official. “I’ve been on the phone with the [Israeli] attache every couple of hours since noon … they’re patient, but not amused by our delay, obviously.”

Well, at least our refusal of international aid was merely the result of “bureaucratic bungling and indifference,” and not the raw brutality of a military dictatorship.

So we got that going for us …

Although this one comment to Michael,
“Now, regarding your (false) assumption that I was merely taking another swipe at Bush’s invasion of Iraq: perhaps you’re feeling a slight twinge of Neocon guilt?”
May be a bit of a swipe, I must admit I was thinking the same thing while reading through the comments. So in that sense, I still think you’re on to something.

If the Constitution is the supreme authority WITHIN our government (God being supreme OVER all government), then I find it rather alarming how far we have strayed from its bounds in our international adventures. One need only take a brief cursory look at the writings of our nation’s founders to discover their complete aversion to interventionist programs. I will take the wisdom found in Madison, Washington and Adams over any of the present crop of neocons and socialist we are being offered. It’s amazing, these politicians will heap praise on the founders, while working to dismantle the very checks and balances the founders establish.

Anyway, excellent series of posts frank…I look forward to reading more.

Frank: I would have written precisely the same thing if Bill or Hillary, Barack Obama, or John McCain were currently president.

Now, regarding your (false) assumption that I was merely taking another swipe at Bush’s invasion of Iraq: perhaps you’re feeling a slight twinge of Neocon guilt?

Michael Martin (18): That is stupid and insane: “I want to save you, and I’ll kill you if you don’t let me!”

Frank: I don’t know if this is true or just a cliche, but it is said that injured anumals are the most dangerous — that they will attack a person who tries to render them aid.

This is sort of what I picture the situation to be in Myanmar. Wild animals simply don’t trust humans (Gen. 9:2), and an injured, vulnerable animal isn’t any different.

The military junta in Myanmar already distrusts those powerful western nations that don’t approve of their takeover. And now that the “wild animal” is severely injured …

The article offers some sane ideas on ways to pressure the regime, or to make the aid more acceptable, but going to war is not one of them. An invasion is an act of war, no matter how you rationalize it or dress it up in other clothes.

That is stupid and insane: “I want to save you, and I’ll kill you if you don’t let me!”

Is It Time to Invade Burma?

So maybe this “idea” isn’t in my head alone …

Well said.

And all I was trying to say, really.

God will ultimately hold the leadership of Myanmar accountable for their criminal neglect. In the meantime, the United States should offer, as President Bush has done, humanitarian aid. The use of force to compel its acceptance is not a viable or sensible option for us. Our national interests are not being threatened.

The people of that country need to clean their own house of the leadership that has neglected and abused them. This situation may be a powerful incentive to to arouse the people to action. Throughout history there are numerous examples of this kind of thing bringing about needed government changes from within.