IN THE span of little more than a year, two separate island nations were struck by debilitating earthquakes. The first hit Haiti on January 12, 2010; fourteen months later, another quake hit Japan. Each of these earthquakes was especially strong, registering magnitudes of 7.0 and 9.0, respectively, and caused considerable damage. Post-earthquake tsunamis followed, adding to the wreckage. International aid was quick to flow into both nations. In these respects, the two situations were similar.
Yet despite the actions of the international community, the circumstances following the earthquakes have proven vastly different in the two countries. In both cases the countries have needed to rebuild massive amounts of infrastructure, and full recovery will be a long process. The contrasting conditions that existed in the two countries before the earthquake, though, ensure that recovery will be much easier in Japan.
It should come as no surprise then that international aid to Japan in the weeks since its earthquake has been far less than that supplied to Haiti in the same time period. Within the first week after each quake, $87-100 million was donated to Japan, while nearly $275 million was given to Haiti. Moreover, there was more of a nationally sweeping campaign for Haitian aid: Advertisements for aid were ubiquitous, with scores of well-known public figures calling for increased help to the Haitian people.
University students have donated money in a way that mirrors international aid. In response to the quake in Haiti, Hoos for Haiti was able to raise $100,000 for victims. The Japan Club has thus far raised only $3,000. The disparity in donations to the two countries leads to an interesting conclusion: People obviously feel more morally obligated to help Haiti. But are their sentiments correctly placed?
Images of destroyed cities, homes and roads, as well as of the homeless, injured and destitute victims of the disasters in both countries have a strong emotional effect on most people. University students asking for money for Japan are quick to point out these troubles, just as people petitioning for money for Haiti emphasized the same things. Nevertheless, Haiti, whose GDP per capita is roughly 1/30th of Japan's, was far more successful in garnering foreign sympathies.
This is despite the fact that Japan is the world's third largest economy, meaning that troubles caused by its quake could have global reverberations, directly affecting more people than Haiti ever could. From a utilitarian standpoint, it could be argued that Japan ultimately helps the world more than Haiti, and therefore is deserving of similar quantities of aid. Steel, car and electronics production all could be slowed in Japan as a result of its quake.
In reality, Haiti needed more global aid. It simply did not have the ability to facilitate endogenous recovery, and therefore needed outside funds to fix the problems caused by its catastrophe. Japan's status as a fully modernized economic powerhouse ensures a quicker and relatively less costly recovery. Despite being hit by a more powerful earthquake, Japan's better constructed buildings did not sustain as much irreversible damage as did the poorly built, fragile structures present in Haiti. And, although Japan has to deal with issues involving its nuclear power plants, it has the means to coordinate and execute recovery plans. Haiti, on the other hand, encountered problems while trying to recoup. Its governmental corruption and lack of law enforcement led to the diverting of emergency relief funds as well as widespread looting, which caused panic following the earthquake.
Moreover, potentially hundreds of thousands more people died in Haiti than are thought to have died in Japan, and millions more were left homeless. This is why people rightfully feel a stronger moral responsibility to help Haiti. Neither the Haitians nor the Japanese brought the earthquakes upon themselves, but the Japanese have the ability to overcome their disaster by rebuilding. Some reports even indicate that Japan's GDP may increase as a result of its reconstruction efforts. The aftermath in Haiti, on the other hand, would have been hopeless without help.
This is not to say that Japan's situation is not tragic. Of course its earthquake was a heartbreaking event, and anyone wanting to give aid to Japan should do so unreservedly. The fact of the matter, though, is that Haiti was damaged much more extensively than Japan. The greater magnitude of distress in Haiti served as an impetus for foreigners to go further in their aid, proving they are more compelled to help human suffering than prevent a temporary shortage of goods from Japan.
Alex Yahanda is a Viewpoint writer for The Cavalier Daily.
Read More
CARTER: U.Va. Health owes clarity to transplant patients
By Nathaniel Carter | 3 days agoUnfortunately, this negative press is fully the fault of U.Va. Health — it failed to address significant stakeholder concerns when crafting its justification.
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | 4 days agoInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
