Sub-Saharan Africa gets it's share of disasters. I know. I lived there for several years. The ones that were direct results of natural disasters we lamented, shook our heads over, spat and went on. The ones that are exacerbated by poor infrastructures, political ineptitude or corruption infuriate us as those who suffer often have little influence over the outcomes or their options as the suffering escalates. This is the case in Latin America right now as well.
An earthquake always comes out of the blue, and in that sense, it is always a piece of bad luck in the geological lottery, as David Ignatius wrote in the Washington Post in January. Yet the short- and long-term aftereffects of an earthquake—the extent of the damage it wreaks, the speed with which the population reorganizes itself and rebuilds—have nothing to do with luck. Those who study famines have long argued that they are created by bad politics and bad economics as well as bad weather: There is always food somewhere, so if a particular country doesn't have any, there must be an explanation other than "It was very hot last summer."
A society's ability to recover from a natural disaster is also a reflection of its economic and political culture.
Disasters have no logic, and no political significance, either. But the recovery process that follows a disaster is always deeply political. Despite a stronger earthquake and more damaging aftershocks, Chile will return to normal faster than Haiti. Luck has nothing to do with it.
Anne Applebaum is a Washington Post and Slate columnist.
Her most recent book is Gulag: A History.
Her most recent book is Gulag: A History.
Comments