Vol. I, Issue 4
January 2005

On 26 December 2004, at 7:58 local time, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake struck off the west coast of northern Sumatra¹. The earthquake triggered a tsunami that killed hundreds of thousands of people; though the full scale of destruction would not be known for several days. The waves, some estimated to be as large as 15 meters (49 feet)², smashed into the shores of all the surrounding countries in the Indian Ocean, with the deadly waves reaching as far away as the east coast of Africa. It was the deadliest natural disaster in recent history³ – perhaps ever.

Leaders from around the world rushed to express their condolences and promise aid. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder broke off his vacation to head up Germany's relief efforts⁴. The day after the quake, French President Jacques Chirac and Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin sent condolences to the leaders of the countries devastated by the tsunami⁵, expressing their deepest sympathies. However, not all world leaders were so generous with their sympathy. U.S. President George W. Bush was vacationing at his ranch in Crawford, TX – and he made no effort to express any feelings of grief or sympathy with the victims of the cataclysm while he was on his vacation. Certainly, the U.S. government did make some effort to respond – Secretary of State Colin Powell stepped up to express his condolences and pledged $15 Million in aid to the affected countries⁶.

But compared to the might of the American economy, $15 Million seems scant. Indeed, it is only 0.0001% of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Much of the inner workings and decision making behind the initial offer of aid are not known, so one is left to wonder if the $15 Million sum was even authorized by President Bush, or if it was just the largest discretionary amount that U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, who was moved by the tragedy, could authorize at the moment.

As other countries began pledging amounts well in excess of the meager U.S. offering, and as international officials criticized some countries of being "stingy⁷", American officials increased their pledge to $35 Million. A few days later, the pledge was increased to $350 million⁸. While this is certainly a tremendous sum, it is still only fourth in the world⁹ in terms of total dollars pledged and 20th in the world as a percentage of GDP¹⁰.

Some people tried to justify the Bush administration's meager offering of aid by claiming that private individuals and non-governmental-organizations (NGOs) would pick up the slack. But isn't that just passing the buck?

Certainly the American people will contribute to this humanitarian crisis out of the goodness of their heart, but why should that be an excuse for their leaders to shirk their responsibility? Americans look to their elected officials for guidance, so why are these officials not living up to their duties? Americans do believe in the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence – that the power of the government derives from the consent of the governed, but likewise, Americans believe in leadership from their leaders. Why must the average American citizen be expected to pick up the slack for their government?

The tsunami in south-east Asia caused one of the greatest humanitarian crises in the history of the world. But it also presented one of the greatest opportunities for the people of the world to show their fellowship. This makes it all the more disappointing that U.S. government officials, led by the Bush administration, chose not to exercise leadership in this moment of worldwide unity.