The Myth of American Generosity

By Mike Whitney

Al-Jazeerah, January 9, 2005

“They’ve seen our resolve in dealing with terrorism. They also need to
see our compassion. It’s the goodness of America that leads to its
greatness.” Senator Sam Brownback (R- Kansas)

Have you ever seen anyone “flip-flop” more on an issue than George Bush
on Tsunami relief?

First he pledged $15 million. (Until UN humanitarian aid chief, Jan
England referred to the gift as “stingy”) Then it was bumped up to $35
million. (which lasted two days) Now, it’s been inflated to a whopping $350
million.

What gives?

There’s nothing humanitarian about humanitarian aid. The money that’s
been pouring in from private citizens around the world was given from the
kindness of their hearts. That’s not what’s happening with our friends at
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. The ever-changing amount of relief reflects a
political agenda that’s aimed at greater economic involvement in the
stricken region. Calculated generosity is not generosity at all, but self
interest.

Now that they’ve seen the extent of the tsunami’s damage, the Bush clan
is swarming to the scene like pit bulls to a pork-chop. The colossal
devastation has created the right environment for projecting America’s
state-sponsored industries (Halliburton, Bechtel, Flour etc) into the area
for what will undoubtedly be a massive reconstruction project.
Just think, this time we didn’t even have to flatten vast swaths of the
countryside like we did with “Shock-and-Awe” in Baghdad. Mother Nature has
conveniently taken care of all of that for us; free of charge. All Bush
needs to do is whip-up the standard public relations campaign, and
“conference-call” his buddies at Halliburton to roll up their sleeves for
their next big job.

The Bidding War

The amount of relief being promised by the various donor-countries has
escalated into a bidding war. Each nation is stumbling over the other to get
a shoe in the door for future projects. So far, Australia has taken the
lead, promising $810 million to the effort. No one remembers Australia being
so magnanimous during similar crises, (like the Ethiopian famine or the Iran
earthquake in Bam) which makes an ulterior motive even more likely. This
brings us to the central point about humanitarian aid; it’s really just a
shell game that’s used to conceal geopolitical and economic aims. Australia
is certainly not the exception. Its lavish gift is just a way of jostling
with the competition to endear itself to the victim nations.
Did you know that humanitarian aid is normally proffered with strict
requirements? For example, oftentimes a donor country will insist that up to
90% of the aid-package be provided by corporations from their own country.
This means that the generosity of taxpayers is no more than a subsidy for
big business.

Maybe, this is no big deal. After all, in an imperfect world, even
charity comes with strings attached. The larger problem is the fact that
countries make these promises of aid with no intention of meeting their
obligations. Consider the enormous devastation at Bam, Iran last year when
26,000 civilians were killed an earthquake. Donor nations promised over $1
billion in relief following the disaster, and yet, officials say that less
than $18 million has been received. That’s less than 2%!!! “The record is
even worse in the case of Hurricane Mitch, which swept through Honduras and
Nicaragua in 1998, killing more than 9,000 people and making 3 million
homeless. Governments promised to send more than $3.5 billion, while the
World Bank, IMF and EU pledged $5.2 billion. In the end, less than a third
of the money was raised.” (UK Guardian)

The Bush administration has been particularly “stingy” in honoring its
promises. The $15 billion pledged to AIDS assistance two years ago has
translated into millions not billions, and most of that has been directed
towards “abstinence-only” programs. Reconstruction money for Afghanistan and
Iraq has been equally paltry. Afghanistan has received only a pittance of
what was supposed to be a modern-day “Marshall Plan”. To date, there are no
major reconstruction projects even underway in Afghanistan; a dismal
reflection of the administration’s misleading foreign policy. (As John
Pilger notes in a recent article, “Just 3% of all international aid spent in
Afghanistan has been spent for reconstruction”)

Iraq is no different. Less than 2% of the $18 billion allocated by
Congress has been devoted to reconstruction programs. Is there any wonder
why the lights only go on for 4 hours a day in Baghdad?
This also explains why the incredulous Kofi Annan warned two days ago
that much of the $3 billion of aid probably won’t materialize.
“If we go by past history, yes, I do have concern ... we've got over
$2-billion but it is quite likely that at the end of the day we will not
receive all of it,” Annan said.

Fellow UN staffer Rudolf Muller added, "A lot of the money will be
swallowed up by the military or will have been diverted from existing
loans." In other words, the pledges of support will “vaporize” in a
bureaucratic, paper-shuffle. That’s why the Secretary-General is asking for
$60 million for immediate relief to provide food, water, sanitation and
medicine to the (potentially) 500,000 refugees of the tsunami.
Annan’s sobering words were unwelcome at the White House where Bush’s
“Friend of Humanity” campaign is in full swing. The administration’s public
relations wizards have taken on the disaster with unusual zeal. They’ve
dispatched a phalanx of dignitaries to demonstrate the core principle of
American munificence; giving with one hand while stealing with the other.
Wasn’t it odd to see Clinton’s florid face exhumed from obscurity and
slapped up on the front page; ready to join the ranks of Bush loyalists?
Apparently, the goal of proving America’s bigheartedness is not limited by
party affiliation. It’s truly a bipartisan charade.

Did we mention that not one measly bottle of water has been sent to
Falluja, where 70% of the city lies in ruins after a two month Dresden-type
beating that “systematically” destroyed all the major infrastructure
including water purification facilities, sewage treatment and the electrical
grid? Falluja is now “The City of Dogs”, where scavenging canines feed on
the dead bodies left in the streets during the American siege. Are the
people of Indonesia and Sri Lanka more deserving than the 250, 000 Iraqis
refugees who now live in tent cities because the US demanded retribution for
the deaths of 4 corporate mercenaries? Or is the Bush-tsunami in Falluja
just another manifestation of Divine intervention?

Bush’s largesse is bestowed with Machiavellian ruthlessness. Falluja
gets the iron-fist while the candies and sweetmeats are hand-delivered to
Thailand. It’s all part of the political reckoning that employs philanthropy
with the same deadly intent as precision weaponry.

The Flag-wrapped Media

The media has played a vital role in perpetuating the myth of American
generosity. Their task is to create an acceptable narrative for American
benevolence and then to reiterate THE VERY SAME MESSAGE FROM EVERY SOAPBOX
IN THE NATION. This is the real meaning of propaganda, which comes from the
root; “to propagate”. (It does not simply mean misinformation, but implies
the intentional repetition of the same lie over and over again.) This can
only be accomplished if every newspaper and TV station covers the same story
the very same way. (a near impossibility in a free country, one would think)
In a mind-boggling display of unity, over 200 stories appeared in US
newspapers announcing the “CHANGE IN AMERICA’S IMAGE”. (1-5-05) (Kremlin
ideologues must be looking on with admiration at the astonishing uniformity
of the “free market” propaganda system. Quite clearly, it has no rival.)
Similarly, every paper in the country has produced the requisite full-page
pictures of smiling, white Americans distributing CARE packages to the
mud-splattered, dark-skinned natives.

TV, of course, produced the same dismal results providing a week long
celebration of American goodwill.

Who says this ain’t a great country?

Interestingly, the media gambit to “boost America’s image”, dwarfed the
coverage of Alberto Gonzales, the administration’s foremost apologist of
torture. Gonzales who created the legal rationale for abusing prisoners in
“cruel and inhuman” ways, is being elevated to the “highest law-enforcement
officer in the country”, Attorney General. How’s that for irony? Think a few
wary Muslims might be watching the Senate hearings rather than the American
“charm offensive” being waged in the Southeast Asia?

Even with the massive media blitz, it’s all uphill for the Peerless
Leader and his corporate cadres. You can fool some of the people some of the
time, but as the numbers indicate, America’s popularity is headed for the
bottom of the tank. “In Indonesia, whose Muslim population is overwhelmingly
moderate, polls taken after the U.S. invasion of Iraq showed plummeting
support for the United States. America's "favorable" rating fell from 61
percent to 15 percent from summer 2002 to summer 2003, according to the Pew
Research Center.” (Ass. Press) It’ll take more than a few smiley photo-ops
and chocolate bars to turn those numbers around.

The administration is using the cover of humanitarian aid to insert
itself into the economic future of the region. Whatever aid it provides will
mean bigger profits for American corporations and greater involvement for
the US Military. Secretary Rumsfeld has already used the tragedy to
sidestep the congressional ban on aid to the Indonesian military; a clear
attempt to shore up a brutish regime that provides access to Indonesia’s
vast resources. Even greater support is bound to follow the current
disaster.

A “debt-relief” proposal recommended by the IMF will undoubtedly bring
about the same economic conditions that have crippled third world nations
across the globe. On the surface the offer looks like a gift, but in reality
it requires strict compliance with the rigorous guidelines of economic
restructuring. (In other words, privatizing all publicly owned assets,
reducing subsidies to public education, removing protective tariffs,
eliminating public health-care, banning unions, and permitting damaging
flows of capital to move in and out of its markets without regulation.).
The acceptance of this economic regime effectively hands over national
sovereignty to a cartel of international bankers and financiers. It’s
designed to ensure that real democracy cannot flourish.

These are the real implications of American generosity. The $350 million
may be dressed up to look like bounteousness, but it’s just another bone
tossed to Bush’s friends in big business. A year from now, the “tired and
huddled masses” battered by the tsunami will still be living in refugee
camps, drinking brackish water and huddling in lean-tos. The money will have
changed nothing, except to pave the way for a greater American presence in
the region.

United States | Politics | |