A Pakistani flood survivor hangs onto a hovercraft and waits to get relief food distributed by naval officials in Sangi Village near Sukkur, in southern Pakistan on Thursday, Aug. 19, 2010.Shakil Adil
Pakistan's floodwaters continue to rise, and with them grows the need for a prompt response to the country's humanitarian crisis. Among the many reasons to care about the 20 million people put at risk by the floods, the longer-term security situation in Pakistan is one that governments and individual donors should remember.
Three weeks after heavy rains first started to overwhelm the Indus River, and more than a week after a $460-million (U.S.) emergency appeal from the UN's Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, the country's needs are still nowhere close to being met.
In the interim, some of the most afflicted areas are, by some reports, getting most of their aid - or the promptest aid - from Islamist charities and Taliban-affiliated groups. The Pakistani government's threat to prohibit fundraising by members of banned organizations that are looking to provide humanitarian assistance, and try them under the country's Anti-Terrorist Act, may backfire. The government is overstretched and distrusted. Where there is basic human need - for water, shelter and food - the needy will usually not be particular about the ideology of the aid-giver.
The Swat Valley, close to the political and military capitals of Islamabad and Rawalpindi, is especially at risk. In the last five years, it has endured a major earthquake, a Taliban takeover, a brutal government response and now this flood. If the Taliban and their proxies prove themselves more capable of delivering aid than the government, the region could in time throw its popular support to the Taliban.
That further emphasizes the need for more donations from outside Pakistan. The most well resourced organizations, and those involved in the recovery and reconstruction after the 2005 earthquake, are more likely to have connections with other Pakistan-based community groups. With sufficient money, Western organizations can work with local groups to deliver aid that is sufficient to build enduring trust.
In an ideal world, aid would not be a political tool. Robert Fox, executive director of Oxfam Canada, says, "We respond because people have urgent needs," and he notes that "it puts aid workers at risk" if their work is being perceived as being driven by strategic or military interests.
There can, though, be a confluence between aid and stability. More Western aid may be more effective at bringing peace to the country than the large share of U.S. military aid (widely believed to have been squandered) has done to date. We can help alleviate the immediate suffering of Pakistanis, and make them less likely to be lured to the terrorist cause.