I found a really disturbing and interesting article about the 2010 Pakistan floods. It reminded me a lot of what McKibben was talking about in Eaarth, especially in the first chapter. Notice how the article mentions the floods affects on infrastructure, politics, international relations (foreign aid and U.S’s regional strategy to combat the Taliban and Al Quaeda) and military issues, disease, food shortage, economics (severe inflation), and
political instability.
Imagine what will happen when the number of climate-related storms, floods, and droughts continues to increase around the world? What role will the U.S play?
so far the role the US is playing in Pakistan is confusing : they’ve sent in help, but one wonders whether this is humanitarian or a show that we’re on their side while we send drones overhead and bomb remote villages where suspected Taliban leaders and insurgents hide. The other problem with Pakistan is that we’re in a touchy situation with them because (a) we know that the ISI (Pakistan version of CIA) has been supporting the Taliban, and (b) we’ve also been giving them money and support to fight the insurgents raising war against Afghanistan from inside Pakistan; (c) there is the problem of Pakistan’s nuclear power — very dangerous. And, finally, (d) there is the problem of geography — where Pakistan sits with respect to India, China, Afghanistan and Iran. It’s a tough neighborhood. In all, the US has been walking a very fine line between “help” and “disruption.” When this happens, nothing gets done and people suffer.