FAMINE IN THE EAST BARBARISM IN THE WEST
Those of an optimistic or progressive cast of mind frequently assure themselves and others that human society is, on the whole, improving itself; that the world is becoming less barbaric, more civilized as human knowledge and skills increase; and that with a less inequitable distribution of material wealth within each national society, and between national societies, poverty will disappear and with it the cause of war, violence and disorder, in much the same way as diseases have been eradicated. This vision of a better tomorrow engineered by reasonable men acting either on grounds of enlightened self-interest or through political machinery remains a very powerful source of political and social beliefs and activities. But when the major events of this century are considered and the question is asked, whether these events support the optimistic vision, the answer can hardly fail to be negative; and if the further question be pressed, whether nevertheless the optimistic vision has made things better than they otherwise would have been, the most honest answer must be that, on the contrary, it has made things worse. Self-interest has not shown itself to be enlightened, and political machinery placed in the hands of those bent upon forcing changes in society has shown itself to be not only a powerful but as often as not a terrible engine..
We in the west need, from time to time, to remind ourselves that this century has been most barbaric. The worst wars have been fought. The worst weapons have been used. The worst persecutions have been sustained. The worst regimes have been popularly supported and defended. And if, as it does, Germany's Hitlerian orgy remains the most disgusting collective act of which we have certain knowledge in the world's written history, Stalin's Russia was scarcely less offensive a regime; and when catalogues of atrocities are drawn up we ought not to forget that Dresden and Hiroshima will stand high on any list. Nor were these events and regimes sudden aberrations peculiar to one country or to one continent or to one race, or peculiar to a time now past. The barbarities continue, in Africa, in the Middle East, in Asia. And although this country, and its continental neighbours, are not currently engaged in any monstrous acts of commission, they are in no position to congratulate themselves for much: for they stood aside when Biafra was killed, and they now stand aside while the Bangla Desh disaster deepens, and are as guilty of acts of omission as were the Germans, and most of the continentals besides, who acquiesced in and collaborated with the acts of Hitler.
In the past month there has been a great deal of mutual congratulation between the capitals of the wealthier countries of the world, arising from the manner in which the politicians and bankers have dealt with the currency problems — crisis really seems too strong a word for a situation Which has caused little actual distress — that have followed from President Nixon's efforts to look after the American economy's capacity to continue with its duty of making America richer faster. It may well be that the international community will eventually be seen to have behaved remarkably well in this regard; that the Japanese will turn out to be good boys, the Americans will be seen not to have been bad boys, and that the Europeans will have been adept boys. Time will tell; but already two developments seem most likely : tariff protection will increase, and with it the propensity of rich nations to draw together at the expense of poor ones. The monetary crisis,' at all events, produced a great deal of activity.
We may compare this hectic activity by the politicians and bankers in Europe and Japan to look after their interests as they see them in the face of President Nixon's activity in looking after American interests, with the activity of these politicians and bankers in the face of famine next month in East Pakistan. Here there is little, if any, governmental activity at all.
According to Mr Bernard Braine, the chairman of the House of Commons Select Committee on Overseas Development Aid, in the Times this week, and there is no cause to dispute his words, "as sure as night follows day there will be an appalling famine in East Pakistan in October unless the international community intervenes now. That was the sombre conclusion reached by a non-governmental conference Of South Asia experts which met in Toronto last week under arrangements made by Oxfam of Canada." Dr Jon Rohde of the Harvard Medical School told the Toronto conference that there were three urgent requirements: First, that international opinion should demand that the opposing parties in East Pakistan permit sufficient food to reach the affected areas regardless of whether these are under the control of the army or the insurgents. Second . . . to persuade the Pakistan Government to accept that distribution should be under the supervision and administration of a greatly augmented UN staff. Third, that an international team of experts should be permitted to enter East Pakistan without delay . . . to determine where are the areas of greatest need, to assess current food stocks and to decide on the quantities and type of relief supplies needed. . . .
Mr Braine concludes: "Time is desperately short. The world community must act now or be prepared to witness a human disaster of unimaginable proportions."
It is to be hoped that the non-governmental work of the Toronto conference and of men like Mr Braine is successful and that the international community — which essentially is a community of governments — does in fact act now and that the avertable disaster is averted. But on past experience, the fact is that the 'world community,' whatever it may be, is perfectly prepared to witness " a human disaster of unimaginable proportions." Indeed, the more unimaginable the disaster the readier is the world community prepared to witness it, for it witnesses only insofar as it turns its face aside.
Governments respond with the greatest of reluctance to pressure of public opinion. When that pressure is so slight as to be negligible, as it is in the rich west over the starving millions Of Bangla Desh, only an exceptional politician can produce governmental action. The power exists among the rich nations of the west to avert the crisis in East Pakistan, but not the will. Enlightened self-interest might well indicate that a British government should take the lead in forcing the international community of governments to act with urgency. But the public has no good cause to expect enlightenment from its governments as long as it contemplates with equanimity another famine in the East. We do not know the extent to which we are barbarized.
Previous page
