Aftershocks

The tragedy in Haiti is still unfolding as I write this and the death toll is already projected to reach the thousands. The major newspapers and all of the network anchors are enroute, including Diane Sawyer, who is parachuting in from Afghanistan. The earthquake and its aftermath promise to be a major story for days, and possibly weeks to come. What kind of a story the journalists tell will be decided, in large part, in Washington.

The role that the United States Government should play in disaster relief is pretty straightforward. Lives hang in the balance and our government should respond immediately with food, medicine, and, if necessary, security police to keep order. Yes, France should help, too. Haiti was once a French colony. But since the declaration of the Monroe Doctrine almost two centuries ago, the United States has taken a proprietary position on security issues in the Americas, and implicit is the notion that when disaster strikes and urgent assistance is needed, the US should lead the charge.

But then what? What role should the US play in Haiti after the wounds are bandaged and the rubble is cleared?

The instincts of the Obama administration, from the president on down, will probably lean strongly in the direction of nation re-building. It's president Obama's chance to use US power for good, and to demonstrate that he's the un-Bush (see Katrina, Air Force One flyover, "Heck of a job," etc.). But Haiti has long been a problem that's defied easy solution. The fact that it's the poorest nation in the hemisphere is repeated so often you'd expect to see it on Haitian bumper stickers. Living conditions are atrocious. Political corruption is endemic.

Ironically, the tragedy of this massive earthquake could, at last, provide an opportunity for reformers in Port au Prince -- with Washington's help -- to finally lift the Haitian people out of poverty and create a new and better country. It would be the longest of long-shots, but it could be done. Social entrepreneurs from around the world could be enlisted to come up with new housing and transportation solutions. The US and France could cooperate on restoring basic services like water and electricity. And Dr. Paul Farmer could be put in charge of building a new medical infrastructure. (If you haven't read Tracy Kidder's Mountains Beyond Mountains, now is the time).

There will be pushback, of course. As the seemingly interminable wars in Iraq and Afghanistan drag on, the American people will be in no mood for more nation building, no matter how needed or how close to home. And the president himself might have a hard time justifying major expenditures for Haiti when so many of our fellow citizens are hurting here at home. (Someone is bound to say that we should finish rebuilding New Orleans before we send American tax dollars to Port au Prince).

The timing is terrible. But in the end, there is no good time for an earthquake, and there is no time to respond but now. It will require the American people to sacrifice for others for reasons other than national security or political gain. But that's how great nations define their greatness. And as we like to say in my neighborhood, what are neighbors for?