DO-GOODER NATION:

Next: A War Against Nature (ROBERT D. KAPLAN, 10/12/05, NY Times)

THE rest of the world and even quite a few Americans are uncomfortable with the globe-trotting United States military. But in future years they will see much more of it. The causes will be more related to the natural environment than to terrorism. Just ask the earthquake victims in northern Pakistan, where eight American military helicopters have now arrived with relief supplies - the start of an aid effort by the military's Central Command that will include airborne reconnaissance and heavy-lifting equipment.

With the global population now at six billion, humans are living in urban concentrations in an unprecedented number of seismically, climatically and environmentally fragile areas. The earthquake-stricken region of Pakistan saw a doubling of its population in recent decades, certainly a factor in the death toll of more than 20,000. The tsunami in Asia last December showed the risks to the rapidly growing cities along the Indian Ocean. China's booming population occupies flood zones. Closer to home, cities like Memphis and St. Louis lie along the New Madrid fault line, responsible for a major earthquake nearly 200 years ago when those cities barely existed; and the hurricane zone along the southern Atlantic Coast and earthquake-prone areas of California continue to be developed. More human beings are going to be killed or made homeless by Mother Nature than ever in history.

When such disasters occur, security systems break down and lawlessness erupts. [...]

In a nation and a world where mass media and the Internet spread the word of disaster so effectively, impassioned calls to do something can quickly erode constitutional concerns, political differences and worries over sovereignty. Just as Pakistan has now agreed to accept aid from its rival India, Iran accepted help from the United States Air Force after the earthquake in Bam in 2003. The very people who typically denounce the American military will surely be complaining about its absence should our troops not show up after a major natural calamity. [...]

Will a new emphasis on disaster relief further strain an already overstretched military? No. Most of our deployments around the world, for either military or humanitarian efforts, involve small groups, perhaps several platoons. It is Iraq that's been breaking the system, and as we gradually lower our troop levels in that country, there will be more capacity for operations that provide significant diplomatic benefits.

Fluidity and flexibility now define military affairs.

It's not like we respect anyone else's sovereignty anyway.

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 12, 2005 9:20 AM