Hurricane Katrina disaster diplomacy

Abstract

Hurricane Katrina struck the United States at the end of August 2005. The consequent devastation appeared to be beyond the US government's ability to cope with and aid was offered by several states in varying degrees of conflict with the US. Hurricane Katrina therefore became a potential case study for 'disaster diplomacy', which examines how disaster-related activities do and do not yield diplomatic gains. A review of past disaster diplomacy work is provided. The literature's case studies are then categorised using a new typology: propinquity, aid relationship, level and purpose. Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath are then placed in the context of the US government's foreign policy, the international response to the disaster and the US government's reaction to these responses. The evidence presented is used to discuss the potential implications of Hurricane Katrina disaster diplomacy, indicating that factors other than disaster-related activities generally dominate diplomatic relations and foreign policy.

Catastrophe and Conflict: Disaster Diplomacy and Its Foreign Policy Implications

“…Considering that most offers were not accepted and that the U.S.A.'s relations with other countries did not change as a result of Hurricane Katrina disaster diplomacy (Kelman, 2007), medical diplomacy failed in this case study.…”

“…In terms of disaster risk reduction not necessarily being a high political priority, the legislation from Mongolia, South Africa, and the U.S.A., noted in section 3, indicates that even with good practice case studies, other political considerations can preclude the legislation achieving its disaster-related goals on its own. In terms of disaster response not necessarily being a high political priority, perceived historic wrongs and domestic politics can outweigh accepting assistance, as shown in many instances (Nelson, 2010b) including Cuba and the U.S.A. refusing to accept aid from the other (Glantz, 2000;Kelman, 2007).…”

“…After Hurricane Katrina, Cuba's aid offer included more than 1,000 doctors and several tonnes of medical supplies; China offered medical experts; India included medicine, a medical team and water purification systems in their offer; Mexico sent medical supplies delivered by Mexican army vehicles crossing the border; and Russia suggested supplying medicines and drinking water (Kelman, 2007). Considering that most offers were not accepted and that the U.S.A.'s relations with other countries did not change as a result of Hurricane Katrina disaster diplomacy (Kelman, 2007), medical diplomacy failed in this case study.…”

Adaptive governance to typhoon disasters for coastal sustainability: A case study in Guangdong, China

“…In recent years, the socio-economic losses from coastal disasters have increased (IPCC, 2007(IPCC, , 2012. Following the tsunami in the Indian Ocean in 2004 (more than 87,000 deaths), Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans in 2005 (more than 1300 deaths and approximately $30B in direct economic losses) (Kelman, 2007), and Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey in 2012 (estimated at 72 direct and 87 indirect deaths and over $71B in direct economic losses) (National Hurricane Center, 2013), we are lost in a vicious cycle of ''damage-recovery-damage'' from disasters. Is a high rate of socio-economic development inevitably accompanied by higher risk?…”

Disaster assistance: determinants of countries around the world contributing towards disaster donations

“…More recently the discussion about disaster relief widened to include the use of humanitarian aid as a diplomatic tool (Kelman, 2007;Kelman, 2012). The evidence available from studying Aceh following the 2004 Asian tsunami suggests that interstate and intra-state disaster diplomacies are similar, irrespective of the players involved, and that disaster diplomacy is similarly limited in resolving decades-long conflicts and achieving peace (Gaillard et al 2008).…”