I suppose this will be off the new cycle by the end of the week

[james_davis_nicoll]

The Geneva-based Doctors Without Borders said bluntly: "There is little sign of significant aid distribution."

The aid group complained of skewed priorities and a supply bottleneck at the U.S.-controlled airport. Doctors Without Borders spokesman Jason Cone said the U.S. military needed "to be clear on its prioritization of medical supplies and equipment."

[Poll #1513195]

Comments

Re: Quoting the article

[gohover.livejournal.com]

I'm not clear on what those military flights are doing, but other news coverage has made it sound like the military is establishing infrastructure so that the food and medicine aid can scale up to the enormous amounts necessary.

It also sounds like the bottleneck is the single suitable runway at the airport. As during the tsunami disaster, the US military is bringing hovercraft, helicopters, and other amphibious assault vehicles into position so that aid get in via other means. So, here's a funny thought: If more nations were interested in conducting amphibious assaults (or if the US decided that it needed to be even better at amphibious assaults), aid organizations would benefit.

Re: Quoting the article

[movingfinger.livejournal.com]

The military has established a priority list for providing slots, Major Jones said. At the top are planes bringing in water. Next is equipment for distributing supplies, followed by food and then medical personnel and medicine.

Haiti's government handed responsibility for operating to the airport to the US military, and someone in the military has made triage decisions prioritizing water and transportation over care for the injured (medical personnel, medicine). There are also reports that US troops are being landed to maintain social control. To a military person, this hierarchy makes sense. To the rest of the world, it does not. For the United States, it will create an impression for years to come that people were allowed to die because the US military would not allow care to get through. There is no right answer in this problem.

Re: Quoting the article

[londonkds.livejournal.com]

It depends who the water is for. There is apparently a very serious shortage of drinkable water in parts of Haiti (there wasn't much of an infrastructure to start with, and then the earthquake destroyed most of it).

Re: Quoting the article

[maruad.livejournal.com]

Shortage of drinking water is always one of the first problems in a major disaster.

Re: Quoting the article

[geekosaur]

I think I have to go with "someone will consider the answer wrong no matter what"; the prioritization above (a) makes sense from the standpoint of prerequisites, and (b) apparently isn't limiting medical that much considering that at least one country (Israel) already has an emergency field hospital up and running.

Re: Quoting the article

[icedrake.livejournal.com]

That's interesting. A press release from the MSF spoke of a plane with an inflatable hospital facility being diverted to Samana. In this case, the issue seems to be not prioritizing but lack of clear communication. I doubt the MSF would insist they had to have the hospital on the ground NAO NAO NAO if this meant displacing water shipments, and having people die of thirst, instead of injuries. But once the plane is in the air, with assurances that it will be allowed to land, that's a whole different situation.

Re: Quoting the article

[doug-palmer.livejournal.com]

They only had to divert two planes out of 200 on Sunday, of which the MSF plane seems to be one. They ask planes to divert if they haven't got enough fuel to stay stacked up over Port-au-Prince. Under the circumstances, I think that's pretty good pipeline management.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/01/17/haiti.aid/

Re: Quoting the article

[icedrake.livejournal.com]

Actually, that's the US Colonel saying only two planes had to be diverted on Sunday. A BBC World Service interview I'd heard with a different US official went something along the following lines.

Reporter: So you're saying aid and rescue operations are under way. I was out in the city earlier and I drove around quite extensively, but I didn't see any aid workers. Not one.

US official: Well, you must have not been where they were, because I am telling you they're out there.

Two countries -- Brazil and France -- have registered protests with the US after they had planes turned away, and Italy is "very upset" over the prioritizing of its aid flights. France had lodged a protest (and then denied doing so) with the US for prioritizing the evacuation of its citizens over other needs. Not all that altruistic of it, given that France wanted its own nationals evacuated, but at least it had a field hospital on the incoming flight.

In light of all of the above, I'm not all that eager to take the US military's word for the progress of the aid efforts.

Re: Quoting the article

[tavella.livejournal.com]

It's got a single runway. They are attempting to pump relief and rescue for a city of three million through it. The US controllers are trying their best to absolutely maximize the numbers of landings. Sometimes the dance fails and they have to divert planes elsewhere, and yes, a mobile hospital is low priority compared to food and water. Most of those "military" flights are carrying supplies, not troops.

On Saturday, they managed to land 64 and had to divert 3; sucks for the diverted but not an Evil Plot by the US to frustrate the WFP and Medecins Sans Frontiers.