The response to the appeal for aid  by people and governments the world over has been truly staggering. With anything up to $4 billion dollars pledged. A shame-faced America eventually agreed to cough up $350 million after an astonishingly embarassing display of political naivety and apparent stinginess with an derisory initial offer of $15 billion worth of aid. Donations by individual countries make interesting reading:

1. Australia $765
2. Germany $690
3. Japan $500
4. United States $350
5. Norway $183
6. France $103
7. Britain $95
8. Sweden $75.50
9. Denmark $75
10. Spain $68

However the UN have estimated that the total cost of the relief will eventually be $14 billion. The figures are also misleading because they are comprised of different type of pledges. Some are interest free loans that will have to be paid back, others are staggered over several years and pledges from the World Bank include credits and grants.

But there is a bigger issue I want to focus on here - how much money actually gets to the people on the ground, the vitims of this disaster that are suffering as we speak. In a prior article I mentioned that the endemic corruption in Indonesia that I have experienced first hand is already skimming what little aid is reaching the devastated areas. A UN official privately conceded that if 90 cents in the dollar would reach the victims, then they would be doing well.

It's important to realise that a pledge does not mean a promise, and all too often the money pledged never gets released. Out of last years pledges of $1.1 billion to help the victims of the Bam earthquake in Iran, where 20,000 people perished in the ancient caravan city, only $17 million has actually arrived. And this is not the only example. In 2002, Bush generously promised some $2 billion in development aid to African countries, not one penny has actually arrived. The same sad story is true of pledges made after the earthquake in Gujurat, India in 2002, and the floods in Mozambique in 2000.

But it isn't just a shortfall on delivery of the pledges, it's also the colossal amount of money that is wasted. Here in Phnom Penh, the place is crawling with UN and NGO staff, driving huge latest models SUVs, more often than not with just one person inside. The SUVs are bought usually in the donor countries and shipped to where they are to be used, the same with their modern, shiny equipment and brand new clothes. In short, much of the aid goes towards the economy of the donating country. In Africa, markets are stacked high with donated clothes from Western charity drives, they rarely arrive where intended and are sold on the market instead. A large NGO presence drives up the cost of hard to find acommodation, so in countries as far apart as Mali, Afghanistan and Cambodia a large portion of the relief money goes on accomodation, food and large per diems.

The next point of aid failure is the various agencies that compete against one another for scarce resources, especially true where there is a disaster such as the asian tsunami. With little transport available, the price of securing it rises astronomically and once again aid is not effectively delivered. News teams too must bear the brunt of some of the blame, with hundreds of reporters around the planet commandeering the same precious resources and essentially covering the same story. In Aceh, Indonesia and elsewhere, the first helicopters that flew in weren't stuffed to the brim with aid, they were packed with reporters and cameramen. Some agencies deliver the wrong aid to the wrong area, again because there is no coordinated effort, with agencies doubling up on what needs to be done. The worst agencies are those that take up precious cargo space and fill them with bibles instead of aid.

The above points are not intended to put people off continuing to donate what they can. It's a recognition of the need for a coordinated force that can respond to disasters quickly and efficiently. With the good will that is out there it is a crying shame that the aid is not being effectively delivered where it is needed when it is needed. People have commented that perhaps the reason why there is so much good will, is that with so many different people dead scarcely a country hasn't somehow been affected. It is imperative that the world does not lose interest once the dust has settled, the need for a global emergency task force has been aptly demonstrated, the infastructure must be put in place to cope with these natural disasters so that lives can be saved in the future.

yechydda,