http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-11054958

So the UN today has said that aid and money has been slow to come in for the floods that have taken place in Pakistan. With around 20 million people affected by the waters, it is strange to think that the world has not reacted with the usual gusto it does with such tragedies. It was an unfortunately a similar reaction the earthquake in Kashmir in 2005 elicited. Compared to how the world rallied around the Tsunami in 2004, have we reached breaking point with our generosity? Is there a limit to our emotional response to images of suffering?

Could it be that we used all our generosity with the recent earthquake in Haiti? Or maybe worse, people think that Haiti is a country more in need than Pakistan (an argument that is hard to refute considering Pakistan has the 6^th largest army in the world and has no doubt spent countless billions on a nuclear programme).

Even stranger could be that these floods are the wrong type of disaster. Earthquakes, volcanoes, they are spontaneous, monsoon rains are a regular part of the yearly calendar. Should the country have spent their money not on arming themselves with nuclear bombs, and instead on reinforcing a crumbling infrastructure?

The timing of this event is also unfortunate, both because of the events in Haiti, but also the world economic situation, with recessions rife across the globe. People just can’t afford the previous acts of kindness.

Then we get to the even more unsavoury end of the reasons why people aren’t giving.

British Prime Minister David Cameron's comments in India, when he said Islamabad promoted the export of terror, did not help. People are less likely to donate to any country seen as a haven for terrorism. There may also be a feeling, particularly in the US, that Islamic governments and charities should be stepping up to the plate to donate. Seeing that the Middle East views the US as the Great Satan, why should they show compassion when the petro-billions of the region aren’t being mobilised into substantial gifts? $2 billion was spent on the race course in Dubai, I am sure they could mobilise similar cash for this disaster if they wanted to.

Maybe it is the idea that corruption concerns may explain why giving is lower to developing countries than many would like it to be, but it does not explain why there is less money pouring into Pakistan than does to disaster relief causes in other developing countries with similar governance issues. People are always sceptical about their money reaching flood victims, particularly in countries with reputations for corruption. But Haiti didn't have a very good reputation in this regard.  Apart from various reasons given, there is the perception that historically the Pakistani government and politicians have deliberately misdirected aid for humanitarian causes to other channels like in military projects. Obviously people and foreign governments somehow lack trust in Pakistan.

And there in lies the nub. Pakistan’s complicated relationship with the world community has made simple empathy hard to reach. There are so many overriding factors that to think of the dead and the displaced is superseded by other, more petty factors. This is a natural disaster, and these are human beings who are suffering. It is a shame we often get our basic humanity clouded by such things.

- Anand