What We Talk About When We Talk About Man-Made Disasters

This is the weekly blog post from the "Hurricanes" group; and in advance, I would very much like to apologize for any poor formatting here. This is actually my first time ever posting in a blog!

Anyway.

Thoroughly engrossed by our previous conversations largely concerning natural disasters, I really wanted to push the envelope with this post. So while searching for a concrete example of recent man-made disasters, I stumbled upon this heart-wrenching reminder of how the goings-on in Syria are not resolved issues simply because CNN has ceased to incorporate them into its programming (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/the-politics-of-starvation-syrias-civilians-go-hungry-after-months-of-sieges-9094281.html).

Widespread starvation is increasing in its severity throughout countless communities in the country as a result of the sieges still taking place. The sheer scarcity of food has driven the price of rice in some areas to be $40/kilo as opposed to the typical $2/kilo. But this isn't merely about economics--by any means. Hundreds of thousands of people are now cut off from any regular flow of goods necessary to survival as a result of political turmoil between the Syrian government and multiple opposition groups.This particular article deals with two especially hard-hit cities, Zahraa and Nobl, where "besiegers [Sunni rebels] ... accuse the Shia townspeople of supporting the government of President Bashar al-Assad and are seeking to starve them into submission" (Cockburn). Select convoys await the opportunity to send aid to these communities, and some have even found themselves in the middle of gunfire as a consequence. Later in the piece, the situation as a whole is not once, but twice, assigned the title of "disaster."


The question I pose here today is--is it actually a disaster? The Syrian Civil War has often been referred to as the Syrian Crisis. However, our last class successfully differentiated crises from disasters, leaving us  now (I think) to truly consider where the mass starvation stemming from armed conflict is located within our new understandings. Is this a disaster if food is available somewhere within Syria and is "just" not being provided to the citizens who need it? What does the atmosphere of political retribution imply for whether or not we say this is a disaster. How many people have to suffer before we tip the scale from one extreme to the next?  In my opinion, regardless of the politics, this is a high-impact and long-term devastation inflicted upon too many of Syria's people. Courses of action in response have already been under way,  and international norms are certainly in question (recall al-Assad's "alleged" use of chemical weapons, the expected behaviors of the international community, etc).
Where do you all stand on this issue? I think that we definitely need to talk about this.
-Anthony DeSantis