Pakistan aid

Regarding “Opinion: Why help Pakistan when we can’t handle flooding at home?” (Sept. 6): The recent devastating flood in Pakistan has impacted at least 33 million people and caused a loss of $10 billion to this country. Pakistan contributes less than 1 percent to global warming but is considered one of the top 10 countries in the world most vulnerable to the consequences of global warming and climate change. This requires our empathy as one of the most advanced countries in the world and one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gases. Reps. Sheila Jackson Lee and Al Green, in addition to being the representatives of their respective congressional districts, are also the face of our nation to the rest of the world. They are in Pakistan to show the empathy and sympathy of the American people to the people of Pakistan in this hour of grief and offer our friendly support. They are representing the good face of the American people.

Siraj Narsi, Sugar Land

Regarding “Opinion: Unless Pakistan flood response prioritizes women, we risk destroying entire generation,” (Sept. 7): As someone who spent three years overseas in a foreign aid capacity, I was taken aback by the gist of Farzana Bari’s op-ed, which implies that the global community is somehow responsible for the country’s current misfortunes and/or for providing massive amounts of aid to ameliorate the situation.

Such a response is not unlike our own local and state officials’ entreaties to the federal government, when massive flooding events such as Hurricane Harvey descend on the Houston area. In both instances, those who are responsible and have done nothing about it, are asking the rest of society to bail them out — either from their ineptitude, their complicity with others or just their plain indifference. They seek to blame or shame others. “Global policymakers and aid agencies have missed a lethal blind spot in their response,” she writes. Whether it is to help women or some other group is beside the question. Is this not that an internal matter for Pakistani society to determine?

When I went overseas, we were emphatically told not to involve ourselves in such delicate matters. We were invited by the government of a country.

We were not there to change the culture or society, but to help people acquire the skills necessary to improve their ability to take care of their basic needs in life. While our activities may have changed people’s thinking in other areas, it was a residual effect, not our goal.

If the people of Pakistan want to change how their culture and society functions, and begin to treat women in a different manner, then the changes that Ms. Bari suggests must come from their society. It is not the responsibility of the United States or the global community to do so or to incessantly pay for it, after resources have been otherwise spent.

We have many similar problems in Houston and this country that are festering and equally as scary. Only the people here at the local and state level can change our cultural and societal priorities that may impinge on our ability to address the calamities we face and that may lead to even larger societal ills. We shouldn’t be asking the federal government or the global community to pay for remedies to problems that have befallen us.

Kenneth Booth, Seabrook