Apr 5, 2025, 9:47 AM
Apr 1, 2025, 12:00 AM

U.S. fails to provide significant earthquake aid to Myanmar

Tragic
Highlights
  • The 7.7-magnitude earthquake in Myanmar on March 28, 2025, caused extensive damage and massive casualties.
  • The U.S. has only deployed a small team in response, while countries like China and Russia provided significant support quickly.
  • The limitations of U.S. humanitarian aid underscore a worrying trend in global disaster response leadership.
Story

Myanmar experienced a catastrophic 7.7-magnitude earthquake on March 28, 2025, resulting in more than 2,800 fatalities and thousands more injuries. The disaster left millions in need of immediate shelter, food, and medical assistance. Despite the urgency, the U.S. response lagged significantly behind that of other countries, which had mobilized more robust teams and resources shortly after the quake. Former USAID officials highlighted that staffing cuts and logistical contract cancellations under the Trump administration left the U.S. without its usual disaster response capabilities, such as deploying a Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) or utilizing its military-grade logistics assets. Although up to $2 million in funding was pledged, many local humanitarian organizations had already been impacted by prior USAID funding cuts, limiting their ability to respond effectively. The U.S. team, consisting of just three members, arrived five days post-disaster to assess needs but was perceived as inadequate given the scale of devastation. This delayed response drew criticism and raised concerns regarding the broader implications for U.S. humanitarian leadership. As Myanmar faced challenges exacerbated by civil conflict, the absence of substantial U.S. aid not only hindered immediate recovery efforts but also highlighted a shift in global disaster response dynamics, with nations like China and Russia stepping in to provide significant assistance within days. The U.S. administration's focus turned towards partnerships with local organizations, which many experts believe is not a substitute for traditional disaster responses that require large, capable teams on the ground to save lives during the critical initial phase following such disasters.

Opinions

You've reached the end