Leadership
Moxie wrote an interesting post contrasting the leadership shown on 9/11 with the lack of it this week:
"What do they need?" we asked.
They had an answer for that, Rudy & Company. They told us what was needed and where to bring it. When there wasn’t anything civilians could do, they told us. And we knew it was true. We knew we had to just sit tight until the rescuers needed something we could give."
I’m not sure that’s quite a fair comparison. 9/11 was logistically simple compared to the mess caused by Katrina. There were very few wounded, and remarkably little damage outside the few blocks of the twin towers. It was a mess getting everyone home that first day, but the weather was good, and except for emotional trauma, most people got away with nothing worse than blisters from walking a long distance.
Moreover, at least some of the answers that Rudy and co. gave that first week turned out to be wrong. They said there was no reason to worry about the lingering cloud of dust. (I was in the city six weeks later, and you could still taste it in the air.) At best, this was an attempt to put a positive spin on an uncertain situation, to try to avoid panic and a mass exodus that would have damaged NYC for years. At worst, it was an outright lie.
But yes, reading the coverage this week has made me appreciate what Giuliani did. He managed to set an emotional tone of projecting confidence without seeming to take things less seriously than they deserved, of acknowledging the huge task ahead without seeming overwhelmed. Bush still seems to be smirking and joking about Trent Lott’s house. Nagin seems to be on the verge of a nervous breakdown. FEMA officials seem to have forgotten that no one cares about how hard they’re working, only the results. And the results — or lack thereof — speak for themselves.
And if this report is true — if the food distribution center where Bush’s press conference was held was a fake, taken down as soon as he left — then heaven help us all. I’m pretty cynical these days, but that’s beyond what I can wrap my head around. I’m literally nauseous at the thought. (Via Scrivenings and Phantom Scribbler)
Important Update: Respectful of Otters and Idealistic Pragmatist tracked down the German video that was cited as the source, and found that it did not say that the food distribution center was a fake. It did report that the street cleaning crews in Biloxi only showed up when the President was there. As Rivka wrote:
"But we need to be careful not to undercut the points we’re trying to make with even unintentional amplification. The news coming out of the U.S. Gulf Coast, including the biting commentary by ZDF news, is damning enough as it stands."
If you’ve reported on this story as fact, please update it.
September 4th, 2005 at 7:47 pm
I saw that somewhere else, too (the press op story). It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when the president can’t even be bothered to leave behind some people to do work after his photo op. I think you’re right about the comparison between 9/11 and this being problematic. The other thing I was thinking today is that 9/11 affected what, 4-5,000 families? Not a small number, but nothing compared to this. And the survivors still had homes, water, clothing, jobs. In this case, people have had their entire lives washed away, and their livelihoods too. In some ways, I think it’s more comparable to the Dust Bowl.
September 4th, 2005 at 9:31 pm
As usual your analysis is spot on, Elizabeth. As horrifying as 9/11 was, the damage was confined to a relatively small area. This affects thousands of square miles. Landismom hits it right on the head with the comparison to the Dust Bowl: a human disaster of unthinkable scope, caused by weather and environmental degradation, and aggravated by human error and callousness.
September 4th, 2005 at 10:12 pm
For the money, nothing devastates like a flood. Nagin’s having a nervous breakdown because they’re going to have to bulldoze 80% of his city and start over. It’s going to make the ongoing debates over lower Manhattan look like a PTA meeting.
September 5th, 2005 at 1:45 am
Thank you for your thoughtful and level-headed post. I’ve read so much invective over the past few days, I’d thought I was going to have to quit the blogosphere.
I think the next weeks and months will be the true test for this country. It’s affecting all of us, everywhere — 1000 refugees will be arriving in Portland, OR in the next days; and the Deep South is about as far from Portland as one can get, both physically and culturally.
September 5th, 2005 at 1:53 am
I do think people ought to be angry, by the way. It’s just — well, it’s more useful to read something coherent.
September 5th, 2005 at 11:19 am
Although I never knew much about Giuliani before 9/11 save the way his son mocked him during his inauguration speech, I now know him to be a great leader, especially in light of the way he handled the entire mess of Sept. 11.
On the other hand, many are beginning to criticize Nagin and are even blaming him for not getting the poorest and oldest of his citizens safely out of the city.
Although Nagin has been cursing and screaming of late, I wonder how stoically Giuliani would have led if massive federal help was slow in coming to help the great city of NY.
In all honesty, and I think you’re right, no real comparison can be made here because the situations are just too different. Many can claim that NY had it all together; in effect had the perfect plan, that everyone on the local level worked in tandem and things ran as smoothly as anyone could have imagined.
But look at New Orleans. How could ambulances, police cars and firetrucks traverse 8+ feet of water? They couldn’t. Plus all of the hospitals were essentially non-functioning.
It would be great if we could use 9/11 as the essential blueprint on how to run disaters, but in this case we just can’t.
Nagin’s hands and the local government’s hands were really tied. They could only look to the federal government for relief. If Nagin blew up a few times, I think he was well within his right to do so.
September 5th, 2005 at 9:10 pm
I didn’t mean to come across as slamming Nagin. I think his anger and frustration are appropriate; my point was just that they’re not the most reassuring response for anyone who is still in need of help to hear.
And I’m angry too — I just don’t think that my incoherent rage is worth anyone reading.
September 6th, 2005 at 11:24 am
You know who hasn’t been visible AT ALL? At least that I’ve seen? The governor of Louisiana. She seems to have disappeared. I’m not sure why we’re hearing more from Nagin than from Gov. Babineaux Blanco (if that’s how you spell it).
I have a feeling that some of the initial confusion stemmed from the governor’s disconnect – generally, because of federalist principles, the feds can’t go in unless they’re invited by the gov and even then, they leave the on-the-ground logistics coordination to the state. I wonder if Blanco got her act together soon enough to invite them or if she even knew what she was supposed to do. I heard rumors that the Coast Guard had been at least contemplating the idea that blowing up a few levees in New Orleans would be an ideal terrorist attack and was planning for that contingency – but the CG has clear legal authority to respond directly to terrorist attacks under a law passed shortly after 9/11. I don’t think they have the legal authority to respond directly in the case of natural disaster.
Anyway. Just some thoughts.
September 7th, 2005 at 12:38 am
No, Blanco did declare a state of emergency even before the storm fully hit, and asked the feds to do likewise. The feds got around to it a day later, and took their time about preparing a response. I don’t know why Blanco hasn’t been in the news much, possibly just that Nagin is better copy.