What happens when a government does not protect its own people, or bring them relief after a natural disaster destroys their homes and kills many of them? Here are some examples:

In Egypt, the years after the [1992] Cairo earthquake saw the largely non-violent Muslim Brotherhood take over key parts of civil society, and a vicious war between radical militants and state security services.
— Why Musharraf had to eat humble pie Islamic religious groups will quickly take advantage of government shortcomings, warns Jason Burke Sunday October 16, 2005 The Observer

The Observer article does not mention that it was the previous suppression of the Muslim Brotherhood by the Egyptian state that had radicalized Sayyid Qutb, making him one of the historical strategists of the current jihadists, and executed him, making him a martyr to their cause. The article makes the point that such religious organizations, especially radical ones, are less likely to be corrupt than are government agencies, and thus often take advantage of a natural disaster and succeeding failure of the government to help in order gain the confidence of the people for the religious organization. This is especially possible when the government has harrassed traditional nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), often considered too liberal by the powers that be, until such NGOs are ineffective. Radical religious organizations can then step in and pick up the slack.

The article continues:

The state’s poor showing in the Turkish earthquake [of 1999] contributed to the victory of an, albeit very moderate, Islamist party in elections there.

There are many other examples. A relatively reformist government in Iran, widely criticised for its performance in the Ban earthquake of 2003, was beaten by conservatives earlier this year.

It would be wrong to oversimplify, but the point is clear. Islamic political ideologies provide a clear alternative to the various versions of secular, nationalist, ‘democratic’ government that predominate in the Muslim world. When one fails, the other is strengthened.

This phenomenon is not limited to the Muslim world. Louis XV’s government failed to provide for the welfare of the French people, and the French Revolution ensued. Perhaps Winston Churchill put it best in the 1930s:

The responsibility of ministers for the public safety is absolute and requires no mandate. It is in fact, the prime object for which governments come into existence.
–Churchill: A Life, by Martin Gilbert (New York: Henry Holton Company, 1991), 565.

He should know; he was the prime architect of the bloody Gallipoli campaign, and he had lost his government post because of it.

The Observer article notes that President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan went so far as to publicly apologize for his government’s inadquate response to the deadly earthquake that has killed tens of thousands of people in Pakistan and elsewhere. Musharraf was no doubt aware of those previous examples, and he could see what the Observer could see:

So it should be no surprise that in Pakistan it was activists like those of Jamaat-ud-Dawa, an ultra-hardline group with past links to a banned militant group, who took up the slack.

A group that can do that can build political support; perhaps enough to become the government.

Mushrraf’s government may survive; after all, he has the backing of the most respected organization in his country: the army. And one good result of all this death has been that Pakistan and India are currently actively cooperating about Kashmir.

Nonetheless, failure of any government to address the most basic security needs of its own people is a huge risk not only for that government (which may fall) but for its people (which may end up with something worse) and for the world (which may have to sort out the mess).

-jsq