A deadly bridge collapse in Baltimore and a terrorist attack in Moscow serve as shocking reminders that tragic events have become regular occurrences. Advances in information-spreading technology have led to greater public awareness of tragedy and also amplified efforts to manipulate tragedy for political means. Whether it be to inflame geopolitical tensions or blame the accident on DEI, the politicization of tragedy has become an increasingly common weapon used to advance the aims of our world leaders. Such politically motivated tactics often diminish the individual trauma and consequences associated with surviving such a tragedy, rather than uplifting those impacted. On the flip side, grassroots activism has greater potential than ever before to spark systemic change and turn tragedy into triumph.
On March 22, ISIS-K attacked a concert hall in Moscow, killing 137 people and becoming the deadliest terrorist attack on Russian soil in two decades. Rather than immediately acknowledging that ISIS had been solely responsible, Russian president Vladimir Putin chose to blame the attack on Ukraine and its Western allies. He doubled down on conspiracy theories that American and Ukrainian special forces had assisted “radical Islamist” fighters in the attack, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
In reality, the reason the attack was successful was due to the negligence of Russian intelligence services, not because the terrorists received aid from the U.S. and its allies. Both Iran and the U.S. notified Russia of an imminent ISIS-K attack in Moscow, and Russian intelligence failed to heed their warnings. Rather than come clean to the Russian people and prioritize relieving the families impacted, Putin has chosen to rescue his own ego and advance his selfish war against Ukraine.
Putin’s objectives in constructing the Russian media narrative surrounding the attack were two-fold. By politicizing the atrocity to save the reputations of himself and his intelligence services, Putin shamelessly shifted blame toward his Western opponents. He also disregarded his own history of brutal crackdowns of the mostly Muslim region of the North Caucasus in Russia. All four of the ISIS-K attackers hailed from Tajikistan, a formerly Soviet republic with a history of radicalization; it is the region’s poorest country and citizens live under oppressive authoritarian rule. By boiling down a terror attack with complex causes into a simple “us” versus “them” scenario and refusing to honestly assess his nation’s failure to protect its people, Putin’s efforts in politicizing the tragedy of the concert attack have fallen entirely flat.
Putin is not the only world leader guilty of politicizing tragic events. Across the Atlantic Ocean, the recent bridge collapse in Baltimore represents another timely case study of politicians leveraging tragedy for their own political benefit. In the early morning hours of March 26, the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapsed when it was struck by a massive container ship. Six construction workers on the bridge are presumed to be dead. A mayday call from the ship allowed first-responders to shut down traffic right before impact, likely preventing the loss of many more lives on a bridge that carries more than 30,000 cars every day.
Rather than acknowledging that the accident was nothing more than an accident, several Republican lawmakers took the opportunity to politicize the tragedy, blaming Baltimore’s “DEI mayor” Brandon Scott. To add insult to injury, they also disparaged a commissioner for the port of Baltimore, who is a Black woman. Given that the GOP’s war on DEI is built on racism and misinformation, it is unsurprising they would leverage a freak accident as yet another misguided piece of evidence for their political narrative that DEI is destroying the country.
By prioritizing their vendetta against DEI, Republican politicians ignore the very real consequences of the bridge collapse on the city of Baltimore. The Baltimore port is a beacon for global shipping, and while freight can be redirected to nearby ports, the local economic impact of the collapse is extremely consequential. Baltimore is one of America’s poorest cities, and the collapse threatens the livelihood of thousands of workers. The Biden administration immediately said it would pay the price to rebuild the bridge, which does ensure that the bridge will be rebuilt. However, this doesn’t include support for the hundreds of thousands of Baltimore residents who will suffer financially during the years in which the bridge is rebuilt.
Particularly considering the GOP’s stance, the Biden administration cannot settle for political one-upmanship. Rather than using this opportunity to strengthen Biden’s infrastructure repair resume, it must also make every effort to directly support the citizens of Baltimore. Looking back on Biden’s handling of past infrastructure crises, Baltimore must represent a shift in strategy if Biden is to convince voters that his reassurances regarding rebuilding after the accident aren’t just political posturing.
A prime example of Biden’s disaster response can be found in East Palestine, Ohio. One year and $800 million later, the derailment of 38 freight train cars carrying toxic materials still carries significant consequences for the people of the village. While the Environmental Protection Agency has declared the environment to be safe, the population of the town is still reeling from the aftermath of the disaster. Although Biden went to great lengths to support the community, waning public interest in the tragedy meant that continuing to support East Palestine to the same extent long term wasn’t as politically advantageous as in the short term, meaning that survivors must still contend with the consequences of the disaster.
Similarly, when the Hawaiian island of Maui was engulfed in a catastrophic wildfire, Biden’s failure to rapidly respond to the crisis while on vacation justly drew heavy criticism. Biden’s visit to the island shortly after the blaze was almost entirely political, as his posturing did not translate into a sufficient allocation of resources for survivors of the tragedy. While the federal government has committed hundreds of millions in aid relief, it still hasn’t done enough to repair the damage from the tragedy, with many survivors reeling from psychological injuries and struggling to find long term housing six months later. To truly repair the wounds of tragedy, leaders must do more to address the consequences of tragedy, not just to seize a political opportunity in a tragedy’s immediate aftermath.
Tragedy isn’t always politicized in a negative way. While this is the case more often than not among world leaders, average people have proven that tragedy can also be strong drivers of systemic societal change. Over the last 10 years, the Black Lives Matter movement has demonstrated that through widespread activism, institutions at the core of rule of law in our country can be changed for the better. Police reform is only the latest chapter in a centuries-long struggle for racial equality in the United States, one which has been spurred on by tragedy, again and again.
Tragedy is a part of our society. Nevertheless, politicians cannot stoop down to meaningless politicization. Tragedy has a real human cost. In inappropriately politicizing tragedy, politicians obscure the cost of tragedy and diminish the efficacy of tragedy relief. To do this cost justice, politicians must thoroughly and vehemently approach tragedy’s aftermath while avoiding political narratives. By doing this, politicians can supersede politicization and craft lasting solutions.
Maximilian Schenke is an Opinion Columnist who is most passionate about international politics, but often also writes about national politics, or whatever else is on his mind. He loves receiving criticism or otherwise at maxsch@umich.edu.