Tuesday solemnly marked the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. State agencies and local media in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, the states hardest hit, estimate total deaths of over 1800 people from the storm, and about $82 billion in property damage.

Aside from the dry statistics, more lasting impressions were created by the pictures that won’t go away. Residents desperately trying to escape the area before the storm hit on crowded highways. Those too poor, stubborn, or unlucky to get out in time pleading for help, waving flags, bright clothing and signs at the news helicopters that surveyed the aftermath. Broken windows and strewn goods showing evidence of the looting that took place in a city abandoned by the rule of law. Thousands of cots lying side by side in a football stadium, demonstrating just how unprepared for the storm organizers were at all levels of government. Houses torn apart and flooded, remaining vacant after a year.

The city of New Orleans was effectively drowned, and with it went the credibility of a government that claimed to have learned from catastrophes past, and a president that bragged about the “mandate” given to him by the American people to represent their interests. Now, one year later, the Gulf Coast region is being hit by a new flood — apologies. But regret is not the same as improvement, and there are valuable lessons for the future of the country at home and internationally.

On Tuesday, the president visited New Orleans, the site of the worst damage and took “full responsibility” for the government’s embarrassing performance during the emergency. News shows played clips of the destruction and then rebuilding efforts, and there were feature stories with refugees who are now trying to rebuild their lives. If you think this sequence sounds familiar, say reminiscent of the events of September 11, 2002, you are not alone.

The similarities continue. Again a disaster uncovered serious deficiencies across the board in domestic policy. The storm caused one of the most catastrophic disasters, natural or otherwise, ever to occur on U.S. soil. The national emergency response system, supposedly revamped after September 11, was revealed to be inadequate and unready. A House investigation into the response published a report in February entitled “A Failure of Initiative” that castigated the federal relief attempts.

Accusations of institutional racism and discrimination against the poor — which began with those stranded demanding to know why no help was on the way — shook a country that learned that its claims of equality and opportunity might be merely superficial. Though officials tried to play up the fact that there appeared to be no income correlation within the deaths, there is little question that those who were stranded, who couldn’t get out in time, who were packed into the Superdome, who now can’t afford to rebuild or even make it back to New Orleans are overwhelmingly in the lowest income bracket. With the Bush administration claiming validation every time estimates of job creation increase, it is crucial to ask why the trickle down effects of supply side tax cuts seem not to have reached the Gulf Coast’s poor, and what the plan is now that ignoring the poor and citing statistics about net growth is no longer a palatable option.

The hurricane and rebuilding of New Orleans could also provide an important perspective in dealing with global issues. CNN reporter Jeff Koinange, who covered the hurricane, wrote yesterday, “I’ve traveled to close to half-a-dozen refugee and displaced people’s camps across Africa — from Sierra Leone to Uganda, Kenya to Congo — in the year since Hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans....And each time, I get this feeling of deja vu.”

In the paralyzed post-hurricane city the U.S. was given a taste of conditions many poor countries face in a normal day, and we must harness that knowledge in efforts to promote development and reduce violence in those environments. New Orleans’ inadequate preparations showed the problems corruption and neglect can cause, reinforcing how crucial responsible government is in developing countries.

Even more importantly, the experience of New Orleans — where worrisome instability ensued with relatively minor disorder — offers an important insight into the rise of Islamic militancy which has occurred most recently in Somalia, but also in Afghanistan, Palestine and Chechnya. Chaos breeds extremism. Looting, fighting and raping were tragically common in the post-hurricane calm, and there was no one around to do anything about it.

Now imagine that scenario in place for years. After a certain length of time living in fear with no guarantees about any facet of everyday life, any sort of government is preferable to none. Would you trade a government that stones adulterers for the ability to walk to the store safely? For most, the answer becomes absolutely. A repressive regime claiming religious credibility is fast forming and therefore perfectly placed to take over in an unstable situation.

There is a strong belief that this radical Islamic trend is based on a cultural difference. Proponents of this view include respected scholars like Samuel Huntington who argues this in his award-winning book Clash of Civilizations. Less credibly, but equally if not more prominently, pundits like Ann Coulter pursue the same line with claims that the solution to terrorism is for the United States to “invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”

But if those trapped in New Orleans had not been eventually rescued, if there was no one above to come and instill order, is it really such a stretch to think that a leader who could promise the rule of law would be able to take control, no matter how terrible he or she was? Philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote in the 17th century that the first responsibility of government is to provide security to its citizens. What would you do?

Whatever the true extent of the damage, the real measure of what Hurricane Katrina did to New Orleans as a city, the Gulf Coast as a region and the U.S. as a nation, will be known in the future.

Apologizing and accepting responsibility is important.

The first step to fixing problems is identifying them. But the second more important step is fixing them.

Have stories or thoughts about stability and development? Email mwilkers @ stanford.edu