Myanmar's Military Dictators Obstruct International Humanitarian Assistance
Isolationist and paranoid, the repressive regime compounds the post-cyclone disaster
The news trickled in slowly, and the world watched with horror as the death toll mounted quickly. At first, a few hundred; then, a few thousand; and soon, well over 60,000 people feared dead after a monster cyclone swamped low-lying portions of Myanmar's fertile southwestern coastline. A 12-foot storm surge raced through thatch huts and rice paddies in the middle of the night, leaving as many as 1 million people homeless.
Despite the scale of the suffering, there was an eerie silence in the days after the disaster. The military junta has so isolated the nation (formerly known as Burma) that there were few outsiders around to relay the stories of suffering. For days, victims' voices were still missing. And so were the usual armies of humanitarian workers because the authoritarian regime was either completely paralyzed or simply unwilling to react. Myanmar's ruling generals made United Nations officials and other aid workers wait for entry visas before they could begin even a damage assessment. "This regime is extremely paranoid and isolated and xenophobic," says Derek Mitchell at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "The prospect of having all kinds of people from all over the world doing work they cannot really control or even monitor is troubling to them." Indeed, the only relief flights allowed in at first were from "friendly" countries like India.
This meant that aid workers lost precious days in the race to provide clean water and food. Aid groups were reluctant to openly criticize the regime, fearful of losing what little access they had. But French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner was aggravated enough to suggest that the United Nations should force the generals to accept aid deliveries. The bungled response by Myanmar's military rulers—who did not hesitate to brutally suppress monks leading democracy protests last fall—wasn't much of a surprise. They recently ensconced themselves in a new Stalinist-like capital city, protectively isolated from most of the population and their suffering. For them, the damage was apparently out of sight and out of mind.
Reader Comments
A well-orchestrated U.S-led military campaign of intimidation (if not invasion)
A well-orchestrated U.S-led military campaign of intimidation (if not invasion) is well on its way. Washington Post reports that “Three or four [war]ships began a five-day journey to a location off Burma to be available to offer aid.” (Amy Kazmin, Colum Lynch and Howard Schneider, Burma Seizes U.N. Food Deliveries, Washington Post, Friday, May 9, 2008; 9:41 AM) Its usual partner in crime Britain and its unusual partner France did NOT take very long to follow US’s lead. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced that he is going to send the Royal Navy frigate HMS Westminster to Burma. (MSNBC, May 12, 2008, 22:13) France has sent its amphibious landing ship Le Mistral from India to Burma. The French amphibious landing ship was conveniently present in the area because of a scheduled joint exercise with the Indian and British armed forces. The French amphibious landing ship will depart the port on May 15 and arrive on May 18. (Press statement issued by M. Bernard Kouchner, Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, Paris, May 8, 2008; The Website of French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Embarquement d’aide humanitaire sur le Mistral, May 13, 2008)
In order to establish a good reason of war (casus belli), the media has been making a news reports that say – true or untrue matters less LATER like the Saddam Hussein’s attempts to buy uranium – that Burmese military refused the international aid despite the life threatening situation of over one million of its own people. In order to establish a good reason of war (casus belli), the media has been feeding the public in the past several days that the Burmese military government has abused the humanitarian assistance by giving out the international relief materials as if it were theirs.
To make the stories more sensational and the casus belli most justifiable, the media didn’t fall behind. It publishes and broadcasts the sensational stories with the headlines like “Myanmar Cyclone Victims Getting Low-Quality Supplies,” “Burma Junta Steers Bad Food to Cyclone Victims,” “Burma Junta Impounds UN Aid,” “Burma Junta Impounds More UN Aid,” etc.
U.S (along with French Foreign Minister and the leader of British Conservative Party) has hinted a possibly legitimate reason to send their armed forces into Burmese territory: the “responsibility to protect.” Romesh Ratnesar asks in Time magazine “Is it Time to Invade Burma?” (May 10, 2008)
A natural disaster that causes tens of thousands of deaths, if not a hundred thousand, and that threatens a million or more, will by and large rally the shallow public opinion in support of military campaigns.
Of course, the well-orchestrated U.S military campaign was intended to intimidate (if not invade) Burma.
Are the U.S warships, aircrafts and helicopters going to engage in the combat operations immediately? NOT necessarily. They are there just to encourage the population to rise up against the Burmese military government like a people’s power revolution and to discourage the soldiers from shooting in the crackdown. The regime opponents want to encourage its activists and their sympathizers with the news that ‘Americans are coming!!! Americans are coming!!!’ ‘Americans are there!!!’ coincidentally timing with the U.S, France, Britain navy warships, the buzzing military aircrafts and helicopters in sight of Burmese public. (Burmese governments can be overthrown with rumors. One of Burma’s earlier dynasties collapsed due to rumors that its enemy troops Sagaw Karens were marching to the capital.) Gordon Lubold reports that in Mae Saout, Thailand, “thousands of Burmese exiles and refugees were excited when they saw a US helicopter flying above them on Saturday…” (Gordon Lubold, U.S. helicopters cause stir in Thai town on Burma border, Yahoo News, Washington, D.C, May 12, 2008, 4:00 a.m.; Christopher Johnson, Mae Sot, Thailand Christian Science Monitor, U.S. helicopters cause stir in Thai town on Burma border: In Mae Sot, home to many Burmese exiles and refugees, two helicopters stopped unannounced during a survey of the area, via ABC News) Melinda Liu assesses in Newsweek that “Cyclone Nargis may have done more than just wreck Burma's cities. It may also spell doom for the government.” (Winds of Change: May 19, 2008 Issue) David Montero predicts in Christian Science Monitor that “Disaster May Loosen Junta’s Grip in Burma” (May 8, 2008)
Why is the timing? The cyclone devastation can establish a good reason of war (casus belli) and the constitutional referendum is the last chance (some wrongly assume) to overthrow the Burmese military government.
Why is the media not reporting the scheming strategy of regime change in Southeast Asia by its leaders? It is partly because its journalists are no longer good at investigative journalism and thus cannot file a report on covert activities until they become full-blown and partly because the Western media is usually self-censored. How different is a self-censored media from a government-censored media? They will find out soon, alas, at the expense of my fellow Burmese when they do.
Terrifying
It's a tragedy!!! And, it is terrible that such a repressive regime is in power there. Thereby, not allowing the proper aid to its recipients. And, there must be a well divided social line, between the people in government, and the rest. Which is so unfair!!! I wish corrupt countries like these would open up their mind, and allow the people's more freedom. The strength of a country begins with its people!!! Thanks for reading!!! Thanks!!!
advertisement
