The Politics Of Cyclones
The world is, rather understandably, disconcerted by the inaction of Burma’s military junta with regards to their response to the devastation caused by Cyclone Nargis. As many of you are aware, the regime has been hindering international aid efforts, causing the humanitarian crisis to worsen. As it stands now, some 78,000 to 100,000 people have been killed and a further 60,000 are thought to be missing.
While shocking to the layman, the Burmese regime has some cause for trepidation. We are, after all, talking about a military dictatorship that has imprisoned the country’s democratically elected leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, on and off since 1989. The very same regime was also responsible for using lethal force against non-violent protestors last year, among a variety of other transgressions during their tenure.
No matter how many people have to suffer in the wake of the disaster, the retention of control is, to the regime, of the utmost importance. While they might be megalomaniacal, they’re not so far gone as to not realize that organizations, such as USAID, have been used in similar situations to provide foreign powers with covert footholds. Thus, their number one fear is very probably the consequences of allowing foreign agencies and their employees access to not just those suffering, but the people themselves. In doing so, such a connection could lead to the infusion of anti-government sentiment that is backed by foreign interests. And while I hate to admit it, foreign aid agencies that are federally funded have been used repeatedly in the past to do just that.
The bottom line here is that politics, power, and agenda have no place when it comes to a disaster of this magnitude and such immense loss and endangerment of human life. Not when the number one threat to those trapped in the affected area is a lack of clean drinking water.
While brutal at the best of times, the Burmese junta is by no means completely daft. They are well aware of the dangers of allowing foreign aid agencies unrestricted access and movement. Because with them comes conditions, the sort that they are not willing to meet. And while, on the surface, such matters are viewed as simply exercises in good will on the part of major world powers, conditions are always present when their assistance is accepted.
Lost, as always, in the political haze, are the tens of thousands of people that are now facing the onset of disease and starvation. In the end, international politics will hammer the death nails into their coffins, not a lack of global, public compassion. Ultimately, through their inability to accept foreign assistance, the Burmese regime could very well find itself guilty of crimes against humanity. Their inaction could also very well lead to renewed efforts by members of the National League For Democracy and Burma’s Buddhist monks to challenge their authority. Given that that movement is steeped in the tenets of non-violent non-cooperation, perhaps, after some time, they will finally secure a free and independent Burma without the assistance of the likes of the CIA, MI6, and others who would use this terrible disaster to plant seeds of their own.
We are all human. When one of us suffers, we all suffer. When one of us is faced with disparity we must all take responsibility for allowing it to happen. Governments are simply ‘things’, they are not, nor have they ever been, the masters of human compassion or at all accurate moral compasses. What is transpiring right now in Burma in the wake of Cyclone Nargis is a human matter, and therefore governments, nor politics, have no business usurping such fundamental truths.
May 17th, 2008 at 6:29 am
It’s desperate out there. The Regime failed to warn its people of the cyclone. The price of essential commodities rose by as much as 400% following the disaster; meanwhile, most of the poorest people are living on less than 1 Euro a day. So, already facing the grim prospect of malaria and dysentry they are now being punished through obscene profiteering. What will happen next, do you think? Will Burma’s junta collapse?
May 17th, 2008 at 7:36 am
See, if I was going to start a war, if would be over something like this. Troops forcing aid on these people would be a good use of my taxpayer money.
May 17th, 2008 at 8:43 am
So, on each end of the channel representing the aid for the people, there is a government that is unwilling to accept any stipulations that come with the acceptence of aid and another that is unwilling to waive those stipulations in order to provide the assistance. All the while people are suffering and lives hang in the balance as. Strip away the bullshit of politics and at the core it is very simple…help them.
May 17th, 2008 at 10:32 am
“We are all human. When one of us suffers, we all suffer. When one of us is faced with disparity we must all take responsibility for allowing it to happen. Governments are simply ‘things’, they are not, nor have they ever been, the masters of human compassion or at all accurate moral compasses. What is transpiring right now in Burma in the wake of Cyclone Nargis is a human matter, and therefore governments, nor politics, have no business usurping such fundamental truths.”
I really liked that paragraph. I think that sometimes people get the feeling that the government is the true entity and it is us that are simply “things”. My heart goes out to the tens (probably hundreds) of thousands of political pawns that are dying and starving so that no government needs to suffer any embarrassment.
May 17th, 2008 at 11:35 am
“The bottom line here is that politics, power, and agenda have no place when it comes to a disaster of this magnitude and such immense loss and endangerment of human life.”
Indeed! Hence I am struck by the irony of writing such an overtly political and agenda heavy blog post about the situation. Western governments exploit the disaster to take the moral high ground over the Burmese govenrment, no doubt about that. But how is this different from citizens exploiting the disaster to take the moral high ground over Western Governments? Heck even aid agencies have been using the disaster to demand political change. One wonders just how bad a disaster has to be before the politics can be left aside and we show a bit of solidarity with the victims by concentrating on the humanitarian issues, rather than the political ones.
I would doubt that International Politics and trials of alleged crimes against humanity will lead to the emancipation of the Burmese people, that isn’t what history shows us. It is the same history shows us that the best hope for people brutally repressed by their governemnt is to fight back. Hard.
May 17th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
We all can see that the regime should help it’s people. These control freaks should just realize that if their people are dead who would they have power over?
May 17th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Their practical resistance to outside aid seems too rigid as an active to deterrent to prevent foreign footholds. Far too much UN aid is being rejected, or subject to completely unreasonable terms, to exude the idea that there’s any sane screening rationale guiding their actions. They may just as well tell everyone to fuck off completely. It would practically have the same effect, considering I don’t trust how they’re handling the supplies they ARE being given.
May 17th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
I hope someone is taking names and demands the Junta members be tried for War Crimes because what is happening is not a “humanitarian crisis”, it’s murder. I hope the Hate America crowd is watching and clamors for the same treatment they want for the American leadership.
“See, if I was going to start a war, if would be over something like this”.
So, Monkey, wars are ok if you approve of them, but not ok if you don’t?
May 17th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
Well Robert, I get this distinct feeling that the powers that be could care less if I approve of their warring ways or not…and I also think it’s pretty clear that my tongue was planted quite firmly on the inside of my cheek. I’m sure it will be a cold day in hell when wars are declared over basic human rights and dignity rather than for wealth and power. Call me a cynic.
My point was only this - if I accept a reality that doesn’t see us disbanding our army any time soon, and if I accept that we’re in bed with the US and their nasty habit of sending forces to faraway lands in order to make others do their bidding…well, I’d rather see us fighting a war over clean water than over oil…especially when massive civilian casualties are a given either way. I pay taxes, and the government generally (often, mostly) spends that money on things I would never support in a thousand years, largely ignoring the things that are important to me…and so, I spend more money I don’t have making donations to private organizations who believe in the same things as I do…only to find out that they aren’t being allowed to do their work…and so the fantasy is born - let me have it, okay?
May 18th, 2008 at 4:21 am
I wish there was a third party of sorts that could be impartial and go in there to get these poor people there supplies and food. To think that as I go to sleep tonight someones curled up in the fetal position somewhere with severe hunger and mental distress thats unimaginable is just all out depressing. Some people are just oblivious to the fact that we are pawns in a bigger game.
May 18th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Statement:
The United States would be far more justified invading Burma because of “what they’re doing to their own people” than they were invading Iraq five years ago.
Discuss.
May 18th, 2008 at 10:15 am
By the same logic, would Burma have had a right to invade the United States given the Bush Administration’s appalling reaction to Katrina? Obviously there are massive differences, especially in the death toll and the fact that aid eventually did arrive, but there are still people displaced because of that event, in the world’s richest nation no less.
The fact of the matter is, Burma already has a democratically elected leader. Her philosophy, and that of her party, is to affect change through non-violence. That said, reinstating her through the use of violence would be contradictory to her beliefs. It would also mean that her government would be indebted to those responsible for her emancipation and the restoration of her government. That, in itself, would render any new Burmese government in the debt of a major world power in an area of the world where, for example, the introduction of military bases would be quite welcomed.
May 18th, 2008 at 10:59 am
In an ideal world, we’d all deal with our own messes before going out into the world to try and fix those of others - on all levels, global right down to personal.
I struggle with this - at what point do ideology and symbolic struggle trump the basic real-life needs of countless citizens? (That’s a rhetorical thought fragment, and it applies to all kinds of situations - can’t articulate any more fully right now…ironically, my attention is elsewhere - I’m trying to do my taxes).
May 18th, 2008 at 11:48 am
I have a hard time placing the word ”power” with ”control” in these situations. I think that those in control in Burma realise that they have no power, especially when faced with a natural disaster on this scale. What I can say though is that it is very sad that aid-countries cannot find the power within their control to force themselves into this region and deliver the much needed help millions are deprived of. But I guess that only happens when there is an imminent threat to our sovereignty.
May 18th, 2008 at 2:09 pm
[quote comment="52949"]I have a hard time placing the word ”power” with ”control” in these situations. I think that those in control in Burma realise that they have no power, especially when faced with a natural disaster on this scale. What I can say though is that it is very sad that aid-countries cannot find the power within their control to force themselves into this region and deliver the much needed help millions are deprived of. But I guess that only happens when there is an imminent threat to our sovereignty.[/quote]
That was really well said (and actually what I was trying to get at in my own special way). From what I understand, UN representatives have now shown up in Burma to try and negotiate aid delivery…after their phone calls went unanswered.
May 18th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
“it is very sad that aid-countries cannot find the power within their control to force themselves into this region”
If Canada proposes to land Cargo Planes loaded with aid without the Junta’s permission, don’t you think France or China would veto any UN vote?
May 18th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
We caught the edge of Nargis in Dhaka when it hit. Even just the edge of it was incredibly intense. The interesting thing I’ve found is that, even as Bangladesh borders Burma, there’s very little attention being paid to the situation here. There was a short newspaper article last week about how five Bengali soldiers were to be sent to help the victims, and the subsequent short articles on the junta’s lack of action, but it surprises me that as a direct neighbour the Bangladesh government isn’t taking more action to try to help. I’d think that the Junta would be far more willing to let another south Asian nation provide aid than European or North American countries.
And apparently we’re entering the beginning of monsoon season here, so most likely, this situation will see further deterioration before long…