The inexplicable behaviour of Burma’s generals in the wake of Cyclone Nargis has provoked a crescendo of outrage from agencies struggling to save the two million people stranded by the storm from starvation and disease. For many the excruciatingly slow pace of the relief effort has been unbearable. One veteran aid worker from the French group Comité de Secours Internationaux, has described the junta’s response to the crisis as a “crime against humanity… like they are taking a gun and shooting their own people.” The French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, formerly the founder of the aid agency Doctors Without Borders, even suggested the desperate measure of entering the country under the UN’s doctrine of ‘responsibility’ rather than wait for Burma’s notoriously inefficient government bureaucracy to grant formal permission.
In the end, however, diplomacy of a sort prevailed and tens of thousands will die for it. For in Burma’s case the international community’s loss of nerve in matters of ‘sovereignty’ has effectively underwritten a second catastrophe. It is doubtful that the junta could mount an effective relief operation even if it wanted to. Certainly, its record so far offers no grounds for optimism. Despite being warned of the cyclone’s approach at least forty-eight hours before it made landfall the generals appear to have done little or nothing to warn the population. Their unwillingness to open the country’s borders after Nargis struck, and their mishandling or seizure of the small amounts of aid that have been allowed through has meant that less than twenty per cent of the 375 tonnes of food necessary for effective relief is currently reaching those who need it. This sickening parody of governance has been made even worse by a decision to proceed with a constitutional referendum even while their unconscionable bungling of the relief effort has been televised all around the world.
Life in Burma was surreal long before the cyclone. Commenting on the junta’s “peculiarly pre-modern and backward form of evil” over the years, the American journalist James Fallows recently recalled “the decision that effectively bankrupted many Burmese people and helped bring on riots 20 years ago… the out of the blue decree that most denominations of Burmese currency, except those in ‘lucky’ denominations like 45 and 90 kyat, would be valueless.” A government that can do that, overnight, a government that can suspend democratic elections and keep the nation’s rightful ruler under house arrest for nearly twenty years, without suffering the ‘regime change’ imposed on similar tyrants elsewhere, is one that has grown accustomed to its own madness. In terms of their recent history, therefore, the generals’ refusal and obstruction of aid after Cyclone Nargis has been entirely consistent with their paranoid style.
But the junta cannot be blamed for everything. As the Economist points out, “leaders of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) have remained largely silent, and tight-fisted” in the face of the disaster.
Frustration at the lack of progress made so far by US and European diplomats has led many to blame China for not doing more. But China cannot be made the scapegoat for every international crisis. India also has strong economic and historical ties to Burma and it seems to have done relatively little to pressure the government to do more. Furthermore, the lobby-driven politics of ‘mature’ democracies makes long-term sanctions highly problematic. For example, just a few days ago Doug Goodyear resigned as John McCain’s campaign chairman after Newsweek publicized his work as a lobbyist – he collected more than $300,000 in fees – for the Burmese junta (a previous candidate for Goodyear’s job seems to have been passed over because of his work on behalf of Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos). Criticism of Burma has always been easy but effective policy has been proved depressingly elusive.
And so, as has too often been the case, Burma’s military will probably outlast this latest outrage. A year ago the world was shocked by the regime’s brutal crackdown on pro-democracy protesters and the news was filled with awful revelations of the junta’s mistreatment and torture of thousands of dissidents in its dreadful prisons. But after making all the right noises, the international community did not dare to confront the generals with anything like the same level of force that has been used in Afghanistan and Iraq. Given the outcome of military action in both of those countries, this may be a blessing in disguise. What is indisputable, however, is that nothing meaningful has yet been done to end the ongoing repression of Burma’s democracy movement.
And without a long-term multilateral effort to bring the generals to heel, they will still exert a stranglehold on the country long after this ‘crime against humanity’ has been broadcast to the world.
