As I follow the news on Burma and the cyclone that created such devastation there, I feel tremendous sadness.  However, this sadness quickly turns to disgust as I have read about the military junta’s reaction to this disaster.  I am appalled by the complete disregard that it has shown for its own citizens.  It reminds me of the Soviet Union’s reaction to the Chernobyl disaster.  It took the Soviet Union three days to even report that a nuclear disaster had occurred – a disaster that had the potential to affect both those in the Soviet Union and those living in neighboring countries.  The reluctance of the Burma regime to admit that it needs help seems eerily reminiscent of that era. 

Unfortunately, it’s not just about refusing aid – or accepting it only under the most restrictive conditions.  What is even more appalling is that one week after this disaster which is reported to have resulted in 1.5 million victims, the Burmese government has the audacity to go ahead with a sham constitutional referendum intended to cement its hold on power.  There are reports that the Burmese government has been diverting some resources from the relief effort to hold the referendum.  This complete disregard for its own citizens should be evidence enough that it is time for these leaders to go.  Of course, they intend no such actions. 

Simon Jenkins, a UK columnist, described the callousness of this regime:  When the cyclone tore off the roof of Rangoon’s Insein jail and part of it caught fire, the guards opened fire and killed 36. An aid worker told the BBC: “They are murdering their own people.”

So, what is the United States and the international community to do.  There was an worthwhile article in Time magazine, Is it Time to Invade Burma, that explored the different options.  Some such as Andrew Natsios, the former USAID director, have called for air drops whether or not the Burmese government allows it.   Many argue that the Responsibility to Protect doctrine recognized by the United Nations in 2005 provides the authority for the international community to intervene in Burma if the Burmese government in unwilling or incapable of dealing with this disaster.  Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, has been pushing for a United Nations resolution compelling Burma to accept international aid. 

While I agree that the international community must rapidly and decisively take a stand on this issue, we must be careful not to allow our disgust for this regime lead us to political posturing rather than decisive action.  That decisive action may require the international community to bite its tongue in making concessions to the Burmese government in order to get the aid to recipients immediately.  When many Burmese citizens are barely hanging on, we should be careful to ensure that saving lives is not overshadowed by a larger confrontration with this oppressive regime.  The example of Somalia comes to mind when the US sought to alleviate famine in a hostile environment and ended up with “Blackhawk Down.” 

My point is that when considering such a humanitarian disaster, sometimes there are better alternative to going in, guns blazing, in order to bring relief to those affected by a disaster.  It’s time for creative thinking on how the US and other concerned countries can get relief to the people in need, even if that means making some symbolic concessions to an oppressive regime.  I thought that retired General William Nash exhibited this type of creative thinking in a recent suggestion he made:

Retired General William Nash of the Council on Foreign Relations says the U.S. should first pressure China to use its influence over the junta to get them to open up and then supply support to the Thai and Indonesian militaries to carry out relief missions. “We can pay for it — we can provide repair parts to the Indonesians so they can get their Air Force up. We can lend the them two C-130s and let them paint the Indonesian flag on them,” Nash says. “We have to get the stuff to people who can deliver it and who the Burmese government will accept, even if takes an extra day or two and even if it’s not as efficient as the good old U.S. military.

Basically the Burmese government has said that they would accept foreign donations but that they would need to distribute.  While this condition is unacceptable, perhaps a condition could be created whereby the Burmese military worked hand-in-hand with the UN and other international donors on the actual distribution.  Certainly, I’m not sure if this would work, but it’s time to begin thinking about ways that we can allay the Burmese government’s fears in order to get the work done.  It’s no time to be queasy about making a deal with the devil to save lives.  A child dying of cholera has little concern about such political considerations.

Related posts:

1. The red corvette of international affairs
2. Adapting Along the Road to Copenhagen