Font size: 
The junta is still obstinate as they continue to limit the entry of international relief in Myanmar. It is this stubbornness which provokes world leaders to call for bold measures like relief invasion in the name of humanitarian intervention. Myanmar’s neighbors and the rest of the world are obviously concerned over the rising death toll and the deteriorating situation in the flooded regions of the country. The junta should not assume that the world will turn a blind eye to the unprecedented human catastrophe in the Irrawaddy Delta.
In order to deliver emergency assistance to Myanmar’s flood victims, the “responsibility to protect” doctrine has been invoked already. It is a legal instrument which was passed by the United Nations a few years ago to justify military attack on the grounds of preventing genocide, war, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. But who will judge whether a country is undemocratic or not? Who will decide which government is committing a crime against humanity? This controversial matter is still unresolved.
The arguments to attack Myanmar can be used to invade other “failed states” as well. Numerous governments are engaged in a violent war against their own people. Rampant human rights violations in despotic countries can be described as crimes against humanity.
So why are the United States and other rich countries ganging up on Myanmar? Why are they not proposing an invasion of other poor countries ruled by cruel regimes?
Is it because Myanmar is too close to China? Or maybe the energy-hungry countries are salivating over the rich gas deposits in Myanmar. These powerful governments want to invade Myanmar in order to reap economic benefits. They are invoking the names of cyclone victims and Myanmar’s local activists to justify a possible military aggression. This is hypocritical.
The discourse of relief invasion represents a shift in the foreign policies of the United States and other rich countries. There is now a new rationale to justify foreign intervention. Environmental disasters could now be used to advocate regime change in “unfriendly” countries and install a new government which would be accommodating to the agenda of the West.
Outright military occupation has always been the preferred mode of dominating small nations. In many instances, military power was replaced by economic subordination. Today rich countries can choose what type of intervention is most effective in subjugating a poor country.
Local wars had been exploited to defend military intervention. This was accomplished in Kosovo and East Timor a decade ago. Then the Bush doctrine of preemptive strike was adopted to attack Afghanistan and Iraq. In Eastern Europe, civil society groups were funded to intensify local uprisings which would lead to the so-called “color” or “flower revolutions.”
Here comes Myanmar, devastated by a deadly cyclone, ruled by a callous and evil junta, and the Burmese represented by dissident groups clamoring for change. Myanmar is a perfect target for military invasion.
Myanmar showed how natural disasters can be manipulated to undermine the national sovereignty of countries. Many governments seriously contemplated entering Myanmar without the approval of the latter’s government. The junta may be unpopular and oppressive, but it is still the head of Myanmar’s bureaucracy.
Since global warming is expected to worsen in the future, the world should expect stronger cyclones, hurricanes and long periods of drought. Poor countries with little resources to cope with these disasters are vulnerable to foreign intervention. In the name of humanitarian missions, rich countries can “invade” small countries or intimidate uncooperative governments. Climate change will facilitate this new mode of colonialism.
Bowing to international pressure, the junta finally agreed to partially allow the entry of relief goods in Myanmar. This softened the hard-line stance of rich countries who want to invade Myanmar. Now they want to occupy certain areas in Myanmar that are not effectively controlled by the junta. This is still military aggression.
If the junta is suspicious of the motives of relief workers from the United States and other rich countries, Myanmar’s neighbors could have volunteered to lead the international relief campaign. But why was the Association of Southeast Asian Nations too slow in organizing the so called “coalition of mercy?” A united ASEAN aid campaign could have defused the tension in Myanmar’s borders where relief goods are awaiting to be shipped. Like the junta, ASEAN underestimated the damage wrought by cyclone Nargis.
If ASEAN had acted quickly, the United States and other rich countries would have no compelling reason to propose a relief invasion.
--
(Mong Palatino is a Filipino youth activist, news editor of Yehey!, a Philippine-based web portal and regional editor for Southeast Asia of Global Voices Online. He can be contacted at mongpalatino@gmail.com and his Web site is www.mongpalatino.motime.com. ©Copyright Mong Palatino.)
