Aid and abetment
Time is running out to help the victims of the cyclone that struck Myanmar three weeks ago. Nothing can be done for the tens of thousands of dead, but the 2.4 million people who need shelter, food, fresh water and medicine have been offered aid by foreign governments and this must be moved to where it is needed as quickly as possible.
How this is to be done is a matter of international debate. Myanmar's secretive military regime has so far insisted on being in charge of the humanitarian process, opening the door only to those it trusts. So many restrictions have been placed on aid that only a small amount has got through; the World Food Programme says that just 30 per cent of those needing help have received it.
The junta's agreement at a meeting of fellow members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Singapore on Monday to allow in medical teams was a start, as was the grouping's deal for a co-ordinated emergency effort. That UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was allowed into the country to hammer out firmer measures is groundbreaking for a regime that is so distrustful of foreigners. The international donors' meeting in Bangkok tomorrow will quantify what is on offer.
These are positive steps, but they do not change the fact that the junta cannot be trusted. Its insistence on holding a referendum on a new constitution a week after the disaster, in unaffected areas, and tomorrow in parts still reeling from the storm say, much about where its priorities lie. Meanwhile, ships from Britain, France and the US, packed with supplies, are not allowed to dock.
There are vast differences of opinion about the right international approach. Asian governments veer towards long-held views of non-interference, unless invited, while some humanitarian groups urge aid to be sent in regardless of the likes or dislikes of the generals. A few hardened critics even speak of using military force to overthrow the junta to not only get aid through, but also to bring about democracy.
International law would seem clear on the matter. Those made homeless by the cyclone are deemed to be internally displaced. Under the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, a state should not arbitrarily withhold permission for international humanitarian aid, 'particularly when authorities concerned are unable or unwilling to provide the required humanitarian assistance'. The principles state: 'All authorities concerned shall grant and facilitate the free passage of humanitarian assistance and grant persons engaged in the provision of such assistance rapid and unimpeded access to the internally displaced.' Former UN emergency relief co-ordinator Jan Egeland said: 'A lot is at stake here. If we let them get away with murder, we may set a very dangerous precedent.'
Such talk is fitting, but the UN Security Council will never allow intervention; permanent member China, Myanmar's staunch ally, will veto such a move. Afghanistan and Iraq are reminders of what happens when unilateralism is applied.
But nor should we be satisfied with the generals calling the shots, former Australian ambassador to Myanmar, Trevor Wilson, told me. Clearly, they did not have the capacity or resources to respond in the right way to a disaster of such immensity, he said.
There is only one response: to pressure the junta. This seems lame, but there is plenty of evidence to show that the generals are listening. Their allowing of nine UN helicopters into the Irrawaddy region to deliver relief supplies springs quickly to mind. American C-130 transport planes have been flying in since Monday.
A much larger international response is needed. But it has to take place on the generals' terms. China, India and Asean must do more to push the junta to allow in more aid and issue visas to foreigners with particular relief work expertise. Mr Ban is doing this personally on behalf of the UN.
What the world can achieve was set by the landmark global response to the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. That same mercy and goodwill must now be applied to pushing Myanmar's junta to saving the lives of the people it claims to rule.
Peter Kammerer is the Post's foreign editor
