Burma Turning to Forced-Labor for Reconstruction

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter russ_watters
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Turning
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the situation in Burma following a natural disaster, focusing on the military junta's use of forced labor for reconstruction efforts and the potential international response. Participants explore the implications of military intervention, the role of the UN, and the geopolitical complexities involved.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express concern over the military junta's exploitation of cyclone survivors for reconstruction work, citing reports from aid workers and local residents.
  • There are conflicting views on the feasibility and morality of international military intervention, with some suggesting that it could be straightforward while others highlight the challenges posed by geopolitical alliances, particularly with China and Russia.
  • Several participants argue about the legitimacy of using force under the UN charter, questioning whether internal matters warrant international military action.
  • Some propose that targeted military actions, such as cruise missile strikes, could be effective in compelling the junta to allow foreign aid, while others doubt the effectiveness of such measures.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the historical context of foreign intervention and the potential for unintended consequences, drawing parallels to past interventions in Iraq and Somalia.
  • Participants discuss the perception of Western aid and the reluctance of the Burmese government to accept assistance, suggesting that internal legitimacy may play a role in their response to foreign aid offers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views on the appropriateness and potential effectiveness of military intervention in Burma. Participants express differing opinions on the role of the UN and the implications of international action.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexities of international relations, particularly the influence of China and Russia on UN actions, and the historical context of foreign interventions that may affect current perceptions and decisions.

  • #31
Vanadium 50 said:
Um, where exactly does it say in the UN charter (especially Article VII) where the UN can use force on a sovereign country because it doesn't like how it is handling a purely internal matter?
...
Then UN can act if the genocide convention is triggered:

Article 8
Any Contracting Party may call upon the competent organs of the United Nations to take such action under the Charter of the United Nations as they consider appropriate for the prevention and suppression of acts of genocide[i.e. use of force] or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3.
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

which is why genocide is such a hot potato word. It provides international justification for the use of force.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
mheslep said:
Then UN can act if the genocide convention is triggered:


http://www.hrweb.org/legal/genocide.html

which is why genocide is such a hot potato word. It provides international justification for the use of force.

Technically you may be right but what are the chances that the UN would actually act on this considering the mess it could start? I don't see it happening.
 
  • #33
Pretty good chance is the US would agree to take the lead, otherwise zero.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K