Myanmar (Burma): Devastation from Cyclone Nargis

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lisab
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the humanitarian crisis in Myanmar (Burma) following Cyclone Nargis, focusing on the challenges of delivering aid amidst a repressive military regime. Participants express concern over the high number of fatalities and the obstacles to providing necessary assistance to survivors, including medical aid and clean water.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants report that fatalities may exceed 100,000, highlighting the tragic loss of life.
  • There is a consensus that the ruling regime is obstructing aid efforts, with some suggesting that the junta is more interested in controlling the narrative than in actually helping survivors.
  • Participants express skepticism about the junta's willingness to distribute aid effectively, fearing that aid may be misappropriated or inadequately distributed.
  • Some argue that the junta's paranoia about foreign influence prevents them from allowing aid workers into the country, which could exacerbate the humanitarian crisis.
  • France's proposal to invoke a U.N. "responsibility to protect" clause is discussed, with mixed feelings about the implications of such an action on the junta's perception of the West.
  • There is uncertainty regarding the actual number of casualties, with varying estimates from different organizations, indicating a lack of reliable information.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the severity of the situation and the obstacles to aid delivery, but there are multiple competing views regarding the junta's motivations and the best course of action for the international community. The discussion remains unresolved on how to effectively address the crisis without exacerbating tensions.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of reliable data on casualty figures and the dependence on varying definitions of aid effectiveness. The discussion reflects ongoing uncertainty about the junta's intentions and the potential consequences of international intervention.

lisab
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
2,050
Reaction score
612
Wow, the number of fatalities in Myanmar (Burma) caused by Cyclone Nargis may be over 100,000:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24497236/

It seems the military leaders can't get their act together to get help to the survivors.

What a horrific loss of life...so sad.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is lots of aid standing by that the ruling regime won't let into the country. Terrible.
 
I agree with Russ. This is one repressive regime. I even agree with Bush on his criticism of Myanmar's regime.

But what to do? Hopefully, the world's leaders ( :rolleyes: ) will make things happen - ASAP.
 
Yes, it's really quite sad. If they don't let in medical aid, the fatalities will just continue to rise as the injured develop infections, and the other survivors are sickened from the contaminated water and diseases from the corpses.

I don't know if it's so much not being able to get their act together as not wanting to.
 
Myanmar's junta wants the aid - they just don't want to let anyone into administer the aid, including people with satellite uplinks, camera-phones, just plain journalists, etc. They certainly don't want to let in "aid workers" whose ranks could be infiltrated with intelligence agents from other countries. Their paranoia and lack of openness will doom a lot of innocent people.
 
turbo-1 said:
Myanmar's junta wants the aid - they just don't want to let anyone into administer the aid, including people with satellite uplinks, camera-phones, just plain journalists, etc. They certainly don't want to let in "aid workers" whose ranks could be infiltrated with intelligence agents from other countries. Their paranoia and lack of openness will doom a lot of innocent people.

You can call me cynical or paranoid for this opinion, but these sorts of regimes seem highly likely to simply take the money given as aid and never distribute any of it (or only a very small amount...enough for a few photo ops to show the rest of the world they're using it and need more). It seems the journalists are already there since the news stories are getting out complete with photos.
 
Well, much of the world is ready to air-lift in things that they cannot buy readily in the short term, like clean water, rice, tents, etc. I would never advocate dumping money into a military junta because it would never get where it is needed in time to do any good - the fact is that the junta will not accept controls on the aid in the form of administrators who are trained to organize its distribution. Maybe I'm the cynical one, but I'll bet when aid arrives, the soldiers enforcing martial law will be well-fed and well-supplied with clean water ... and civilians will die for lack of either.
 
turbo-1 said:
Well, much of the world is ready to air-lift in things that they cannot buy readily in the short term, like clean water, rice, tents, etc. I would never advocate dumping money into a military junta because it would never get where it is needed in time to do any good - the fact is that the junta will not accept controls on the aid in the form of administrators who are trained to organize its distribution. Maybe I'm the cynical one, but I'll bet when aid arrives, the soldiers enforcing martial law will be well-fed and well-supplied with clean water ... and civilians will die for lack of either.

Ah, I thought you were making a different point from that. The articles I'm reading seem to be indicating the junta is more than willing to take money, just not aid workers, which is where I was coming from, but yes, I agree if supplies were just airlifted in without some sort of support to ensure its distribution, they would not make it to the people either.

It's a tough situation. There's no way they're going to want to allow in armed support for the aid workers, but it's hard to consider sending aid workers in without it having the same suspicions you do about the junta's willingness to allow the aid to actually get to those who need it.
 
France has suggested invoking a U.N. "responsibility to protect" clause and delivering aid directly to Myanmar without waiting for approval from the military in Yangon.

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=50f33e64-c430-4037-b8d8-3fd319e49b85&k=87333

I can understand France's impatience with the mooks running the government there, but going in without their approval would probably just confirm their paranoid suspicions of the West.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
lisab said:
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=50f33e64-c430-4037-b8d8-3fd319e49b85&k=87333

I can understand France's impatience with the mooks running the government there, but going in without their approval would probably just confirm their paranoid suspicions of the West.

I agree...it's pretty much a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
lisab said:
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=50f33e64-c430-4037-b8d8-3fd319e49b85&k=87333

I can understand France's impatience with the mooks running the government there, but going in without their approval would probably just confirm their paranoid suspicions of the West.
Surprising (but welcome) to hear coming from France. So it begs the question: at what point does a regime forfeit the right to sovereignty? How many people have to die? And does it have to be due to murder (genocide) or is oppression-caused malignant gross neglegence enough?
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband warned that "malign neglect" by the isolated nation's military rulers was creating a "humanitarian catastrophe of genuinely epic proportions."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-05-11-burma-aid_N.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
Still a lot of uncertainty in the numbers, but they are still going up:
Burma's government issued a revised casualty toll Wednesday night, saying 38,491 were known dead and 27,838 were missing...

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, however, said its estimate put the number of dead between 68,833 and 127,990. The Geneva-based body said the range came from a compilation based on other estimates from 22 different organizations, including the Burma Red Cross Society, and on media reports.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-05-14-burma-deathtoll_N.htm
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 85 ·
3
Replies
85
Views
13K
  • · Replies 238 ·
8
Replies
238
Views
29K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
11K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
12K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
8K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K