Natural disasters can have a reconciliatory effect on relations between unfriendly states. Two examples are the Izmit earthquake in Turkey in 1999, which helped to improve ties between Ankara and Athens, while the Indian Ocean tsunami in late 2004 helped to bring Aceh separatists and the Indonesian government to the negotiating table.
As horrifying as the death tolls for natural disasters can be, one upside has always been the expression of support and sympathy from other countries and the provision of emergency aid and services to the afflicted. The political gains that derive from reducing acute human suffering allow dueling states to admit to their limitations and join hands in the service of higher principles and practical need.
Then there’s Myanmar.
Cyclone Nargis wrought terrible destruction on the south of that country last week, and the death toll is of such staggering proportions that Myanmar’s military regime must be held directly responsible for much of the suffering.
The Myanmar regime knew Cyclone Nargis could hit sensitive areas, yet virtually nothing was done to prepare for what was in store. Even allowing for the region’s poor infrastructure and vulnerability to flooding and storm surges, the reaction of the authorities to the drowning of the Irrawaddy delta has been appalling in its negligence. In the civilized world, these authorities would warrant prosecution for manslaughter.
The UN has already described the Myanmar junta’s obstructionism over visas for relief workers as “unprecedented” in the context of “modern humanitarian relief efforts.” The junta’s rejection of US aid and services, while not surprising, is even more irresponsible, especially given the splendid work of the US military in the aftermath of the Indian Ocean tsunami.
The dire situation facing survivors would challenge even the best equipped relief teams. With Myanmar refusing to admit aid workers — even those with UN accreditation — and demanding that donor countries naively entrust the military with money and supplies, it therefore appears all but certain that the death toll will rise dramatically and unnecessarily.
Myanmar has a number of friends in the region who have helped it weather the other storm of trade sanctions and diplomatic isolation. Even China, which has been one of the junta’s staunchest supporters, might be wondering whether the incompetence and negligence of the Myanmar government during this disaster — rivaled in scale only by North Korea’s mishandling of famine — will damage its interests if the junta does not pick up its game. Even so, there is little sign that Myanmar will take any notice of the growing anger at its ruinous conduct.
Locking up democrats and rigging constitutional ballots are reason enough to rebut the Myanmar junta’s legitimacy. But with this latest natural disaster, and the man-made disaster to follow, there is no other choice for the world community to make: the junta must be censured in the UN for spurning the most basic responsibilities of government.
Punishment is another matter: How to deal with the junta without hurting ordinary people or offending its allies is a dilemma that has haunted responsible nations for some time. It is clear, however, that the current strategy of tolerating the junta’s excesses and rewarding suppression of dissent with trade that bolsters the military are of no benefit to the Burmese.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
On March 22, 2023, at the close of their meeting in Moscow, media microphones were allowed to record Chinese Communist Party (CCP) dictator Xi Jinping (習近平) telling Russia’s dictator Vladimir Putin, “Right now there are changes — the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years — and we are the ones driving these changes together.” Widely read as Xi’s oath to create a China-Russia-dominated world order, it can be considered a high point for the China-Russia-Iran-North Korea (CRINK) informal alliance, which also included the dictatorships of Venezuela and Cuba. China enables and assists Russia’s war against Ukraine and North Korea’s
An article published in the Dec. 12, 1949, edition of the Central Daily News (中央日報) bore a headline with the intimidating phrase: “You Cannot Escape.” The article was about the execution of seven “communist spies,” some say on the basis of forced confessions, at the end of the 713 Penghu Incident. Those were different times, born of political paranoia shortly after the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) relocated to Taiwan following defeat in China by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The phrase was a warning by the KMT regime to the local populace not to challenge its power or threaten national unity. The
The Iran war has exposed a fundamental vulnerability in the global energy system. The escalating confrontation between Iran, Israel and the US has begun to shake international energy markets, largely because Iran is disrupting shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. This narrow waterway carries roughly one-third of the world’s seaborne oil, making it one of the most strategically sensitive energy corridors in the world. Even the possibility of disruption has triggered sharp volatility in global oil prices. The duration and scope of the conflict remain uncertain, with senior US officials offering contradictory signals about how long military operations might continue.
RSS