Humanitarian intervention in Burma [opinion]

 “It is never to late to save lives”, said Surin Pitsuwan mid May. Pitsuwan is Secretary-General of Asean, the union of Southeastern Asian countries. He was saying: we cannot give up trying to get help to the victims of the cyclone Nargis in Burma, because every life saved is worth the effort.
But it is of course too late too quickly when people are wounded or don’t have potable water because cattle is rotting in the river or in the flooded fields. The clock is inexorably ticking when people lack food because their supplies were washed away by a ten foot high tidal wave. Time is merciless when victims are denied help because the generals fear the eyes and ideas of foreign relief workers.
Relief organisations say the obstruction of the generals endangers the life of one to two and a half million people. Some Burmese in Rangoon were so desperate they raised a banner saying ‘We don’t ask for gold, we ask for water’. A cry from the heart for humanitarian help, or so it seems, because at the same time it is an exceptional deed of political stance in dictatorial Burma: Gold in Burmese is shwe and the military junta’s main man is called Than Shwe.
You understand, and so did the authorities. And no, they did not supply potable water, they removed the banner. Mid May the Burmese government declared the first phase of relief was successful, which everybody refuted, including UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon. According to theThe Irrawaddy, 43 companies that are run by friends of the military top already signed lucrative contracts for the reconstruction phase.
The Burmese generals’ cold, inhuman behaviour exasperated the international community.  The French Minister for Foreign Affairs, Bernard Kouchner tried to convince the UN Security Council to call in the famous R2P -the responsibility to protect-, which would clear the way for a humanitarian intervention under the auspices of the UN.
Meanwhile, France had already sent their warcraft Mistral to the Burmese coast - with a cargo of 1000 tons humanitarian supplies, two weeks’ food for one hundred thousand people, so the French government assured. Gordon Brown reacted in a similar way when on 17th May he said the natural disaster in Burma was evolving into a catastrophy brought about by humans, because of the generals’ attitude. This is a coded message to demand an intervention from UN. The Brits too sent their warcraft HMS Westminster on a humanitarian mission. The White House spoke loudly about the importance of each human life and stationed part of their Seventh Fleet in the Bay of Bengal - including helicopters, aircrafts, humanitarian supplies and 11,000 soldiers. It was hardly reported that in the mean time Thai and Indian relief workers did get access to the country.
There is no denying a humanitarian intervention in Burma was indeed justified more than ever : hundreds of thousands vulnerable and wounded people were held hostage, while everything needed - water, blankets, tents, plastic cloths, rice and medicine - was made available to bring relief. A regime that fears help when disaster strikes, is asking for being removed.
Why this did not happen has to do with the mistrust for France, Great Britain and the US when they appear at the coasts of a third world country. More than one Asian government fear that a justified intervention in Burma today will be used later as a leg up to an intervention in their own country. If western powers would show themselves less imperialistic in daily geopolitics, their humanitarian arguments would be much more credible. Humanity would be the better twice.
published as editorial in MO* magazine, May 28 08