Burma Cyclone

Nick 0208 Ldn

What do we all thik of the idea of forced aid drops into the country?

I mean obviously there are logiistical issues with the lack of aid workers within Burma and damage to infrastructure, but that than to be sitting by the Thai border queuing to get in and such for coming up on 10 days. Naval assets could even be brought into play, they'd meet little resistence.

Team Brian GB

I doubt Burma have anything in the way of a sophisticated air defence network so if the Americans keep getting denied they should send their B52s in, and considering how their coastal regions have came to a halt if the US Navy wanted to get in the action, again there would be little to stop them, and even if there was would Burma actually be idiotic enough to engage them?

China are in absolutely no position to use their diplomatic power so soon after the Tibet saga, plus with this massive earthquake they have their own country to worry about.

spinoza

The planes would get shot down by anti-aircraft guns, and anyway the RN or USN wouldn't get close enough to the Burmese coast without being warned away by the Chinese or Indian navies. Not to mention that it's largely pointless unless you really do plan to invade.

Same reason why there haven't been food aid / medicine drops on Zimbabwe. It's illegal, and it doesn't accomplish a great deal without a follow up plan.

spinoza

Jesus Christ on a bike. You're not dropping bombs, you're dropping aid packages, which presumably you intend to survive impact. So you have to fly lower, and slower, and therefore present a nice easy target for what air defences Burma does have.

I hope no one is going to suggest bombing Burma in order to deliver aid safely

They might give in, after a big fight, but after alleviating immediate hunger I doubt anyone will ever get traction with China over Burma ever again. Or any other nasty little regime that counts China as an ally.

Team Brian GB

I doubt China or India would warn us off, China especially as her navy as too far away around lower Indochina and is of a very limited capacity, though it is very problematic but there is precident.

Whether it is illegal or not seems not to be as simple, there are some interpretations out there that humanitarian intervention is within international law.

spinoza

In any case I don't think simply dropping aid works. Things fuck up - remember after the tsunami, when some bright sparks dropped woollen clothing on Acheh? You need aid workers on the ground to manage and dispense the aid, otherwise most of it ends up being worthless.

Team Brian GB

Sometimes I wonder is the United States still a superpower anymore, it is always let us not upset China whilst they give the Americans the finger- the next President will have a very big decision to make regarding relations with China, the U.S. were never as courteous with Moscow.

spinoza

You think China's navy is only in the South China Sea and has a limited capacity? I'd be glad if you had some official sources.

I do have some anecdotal evidence - I've got some mates who've been diving the Burmah Banks other dive sites north of that for some years, and they say that almost every trip they make now they see a Chinese naval vessel. So they could have a minimal presence only, but I doubt it.

Yes, but what do you do after that? You're unlikely to be able to deliver enough food in a few days to keep hundreds of thousands of people going for at least a few months. In the meantime everyone turns nasty and refuses to cooperate because they claim (with some justification) that the West has broken international law. In the end, the same number of people die, possibly slightly later than otherwise, and the West loses the moral high ground everywhere but in their own eyes.

Team Brian GB

If that is the case then so be it as I have no first hand sources but have always been under the impression that the Navy was the weak link of the Chinese forces and has limited blue water capability with a smaller fleet that the Royal Navy- I did know however they have masses of submarines. I was very quick to write them off but I can now see how you could have a situation in the Indian Ocean rivalling Jutland- considering Carrier Groups in the Gulf, then also Diego Garcia, Honolulu and Japan.

Which would therefore mean air power, I know full well that an air lift is in no way a substitute for getting in on the ground but it must be explored, even if it were to be abandoned on political grounds.

I don't see how we would lose the moral high ground though if we keep to the objective at hand, a totalitarian state comes to the aid of another totalitatian state who is preventing what will soon be 1 million people from urgent attention purely for their fears over self-preservation. Unless of course it is viewed through tainted eyes.

I feel sorry for the State Department as they really have their work cut out at the moment.

spinoza

Well from their point of view you could be dropping anything on them, not just aid. Of course the West will discount this, and claim to retain the moral high ground, but to the Chinese (and supposedly non aligned countries like India) it will look like a threat with future action implied.

Nick 0208 Ldn

The Indians are going to fire on a British or American ship attempting to deliver aid to the Burmese, surely?

And nor would even the Chinese when it came down to it IMO, they'd e able to see what was going on and the numbers and eqiupment invovled.

There are something like 17,000 Red Cross volunteers in Burma and local staff for small NGOs, it is not as if there is nobody onthe ground to facilitate matter at all.

Though like Team Brian GB has said, itis so frustrating, the near impotence of the foreign policy of so many nations these days.

It has been what, 9 days now? Many areas will still be completely isolated from help, you can imagine the damage that has already been done with this neglect that has been forced upon us. Water-borne diseases must be rife.

What do you then propose spinoza, that we sit here doing pretty much nothing? Simply sending in reconnaissance teams?

spinoza

They would threaten, certainly. They may not fire. There will be diplomatic consequences though, for efforts to engage both India, China, and any other country, at any point thereafter. I don't think that such consequences are worth risking for a one time injection of aid, poorly managed, hastily put together, and delivered in a haphazard manner.

Hopefully, most of these people are in the Irrawaddy delta, have the right communications equipment, and are properly organised to dispense food and materiel aid as well as medical treatment. Otherwise it might as well be as if there were nobody.
(1) Send the aid through India, China and Thailand.

(2) If you're going to waste aid by air dropping loads of it on the offchance that a small percentage gets to the people who need it, you might as well bribe the Burmese army with what was going to be wasted anyway. Some of it does trickle down to people who would need it - soldiers' families, for example.

(3) If aid is to be delivered unilaterally without the consent of the Burmese military, then it has to be done in a manner such that China, India and Russia are comfortable with it. You might even get them to do the strong arming themselves.

Sending a USN or RN battlegroup to the region without getting agreement from all the interested countries, flying bombers and transport planes over the country dropping food aid without sending people in as well, and thinking that this actually works strikes me as foolish.

Nick 0208 Ldn

You are probably right there, you have tp pick your battlesso to speak, when the opposition is as ti is here. There would need to be the will for more than one off effort in regards to this disaster. I don't see that currently.


Thought very much the same myself actually at the beginning of last week, although even aid from "friendluy" countries was being restricted or inpounded, it was at least getting infar better than that from Western sources. Aesthetics be damned and simply load our food and tents and the like onto their aircraft and trucks. Was it not that simple?


Saw a piece on Sky News alst night, there is a US task force lying a short distance from Burma ready to move if given permission or ordered in. And a French vessel is fast appraoching wishing to deliver aid directly.

Though perhaps more interesting i thought, was a report of how other Burmese [from less effected parts fo the country] were putting any spare food and water and emergency supplies in lorries and driving them to the worst affected areas thsmselves. The militariy's efforts whatever they are, clearly not seeming enough to the average Burmese.


Generally speaking, it does appear that Western NGOs are now fianlly getting a noticeable numeble number of flights heading to the country, believe three planes for MSF are on theri way. The first British aircraft left Dubai last night with a further four on standby apparently.

Team Brian GB

The Prime Minister said in PMQs earlier this afternoon that he pressed for a UN Security Council meeting but was blocked by 'other countries'.

nickm

Bad idea geopolitically, bad idea practically that wouldn't work without some military presence on the ground.

Nick 0208 Ldn

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7402944.stm

And now there are estimates of possibly 200,000 dead with ten times that number displaced or caught up in the disaster in other ways.

The UN's top officials are about as useful as a boat with a hole in its bottom at a time like this it seems.

This is the government equivalent of corporate manslaughter going on by the day.

Wit Tanker

How can you blame UN when its all to do with Burma rulers. The aid shipment are not even being distributed, and the foreign workers are not even let in without a visa. The UN has no influence over the internal affairs of Burma.

Nick 0208 Ldn

I wouldn't say that i was blaming them, though the value of their groveling seems to be little enough. There was a high ranking UN official on the BBC World Service earlier on [i forget his exact position] and if only you could have heard the horror in his voice when the correspondent suggested states acted unilaterally. At the very top level these people are more cautious politicians and bureaucrats than aid workers.

In no time at all we will have been a fortnight since the cyclone did its worst and 100,000s will still have received no outside help, not official help anyway. Word still reaches us of cases where fellow Burmese attempting to do all they can with the little that they yet possess.

bbest

mu77

terrible - another gov't that doesn't care about it's people.

kuanteen

Lower ranking members of the government are apparently thieving aid.

The generals are redistributing some aid under their own names. Despicable.

Great blog keeping us up with the events in Burma: Rule of Lords

And a Burmese newspaper run by those in exile: The Irrawaddy

Nick 0208 Ldn

Gordon Brown spoke to the BBC World Service last night about the crisis.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/c...003399&ls=7867



There are now American, British and French vessles waiting off the Burmese coast with a significant of aid if only they were given the eprmission to distribute it.