I wanted to write a more coherent piece on the current tragedy that is unfolding in Burma. Since I'm behind in so many things, let me at least get this off of my chest: Take all the arguments (most of them phony) that were ever advanced for invading and occupying Iraq - pretty much all of them will be justified and apply in the case of Burma. Burma is ruled by a military junta whose criminality is becoming more evident by the day. With a strong undercurrent of Buddhist culture, the Burmese people are a decent and dignified lot, by and large. The military junta, which doesn't look much different from an armed and well-organized mafia, has made use of the largely-peaceful nature of its people and has entrenched itself, sucking the life out of this once-rich South Asian nation. Until about 40 years ago, people from other countries in Asia used to live and work, or run businesses in Burma - a nation rich in natural resources. When foreigners were suddenly driven out of Burma, there was support for such action initially. Today Burma has been reduced to a basket case economy. The people there are exploited as forced labor and ruled with an iron fist. It's not that these facts are not known outside. The very fact that Aung San Suu Kyi was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize as early as 1991 shows that the world has been watching Burma for long. Too long, in fact. Watching helplessly, waiting for something to change within the country.

Aung San Suu KyiThe contrast with other cases such as Iraq is only too striking: while Saddam Hussein was no angel, Iraq itself was somewhat of a functioning society. Iraqi society was far more secular than every other nation in that region. Burma, in contrast, has been reduced to a pathetic situation. People there have managed to survive purely by their own resilience and self-reliance. But they are still at the mercy of this ruthless military regime. Iraq did not have a democratic set up that could take over after the fall of a dictator. Burma has a viable opposition with a well-respected leader in Aung San Suu Kyi that can take over the running of the country as it goes through its initial period as a democracy. She had convincingly won the elections held in 1990, by the way - and should have become the Prime Minister. In contrast to a phony group of Iraqi exiles feeding all kinds of lies to the Americans, there is a genuinely concerned diaspora of Burmese exiles in many countries - that can be counted upon to provide an objective assessment of the situation on the ground. Iraq under Saddam Hussein may or many not have been a threat to its neighbors. Burma's case is much simpler - it has never been a threat to anyone outside of Burma. May be that is one reason no one is interested in helping the Burmese people find their voice. Everyone in the West talks about human rights and understands the need to fight for human rights. But here is a people who have fought for their basic rights on a few occasions and have paid heavily for that.

We have some idea about the devastation brought about by the recent cyclone in Burma. But what has been agitating so many people around the world is the refusal of the military regime there to let international assistance to get into the affected areas urgently. This is criminal. It is obvious that the military junta does not want outsiders to see the extent of the deprivation of the Burmese people. What vanity! Of course, it is not just vanity - it is also a genuine fear that these foreigners would somehow help the Burmese people to rise up and overthrow this outfit. It clearly shows their criminal intent of staying in power at any cost - even at the cost of tens of thousands of lives. How much more criminal a 'government' can get? And how much more justification does the 'international community' need to take appropriate action to put an end to this injustice and cruelty? There have been reports of the Burmese military putting the names of their military rulers on the aid packets sent by aid agencies. And there was also at least one report that said that the military was siphoning off the 'better quality' aid items for their own use and distributing poor quality, rotting food items to their local population.

It's easy to blame China and Russia for the rest of us not being able to do anything in Burma. But, fuck them! China, Russia, France and a whole lot of countries WERE against the US and Britain invading Iraq - that didn't exactly deter us from invading that country on trumped up charges, did it? If the US really wants to bring about a change in Burma, it can do it - and the entire international community, barring some rogue nations, will support the US. The Americans and the British have toppled enough governments worldwide that I'm sure it's within their capability to topple this regime in Burma and enable a democratic government to take root. The question is, do we have the balls to take the leadership and put together a coalition of the willing? There is sufficient provision within the existing international legal framework to allow, or even encourage, such an intervention. One such clause is the 'Responsibility to Protect'. If the US doesn't, I hope some of the neighboring countries such as India, Nepal, Bhutan, Thailand, etc. would seriously consider such an invasion - or any plan that would result in the overthrow of this criminal gang and bring in the much needed relief to the Burmese people. They have suffered in silence LONG ENOUGH!