oneworldtalk

If the intransigence of the Burmese generals continues, we will have to face the question of whether in the name of humanity some international action should be taken against their will - such as military air drops, or supplies being landed from ships - to get aid to the huge numbers who desperately need it.

Last week, Bernard Kouchner, France's Foreign Minister, argued, as others are now doing, that this is a proper case for coercive intervention under the "responsibility to protect" principle unanimously endorsed by 150 heads of state and government at the 2005 UN world summit. His proposal was immediately rejected by China and Russia, which are always sensitive about intervention in internal affairs, but it also generated concern that such an "incendiary" approach would be counterproductive in winning any still-possible co-operation from the generals.

It also provoked the argument from humanitarian relief agencies - who know what they are talking about - that any effort to drop supplies without an effective supporting relief on the ground would be hopelessly inefficient, and maybe even dangerous, with the prospect of misuse of medical supplies.

These are strong arguments but as the days go by with the prospect of an enormously greater death toll looming, they are sounding less compelling, and at the very least, need revisiting. My own initial concern, and it remains a serious one, was that Kouchner's proposition had the potential to dramatically undercut international support for another great cause.

The "responsibility to protect" as it was conceived - as I well know, as one of the architects of the doctrine - is not about human security generally, or protecting people from the impact of natural disasters, or the ravages of HIV/AIDS or anything of that kind.

Rather, "R2P" is about protecting vulnerable populations from "genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity". That is the language of the 2005 UN General Assembly resolution, and Security Council resolutions that have followed it, and it is only in that context that the question should even arise of intervening in a country against the express will of its government. Even then, it allows the use of military force only with Security Council endorsement, and as a last resort.

If R2P is capable of being invoked in anything other than a context of mass atrocity crimes, then such consensus as there is in favour of the new norm will evaporate in the global south. And that means that when the next case of genocide or ethnic cleansing comes along, we will be back to the same depressing arguments about the primacy of sovereignty that led us into the horrors of inaction in Rwanda and Srebrenica in the 1990s.

But here's the rub. If what the generals are now doing, in effectively denying relief to hundreds of thousands of people at real and immediate risk of death, can itself be characterised as a crime against humanity, then the principle does indeed kick in. The Canadian-sponsored commission report that initiated the R2P concept anticipated just this situation, in identifying one possible case for the application of military force as "overwhelming natural or environmental catastrophes, where the state concerned is either unwilling or unable to cope, or call for assistance, and significant loss of life is occurring or threatened".

The UN resolution does not pick up this specific language, but it does refer to "crimes against humanity". The definition of such crimes (in the Rome statute establishing the International Criminal Court, as well as in customary international law) embraces, along with widespread or systematic murder, torture, persecution and the like, "other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health".

There is, as always, lots for the lawyers to argue about in all of this. And there will be lots for the Security Council to quarrel about. But when a government default is as grave as the course on which the Burmese generals seem set, there is at least a prima facie case to answer for their intransigence being a crime against humanity - of a kind which would attract the responsibility to protect principle. And that bears thinking about, fast, both by the Security Council, and the generals.

Guardian News & Media

- Gareth Evans was a minister in the Hawke and Keating governments. He is president of the International Crisis Group and co-chairman of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty.

China and Indonesia rejected France's idea of having the UN Security Council ratchet up the pressure on Burma to grant full access to foreign aid workers.

The US Navy said four ships, including the destroyer USS Mustin and the three-vessel Essex Expeditionary Strike Force, were heading for Burma from the Gulf of Thailand.

But the US ruled out conducting aerial food drops without permission, after earlier calls for the international community to proceed with the relief effort regardless of Burma's position.

Bill Gates, the chairman of Microsoft, said his charitable foundation would donate $US3 million ($3.2 million) to the humanitarian relief effort.

- Agence France-Presse, Reuters

Singapore, which currently chairs the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), called the talks to discuss the humanitarian situation in its impoverished member 'and consider how best to assist Myanmar in its relief and recovery efforts.' In contrast with more aggressive calls by Western nations for the junta to open its doors to foreign aid workers, Asean is likely to attempt a compromise to speed up aid delivery and spur reconstruction, diplomatic sources said.

But under Asean's consensus doctrine, any such plan must have the approval of Myanmar, whose foreign minister Nyan Win is attending.

Thai Foreign Minister Noppadon Pattama has said he and his fellow ministers would discuss forming a mechanism within Asean to help member nations suffering from similar disasters in the future.

Thailand will also air its proposal for Asean to work with the United Nations to help Myanmar recover from the disaster, Mr Noppadon said.

Ms Debbie Stothard, an activist with the anti-junta group Alternative Asean Network on Burma, noted that the cyclone is the biggest natural disaster to hit the region since the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, and called Asean's reaction 'deeply disappointing.'

'It's still not too late for Asean to redeem the situation. But they need to show some political leadership and ensure that the Burmese regime behaves in a more sensible manner,' she told AFP, using Myanmar's former name.

'Asean has a lot to make up for, they need to show that they have some spine here.'

Ms Hannah Ruth Chia, an analyst with the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, said Monday's meeting must address the urgency of aid reaching the victims.

'But with Asean having failed to exact significant change in Myanmar over the past 11 years since it became a member, what can such a meeting achieve except to hector the Myanmar foreign minister in private?' she wrote in a commentary.

Ms Chia said that with Western powers considering forced intervention to deliver aid, Asean risked being viewed as ineffective if it refused to take a stand.

Despite its non-interference policy, Asean 'must show that it is willing to make subtle exceptions when a government refuses to help its own people,' she wrote.

'If Asean is seen to be unwilling to act one way or another, it could find itself being undermined by external powers should these powers decide to go ahead with forced intervention regardless of Asean's position on the matter,' Ms Chia said

Ms Hannah Ruth Chia, an analyst with the International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore:

'But with Asean having failed to exact significant change in Myanmar over the past 11 years since it became a member, what can such a meeting achieve except to hector the Myanmar foreign minister in private?'

'If Asean is seen to be unwilling to act one way or another, it could find itself being undermined by external powers should these powers decide to go ahead with forced intervention regardless of Asean's position on the matter,' Ms Chia said

Ms Debbie Stothard, an activist with the anti-junta group Alternative Asean Network on Burma, stated that Asean's reaction 'deeply disappointing.'

'Asean has a lot to make up for, they need to show that they have some spine here.'

CHILDREN of some of the most senior members of the Burmese regime are studying at Australian universities, local Burmese say.

They include the son and daughter-in-law of a minister, whose names are on a list of banned figures, and the son of a colonel in the Burmese military.

The former foreign affairs minister, Alexander Downer, said it was "likely that some elements of the regime would have children studying here".

The junta has aroused international disgust by blocking foreign aid after the devastation of Cyclone Nargis this month.

----------------

Kyaw Myint Malia of the Burmese Friendship Association said local Burmese were aware that the children of several junta members were studying at universities, but many of them changed their names and background details before applying for their student visas.

The website Burma Dictator Watch says the youngest daughter of one of the regime's most senior military commanders is also studying at a Sydney university.