Basil Fernando

[This is an open letter to ASEAN from the Executive Director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, urging ASEAN to respond appropriately to the Cyclone Nargis disaster in Burma or risk descending into irrelevancy. The letter dated May 9 was addressed to Dr. Surin Pitsuwan, Secretary General ASEAN, 70A, Jalan Sisingamangaraja Jakarta 12110, Indonesia; it was also copied to all ten heads of governments of ASEAN members]

Devastation in the Delta: Most affected areas by % of population and area.

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has observed with great alarm, the spiralling effects of Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar (Burma) and the apparent inability of the global community, despite good efforts, to respond effectively to what is evidently a natural disaster of unprecedented proportions.

Unprecedented, because the long-term consequences of the disaster may exceed even the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, due to the damage caused to rice and other crops. Implications of this are not only for Myanmar but for all of Asia.

It is at times like these that the capacity of international and regional organisations is sorely tested. Entities that rise to the immense challenges presented prove relevant and remain important in the long run; those that fail, lose credibility and influence, and ultimately pass away into irrelevance. 

Falling short

So it is for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which Myanmar is one of the ten member states. AHRC welcomes your calls for help from members and from around the world to support the recovery effort, as well as other small initiatives that you have taken, such as the setting up of an emergency fund to receive assistance from private foundations and individuals.

However, it is of concern that ASEAN’s response has so far fallen short of its capacity and much farther short of what is needed and should be expected of it at this time. That ASEAN can and must do much more is obvious. A number of members individually have to show greater efforts.

To begin with, Thailand, which has its longest border with Myanmar, and abundant financial and material resources as well as skilled people, must play a lead role not only as a halfway house for aid sent by other countries but also in its own right. The government of Thailand has so far apparently not fully grasped the implications for its own country of failing to help significantly in rescuing Myanmar.

Yet if the catastrophe is prolonged and millions are pushed into famine or utter poverty, the consequences will certainly be felt across its borders for years, decades to come. Singapore and Malaysia are two ASEAN members with established business links in Myanmar and robust economies that should be making much stronger financial contributions than they have so far.

 That the amounts of aid that they have offered pale in comparison to those of European countries should be a cause for shame of their governments and indignation among the citizens of these states who would certainly expect better of their neighbours were they the ones left starving and homeless today. Brunei also is a wealthy country that has failed to show generosity towards the cyclone’s victims.

Indonesia and the Philippines too have wide experience in handling calamities of this sort, and a great deal of effort was spent training people in Indonesia, especially in the aftermath of the tsunami. Where are those people, their knowledge and equipment, when Myanmar needs them?

‘Picking and Choosing’

But above all, ASEAN’s most important role must be as a group, under your leadership, in exerting all pressure on the government of Myanmar to accept assistance offered without, as you have reportedly said, “picking and choosing”. This is, you know very well, no time for picking and choosing.

The countless thousands of people whose lives hang in the balance today have no opportunity to pick and choose. Either they get the assistance they need, now, or they die. This much is clear, despite the difficulties of getting detailed reliable information from many affected zones.

It is thus unacceptable for ASEAN to defer and sidestep by saying that diplomatic efforts have been tried and have not worked as expected. The fact is that the regime in Myanmar cannot ignore the combined efforts of ASEAN and other regional partners of the grouping, especially China, India and Japan, if indeed no effort is spared to get it to acknowledge and respond to the suffering of its people.

The fact also is that the world is looking to ASEAN and these dialogue partners to play this role. So too is the AHRC.

The obstacles that exist between the aid sitting in Bangkok and elsewhere and the people who need it in Myanmar are more imaginary than real. It is more a result of inadequate trying than that they are somehow insurmountable. There can be no ifs or buts, no picking and choosing: ASEAN must, especially having taken Myanmar on as a member state, stand up to the challenges put before it by Cyclone Nargis and succeed.

This is, whether you like it or not, a life and death struggle not only for millions in Myanmar but for ASEAN itself. Failure is this time unthinkable. ASEAN failed those millions of Burmese last year when they rose up to demand change in their country. Had ASEAN responded to them in their time of need, the worst effects of this cyclone might have been averted.

Because of the political dimensions to their plea for help, ASEAN could hide behind excuses that were palatable at least for its members and some in the international community. But, Dr. Pitsuwan, there will be no excuses to hide behind this time around.