MHE514 Module 2 - Case, Natural Disasters - Essay Example

MHE514 Module 2 - Case, Natural Disasters Background Through the days of May 2 and May 3, 2008, a tropical storm ripped through the lives of the fifty-three million people of Burma, killing 22,000 and rendering hundreds of thousand homeless, to face the ravages of nature. The health system in Burma has remained one of the least effective in the world, leaving the population open to diseases like malaria, diarrhoea and other diseases due to the lack of clean drinking water and proper sanitation.

Malnutrition was another cause for worry. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United States of America were ready to provide assistance, but the paranoid rulers of Burma refused to consider any such assistance for its suffering population (Burma Reels as Storm Toll Rises, 2008).Brief Summary of Article Ratnesar 2008, in his article “Is It Time to Invade Burma?” takes a look at the inadequate response of the rest of the world to the human disaster unfolding in Burma, due to the lack of concern of the ruling Burmese Junta to their sufferings and thereby denying the required and available international aid.

In the face of this refusal to accept international aid, which sets a precedent for the rulers of any country to remain indifferent to human suffering, Ratnesar suggests that it is time for the rest of the world to act, through military action by the invasion of Burma, to provide relief for the suffering people. Negotiations to permit the international community, may not succeed with Burma, and hence the need for a more vigorous reaction from the rest of the world. This would have the added benefit that of letting know to rulers with a similar disposition to their citizens as the rulers of Burma that the world would not tolerate human suffering and has options to deal with it (Ratnesar, 2008).

Response to the Article Viewed from the moral perspective, the recommendation of the author is justified. There was a human disaster unfolding in Burma, which was many hundred times the disaster that the United States faced in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina (Burma Reels as Storm Toll Rises, 2008). The paranoia of the ruling junta in Burma became an obstacle to international humanitarian aid to reduce the human suffering in Burma (Beech, 2007). This paranoia of the ruling Burmese junta had led to curtailment of movement of international NGOs, such that at the time of this human disaster there was minimal aid infrastructure in the country and hardly any international aid flowing in (Burma Reels as Storm Toll Rises, 2008).

Yet, the response of the world community was lukewarm. Pressure on the rulers of Burma to relent and allow international humanitarian assistance was limited, instead of more vigorous action, including considering military options. The legal view also provides justification for the recommendations of the author for military intervention in Burma. At the UN 60th anniversary World Summit in 2005, all the Asian countries signed up to the doctrine that sovereign states have the responsibility to protect their own people, others have the responsibility to assist them in doing so but if they manifestly fail to do that, to protect their own people, then it is the responsibility of the wider community to engage in whatever way is necessary to ensure that protection occurs, including ultimately through the use of military force” (When is military intervention justified? 2008). This doctrine that was agreed to and signed with the provision for military intervention in case there is a dereliction of duty towards their own citizens forms the basis of the legal justification for military intervention in Burma.

World politics is not built on morality and legality. Instead most of the time world politics is based on the narrow economic and political aims of the concerned nations. The author has not taken this into consideration, while making recommendations for military action. There are political and economic reasons why the countries in the region and Burma’s neighbors do not support any military intervention in Burma. Nearly a decade ago Burma became a member of ASEAN and has developed close economic ties with its members.

Nearly a fifth of the electric power requirements of Thailand are generated by natural gas from Burma, while Malaysia in company with Thailand has large involvement in the development of hydropower plants in Burma. One of the main attractions for China and India in Burma is the vast natural gas reserves that Burma has. In such a situation these neighbors and the countries in the region are averse to any action upsetting the ruling junta in Burma (Beech, 2007). The argument of breach of sovereignty is the argument that is used against any intervention in Burma (Hatridge, 2008).

Without support from the neighbors of Burma and the countries in the region, military intervention is not a practical solution. Thus though the recommendation of the author for military intervention in Burma has moral and legal justifications, the lack of practicality rules it out as a solution to the humanitarian crisis in Burma.Possible Solution Does the ruling out of military intervention mean that the people of Burma are left to their sufferings without any action from the world? The answer is no.

There is a solution that offers greater chances of success. This makes its countries like China and India and the ASEAN members contributors to the solution. China has strong political and economic ties with Burma, and so too the ASEAN countries. India is attempting such closer cooperation between the two countries. All these countries with particular emphasis on China can use their leverage to cause the military junta to accept international aid and international NGOs to ameliorate the suffering of their people.

Such a solution is not farfetched for China is starting to demonstrate more responsibility in world politics, as it tries to occupy a powerful place in world politics. China is showing signs of being more accommodative to American humanitarian concerns in different parts of the world, including Burma (Thompson, 2007). Therefore led by China and along with the other countries in the country pressure can be brought on the Burmese ruling junta to take steps to allow international aid and thereby reduce the suffering of the people of Burma.

Literary ReferencesBeech, H. (2007). Burmas Faceless Leaders. Retrieved January 28, 2008, from, TIME Web Site: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1666978,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-sidebarBeech H. (2007). The UN Envoy Trying to Save Burma. Retrieved January 28, 2008, from, TIME Web Site: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1672377,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-sidebarBurma Reels as Storm Toll Rises. 2008. Retrieved January 28, 2008, from, TIME Web Site: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1737748,00.html?iid=sphere-inline-sidebarHatridge, R. (2008). Should military intervention deliver emergency aid in humanitarian crises?

Retrieved January 28, 2008, from, The Korea Times Web Site: http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/01/241_27518.htmlRatnesar, R. (2008). Is It Time to Invade Burma? Retrieved January 28, 2008, from, TIME Web Site: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1739053,00.html?imw=YThompson, D. (2007). Washington’s Weakening Influence: Sino-Indian Competition over Burma. China Brief, 7(17), Retrieved January 28, 2008, from, The Jamestown Foundation Web Site: http://www.jamestown.org/single/?

no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=4420When is military intervention justified? 2008. Retrieved January 28, 2008, from, Australian Broadcasting Corporation Web Site: http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/programguide/stories/200811/s2416176.htm