Showing posts with label Burma. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Burma. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

Blast From the Past (Literally)

Hurricane Sandy is a history-making storm.  Take a look at 6 other tempests that changed history, from the "divine wind" typhoon that saved Japan from a Mongol invasion fleet in 1281 to the storm that wrecked the Spanish Armada and thus saved England in 1588 and more.

Monday, March 08, 2010

Human Rights Spotlight: the Geneva Summit

Maggie's Farm offers a reminder that the Geneva Summit is beginning today.

Here is the WSJ blurb about the meeting:
The Geneva Summit -- organized by groups such as U.N. Watch and Freedom House, and chaired by Poland’s Lech Walesa and the Czech Republic’s Vaclav Havel -- will bring together political dissidents from China, Iran and Burma, rights activists for the Tibetan and Uighur peoples, a survivor of the North Korean gulag, plus a former Sudanese slave named Simon Deng who plans to speak about “the gross human-rights abuses by radical jihadists and the Islamic government in Khartoum . . .
I should clarify that the full name of the meeting is the "Geneva Summit for Human Rights, Tolerance, and Democracy." (Yes. Democracy.)

Contrast, my darlings, with the rogues' gallery that is the UN's Human Rights Council.

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

The HopeChange Chronicles: Obama's Foreign Policy and Human Rights

That sound you hear, gentle reader, is me banging my head against the wall in frustration at the current administration's fundamentally, totally, and risibly un-serious "foreign policy." Read this. Previous rants here and here.

Oh, and while we're at it, let's frivolously, gratuitously, and needlessly cold-shoulder our German allies on an anniversary that brought freedom to millions. Pffffft.

Sunday, July 19, 2009

The 2009 Failed States Index

Foreign Policy has published its annual listing of the world's basket cases. If you have the stomach for it, you can take a look at the parade of failed states.

You know, it seems to me that people spend a lot of time fretting about why states fail. How about also spending some time on how states succeed -- and then following suit? On a related note, perhaps we can take a look at the cautionary tales of once-successful states that have become failed miseries and be honest enough to say how and why (*cough* Zimbabwe! *cough*).

One complaint already: on the interactive map that classifies states by their health (or lack of it), Taiwan isn't even included. It's simply a white blank dot, a non-entity, a non-factor. China, however, is colored orange, "in danger." I know we're better than THAT! (for now, anyway)

Also, take note! According to this new survey, the four most stable, successful states in Asia are . . . (drum roll, please) South Korea, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand -- all of which are vibrant democracies. (Indeed, Oz and the Land of the Kiwis rank as among the most stable states in the world.) Worst off in Asia -- the thugocracy of Burma/Myanmar.

Monday, May 19, 2008

UK on Burma Cyclone Disaster: Unilateral Humanitarian Intervention

Ninme called this sort of thing "unilaterally aidvading."

Here is the news story and blurb:
Britain would support unilateral humanitarian intervention in Burma if the military government’s refusal to accept foreign aid for the victims of Cyclone Nargis results in epidemics and widespread deaths, Lord Malloch-Brown, the Foreign Office Minister, told The Times yesterday.

Lord Malloch-Brown was in Rangoon, the former Burmese capital, as part of an international effort to break the deadlock which has left many of the 2.5 million victims of the cyclone bereft of food, shelter, fresh water and medical care. The United Nations’ humanitarian chief, Sir John Holmes, arrived in the city last night and Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary-General, will also travel to Burma this week to make the case for an aid operation fronted by SouthEast Asian nations, India and China, but containing a strong UN component.

But Britain has not ruled out supporting action under the terms of the UN’s 2005 New York declaration, which sets out the “responsibility to protect” populations from crimes against humanity using “appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means”. In a radio interview on Saturday, Gordon Brown referred to the possibility of unilaterally dropping international aid to stricken areas of the Irrawaddy delta, where as many as 129,000 people are believed to have died a fortnight ago.

“As far as air drops are concerned we rule nothing out, and the reason we rule nothing out, is that we want to get the aid directly to the people,” Mr Brown told the BBC.


I had mentioned this type of idea previously. The entire idea of "responsibility to protect," coming from the UN, makes me laugh -- and not in a good way.

As usual, the conduct of the Burmese ruling junta is shocking in its wickedness, but not surprising. There is no inhumanity like that practiced by a bad ruler on his own people, in the cause of self-interest.

At the same time, "aidvading" opens up a whole other can of worms.

UPDATE: Samizdata has a piquant description of this idea as: "Invade the country -- kill the generals -- feed the people." Errrrr . . .

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Burma/Myanmar's Cyclone Crisis and Fallout

The deplorable behavior of the ruling junta has apparently turned Time magazine into a cheerleader of robust unilateral action. One Time article suggests with a straight face that it is time to invade that country. What?

Check out the story, which contains this interesting phrase: "coercive humanitarian intervention."

Oh, my!

UPDATE: Blogfriend Dignified Rant has a -- well -- dignified rant about this idea.