The Student Room Group

Burmese Aid

Australia condemns in the strongest terms the belligerence and intransigence of the Burmese government that is stifling aid efforts and causing unimaginable damage and harm to tens of thousands of innocent Burmese people.

Australia calls on the International Community to put pressure on the Burmese government to accept aid and aid workers to help those in need. And if necessary to take direct action to help those in desperation.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
The Secretary General also implores Burma to accept aid and support for the victims.
Reply 2
Liechtenstein believes that it is the duty of the Burmese Government to it's people to allow aid workers access to the country. Our thoughts are with those affected by the disaster, who, we strongly suspect, are not those who have made the decision to restrict the movement of aid.

Liechtenstein does point out that at this time it is difficult to put pressure on the burmese goverment, because it would rebound a thousandfold on those we are trying to help.
Reply 3
China believes that although aid is needed the Burmese government needs to open the borders first before the international community can act.

Therefore China asks Burma to open their borders in order for a suitable emergency aid program to commence.
Afghanistan feels that it is the country's decision whether or not to accept the emergency aid being offered to them by the international community. Burma is an independent state and as such should be allowed to take the action it deems necessary to overcome this natural disaster.

However, Afghanistan does feel that the Burmese authorities are being unnecessarily harsh in halting aid proceeding into the country. The decision to allow this aid to move forward lies solely with the Burmese authorities and this must be respected.
Reply 5
Australia wonders how Afghanistan can pretend that this is a solely internal matter when human lives are being ruined and destroyed by the unelected and paranoid military junta. If the UN is never going to intervene then it has no business existing. And if it does want to exist than surely there can be no more necessary intervention than to go over the heads of a dictatorial government to save the lives of the innocent.
UniOfLife
Australia wonders how Afghanistan can pretend that this is a solely internal matter when human lives are being ruined and destroyed by the unelected and paranoid military junta. If the UN is never going to intervene then it has no business existing. And if it does want to exist than surely there can be no more necessary intervention than to go over the heads of a dictatorial government to save the lives of the innocent.


I am by no means saying this entire affair is an internal matter. What my post was trying to say is that it is up the Burma to allow the UN into the country - we have no right to invade their land without their expressed permission. It may be a 'paranoid military junta', but that is the government that exists there and we cannot remain within our charter if we force ourselves into the country uninvited.
Reply 7
Captain Biggles
I am by no means saying this entire affair is an internal matter. What my post was trying to say is that it is up the Burma to allow the UN into the country - we have no right to invade their land without their expressed permission. It may be a 'paranoid military junta', but that is the government that exists there and we cannot remain within our charter if we force ourselves into the country uninvited.


With all due respect to the representative this is complete tripe. The UN was hardly invited into Iraq in 1991 or indeed into Serbia in 1998. If this organisation won't step in to save human lives when tyrannical regimes are wilfully and deliberately destroying them, then it should be disbanded forthwith.
UniOfLife
With all due respect to the representative this is complete tripe. The UN was hardly invited into Iraq in 1991 or indeed into Serbia in 1998. If this organisation won't step in to save human lives when tyrannical regimes are wilfully and deliberately destroying them, then it should be disbanded forthwith.


This is not a question of whether or not the regime in place within Burma is a dictatorship or a democracy. Yes, I agree that aid should be allowed into the country and that the Burmese authorities are taking a more than harsh stand against the assistance of the international community, however we can only offer our services - it is the country-in-question's decision each time as to how they deal with any crisis.

The delegate for Afghanistan would again like to call on the Burmese government to open their borders to the help and assistance being offered by the international community.
Reply 9
So Afghanistan would be happy to sit back and allow a country to liquidate an ethnic minority, for instance, so long as it was an internal matter. The UN should just offer help in that situation?
UniOfLife
So Afghanistan would be happy to sit back and allow a country to liquidate an ethnic minority, for instance, so long as it was an internal matter. The UN should just offer help in that situation?


No.
Reply 11
So then Afghanistan recognises the need for the UN to interfere with apparently internal matters when human lives are at stake. In that case what is the difference in this situation?
Reply 12
UniOfLife
So then Afghanistan recognises the need for the UN to interfere with apparently internal matters when human lives are at stake. In that case what is the difference in this situation?


China would like to remind Australia that the method of distributing aid and deliberate ethnic cleansing are completely different matters.

China encourages Burma to open their borders and allow international help with the logistics of supplying aid needed to save lives.
UniOfLife
So then Afghanistan recognises the need for the UN to interfere with apparently internal matters when human lives are at stake. In that case what is the difference in this situation?


From my view of it, there is no international law dictating that countries must open their borders to receive international aid. Although the country's authorities may not be doing everything the international community expects of them, in the case of Burma, they are trying to deal with the situation as they deem appropriate. As much as we all would like to see the aid go forward, we cannot override the sovereignty of any state.

When do we deem human lives are at stake? Many countries have the death penalty for certain heinous crimes - the lives of these criminals are at stake yet we do not expect the UN to interfere because it is the country's decision to have introduced it in the first place. Should any country be clearly and obviously neglecting a situation in which the human rights of their people are being breached, or indeed any country takes steps to worsen the situation, then this delegate believes the UN should take steps. We are not the world's molly-coddlers and should definitely not force ourselves on country's who are trying to cope as best they can.
Libya supports the Afghanistan representative's point and poses the question of whether we want an international political debacle on top of this natural disaster? Libya feels that Burma has already made steps towards an concerted international response to Nurgis, however this will not be helped by the 'egging on' by other countries, it will have the complete opposite effect to the catalytic effect said countries are hoping for.
Nepal also supports the veiws of the Afghanistan representative, and urges the Burmese to accept aid quickly to lessen the amount already in harm.
Reply 16
Listening to the majority of contries urging and asking Burma to do something they evidently refuse to, UAE stresses that such behaviour is just not good enough.
We firmly take part with Australia in this matter and we would like to ask countries to reconsider your decision -
It's not correct to practise passive politics, claiming to have no rights interferring while the people of Burmas human rights suffers strongly.
Iraq is deeply disappointed with the Burmese government to delay the transportation of Aid to her people.
Reply 18
The problem is that it is a slippery slope. The job of the UN is not to interfere with the internal workings of nations, if we start to interfere more and more then it would lead to unacceptable amounts of governmental supervision by an unelected and unqualified group of people.

So I think any interference needs to be very carefully thought out, and the subject of a resolution. In this case I would be tempted to at least air drop supplies whether Burma likes it or not. Obviously I would not however support a military invasion even if it is to distribute aid.
Iraq proposes that in extreme situations of natural disasters, UN registered bodies are able to fly over any designated air space without hindrance to distribute needed and essential aid. This would allow aid to be distributed much quicker and reach those who desperately need it.

Latest