Late last year I
wrote a comment piece on the lack of aid getting to victims of the Kachin
conflict that triggered some healthy debate about the UN’s role in Burma.
t the time the organisation was attempting to gain access to rebel
territory in the northern state where tens of thousands of internally displaced
persons (IDPs) had taken shelter. The crisis facing those displaced was
considerable – the government had denied them international assistance, and
they were forced to rely largely on locally-sourced food, medicine and blankets
that were in short supply.
The reason for the UN’s inability to access the IDPs was never
clarified by the government, but it likely stemmed from a fear in Naypyidaw
that allowing the body to channel aid to rebel territory would be tantamount to
supporting the Kachin rebels, which have been fighting government forces since
June 2011. The refusal by the government was cynical and self-serving, but I
and others felt that the UN also had a lot to answer for.
In reports issued by its aid wing, OCHA, and in interviews I conducted
with staff in the country, there was a stubborn refusal to acknowledge the full
extent of the crisis. This was likely due to concern that the UN going public
with the fact that the majority of refugees had chosen to shelter in Kachin
Independence Army territory and not government areas would annoy the
government, as would clarity on the real situation in Burma’s north, and
Naypyidaw might then restrict the UN’s work in the country.
The concerns are understandable, but they are no justification for the
silence. The UN’s ambiguity dampened the urgency of the situation, and meant
that local groups who could provide assistance were not being properly
acknowledged and, crucially, their efforts were not supported.
Fast forward to now, and UN teams are en route to Kachin state to
deliver their second convoy of aid, having been granted brief, limited access
to the town of Laiza in December last year. Once again, however, celebrations
should be tempered: as yet there is no sign that the aid effort will be a
sustained one, and the government may well fall back on its age-old excuse of
“security concerns” to block further convoys (as it’s done to block voting for
looming by-elections in Kachin state).
The UN has grown slightly more verbose over the matter, requesting that
aid deliveries be continued well into the future (OCHA says food insecurity
could last until the end of 2013), but its public assessments fail to
illuminate the real situation in the north (Human Rights Watch’s recent report
paints a clearer picture of just how dire things are up there).
As the UN’s caginess continues, so the refugee crisis deteriorates. The
tools of diplomacy can work with the Burmese government (as they eventually did
with Cyclone Nargis in 2008) but the UN must be more frank about the limits of
its work in a country like Burma. When that happens, external groups will begin
to place more emphasis on supporting the local groups (often wrongly derided as
politicised or ill-equipped) who can gain access to victims and provide the
assistance they desperately need.
Francis Wade
http://asiancorrespondent.com
Business & Investment Opportunities
YourVietnamExpert is a division of Saigon Business Corporation Pte Ltd, Incorporated in Singapore since 1994. As Your Business Companion, we propose a range of services in Strategy, Investment and Management, focusing Healthcare and Life Science with expertise in ASEAN. We also propose Higher Education, as a bridge between educational structures and industries, by supporting international programmes. Many thanks for visiting www.yourvietnamexpert.com and/or contacting us at contact@yourvietnamexpert.com
No comments:
Post a Comment