Lionel Rosenblatt
05/29/2008

The following op-ed appeared in the Bangkok Post.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) has been struggling to address issues requiring special engagement with its sovereign members, such as human rights and natural disasters. A humanitarian expert describes how the group can save lives in Burma.

Cyclone Nargis has killed several tens of thousands in Burma's Irrawaddy delta. And if the relief effort continues at the current feeble pace, informed estimates are that the death toll will reach 200,000 in the near future. When that happens, the number of dead Burmese will be nearly the same as those killed by the tsunami several years ago.

But, unlike the tsunami, most of the cyclone deaths will have been preventable.

The so-called second wave of death is silently en route, bred by the lack of clean water which almost surely will bring dehydrating diarrhoeal disease and cholera.

Most of the deaths which will occur in the second wave can be prevented with simple tools such as oral rehydration salts (ORS) and measures to purify drinking water.

The tools to do the job are available - most of them close at hand, but just beyond reach.

Over the past two decades there has been much after-the-fact hand-wringing about the multitude of lives which could have been saved, for example, when the Kurds fled into the mountains, when the Rwanda genocide was ramping up or in Bosnia.

Because of the non-conflict setting, a natural disaster is much easier to deal with; witness the results of the international emergency response following the tsunami, or the extraordinary current rescue and relief operation being mounted in China for the earthquake victims in Sichuan province.

The key problem in Burma is Burma - that is the ruling junta - which is allowing into the country only a trickle of the emergency aid needed.

This is a situation crying out for the United Nations and international community to implement "Responsibility to Protect" - the recently adopted doctrine permitting international intervention when the sovereign government is responsible for massive deaths.

International calls to implement the Responsibility, notably by French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, are falling on blocked ears; it is clear that China and Russia will veto international intervention so as to preserve the pre-eminence of national sovereignty, no matter how many lives are sacrificed on its altar.

There are other options, however.

Most promising is the Coalition of Mercy sponsored by Asean (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations). Under Asean's aegis there may be viable emergency responses acceptable to Burma, which can deliver large-scale, life-saving aid with the speed required.

Time is the enemy and speed is the antidote. Fortuitously, quick response capacity is near at hand. The Thai-US annual military exercise known as Cobra Gold is under way right now with humanitarian response as this year's exercise mission. Therefore, the US Navy's assets in the immediate vicinity of Burma are particularly suited to bringing in life-saving emergency aid: especially helicopter lift capacity.

The big Navy choppers are the key to bringing in large-scale aid very near to the victims, including life-saving medication and supplies to avert cholera, water purification items, and equipment to clear roads and repair landing strips for cargo planes.

So the tools are at hand, but direct delivery flights by US Navy and Air Force choppers and fixed-wing aircraft will probably not be welcomed by the Burmese junta.

However, if such aid goes into Burma under the aegis of Asean's Coalition of Mercy which would take responsibility for obtaining Burmese assent to the relief operation, it could be acceptable.

To enhance a quick green light from the ruling generals, they could be assured that the Americans would play virtually no role on the ground. Asean troops and civilian experts would handle the distribution and assistance roles on the ground. So, for example, a US C-130 would come in under the Asean umbrella with Asean emergency response teams. The same arrangements could also be made for the big cargo helicopters. The US choppers could deliver military engineer units from Asean countries to clear or build roads, repair or build new fixed-wing landing sites.

Plainly put, the US would provide the airborne trucks and drivers with Asean military and civilian personnel playing virtually all the ground roles.

If Burmese soldiers wish to participate or observe, that should be welcomed but with the understanding that Asean makes the rules.

Another key mission will be for the aircraft to spot the isolated pockets of people cut off from the rest who are beginning to die already.

This would provide the means for Asean troops to assist them in place or rescue them. Often, the most isolated and hence most vulnerable populations are left for last and mostly perish when they could have been saved in the earlier days of the emergency.

What a great real-life disaster response exercise this would be: Asean's Coalition of Mercy supported by US and other Western militaries would save perhaps 100,000 lives and Asean could proudly say that their coalition is the cutting edge for a new kind of multilateral disaster response, and the US image will be burnished worldwide.

But, if the current logjam is not broken, the main international response will come only after the massive deaths when hand-wringing and finger-pointing will build to a crescendo.

At least the victims will be spared this symphony. They will be long gone.