The Debate Over Aid and Engagement
Like Cambodia in the 1980s, Burma presents an acute dilemma to aid agencies: should aid be withheld to avoid propping up an unsavory regime and to force political change or do the acute needs of the population justify the provision of assistance regardless of the political context? Those opposed to or at least cautious about international aid being given to Burma maintain that the SPDC is responsible for the poor conditions in the country and no sustainable, long-term solution can be found without a change in the government. They argue that politics cannot be separated from the aid issue because the root cause of the current situation is prolonged military rule. Furthermore, they believe that under present circumstances, aid will only serve to legitimize a regime that should not be in power. Proponents of humanitarian aid to Burma argue that with more than a decade having passed since the events of 1988 and the 1990 elections53 with no sign of political change, ordinary people cannot afford the luxury of aid being conditional on change, especially when the humanitarian situation is so dire. They stress that civilians already suffering due to the policies of the military government should not be dealt a second blow and deprived of humanitarian assistance. Moreover, they maintain that politics shouldn’t blind people to the social costs of denying aid. Agencies working in Burma point out that the country receives less international humanitarian aid per capita than almost any nation in the world, including others with repressive governments. Neighboring Laos, for example, which is ruled by a communist regime that suppresses political liberties, receives more than 20 times as much humanitarian aid per capita as Burma according to 2003 figures compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. These figures also show that Vietnam receives nine times as much aid per capita as Burma; even Cuba, which like Burma is subject to US trade sanctions, receives more than twice as much aid per person.54 Supporters of aid to Burma argue that politics should be delinked from the issue of humanitarian assistance and aid should be delivered now, rather than after regime change. The Burmese government-in-exile or the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB) has taken the position that without considering the root causes of the humanitarian conditions, aid is likely to make the humanitarian and political crisis worse. It believes that aid will fail to provide protection and assistance to the most vulnerable populations and further consolidate the regime’s rule. While the NCGUB shares the concern of the UN and the international community regarding the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Burma and believes it needs immediate attention, the NCGUB considers existing aid channels to be inadequate. It wants the humanitarian issue to be one of the first items on the agenda of a substantive dialogue between the SPDC and the NLD, and favors development of joint consultative mechanisms. Their purpose would be to ensure transparency, accountability and independent monitoring of humanitarian aid. If these structures were agreed upon, the NCGUB would support increased humanitarian aid by the international community. With no genuine political dialogue presently taking place, reaching an agreement with the SPDC on aid structures has been impossible. The position of the National League for Democracy (NLD) on humanitarian aid has been described by some analysts as remaining ambiguous.55 In 1995, NLD leader Aung San Suu Kyi put forward two main principles. The first is that international aid agencies have an obligation to work in close cooperation or consultation with the elected NLD leadership. The second is that aid should be delivered to the right people in the right way: it should not be channeled through government structures; be properly monitored; and be distributed to all in need irrespective of their political views.56 While Suu Kyi has called for assistance to Burma to be accountable and transparent, she has also advocated against aid inside Burma. In a 1998 interview, she said, “We don’t think the time is right for NGOs to come in. It is very difficult, if not impossible, for NGOs to work without permission of the authorities…Why don’t these NGOs go to the Karen refugees on the border? There’s plenty of need there. We (inside) really have to help ourselves...[NGO assistance in Burma] would only be a drop in the ocean. Helping a few thousand here or there. We want to create a system which will help everyone. It is far more important to change the political system in Burma.”57 In another interview in 2002, on the issue of foreign assistance, Suu Kyi said, “What we have been saying is that we can cooperate with the SPDC if the assistance is beneficial to the people and supports democratic changes. This is not different from what we said before. We have stated since the time of the SLORC that we are ready to cooperate [with the regime], if the assistance will be beneficial to the people and supports democratic development in the country. We have been consistent on this, and we will continue to hold this policy.”58 A very clear call for humanitarian aid to Burma has come recently from another respected Burmese political figure, Min Ko Naing, the famous student leader of the 1988 uprising who was released from prison in late 2005, after spending almost 16 years in confinement. Min Ko Naing and a group of activists known as “the Student Generations since 1988” have urged the international community to continue providing humanitarian assistance to Burma and advocated for the removal of government restrictions on international aid agencies. This statement came soon after the pull out of the Global Fund from Burma, which had terminated its five-year, $98.4 million grant to fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. It highlighted the country’s failed health and education systems and appealed for the international aid community to remain involved to respond to these crises. The statement also encouraged the establishment of an appropriate mechanism between the military government and all democracy forces in order to cooperate with the international community. Soon after this statement was released, the NLD said that its position on humanitarian assistance is similar to that of the 88-generation student leaders. Both the student leaders and NLD have emphasized that international standards of transparency and accountability must be maintained in allocating any international assistance. As for the Thailand-based Burmese pro-democracy groups and NGOs, the attitude of some towards aid inside Burma has been evolving. In the early and mid-1990s, they were among the most ardent critics of humanitarian aid inside Burma. They recommended that aid should be channeled to refugees along the Thai-Burma border instead of to the population inside Burma, and further exploration of cross-border assistance should be made. Over the last few years there has been a shift in this attitude. More agencies in Thailand, working with Burmese refugees and migrants to provide assistance, protection and capacity building, while continuing to sympathize with the democracy movement, have become aware of the scope of the humanitarian crisis in Burma and the potential for it to have a regional impact. Increasingly, some have started to favor international humanitarian assistance to Burma. There is also greater awareness that cross-border assistance can only reach a fraction of the needy in Burma; the vast majority of the country’s population is not accessible by agencies working along the Thai-Burma border. While some of the NGOs involved in refugee and cross-border activities have started to support the concept of humanitarian assistance to Burma, they have emphasized that aid to Burma should not be at the cost of programs targeting Burmese in Thailand. There remain strong voices against humanitarian aid to Burma. Some of the biggest critics of aid are members of the politically active Burmese community, democracy activists in exile, some of the human rights organizations based in Thailand that focus chiefly on Burma, and political organizations in Western countries that are championing the cause of democracy in Burma. |
Main Page Executive Summary Introduction Types of Displacement and Conditions of the Displaced Population Humanitarian Response Inside Burma The Debate Over Aid and Engagement Rationale for International Assistance Inside Burma Towards a More Effective Response to Internal Displacement Refugees International's Recommendations --------------- Acknowledgements Glossary Notes |
 |
|
Ending the Waiting Game: The Aid Dilemna
Search
Stay Informed
Resources
What I can do to help
Your support helps us save lives throughout the world.
Ways You Can Help
Photo Gallery
ViewAct Now!
|
|