Myanmar's saffron revolution

[amsterdamsel]

It's just sad that people have to be massacred before they are granted basic human rights. The UN is so slow to move on these things, proving time and time again that international organizations are so limited in what they can do.

[ohio]

Yeah, it'd be better if NATO just invaded the country and occupied it to "restore democracy". There's nothing that anybody's gonna do to fix this.

[amsterdamsel]

I agree; I guess they're all tied up in Afghanistan...at least that's where Dutch NATO forces are to my knowledge...

[Shadowjester]

Hmmm, are you sure you've thought this through? Over the past few years we've received daily reminders of how effective an occupying force can be! I know it's a different situation to Iraq but it would still be messy and, as usual, it's innocent people that would suffer.

Surely a diplomatic solution is preferable. Just a firm hand is required. Swift and meaningful action. Nothing will happen though, nothing will change. Indeed nothing major can be done without the support of the chinese, and/or russians anyway, and that's never going to happen.

It's concerning that people already seem to be losing interest in this situation just because the protests have ended. It seems that all those brave men and women who risked their lives, and (relative) freedom, for their cause will have done so in vain.

So sad...

[ohio]

I was being fucking sarcastic... NATO is solidly losing the war in Afghanistan, not to mention Iraq. Besides, Myanmar's environment is pristine due to massive underdevelopment. The junta is the best thing for that country's environment and possibly the culture. It does suck for the people, though...

[tom]

long and short of it is that china sucks Burma's resources dry and no one wants to argue with China since it became the world's biggest sweatshop, churning out all those cheap items in Wal-mart for western consumers.

Talking about revolution, yeah..

[anonymous]

This week nobody gives a shit about Burma. That's a good reason to make a comment now. So I ask what the hell is that country called anyway?  Everybody knows that a  "victim" of Colonialism like Burma (that's the name I prefer) has the automatic right to call itself whatever it wants -no matter how awkward or stupid the name sounds in English -and the media will use it.

Strange then that the bastions of political correctness disagree on this point. The NY Times goes along with Myanmar but the BBC sticks with Burma.

[Ali Baba]

The BBC says Burma because the British government doesn't recognise the legitimacy of the current regime.

Burma/Myanmar has returned to the headlines after a terrible natural disaster that has quickly developed into a humanitarian disaster and the military has exposed how xenophobic and untrusting it is.

I can't say I'm all that surprised though. It's as a character in Metal Gear Solid said;-

"As long as there are people there will always be war."

[Andy]

I say Burma because the SLORC call's it Myanmar and I disagree with their totalitarian government. War isn't the answer in Burma. All that would do would be kill more people and leave Burma weak and helpless. Yes, it might be the fastest way to democracy but it would just result in long term problems and aggravated feelings. Aung San Suu Kyi and the NLD is working hard at getting democracy and I have confidence that soon they will be successful by use of non violent ways. Even if it takes longer, if they do achieve democracy the NLD wants to do it by speaking with the SLORC and arranging with them that no one (even SLORC) members get hurt so that Burma can focus on the present and the future and not have to worry about the hostile feelings from these past years.

[Ali Baba]

How important is democracy to people in these countries? I think there are other human rights that are much more important in these places and investing billions of dollars and other resources to allow people to write their name on a piece of paper isn't going to improve the quality of life there.

The UN very kindly brought democracy to Cambodia 10 yrs ago and what a benefit it is to the people. Children have to pay school fees because their teachers aren't earning a living wage, entire communities are destroyed to make way for modern development and thousands still endure lives of destitution.

Singapore managed to develop it's economy and infrastructure without democracy and whilst it may not be the most pleasant developed country to live in most have access to clean water, housing, schools etc.

Many of these regimes thrive on isolation, which can make diplomatic measures a little impotent and as the junta gains financial support from the Thai and Chinese governments (in exchange for heroin) it's unlikely to collapse anytime soon.