Globalists Deepen Myanmar Suffering
Posted on: 2008-05-09 19:27:24
Decades of abuse have robbed NGOs of legitimacy, increasing Myanmar's pain
The government of Myanmar has proven wary of accepting foreign aid in the aftermath of the devastating cyclone disaster last week, mainly because of the legacy of previous aid programs and calls for intervention, which have often cynically served a larger agenda.
A week has passed since Myanmar (which the "international community" insists on still calling by its colonial name of Burma) was devastated by a cyclone that killed at least 60,000 people (the official count), and probably nearly 100,000. A million have been left essentially homeless across whole regions of Myanmar, trapped in high, disease ravaged waters without food. Some survivors of this human catastrophe have reportedly been resorting to drinking coconut milk as their only source of safe hydration. Observers are even saying that, on a local scale, the damage is even worse than that wreaked by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami.
The United States and other Western governments, as well as the United Nations and various Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), have pledged aid to the beleaguered Burmese, on the condition that foreigners be allowed in by the capital government in Yangon (Rangoon) to distribute it. The world media is already denouncing the Myanmar government's "seizure" of one UN aid shipment, making it sound as if the government's acceptance of the aid was some kind of a theft. The same media have also been replaying various reworkings of a central theme: the Myanmar government is incompetent, paranoid and has no interest in the well being of its own people.
Myanmar has long been an international pariah. Unwilling to accept Western conceptions and norms of government, it has been subjected to international economic boycotts, which have suited the autarkic leadership fine. It just wants to be left alone. In the aftermath of the cyclone, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is having none of it. "It should be a simple matter," she said, about Yangon's reluctance to "accept aid. It's not a matter of politics. It's a matter of a humanitarian crisis."
On the surface, the situation with Myanmar and foreign aid looks like a familiar scenario: whites attempt to help a Third World nation, only to have their best efforts undermined by the locals. But something more is in play, and is informing the Myanmar government's response to the crisis Myanmar faces. The past actions of foreign governments, as well as of NGOs, towards targeted governments is a matter of public record: national emergencies are often used as cover for globalist aims. The Myanmar "junta" (as the media likes to call the Yangon government) has been on the receiving end of this before, and is reacting accordingly.
In 2007, the world was subjected to weeks of coverage about protests in Myanmar. While we were told the marches were about a crying desire for "democracy," Myanmar's unrest was in fact based on economic concerns, mainly inflation. Despite attempts by the media, which painted a scenario of fearless yet humble Buddhist monks leading passionate "pro-democracy" campaigners against a ruthless military dictatorship, the crisis fizzled, along with the protests. In fact, despite claims that the Myanmar government is opposed to "democracy," the cyclone struck only a week before a slated national constitutional referendum, an experiment in democratic norms few brutal despots have dared to engage in. (The media denounced the polls as "rigged" days before they had even opened!)
Since 2005, the US State Department has been saying that United Nations "involvement" in Myanmar is "essential" to counter "human rights abuses": this latest noise, now cloaked as outrage about Myanmar's reticence about "aid" has been doing the rounds for ages, only recently tightened with sanctions against members of the regime, along with their families.
Why should the Myanmar government be so reticent about NGO offers of help? Perhaps because NGO "aid" from the "international community" has repeatedly proven to be a wolf in sheep's clothing.
NGOs have wreaked havoc around the world, often subverting sovereign nations and pursuing subversive agendas in the name of "human rights," "tolerance" and "democracy." One target has been Russia, which is home to nearly half a million NGOs, some financed by exiled oligarchs to carry out destabilization of the Kremlin. Whole nations, like Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia and Serbia have had their governments overthrown because of NGO influenced "color revolutions." Belorussia and Myanmar had close calls. The color revolutions were clearly co-ordinated: Ukraine was Orange, Kyrgyzstan Tulip, Georgia Rose, Myanmar Saffron. All of them were engineered.
The threat of violence actually instigated by NGOs resulted in the shameful banning of the Brussels 9/11 protest, which saw police physically attack democratically elected officials and others concerned about the Third World immigration crisis in front of the European Parliament.
Despite their disconnect from the democratic will of local people, "First World" NGO imperialism is often successful thanks to massive financial aid for special interests with deep pockets. One of the main sponsors of NGO imperialism is Hungarian Jewish oligarch George Soros, "the man who broke the Bank of England." And the US government is not the only foreign power chiming in and joining the Burmese pile-on. The latest news has India, long a Burmese ally, claiming that Yangon "ignored" New Delhi's (doubtless top notch) meteorological warnings. Why? Because Myanmar is so "closed"! In doing this, the Indians don't only get to show how sophisticated they think they are, but they simultaeously get in a shot at their main regional rival China, which Yangon has recently drawn closer to.
Of course, "UN sanction" has been used to justify numerous "interventions" and invasions (remember Kosovo, 1999?), and the pretext of "democracy" has served as an excuse for what many call "human rights imperialism": classic colonial actions carried out under a new, "politically correct" cover.
We're sure (wink, wink) that the Yangon "junta" is just being paranoid. The "international community" would NEVER capitalize on this national tragedy to lay down a base and either create or exacerbate resistance to the Yangon regime. The same goal of overthrow of the Myanmar government which they have pursued for years will suddenly be suspended. George W. Bush, who invaded two sovereign nations on similar "emergency" grounds, signed off on the awarding of the Congressional Gold Medal to Aung San Suu Kyi, lovingly called a "democracy icon" by the AP, days after the cyclone, a political play by Washington at the very height of the disaster. The Yangon government sees Aung San Suu Kyi as a tool of foreign interests, and the Bush move was guaranteed to bolster Yangon's fears about foreign intervention. But maybe the despots of Rangoon are merely being unfashionable and mean.
In case anyone missed it, Shawn W. Crispin in the Asia Times had the decency to lay off the obfuscation in favor of at least being honest: "A unilateral - and potentially United Nations-approved - US military intervention in the name of humanitarianism could easily turn the tide against the impoverished country's unpopular military leaders, and simultaneously rehabilitate the legacy of lame-duck US President George W. Bush's controversial pre-emptive military policies....Without a perceived strong UN-led response to the natural disaster, hard new questions will fast arise about the UN's own relevance and ability to manage global calamities...Because of the UN's own limited powers of projection, such a response would require US military management and assets. US officials appear to be building at least a rhetorical case for a humanitarian intervention. While offering relief and aid with one hand, top US officials have with the other publicly slapped at the Myanmar government's lame response to the disaster."
Similarly, Bernard Kouchner, France's minister of Foreign and European Affairs, who bases his whole political persona on his having founded the NGO group Doctors Without Borders, has demanded "the West" drop all pretence and just invade Myanmar.
Because of their past and present behavior in exploiting human suffering in the interests of their own agendas, globalists, governmental or otherwise, are largely to blame for the level of suffering which the people of Myanmar have experienced and will continue to undergo. The government is unwilling to accept aid because of the past (and probably present) actions of NGOs, in the name of helping the victims of tragedy.