Isolation or engagement; What's next for the people of Myanmar?
Written by: Ashley Clements
Reuters and AlertNet are not responsible for the content of this article or for any external internet sites. The views expressed are the author's alone.

Children turn out for a World Vision food distribution in a cyclone-hit village.
Ashley Clements
Ashley Clements
Visiting the cyclone-devastated Irrawaddy Delta of Myanmar is like stepping back in time. Millions of people live in simple bamboo huts above an endless maze of canals which carve up fertile plains. The Delta's residents continue to earn a living from the staples of fishing and rice production, as they have done for hundreds if not thousands of years. This flat and water-sodden region is inaccessible at the best of times - a two day trip featuring boats, cars, and motorbikes is required to reach some parts. These days, some of us are lucky enough to cut out some of the journey by hopping on a UN helicopter, but it still remains a remote home for much of the Delta's 6 million residents. The feeling of isolation I get when I visit the Delta is due not to its physical seclusion, but rather to political factors which have kept it cut off from the outside world for decades. Accusations of political and human rights abuses have led to a long list of sanctions and the adoption of isolationist policies towards Myanmar. This has left much of the country disconnected from the outside world, in particular the already remote Irrawaddy Delta, where some villages still have never seen foreigners. But all that changed when Cyclone Nargis struck the country on May 2 this year. Over 800,000 homes were destroyed, and 140,000 people left dead or missing. Nearly two and half million people were severely affected by the disaster, prompting a vast humanitarian relief effort by the international community. Now, six months later, the immense media attention and the funding that was so forth coming in the early days of the crisis, has all but dried up. The United Nations Flash Appeal of $486 million is barely more than half-funded. Once again, the world seems to have returned to its default position of isolating the country, regardless of its acute humanitarian needs. If the past six months has shown us anything, it is that aid does work here and does reach the people who need it most. For half a year, aid agencies like World Vision have been delivering effective and accountable aid to those affected by Nargis, making a real difference to the lives of millions. Indeed, World Vision has been present in the country for 40 years, working to transform the lives of people in Myanmar. Whilst lobby groups and activists continue to petition for a reversion to the isolationist policies that they hope will bring about regime change in this country, it is hard for those of us who have seen the impact that aid can have here to sit back and accept a return to the former status quo. Myanmar used to be known as the 'rice bowl of Asia'. Empty fields need to shed their salt water skin before new crops can be harvested; homes need to be rebuilt before parents can offer their children a sense of security; and children need the opportunity to go back to school before communities can feel whole again. If there is a silver lining to the devastation of Cyclone Nargis, it is that the international community has been shown what it can accomplish if it works together, partnering with willing government entities, to bring about meaningful and lasting change for the people of Myanmar. And although the emergency phase of the operation is over, the needs across the Irrawaddy Delta and much of the rest of the country are still immense - many still struggle to access safe drinking water, secure the next harvest, and even pay for their children to attend school. Ongoing aid can and should be used to continue to make a difference to the lives of the people of this country. But the question facing us now is whether aid will be constrained now that the world is no longer watching quite so closely, or will governments learn from the successes of the past six months and push for even greater change over the years ahead?
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
We welcome argument but AlertNet will not publish comments that are racist, abusive or libellous.
2 responses to “Isolation or engagement; What's next for the people of Myanmar?”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content in this article, including by framing or by similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.





04 Nov 2008 17:20:56 GMT
This article is very thoughful. But the author did not mention about corruption of the SPDC regime. There are wide spread reports of siphoning off aid money. While the UN downplays this report, the SPDC converts 20 to 25% of aid $$$ to the generals bank accounts. The lower members of the SPDC, from colonels to the individual private, had horded supplies, such as, high quality mosquito nettings, water sanitation equipments, and nutritious food supplies for their personal use or for reselling. There is no transparency in the SPDC ruled BURMA (not MYANMAR!!!Myanmar is the illegal name given by Gen. Than Shwe)
Only Regime change will save the Burmese people from isolation, poverty, and starvation.06 Nov 2008 09:28:28 GMT
This is sensible talk from the antisanction action faction. Linked at http://him.civiblog.org/blog/_archives/2008/11/5/3962813.html