US Hypocrisy

The US today have claimed that Burma is being criminally neglectful in its treatment of survivors of Cyclone Nargis.(Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/02/burma.cyclonenargis)

While the Burmese Government and Junta is recognised by this blog to be unjust, authoritarian and power-hungry to the extreme detriment of its peoples, what I seek to question is what do the US want from Burma? For the Dubya Government to claim Burma, all of a sudden, to be criminal in not letting in their aid-teams smacks of hypocrisy and hidden agendas to me. Firstly, what gall for these people to place judgement on other nations, who, rightly or wrongly, are completely within their soveriegn right to treat those within its borders as it pleases. I don't think Bush would be best pleased if, under the rhetorical banner of the 'international responsibility to protect', other nations had their naval fleets in the Atlantic and Pacific, waiting, pressuring, to give aid to the hispanic and afro-carribean minorities that are criminally neglected and actively discriminated against by Bush's cronies, the laws they push through and the police who enact these laws. Secondly, why is Burma criminal now? Because the focus of their accusations is not simply the Burmese goverment's hampering of the international aid-effort but actual name-calling - they have been accused of 'seizing' the aid, of aiding 'genocide' in not letting the US navy and their supplies in - to the point where the US along with France told their aid agencies to go into Burma anyway, without permission. This is basically intervention in the disguise of aid. John Pilger nailed my concerns in an article for the Guardian on Saturday, (Cowardice of Silence P. 32) when he drew attention to the fact that no western governments or their representatives have used this time as a platform to draw attention to the plight of Aung San Suu, who was democratically elected the leader of Burma in 1990, and then promptly put under house arrest by the Burmese Junta. She is still there. Why didn't Ban Ki-moon (UN Secretary General) mention this during his tour of Burma? It couldn't be because the UN is in the pockets of governments who would rather disparage and belittle the Burmese Government from afar with cowardly name-calling, with no intention for a peaceful resolution or mediation? All the while with their navy off the shore, ostensibly there to provide aid but who would let another's naval fleet invade (sorry, distribute aid) your land when those owning the fleet base their international relations on ideas of 'regime change', an 'axis of evil', and militarily intervene in under the flimsiest of humanitarian pretexts (Saddam's weapons of mass destruction anyone? The Taliban and Afghanistan? The Balkans?), and then lie about it forever afterwards. Who would do this? Why aren't the US and British Government's criminally neglectful?!

Gah. It gets me it really does.

x J