Burmese blood is the U.N.'s shame

HU SHAOJIANG

CAMBRIDGE, Nov. 5

September's street demonstrations in Burma were the country's largest public demonstrations in 20 years. Unlike previous actions, the main protestors were the monks and nuns who are supposed to live quietly in monasteries. Their peaceful protests lasted more than a week, but finally ended in brutal suppression by the Burmese military government, as expected.

Although the government blocked communications between Burma and the outside world, and reported only a small number of civilian casualties, we could see from photos and videotapes sent overseas or posted online that hundreds of demonstrators disappeared. Many of them have most likely been killed.

Peaceful protest is the people's right. In today's world there are only a few totalitarian countries that ban their people from this means of political expression. Burma is among these countries; so is its neighbor, China.

Actually it is the totalitarian Chinese government that is supporting its counterpart in Burma. In fact, back in January, several democratic countries submitted a proposal that the United Nations pressure the military government in Burma to stop political repression. However, China and Russia, as permanent members of the Security Council, vetoed the proposal.

On the eve of the crackdown against monks and civilians in September, a number of countries had proposed a U.N. resolution calling for restraint in Burma, to prevent a repeat of the brutal suppression that occurred in Burma 19 years ago. But again China's opposition put the proposal on the shelf. With the support of big brother China, the Burmese military leaders were especially violent in suppressing the protests.

The United Nations accomplished nothing toward protecting the legal rights of Burma's citizens, once again revealing its incapability in dealing with major international affairs. As a matter of fact, since the United Nations was founded it has almost never played a decisive role in major international issues.

The only exception was in the early 1950s when the United Nations discussed whether or not to fight against the North Korean regime led by Kim Il Sung, which had invaded South Korea. Because the former Soviet Union made a wrong decision and did not attend the meeting, the United Nations had a good opportunity to exercise justice.

During the Cold War period, there was no understanding and no forgiveness among the superpowers. The United Nations didn't have the chance to work even in a superficial function as a rubber stamp. This situation hasn't really improved substantially even now that the Cold War is over.

In the 1980s, the Chinese government openly used tanks and guns to attack peaceful protesters, who held no weapons at all. The United Nations only watched and did nothing. The United Nations again did nothing when the Serbian army massacred an entire race of people in Kosovo in the 1990s. It did nothing during the racial massacres in Rwanda and Sudan. The United Nations just looked on with folded arms in innumerable situations.

The major reason why the United Nations could not take effective action in human crises caused by totalitarian regimes is that among the permanent members of the Security Council there are nations allied with the totalitarian regimes, and they have veto power. Moreover, with the support and indulgence of their totalitarian big brother, some rogue nations have tried to create chaos within the United Nations. As a result, the United Nations has become a place where justice is not supported, while totalitarianism is protected.

Take Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe's leadership, for example. After nearly 30 years of his rule, the country has changed from the richest in Africa to a poor country where people lead miserable lives under brutal suppression. Nevertheless, this country was allowed to sit on the former U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which sullied human rights under the name of the United Nations.

Even more ridiculous is that the United Nations is financially dependent on membership fees paid by democratic countries. The current situation at the United Nations is that democratic countries pay to allow totalitarian regimes to wreak havoc on the international stage.

In fact, "equality among countries" is not equivalent to "equality among governments." If we let totalitarian governments enjoy the same rights as democratic ones that are elected by their citizens' free choice, it is humiliating to people who are deprived of their rights under totalitarian governments.

In my opinion, if a country violently suppresses its people's right to participate in political affairs, that country's right to speak and participate in international affairs should be taken away. Unless this problem is solved, the United Nations cannot effectively implement justice in key international affairs.

--

(Hu Shaojiang is director of the China Research Center at the University of Cambridge in Britain. He is also an active commentator in overseas media on China affairs. This article is edited and translated from the Chinese by UPI Asia Online; the original can be found at www.ncn.org ©Copyright Hu Shaojiang.)

http://www.upiasiaonline.com/politics/2007/11/05/commentary_burmese_blood_is_the_uns_shame/