O informe leva por título "Crimes against humanity in eastern Myanmar". Copio un extracto da súa introducción:

[...] On 2 and 3 May 2008, Cyclone Nargis struck Myanmar, killing tens of thousands of people and affecting over two million more. Despite the devastating consequences of the cyclone, the government of Myanmar proceeded to hold a national referendum regarding a new and flawed constitution on 10 May, and for the areas most affected by the storm on 24 May, with plans for national elections in 2010. Even as hundreds of thousands of its people struggled for basic shelter, food and health care, the government prioritized acceptance of a new constitution that undermines respect for human rights and entrenches military rule and impunity.

Nearly two years prior to these recent crises, however, a military offensive was launched by the Myanmar army, known as the tatmadaw, against the Karen civilians of Kayin (Karen) State and Bago (Pegu) Division. More than 140,000 Karen civilians have been killed, tortured, forcibly displaced, sexually violated, forced to work, or otherwise subjected to widespread and systematic violations of international human rights and humanitarian law since November 2005. These violations amount to crimes against humanity, and the continuing offensive against the Karen civilians now barely registers on the international radar screen.

This report focuses on violations of international human rights and humanitarian law committed in Kayin State and Bago Division between 2005 through 2007. It includes information on violations committed in military operations by the tatmadaw, in northern Kayin State and surrounding areas, and on tatmadaw policy and practices that have targeted civilians and denied individuals their human rights. The tatmadaw has been waging counter-insurgency campaigns against the Karen National Union (KNU) and its armed wing (the Karen National Liberation Army, KNLA) for nearly 60 years. It is far from clear, however, that the current offensive is being fought in the counter-insurgency context at all, as civilians have been the offensive’s primary targets - rather than just collateral damage - while the KNLA has often been overtly avoided by the tatmadaw. [...]

Neste informe (un PDF de 7,11 MB e 418 páxinas) encontraremos ós países onde os exércitos e outros grupos armados usaron a menores de 18 anos:

• Afghanistan
• Bhutan
• Burma (Myanmar)
• Burundi
• Central African Republic
• Chad
• Colombia
• Côte d’Ivoire
• Democratic Republic of the Congo
• India
• Indonesia
• Iran
• Iraq
• Israel / Occupied Palestinian Territory
• Lebanon
• Liberia
• Libya
• Nepal
• Nigeria
• Pakistan
• Peru
• Philippines
• Somalia
• Sri Lanka
• Sudan
• Thailand
• Uganda
• United Kingdom
• Yemen
• Zimbabwe

E tamén encontraremos outros moitos países que recrutan a menores de 18 anos e introducen de diversas formas o militarismo na educación da xuventude.

I recently learned that a Rambo sequel takes place in Burma, with Rambo gunning it out against the military regime there which was razing villages and killing rural civilians.

While I haven't seen the movie, it seems to represent the wrong kind of idea about Myanmar. Although it only presents one person fighting against the regime, it could certainly be extrapolated to imply that more forceful military action by a state power, such as the US, is justified.

I would hope that the War in Iraq would have taught us that military incursions into foreign countries under the pretext of human rights, etc. are not a particularly good idea. This policy has no doubt led to a great deal of resentment against the US and its allies, which is stoking a greater sense of division among the world's citizens and causing people to join camps with certain questionable forces, who are vocal in their opposition to the US.

Hollywood has to keep churning out movies, and no doubt had to find a new "bad guy" which would arouse the moral indignation of its audience, and give them the good feeling that an American is fighting for "what's right" after all, especially after the emotional drama and fatigue of the daily disasters in Iraq. Perhaps the American people are hungry for a story which once again makes them feel that they are on the correct side of the moral calculus in international affairs.

Yet, despite my obvious criticisms of the Burmese regime, a military intervention is simply a bad idea. The potential repercussions in terms of reinforcing the image of the US as a global bully are considerable, at a time when the US should be trying to "behave itself" to let those sentiments, apparently held by many, to simmer down a bit. If the world is a theater and Myanmar is a stage, how would the global audience view such an intervention? And of course, there's no guarantee that the Burmese people would even appreciate such an intervention- being subjected to a war in an already precarious situation is probably not in their best interests. As I noted in my opposition to the war in Iraq, precious little attention was paid to the opinions of the Iraqi people about whether they supported an invasion of Iraq on the grounds of a series of charges against Saddam Hussein's regime.

Given how overstretched the US military is in its involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, I would have thought that an invasion of Burma would be unthinkable. So I was surprised to find an article by Shawn Crispin of the Asia Times, entitled "The Case for Invading Myanmar". Crispin writes that :

"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. "

I just hope that no one listens to this guy... Let's hope that good sense prevails and another potentially disastrous intervention is avoided.

(See Shawn Crispin's article at: The Case for Invading Myanmar- Asia Times Online )

Despite a massive cyclone disaster which reputedly has so far left 77,000 people dead, the military junta in Burma/Myanmar went ahead with its referendum on a new constitution on May 10th.

Just days after the disaster which caught international headlines, the junta declined to delay the referendum, despite calls by the opposition NLD to do so.

It would seem that such a national disaster as this would serve as a major distraction from the business of deciding on a new constitution, but this logic seems to have eluded the military masters of Burma.

It suggests, again, that the junta was not really serious about having a well thought out debate and decision making process on the new constitution. Seemingly a delay would have made a lot more sense, giving people a chance to really consider the weighty decision without being distracted by the concerns of the cyclone disaster.