THE 7th IISS ASIAN SECURITY SUMMIT
SHANGRI-LA DIALOGUE
Singapore
Sunday 1 June 2007
RESTORING PEACE IN COMPLEX EMERGENCIES
Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib bin Tun Hj Abd Razak, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Defence, Malaysia
As delivered - provisional transcript
Thank you, John. Ministers, Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen. I am not sure whether I will have anything new or a new initiative, as John alluded to, but I will try to make my presentation as interesting as I can. First of all, my sincere thanks to IISS for inviting me to speak at this plenary session. I have always enjoyed sharing my thoughts at this dialogue. I would like to join the earlier speakers in extending Malaysia’s deepest sympathy to Myanmar and the People’s Republic of China in these very trying times. Both of these countries deserve all the support and assistance, so that lives in these affected areas can return to normalcy. As for Myanmar, ASEAN’s challenge is to ensure that it can act expeditiously to prevent further loss of lives.
I would like to begin by briefly dwelling on what a complex emergency is so that we can keep our discussion more focused. The conventional definition of ‘complex emergency’ refers to a situation where there is a total considerable breakdown of authority that leads to a disruption of political, economic and social systems. The primary or root cause of the situation is violence or conflicts, be they internal or external. The situation, in most cases, requires regional or international response that goes beyond the mandate or capacity of any single agency or nation.
The complexity lies in the outcome where citizens are either losing their lives or are being displaced and unable to sustain their livelihood due to high levels of violence. In short, therefore, a complex emergency is where politics and violence come together to create consequences that affect the sanctity of human life and dignity in ways that affronts our notion of humanity.
Such complex emergencies have occurred. In recent times in Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Somalia, Iraq and Timor Leste, to name a few. According to the UN High Commissioner for refugees, the number of refugees at the end of 2006 stood at 9.9 million, the highest in four years. The developing world hosted 7.1 million refugees, which is 72% of the global refugee population.
While I am not challenging the conventional approach of what a complex emergency is, I am of the view that it should be seen in a wider context to include situations where a state is badly affected by natural disasters. I mean a scale of magnitude where the disaster is such that it goes beyond the capacity or capability of that particular nation to manage it. The humanitarian catastrophe unfolded by such disasters – large-scale death, and lethal mix of starvation and poverty – has the direct effect of causing illness, more deaths, displacement of population, disruption of food production, and destruction of infrastructure no less severe than a conflict situation. Certainly they deserve our collective attention and action.
Obviously the December 2004 Boxing Day tsunami and its impact comes to our mind. Of course there was a recent example in this regard in Myanmar where the Irrawaddy Delta, the food bowl of the country, has been devastated by a major cyclone. This brings me to a proposal that I put forward at this forum in 2006, when I spoke about constructing a regional security community. In view of the growing frequency and severity of natural disasters, I then raised the idea of setting up a regional-based humanitarian relief coordination centre. A centre to which we could devote a set of forces made of civilian and military personnel who could conduct rapid assessment of needs, and to coordinate regional efforts in response to calamities speedily and effectively.
It is two years now since I raised the idea. I am glad there have been some positive developments since then. Efforts have been stepped up to implement the ASEAN agreement on disaster management and emergency response, to respond to disaster emergencies through concerted efforts at all levels. Pursuant to the agreement, a mechanism in the form of an interim ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management has been set up in Jakarta, Indonesia. The centre, I believe, will be fully operational by the end of this year. It will facilitate cooperation and coordination among relevant states and relevant UN and international organisations. The agreement also provides the creation of stand-by arrangements that have paved the way for active deliberations of the formulation of standard operating procedures. Even at the ASEAN regional forum level, efforts are being taken to enhance the capacity-building of member states, as well as to provide collective response to calamities.
In the midst of all these positive developments, it is rather unfortunate that we have had to witness a member of our ASEAN family, Myanmar, struck by a cyclone three weeks ago. The humanitarian catastrophe unfolded in the aftermath of the disaster. More than 100,000 people lost their lives; thousands of residential and public buildings were destroyed or severely damaged; transport and communication infrastructures collapsed; many lost their livelihoods and many more are likely to do so. The enormity of the disaster deserves nothing less than a massive international assistance in terms of stabilisation, rehabilitation and reconstruction.
However, there are obstacles that impede such international assistance. While we sympathise with the situation in Myanmar, we respect its sovereignty and resort to ASEAN initiatives to deliver humanitarian aid and assistance. Malaysia welcomes Myanmar’s trust and confidence in ASEAN’s role in coordinating the international response. ASEAN has neither been a destabilising force in the region, nor interfered in internal affairs in its member countries.
I believe the establishment of the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management, although interim in nature, in some ways is a test case as to how best it can coordinate regional response to Myanmar. In this regard, I am encouraged by the leadership role undertaken by ASEAN. It has established an ASEAN-led coordinating mechanism to facilitate the effective distribution and utilisation of assistance from the international community, established a task force under the ASEAN Secretary General to work with the UN and the Government of Myanmar to realise the ASEAN-led mechanism.
Ladies and gentlemen, it is widely argued that traditional relief mechanisms that incorporate the government business and volunteer organisations that for years have been adequate to meet the need for relief work were found to be inefficient, ineffective or both when dealing with crises involving an entire nation. Challenges of this magnitude require a more comprehensive and dynamic approach. In this context, let me offer some suggestions to develop the capacity building of the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance.
Firstly, it has to be recognised that the military is a critical component in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. Only the military has the capability and experience to handle such crisis situations. Although there are diverging views with regards to military involvement I believe there is a wider consensus among the ASEAN countries that the armed forces indeed have a key role in this area.
Secondly, the management of the centre should be such that it can provide the leadership for regional response. It is the glue that binds the multiple requirements with diverse contributors and response efforts. It should be capable of developing coordinating mechanisms based on a comprehensive assessment of the crisis, and identifying the participants’ responsibilities and priorities.
Thirdly, in view of the involvement of multiple agencies, close cooperation are required among those involved in order to achieve unity of efforts, reduce delays, and eliminate redundancy, as well as the risk of inappropriate use of funds and resources. This includes the need for effective civil military coordination. Equally important, it is the need to overcome inter-agency turf battles which sometimes impeded the smooth flow of operations.
Last but not least: information-sharing. Information is only as valuable as the information shared. Quality and timeliness of the sharing of well-formulated data can be crucial for the success of the complex emergency.
Ladies and gentlemen, I am of the view that such efforts should not be undertaken on the basis of a unilateral action. At the same time, it is of utmost importance to respect the sovereignty of the affected state to dispel any fear of interference in internal affairs of that particular state. Therefore, upon restoring security, there should be a graceful exit by the countries involved in the process. Peace building after a complex emergency must be based on trust and transparency. The mediator should not dictate terms and conditions in cases where there is a need for parties to negotiate settlements. Indeed, it is important to create a conducive environment for them to negotiate to ensure lasting peace.
Ladies and gentlemen, I hope that my brief presentation this morning has given some input to our discussion, with respect to how we handle complex emergencies to include situations of massive disasters warranting large scale humanitarian assistance and relief efforts. I look forward to discussing with you and to listen to some of your views. Thank you.