Ian Buruma sets up a tidy, provocative contrast between western and eastern values, in light of the Cyclone Nargis debacle in Myanmar and the Sichuan earthquake in PRC. And then, he tosses in the towel. "Whatever the cause, the consequences remain deplorable." That has to be the worst conclusion ever! But, the setup was promising.

Given the West’s record of horrendous warfare and often brutal imperialism, this seems unlikely. Moreover, the way ordinary Chinese rallied to help victims of the earthquake in Sichuan has been quite remarkable, as have been the spontaneous efforts of people in Burma to assist their fellow citizens, even as the military did very little. Buddhism stresses compassion and mercy as much as Christianity does. Indifference to suffering is not inherent to any Asian culture.

(…)

Nevertheless, there may be cultural differences in understanding how compassion should be applied. The ideal of universal equality and rights does owe something to the history of Western civilization, from Socrates’ “natural justice” to Christianity and France’s Declaration of the Rights of Man. Western peoples have not always lived up to their universalist ideals, but they have in modern times built institutions designed to implement them, in Europe and beyond. There is, so far, no Asia-wide institution to protect the human rights of Asians, let alone mankind.

(…)

In many Asian countries, favors invariably create obligations, which is perhaps why people are sometimes disinclined to interfere in the problems of others. You are obliged to take care of your family, your friends, or even your fellow countrymen. But the idea of universal charity is too abstract, and smacks of the kind of unwelcome interference that Western imperialists – and the Christian missionaries who followed them – practiced in the East for too long.

Yes, interventionism is the flipside of gunboat diplomacy. Western values stress a universalist theme; Confucianism stresses, among all else, reciprocity and obligations, correct practice, scholarship, and prestige—found in Jaroslav Pelikan's "Introduction" to The Analects. Buruma mentions Lee Kuan Yew's Singaporean "Asian" fusion and Amartya Sen's Indian fusion briefly, playing the first off the other again, like the battle of modern proxies.

There are three fallacies to avoid, if anyone could get beyond Buruma's impasse. There's the fallacy of the single perspective, in which a universal synthesis of the real contrasts is presupposed, if only someone could discern it. There's the fallacy of misguided comparisons, in which people judge the other by their own standards. Finally, there is the fallacy of good principles, in which pundits congratulate themselves for devising abstractions and useless proposals, like humanitarian intervention. The way to fuse western and eastern values is a work-in-progress that will combine Confucian and democratic elements (David L. Hall and Roger T. Ames, Democracy of the Dead: Dewey, Confucius, and the Hope for Democracy in China, 1999).

Like individuals and family, states seek alliances, to compensate for weakness or strength. Alliances create obligations, whether to upwards or downwards. The bonds of alliance become more important than the alliance itself, or the circumstances leading to it. Tradition is created. To accept or give aid is not a simple act.  A relationship between weak and strong is created, and requires diplomatic solemnity. The relationship is also permanent.

There's a good reason Myanmar didn't accept aid: the US, EU, and the UN are not interested in taking responsibility for Myanmar. It's debatable whether western states are powerful enough to protect Myanmar. Definitely, ASEAN is too weak to do so. So, the physical damage already done, why compound injury with diplomatic insult? It's simply inhuman to offer a relationship with states unwilling to act responsibly diplomatically.

It comes back to power. Humanitarian intervention is an airy abstraction not for philosophical or cultural reasons. Rather, it's an empty gesture that advertises how impotent western states really are. It's bluff and bluster, and insulting.  It's now a very inhuman era when no state can act responsibly, and all suffer. Unless, like japan, that is, states are strong enough to cope alone.