Cyclone Nargis ripped through Myanmar, leaving 22,500 dead and a million homeless. But there may be another casualty. The military junta is right in worrying that its authoritarian control may end. It has been forced to request international aid, even though it fears more pro-democracy demonstrations. Is there a link between a natural disaster and a regime change? Do authoritarian regimes mismanage disasters?

Amartya Sen’s study stated that famines are less likely to occur in democracies because of a free press that disseminates information and fixes accountability. Authoritarian systems with press censorship are more likely to experience recurring famines. In Myanmar, despite early warnings from India, the military junta telecast limited warnings that failed to reach the danger zone with little or no access to TV.

As geographers Pelling and Dill point out, socio-political and cultural dynamics put into motion at the time of catastrophic “natural” disasters create the conditions for potential political change: “A state’s incapacity to respond adequately to a disaster can create a temporary power vacuum... This generates (albeit temporarily) a window of opportunity for novel socio-political action...” For instance, Mexico and Nicaragua saw changes in their political regimes after the mismanagement of natural disasters.

So the junta is right to be worried about the cyclone’s impact. Demonstrations led by Buddhist monks last year forced the regime to slowly move down the path to democratisation. The junta is trying to democratise, keeping the military the puppet master. The draft constitution is geared to protect military dominance; the constitution reserves several cabinet seats for the military and one-quarter of the seats in both houses of parliament. It also keeps out the main pro-democracy figure Aung San Suu Kyi through a clause.

... contd.