The remarks in question come following the publication of an article in the WHO's monthly Bulletin for September which refers to a WHO-led relief effort in Burma after the cyclone of May 2nd and 3rd as a "Groundbreaking approach to disaster relief."

Specifically, the approach in question centers on the work of Rudi Coninx of the WHO and the "cluster" strategy. According to the article, the aforementioned tactic, pioneered by Coninx in Burma, calls on "a group of relevant UN agencies and others to coordinate specific areas in an emergency response."

A chief benefit of pursuing such a course of action is said to be enhanced accountability – a lesson driven home in the wake of the tsunami of December 2004.

Yet, Coninx is quoted in the Bangkok Post today as saying that even prior to the coordination of relief efforts with the international community, the Burmese regime performed admirably it its emergency response.

"In the first week, the Ministry of Health had already sent around 50 doctors from Rangoon General Hospital…Within the first week they had all the staff necessary... I thought that worked quite well," Coninx explained.

However, much of the acclaim for both the government's early response and the later "cluster" approach appears to be relative, as alluded to by statements from within the WHO establishment itself.

Governmental responses were at least partly determined to be a success in consideration of the miniscule amount of resources available for rapid response as a result of the junta only spending 1.4 percent of its gross domestic product on health resources – that, according to Coninx himself in the Post.

Further, Sarah Cumberland, writing for the Bulletin, elaborates: "The unique political situation and the lack of existing data meant that donors demanded even more informa­tion and accountability than usual, resulting in what has been considered the most comprehensive survey ever conducted after a disaster."

Cumberland proceeds to reference Dr. Richard Garfield, whose comments again focus on the relative nature of the situation inside Burma. "[S]urveys held after previous disasters have mainly mea­sured aid provided. How many people received goods? How many villages were visited? For the first time, Garfield says, this survey asked questions to compare conditions before and after the cyclone. What kind of sanitation was in use? How far did people have to travel to seek health care? What kind of health problems did they have?"

As far as the "cluster" relief approach for the coordination of humanitarian aid, WHO acknowledges that the success of such an approach was not possible until three weeks after the disaster, following the intervention of the ASEAN Secretary General.

According to the monthly periodical and Dr. Nihal Singh from the WHO office in Burma, a primary impediment to the implementation of the "cluster" approach in the first weeks following the cyclone was "perhaps because the Ministry of Health was not clear on the "concept" of the health cluster and did not feel comfortable working directly with the UN agencies and NGOs."

However, the positive nature of the WHO assessments are contradicted by numerous estimates from persons and organizations active on the ground in Burma in the days, weeks and months following the storm, which resulted in an estimated 138,000 either dead or missing.

The argument of an effective rapid response on the part of the government is met which assertions from groups such as Medical Emergency Relief International (MERLIN), who described the scene a week after Nargis as: "Seven days on and the situation is desperate." MERLIN is also a founding member of the WHO's "cluster" network.

And the United Nations as well, for its part, estimated that nearly six weeks after the killer storm one million survivors in need of aid had still yet to be reached – a figure also quoted by Human Rights Watch.

As far as the present atmosphere on the ground and its conduciveness to the relief activities of a broad-based international effort, Global Hope Network International (GHNI) reaches a strikingly different conclusion to that of the WHO.

In a statement released today, GHNI describes Burma's delta region as follows: "Most of the hardest hit places of the Ayeyarwaddy delta still refuse entry to foreigners. It is a dangerous place to work. Our teams of national workers continue to risk their freedom and lives by helping the desperately suffering. People are perpetually hungry and are not getting enough food to remain healthy."

"Months after cyclone Nargis devastated Myanmar, the situation remains grim and dangerous," adds GHNI.

Estimates as to the length of time needed for relief and rehabilitation efforts resulting from damage caused by Cyclone Nargis typically range from three to five years, with the WHO determining that U.S. $2 billion alone is needed just to rebuild health facilities.