Last year's China earthquake struck barely a week after Cyclone Nargis hammered Myanmar. Both disasters caused a horrifying loss of life, yet the two governments' responses could hardly have been more different.
China sent in more than 100,000 troops and dozens of aircraft to rescue survivors and deliver emergency aid. It was quick to accept international assistance - the first time it has done so for a major disaster - and visas arrived fast for aid workers.
Myanmar, by contrast, blocked foreign help for three weeks after the cyclone, prompting international condemnation of the country's military junta.
Aid workers said there were gaps in China's response to the May 12 quake, which left 80,000 dead and an estimated 5 million homeless, but they were impressed by the speed and scale of its operation.
"I don't think it's really comparable to any other country in the world," said one. "I'm not even sure if a Western country would have that degree of mobilisation."
Normally after a disaster, U.N. agencies and international aid groups pour in and co-ordinate with the government to provide food, shelter and medical care. But in China it was the People's Liberation Army who immediately undertook the life-saving work, leaving a fairly peripheral role for international players.
"(In a normal emergency) you would be filling in for government interventions that were not there, whereas in China they were there quite comprehensively," said Richard Casagrande, programme manager for Save the Children's quake response.
He added that the timing of the quake also kept international non governmental organisations (NGOs) from playing a bigger role Â? if only because their priorities lay 1,800 km to the south.
"It came hot on the heals of the Myanmar cyclone, so really the two were competing and it was fairly clear where the greatest needs were, and that was Myanmar."
FILLING THE GAPS
Prone to earthquakes and massive floods, China has decades of experience in dealing with emergencies. Aid workers say it also has the kind of centralised government that makes it relatively easy to launch rapid interventions on a massive scale.
And increasingly, China has sufficient coffers to pour billions of dollars worth of relief effort into a disaster zone.
On a trip to China ahead of this week's anniversary, U.N. emergencies chief John Holmes said he'd now like to see the government play a bigger role in international disaster relief operations abroad.
All this begs the question: Did China need international help at all after the quake? According to the head of the United Nations' China quake response, Yin Yin Nwe, the answer is yes.
"You must realise that the devastation was so complete and the local governments were so overwhelmed that in many areas there was plenty of scope for making a difference Â? especially in some of the more remote and mountainous areas where the media don't get," she said.
U.N. and international agencies supplied tents, water and toilets, restocked schools and provided medical care and psychosocial support. They also helped with child protection Â? a key task after a quake that left many children orphaned and others separated from their parents.
It wasn't always plain sailing. Although the government coordinates with the United Nations, foreign NGOs working in China tend to be left to their own devices. In Sichuan as elsewhere, their success is dependent on building strong relationships with local partners and local governments Â? all of which takes time.
"We were just left to get on with our own thing because the local authorities were stretched for time and reasonably overwhelmed, so dealing with NGOs they didn't have a great deal of familiarity with was not a priority," Save the Children's Casagrande said.
OPENNESS
Given China's traditional wariness of the outside world, it may come as a surprise that international NGOs have in fact been working there for over two decades.
But that doesn't mean China can't be a tricky country to work in. Aid groups said they would have problems if they promoted grassroots movements or engaged in advocacy work.
And they declined to comment on anything controversial such as the scandal over why so many school buildings crumbled in the quake, killing thousands of children.
But aid workers said they had been surprised by the lack of restrictions during the relief effort. And U.N. emergencies chief Holmes made a point of thanking China for its openness - not a word usually associated with what is still a relatively totalitarian state.
Some aid workers speculated that this openness could have been because China wanted to present a positive image ahead of the Olympic Games it was hosting in the summer of 2008 and that it was keen to avoid the sort of criticism being heaped on Myanmar.
Christoph Gorder, vice-president of emergency response for medical aid agency AmeriCares, drew a stark contrast with military-ruled Myanmar, where access to the cyclone-hit area was tightly restricted.
"I've never worked on a natural disaster where there have been so many government hurdles and so much government resistance to international aid," he said.
"China was very open ... I think they were a little bit sensitive about foreigners being in some areas so we were always accompanied by our counterparts but it was our medical counterparts, not some secret police."
FUNDING
Aid workers say the quake has opened the doors for them to expand their work in China and has raised the public's understanding of what they do.
"Without a doubt, nationally, things continue to open up," Casagrande said. "Sichuan is not an area that's been exposed to NGOs so most were starting from ground zero after the earthquake and I think they now understand better what we can offer."
Yin Yin Nwe, who is also head of the U.N. children's fund (UNICEF) in China, likewise expected cooperation to improve. "This is the first national disaster where China has asked for help. I think the next time it will be smoother ... Understanding on both sides will have increased."
With China increasingly perceived as a wealthy nation, aid agencies say Western governments and other institutional donors are starting to phase out funding of development aid. At the same time, multinational corporations and philanthropists are increasing donations to China.
Yin Yin Nwe said she understood why traditional donors were pulling out but warned it was mistake to label China a developed country. Some parts Â? particularly in the West - are on a par with sub-Saharan Africa, she said.
"You can't judge China by the glitz in Shanghai and Beijing."
Additional reporting by Thin Lei Win
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
