What a priceless picture! I can't get over the depth of irony that hangs in air.
At the height of repression by the Burmese military junta and throughout the period that Aung San Suu Kyi was subject to house arrest, the Singapore government, together with ASEAN, has taken a concilliatory stance towards the Burmese government. The officially stated position has always been that engagement with the regime would be more likely to bear fruit and that isolation through boycotts and trade embargoes would not be of any real benefit to the Burmese people.
Whilst one can argue endlessly about the merits of such a foreign policy approach, it is nevertheless true that Singapore maintain trade links with the Burmese government. Our government has never denied trading with Burma. But, there have been other allegations that have been made in the past pertaining to the export of arms from Singapore to Burma and the rather controversial allegation that we turn a blind eye to the drug related activities of members of the military junta. (The allegation about the drug related activities of the military junta has been circulating on the internet. But, the sources are not easily verifiable and it is the same few sites that have repeated the allegation. So, I will leave it at that - mere allegations.)
Whatever may be the extent of the trade and investment between the 2 countries, it is an openly stated position of the Singapore government (specifically during the period that George Yeo was the Foreign Minister) that engagement with the military junta is necessary.
Given the context of the Singapore-Myanmar relationship, I couldn't help but note the irony of the above picture that BG George Yeo shared on his facebook page. It would be fascinating to find out what went through their minds.
6 comments:
https://www.facebook.com/?ref=tn_tnmn#!/georgeyeopage
She looked a tap uneasy being beside him... IMO
So politically speaking, wad do u expect Singapore and Asean to do? Invade Mynmar like the way Americans prepared to do prior to Ms Suu Kyi is released for their resource? There are a lot of underlining things which r not reported in the media.
And on top of that, there r tons of examples out there that nothing good will turn out when other country interfere in the policies of another. Mynmar to a certain extend has managed to solved their own problem and remain free. I rather see them as Mynmar rather than Mynmar aka USA puppet (politically speaking).
Moral arguement sound very nice on paper. One can argue until the cow come home.
So politically speaking, wad do u expect Singapore and Asean to do? Invade Mynmar like the way Americans prepared to do prior to Ms Suu Kyi is released for their resource? There are a lot of underlining things which r not reported in the media.
And on top of that, there r tons of examples out there that nothing good will turn out when other country interfere in the policies of another. Mynmar to a certain extend has managed to solved their own problem and remain free. I rather see them as Mynmar rather than Mynmar aka USA puppet (politically speaking).
Moral arguement sound very nice on paper. One can argue until the cow come home.
compare the resilience of Ms Suu Kyi and that of Georgie Yeo...one has been under house arrest for 2 decades and yet to give up the fight for her beliefs while the other completely capitulate after losing just one election, not to mention all the odds grossly in his favour.
surely the Burmese military junta has to be aware of this by now...they have been taking advice from wimps churned out by LKY's system....LOL
ps: whatever their differences, it is reasonable to say the military junta respects Ms Suu Kyi...LOL
I don't think the Americans were preparing to invade Myanmar. They were merely placing the political squeeze on the military junta with asset freezing and sanctions. To some extent sanctions have worked. Coordinated international sanctions have worked in the past in countries like South Africa as well.
What concerned me most about our trade links was the sale of weapons to Myanmar (which was not denied in a Parliamentary answer provided in 2007 and was merely referred to as being 'not substantial').
Post a Comment