Report from The Irrawaddy:
International gatherings like the ones held on the Thai resort island of Phuket last week are seldom much more than talk shops. The ministers who attended the Asean Ministerial Meeting (AMM) and the Asean Regional Forum (ARF) went there to be seen and heard, not to solve any of the region’s problems.
That’s why no one was particularly surprised or disappointed that there were no great breakthroughs in resolving the perennial problems of Burma and North Korea, which, as expected, dominated discussions at the high-level meetings.
As usual, ministers from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) reiterated their call for Burma to release all political prisoners, including Aung San Suu Kyi, and pave the way for national reconciliation through “inclusive” general elections in 2010.
Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda acknowledged, however, that the Burmese regime was unlikely to budge much under pressure. The junta, he said, changes “too slowly and often a little change at a time.”
But this did not prevent his Thai counterpart, Kasit Piromya, from offering to facilitate the process of change. “Asean as well as members of the ARF would like to work with Myanmar [Burma] and are ready to assist Myanmar in its efforts to promote democracy, human rights and well-being among her people,” he said.
In his capacity as chairman of the 16th Asean Regional Forum, Kasit added that the Burmese foreign minister had been asked “to convey this sentiment to the Myanmar leadership. It is hoped that Myanmar will be responsive to the international community’s concerns.”
At least one person—Vitavas Srivihok, the director-general of the Asean-Thailand office of Thailand’s ministry of foreign affairs—seemed to think that Asean’s message would get a receptive hearing in Naypyidaw.
He told reporters, “The first time I saw Myanmar’s reaction, I thought it was very positive…. They fully understand and appreciate the offers of help by Asean colleagues.
Meanwhile, others were asking what Asean might do if Burma does not comply with calls for reform. Although no clear answer to that question emerged, at least one option—throwing Burma out of the regional grouping—was ruled out as a possibility.
“There are not enough grounds to do that,” Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said in response to a comment made by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who suggested that expulsion should be considered if the Burmese regime continues to flout Asean’s rules.
“We have already done what we can under the Asean mechanism,” said Abhisit. “If Burma is expelled it will further isolate the regime, and would that solve the problem?”
Clinton, for her part, seemed prepared to take strong action, although she did not specify what form it might take. When she arrived in Thailand, she immediately made it clear that her government was not taking the latest developments in Burma lightly.
“We know that there are also growing concerns about military cooperation between North Korea and Burma, which we take very seriously. It would be destabilizing for the region,” she said. “It would pose a direct threat to Burma’s neighbors. And it is something, as a treaty ally of Thailand, we are taking very seriously.”
The next day, however, she struck a very different note, holding out the possibility of a fundamental shift in US-Burma relations in exchange for the release of Aung san Suu Kyi.
“If she were released, that would open up opportunities, at least for my country, to expand our relationship with Burma, including investments in Burma. But it is up to the Burmese leadership,” Clinton said.
This was followed by a rare meeting between US and Burmese officials on the sidelines of the ARF. The American delegation again urged the Burmese leadership to review its treatment of Aung San Suu Kyi and also asked Burma to cooperate with UN sanctions on North Korea.
The Burmese said they would respect the UN resolution imposing a strengthened arms embargo on Pyongyang—a wise move that will probably win the regime some support in Washington.
Clinton said she was “gratified by Burma’s statement and those of many other countries announcing an intension to implement the UN resolution.… Burma’s statement is significant because in the past, North Korea has provided Burma with materials now barred by Resolution 1874.”
Despite the Burmese regime’s claims that it is willing to cooperate with the UN, it has often allowed North Korean ships to dock in Rangoon to deliver ammunition and weapons.
——
In April, while speaking in the United States, Singapore’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr George Yeo, said:
“”Unfortunately, ASEAN today looks a little patchy… The last summit that was held in Pattaya was disrupted in a manner which caused us, in ASEAN, great humiliation.” (Channel NewsAsia)
——
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Must look from a different perspective. It is precisely because the West has an interest in Myanmar, Myanmar’s ASEAN membership is therefore a carrot in negotiating ASEAN’s interest with the West. This is pragmatic policy making, not idealism.
For Myamar, US is always talking about the release of Aung San Suu Kyi . They have been talking about this for decades. All tlak no action indeed.
“there were no great breakthroughs in resolving the perennial problems of Burma and North Korea,”
Guess whose third on the list. Your guess is as good as mine. What is tiny red dot’s interest to resolve the issues of these two countries that could be very well be the same issues it has ? So any wonder why there is no breakthrough when the countries themselves rules by Asian wayang kings and emperors have stake and interest in status quo of Burma and NK ?
Anyone guess what is the anthem song for Asean Ministerial Meeting (AMM) and the Asean Regional Forum (ARF) ?
Could this be the song ? You figure out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t28EUcTDLII
to the western powers who do not understand, ” this is ASEAN Values loh”…
:)
As usual… What is new with ASEAN?
“to the western powers who do not understand, ” this is ASEAN Values loh”…
The westerners will never understand as long as the word WAYANG is not found in their dictionary. Hey, did someone complain that westerners are just WAYANG ? The whole world is just big stage of WAYANG. It just who wayang better than others.
” It just who wayang better than others.”
looks like a sport more worth organising than YOG!! :)
Why would Burma wants to open its rich resources to America’s investors?The country of Burma has more confidence in Asian countries rather than the Anglo-
sphere when come to doing business.Have we not learned any lesson of the last 2 years?They have brought us more financial woes and miseries together with their greed.Burma is rich in precious metal and minerals.Surely,every nation of the world
wants piece of the pie.Slowly but surely,Asean eventually will win the heart of the
military government,by using conciliatory approach rather than tough talk like
SS Hillary Clinton.If President Obama can use conciliatory approach in dealing with his adversaries in the middle east to achieve peace.Why can’t ASEAN do the same.
PRESTON LOON.
Waah Preston, you are so clever lah !
G. Yeo should advise Obama, Hillary, to emulate S’pore in the art of conciliation, in other words , the art of foreplay. The US should Invite the leaders of the Taliban, Iraq,Iran, Hizbollah, Syria, Israel, etc, to a flower naming ceremony in the white house garden and also extending the best medical facilities to these leaders. It worked for the Spore, Myanmar relationship, so cosy like lovers in bed.
aiyoyo
if really all talk no action,
then why have these ‘elites’? for what? so many whys/whats…
cant understand these ‘elites’.
aiyoyo
9) preston loon
well said.
/////Surely,every nation of the world wants piece of the pie////
but the West wants the whole pie, and want the rest of the world to be grateful with the crumps left after they are done exploiting the land.
or else the defiant countries will be branded as countries with human rights voilations, with WMD, with terrorist , forest destroyers, and or its equivalent, similar crap used since colonial days
If Burma stabilises, who will buy all our mines, cluster bombs and military equipment? There is profit in chaos.
I think the ASEAN reaction to Burma has to be balanced. On a practical point of view, it makes no sense to kick them out of ASEAN or to impose a heavy economic embargo on them, since doing so would 1, deprive ASEAN nations of the rich mineral wealth that Burma possesses and 2, cause the Burmese leadership to shut their ears to our pleas for more democracy in Burma.
This is politics, and there’s a very delicate balance between ideology and political savvy. And of course, in every balance, you will not be able to please everyone. (some will prefer more radical change, and some will advise against endangering the stability of ASEAN)
In my opinion, the ASEAN leaders are probably doing the right thing.
Screaming at the Junta to CHANGE CHANGE CHANGE!! is probably counter-productive. They’ll just shut their ears and eyes to our appeals. Dangling economic and political incentives would probably prod them in the right direction.
America will not falter without Asean, but I can’t say about Asean who still think they have a card to negotiate. There are certain country in Asean who still honour every bit of the burma and god knows if they subcribe to similar suppression of ruling a country. When you have countries heading towards such ideology and believe strongly in what Burma did was necesary to keep the people in line, this country has already detached itself before the negotiating table which explains why Asean remain handicapped todate. Do I need to elaborate which country has similar ruler like those of North Korea and Burma?
hi XiiAoGeNgEnX,
////Dangling economic and political incentives would probably prod them in the right direction.////
for rogue-ish behaviour?
then where is the incentive to keep others in the right direction from going the wrong direction?
sounds like paying a premium to people to deter greed. hmmm, sounds familiar woh…
It has been a talk shop for the past few years. How to change lah!!
ASEAN WAYANG!
In my opinion, only the expectation of the people of burma counts in this matter.
If politics is about human rights, UN would have liberated Burma long ago. Hence, let’s not kid ourselves that these people has any intention of liberating Burma. The Burma people are alone in this. That’s their country, and they have to fight it for themselves. Same for Singapore’s singaporean. Everyone else are just trying to take advantage of the situation, including ASEAN, US, etc.
It also demonstrated what a few men with absolute “power” can do to stay on power. There’s no fellow countrymen, no country, only themselves. Let’s hope we don’t ended up the same. Use your vote wisely (if you can vote in the first place, LOL – what a joke).
ASEAN is only focus on economic growth of its countries. They would pay lip service to say we need Mynamar to release Aung Sung Syi but they dont really mean it.
Every country has miscreants,but Burma is one example of a group of miscreants who has a country.
And George Yeo declared that Burma is family.
We must knock it into the thick heads of these miscreants in military garbs that we aren’t interfering in the internal affairs of Burma;we are interfering in the infernal affairs of Burma,like what the US is boldly doing.
If Asean is not impotent politically,Ban Ki-Moon wouldn’t have to fly to Burma to look into the eyes of these scoundrels who lord over the masses here.