Asean has no licence to interfere in Myanmar’s internal affairs: Singapore
- Myanmar’s troubles with national unity has been going on since WWII and the coup only exacerbated that, Singapore’s foreign minister Vivian Balakrishnan says
- While Asean member states condemn the military coup, it does not give them the right to interfere in Myanmar’s internal affairs, he adds
Answering questions about Myanmar during a debate on the foreign ministry’s budget, Vivian Balakrishnan underscored that the country had been struggling to forge a common identity and bring its various component parts together since World War II.
“This coup, two years in the making, has not helped,” Foreign Minister Balakrishnan said. “If you ask me for my opinion, I think it is a dead end. It’s not going to be to a road where you will achieve national reconciliation.”
“So we must understand that although we clearly disapprove of the coup, and we don’t recognise the current military junta, it does not give Asean a licence to interfere in its domestic affairs,” he said.
Balakrishnan suggested that the attendees of the meeting – the “immediate neighbours” of Myanmar – faced a “risk of refugee outflows” and “would be at a greater hurry to see a resolution and may be prepared to compromise on the means by which the post-coup crisis is resolved”.
The plans calls for an immediate cessation of violence, dialogue among all parties involved, the sending of aid to Myanmar, the appointment of a special envoy to facilitate talks, and for the envoy to be allowed visits to the country.
The junta has thus far prevaricated on its plan to implement the peace road map, and it in recent months has sought to suggest that the plan was agreed without its assent.
Asean has barred top junta representatives from key meetings, although bureaucrats have been allowed to take their place.
Nevertheless, Balakrishnan said Asean members still wanted Myanmar to “continue to enjoy the benefits of membership and to the extent possible, within the constraints of its own domestic policies”, adding that there would be a “seat at the table” reserved for it.
“We don’t insist on [Myanmar’s] empty chair. Don’t send a political representative because we don’t recognise the coup and the military authorities, but by all means, send senior-most civil servants, the permanent secretary or the equivalent. Myanmar refuses and rather keep the chair empty,” he said.
On whether Asean’s principle of consensus-based decision making had hampered efforts to tackle the Myanmar issue, Balakrishnan came to the bloc’s defence and said that its “need for consensus is in fact a design feature”, praising the group’s “great diversity”.
While he recognised that the consensus-building function could be abused and used as an “avenue to take hostages and loosely threaten a veto”, in practice, it promotes the consultation and negotiation process, which would not be present in majoritarian voting, he said.
“As far as I am concerned, there was consensus on the Asean leaders legitimately recognised by each other, the consensus principle continues to operate and more importantly, we have not allowed Myanmar to hold us hostage and force us to expedite for instance, recognising the coup outcome,” he said.