Myanmar protests: will Singapore’s ‘truth telling’ make a difference as death toll rises?
- Foreign minister Vivian Balakrishnan’s tougher language on the killings has earned plaudits, though rights groups point out the island nation still has ties to the junta
- He has also raised hopes Asean will strengthen its response to the crisis, which he says could affect the bloc’s efforts to speak as a collective to powers such as the US
With few outside players having leverage over the reclusive ruling generals, who at the time had been in power for nearly two decades, attention turned to the wealthy city state due to its status as a key source of investments and technical assistance for Myanmar.
Rights groups had a litany of complaints: Singaporean banks – with their tough secrecy laws – were supposedly home to the generals’ shady offshore accounts; the island nation was giving them easy access to its world-class hospitals; and was, overall, all too happy for military rule to continue as it was good for business.
Myanmar protesters pressure Singapore to ‘stand for justice’ and compel Min Aung Hlaing to cede power
As Western nations moved to sanction the junta, Singaporean officials maintained that the country’s banking sector would only comply with “international agreements” – implying no action would be taken against Myanmar entities unless the United Nations moved to do so first.
03:24
Dozens killed as Myanmar sees one of its worst days of crackdown since coup
The dim view taken by rights groups towards Singapore and the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) was not helped by the grouping’s failure to demand accountability from Myanmar for the 2007 killing of protesters, though the group – under the city state’s leadership – collectively voiced “revulsion” when reports of the use of automatic weapons against unarmed civilians emerged.
With Myanmar once again staring into the abyss of autocratic rule following the army’s February 1 coup against Suu Kyi’s NLD government, Singapore – now the No 1 investor in Southeast Asia’s poorest nation – is back on the radar of Myanmar watchers, anti-junta protesters and right groups alike.
Myanmar military urged not to ‘invite’ foreign intervention, as Asean foreign ministers meet
Following Tuesday’s informal meeting of foreign ministers from Asean, it was remarks from Singapore’s top diplomat, Vivian Balakrishnan, that appeared to be most closely parsed by observers of the crisis.
A link to the official transcript of his prepared remarks to the virtual meeting was widely circulated on social media, with many praising Balakrishnan’s stern language.
The minister has over the past few weeks gradually toughened Singapore’s position on the coup, and in Tuesday’s meeting – attended by junta-appointed foreign minister Wunna Maung Lwin – he said the republic was “appalled” by the use of lethal force against unarmed protesters, echoing comments he had made to Singapore’s parliament a day earlier.
Balakrishnan told Wunna Maung Lwin – addressing him as “the military’s representative” – that the only way forward was through dialogue, and that the crisis had put Asean’s credibility at risk. He also urged the Tatmadaw to immediately release Suu Kyi and President Win Myint as well as other detained NLD leaders.
Subsequently, the best hope for a resolution to the crisis was a negotiated settlement among the various stakeholders, Balakrishnan said. “We just want the best for you and your people. This can only be achieved if you have honest, frank dialogue among yourselves in Myanmar. The rest of us cannot do this for you. We can be helpful, we can be constructive, but you need to do this yourself.”
‘ACT OR LEAVE A VACUUM’
Balakrishnan’s strong language, compared with the anodyne statement Brunei issued late on Tuesday in its capacity as the 2021 Asean chair, was appreciated by diplomatic observers.
Adding to the focus on Singapore was the release of Prime Minister Lee’s interview with the BBC about the crisis. The 69-year-old leader said the use of lethal force against unarmed civilians was “disastrous”, though he hoped wisdom would prevail as it did after a major military crackdown in 1988 as well as in the aftermath of the Saffron Revolution.
Singapore minister on Myanmar coup: ‘difficult to conclude’ for now whether companies should pull out amid political crisis
Asked his thoughts on Balakrishnan’s comments, former Australian ambassador to Myanmar Nicholas Coppel told This Week in Asia that they showed the city state’s eagerness for Asean “to take a stronger stance in response to developments in Myanmar”.
“Singapore is concerned that if Asean does nothing meaningful, then there will be a vacuum that will be filled by others. Singapore doesn’t want Myanmar to become another client state of China,” Coppel said by email.
“Singapore also wants Asean to be a more respected and important grouping and, for this to happen, Asean can’t keep hiding behind its principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of member states,” he added. “Singapore is rightly pointing out that Asean has other principles which are equally important, including adherence to the rule of law, respect for fundamental freedoms and the principles of democracy that need to be upheld.”
But, as in 2007, the republic has been unable to shake off at times vehement attacks on account of its outsize investment footprint in Myanmar and legacy of cosy ties with the Tatmadaw.
One key gripe among activists is that Singapore has given no indication it will freeze billions of dollars of Myanmar’s gas revenue purportedly held in the island nation’s banks.
Among those who had mixed views on Balakrishnan’s Tuesday speech was Matthew Smith, co-founder of the Southeast Asian rights group Fortify Rights.
“Extraordinary statement on the Myanmar coup and crackdown from Singapore coming out of today’s meeting of Asean foreign ministers,” Smith tweeted on Tuesday night. “It condemns the coup, calls for the release of detainees [and] urges US-Asean ties in this context. Thank you, Singapore.”
Singapore banks have long been the playground of Myanmar’s military elite, and have long held Myanmar public funds, including multibillion-dollar gas revenues
He later told This Week In Asia that it was “very good to see” Singapore do “some uncharacteristic truth telling”.
“But the statement alone won’t be sufficient,” he said. “Singapore banks have long been the playground of Myanmar’s military elite, and have long held Myanmar public funds, including multibillion-dollar gas revenues.”
Kyaw Win, the London-based executive director of the Burma Human Rights Network, said Singapore’s toughened position over the past two weeks was merely a “public relations campaign” aimed at keeping critics in the West at bay.
“We are calling it crocodile tears, [we] never trust Singapore,” the activist said in an interview. “There are some countries out there that prioritise their own interest but also show some morality. But I don’t see that in Singapore … they are all about their own interests.”
ASEAN’S INTERESTS
In his remarks, Singapore’s foreign minister Balakrishnan sought to press home that lasting stability in Myanmar was critical to the interests of all Asean states.
One element that caught the attention of observers was his emphasis that the coup could have an effect on Asean’s ability to speak as a bloc with outside powers.
Balakrishnan’s comments could also “be read as a subtle warning to the [Tatmadaw] against taking steps that would undermine the bloc’s ability to engage as a unitary entity with the US”, said John Lichtefeld, vice-president at Washington-based strategic consultancy The Asia Group.
Myanmar coup: military rebuffs UN warnings, says it is ‘used to sanctions’ and isolation
For now, Lichtefeld said, Myanmar contacts with links to the military had confided with him that “officials are at least somewhat sensitive to taking steps that would put them in a bad position with their Asean partners”.
It was unclear how the rest of the bloc would react if the military rulers decided to boycott engagements with the US, he said, as such a move would undermine “Asean centrality” and open the grouping up to pressure from other major powers “who might want to exclude individual member states from regional discussions”.
Other students of Singapore’s foreign policy, meanwhile, cautioned against parsing too much from Balakrishnan’s speech.
Ultimately, the republic’s position was not unique within Asean, suggested Joseph Liow, a prominent international relations scholar at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University.
He described the chair statement released by Brunei as “strong”, adding that the bloc had been “proactive and forward-leaning in trying to reach out to Myanmar”.
Jakarta’s position, made public by Marsudi in remarks to reporters after Tuesday’s talks, were also hard hitting. While the meeting was about finding solutions, “it takes two to tango”, she said. “Asean’s good intentions and readiness will be meaningless if Myanmar does not open its door for Asean”.
Coppel, who was Australia’s representative to Myanmar from 2015 to 2018, suggested that while the stepped-up pressure from Indonesia and Singapore was laudable, it might prove futile given the nature of the coup’s architect, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing.
With new fatalities reported on Wednesday, more than 50 civilians have been killed since the coup, according to tallies by the UN human rights office. That figure is higher than the 31 people reported to have been killed in 2007’s Saffron Revolution.
“Even if Singapore and Indonesia are successful in getting Asean to commit to a stronger statement of concern, Min Aung Hlaing is unlikely to agree to dialogue, let alone to back down,” Coppel said. “He will never admit that his actions were wrong.”
