Further questions about Myanmar and t-shirts
Posted by theonlinecitizen on October 24th, 2007
By Leong Sze Hian
I refer to the articles Singapores arms sales to Myanmar not
substantial : No deals in recent years ; weapons sold not suited to
counter civilian unrest ; economic links limited, says George Yeo
(ST, Oct 23) and MPs fire questions on Myanmar issue (Today, Oct
23).
The first article reported on the answers given by Foreign Affairs
Minister George Yeo thus:
While Singapores established policy
has not been to divulge details of defence sales, he said that over
the years, defence sales to Myanmar had not been substantial.
These had always been carefully limited to items that are not
suitable for countering civilian unrest, he said. There
have not been any defence sales to Myanmar in recent years and,
going forward, we will continue to behave in a responsible manner.
There is no arms embargo against Myanmar, but Mr Yeo said Singapore
would comply should there be one sanctioned by the United
Nations.
I think the answer may need to be a bit
more substantive. Is the cumulative defence sales to Myanmar for
the period since the Junta came to power, a few hundred thousand
dollars, a few million, tens of millions, hundreds of millions,
billions ? What is the total sum involved ?
Since the amount is not substantial, I see no reason why the figure
should not be disclosed.
Also, does it mean that since the
Junta came to power decades ago, no ammunitions, small arms, bombs,
tear gas, rifles, larger caliber weapons, tanks, armoured vehicles,
etc, has ever been sold to Myanmar ?
Although Singapore is said to have had no deals with Myanmar in
recent years, one would naturally have to ask: What is meant by
recent years? 2 years? 3 years? 5 years? 10 years?
While Singapores established policy has not been to divulge
details of defence sales, surely an exception can be made, after
all that has happened in Myanmar?
The Foreign Affairs minister also said
that going forward, Singapore would behave in a responsible
manner and would comply with any United Nations arms embargo, if
there should be one. Does this mean that Singapore, in spite of
global condemnation of the Myanmese regime, will continue to sell
items that are not suitable for countering civilian unrest?
And how does the Singapore government carefully limit the sales
of these items which are not suitable for countering civilian
unrest?
Turning to economic links and trade with Myanmar, the minister
said:
Economic links with Myanmar were also
limited. Trade last year amounted to $ 1 billion, or 0.1 per cent
of Singapores total trade. Myanmar was 50th among trading
partners, and cumulative total direct investments by Singapore
firms at the end of 2005 was just $ 742 million.
Whilst trade with Myanmar may be small because of Singapores large
total volume of trade, I understand that we are Myanmars third
largest trading partner, after China and Thailand. We may also need
put this into context, in that China and Thailand share borders
with Myanmar.
The minister also said that the cumulative total direct
investments by Singapore firms at the end of 2005 was just $742
million. Was this for the year 2005 only, or is the sum for all
cumulative investments since the Junta came to power?
In a channelnewsasia report, some 50 activists demonstrated outside
the Singapore embassy in Malaysia calling for Singapore to review
its relations with Myanmar. In this connection, a report by Asian
Economics News (May 2001) reported that the Singapore government
had signed a bilateral investment guarantee agreement with
Myanmar.
4 days ago, the United States blacklisted 3 companies with strong
links to Singapore under its new sanctions against Myanmar.
(link)
How does this affect the Singapore governments bilateral
investment guarantee agreement which it signed in 2001, as
mentioned above?
T-shirts
On another note, I refer to the articles Police request on
T-shirts probably an overreaction (ST, Oct 23) and Prof Ho
explains T-shirt incidents (Today, Oct 23).
The former article states that:
Mr Siew then asked what powers the
officers had to ask the duo to go to the police station for an
interview. Pro Ho said it was a request and the duo could refuse
it.
Did the officers inform the duo that it was only a request, and
that they could refuse it?
If not, why not?
Since Prof Ho also said it was probably an overreaction by the
police, will there be assurances that this will not happen again?
Will steps be taken to ensure that officers do not request people
to go to police stations for interviews, unless they are also
informed at the same time that they can choose not to go?
By the way, was there any answer to NMP
Siew Kum Hongs question, What is the total value of remittances
from Myanmar into Singapore over the past 5 years ?, or NCMP
Sylvia Lims question asking the Minister for Foreign Affairs
whether and to what extent there are arrangements in place for
military cooperation between Singapore and Myanmar?