Minister: Hi everyone, and thank you for joining us. I thought I would start with some comments in three different themes. First, I will deal with Cambodia itself, and then I will touch on ASEAN, and discuss the situation in Myanmar.
First, on Cambodia. I think many Singaporeans would not be aware that Cambodia was one of the first countries to recognise (Singapore’s) independence. In fact, Cambodia recognised us on the 10th of August 1965. The late King Father Norodom Sihanouk was a lifelong good friend of our first Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew, so our relations with Cambodia go back a long time. But we also know that the last five, six decades have not been easy for Cambodia. They had war, they had genocide and civil war, and it has taken them a long time to emerge. But since you have been here on the ground, you can see that this is a new Cambodia – emerging, confident and on the cusp of a new wave of development. Let me give you a few signs of that. First, I will point to Cambodia's successful management of COVID-19. It shows that it is not just a matter of having a wealthy country or a wealthy government, but a well-organised government. They have run one of the world's most successful vaccination programmes; well over 90% of the population are vaccinated. They are running programmes for boosting as well. If you look at the infection rates and the mortality rates, it is very good. The first point is (that) they have come through this pandemic very well. The second point that you will notice if you are on the ground here, you see lots of buildings. You will also see lots of new buildings under construction as well. I think there is a real estate boom here, but that is just a proxy for the energy and the potential for the economy.
When I came here, I was given very good access (and) had good meetings with Prime Minister Hun Sen, with the Deputy Prime Minister Prak Sokhonn and with the Minister of Environment – a young man – Say Samal. I also met the Chairman of the National Assembly Commission on Education, Youth, Sports, Religion, Culture and Tourism Hun Many. I think all of us reflected on the very strong potential for development for Cambodia. They also indicated that they welcome more investments from Singapore. I explained that we have investors who are looking at a variety of areas including logistics centres, cold-store supply chains and other developments. In a way, coming here (was) a vote of confidence, to re-establish old relationships and draw some interest on the business and economic front as well.
Next, of course, I want to talk about ASEAN. The fact that we even have this meeting in-person with the majority (of the) foreign ministers, face-to-face, is already a success in itself, both due to COVID-19 as well as the situation within ASEAN itself. Just getting this meeting organised was a challenge. I congratulate the (Cambodian) Foreign Ministry for getting us all together. In fact, there would have been more Ministers present. Unfortunately, I think two of my (fellow) foreign ministers have COVID-19 and therefore had to engage with us virtually. Anyway, the meeting happened – first point. The second point is that if you look across ASEAN, we are all hoping that this year will be the year of the post-pandemic recovery and that we get through the Omicron wave which clearly seems to be less severe in countries that have high vaccination rates. I offer Cambodia as an example. We should get through this in a matter of weeks and months. There is very strong interest to re-establish travel, especially business delegations and investors, to be able to walk the ground, meet people, make deals, get the economy started again. There is strong interest in travel and overcoming the pandemic. In addition to that, there was also interest in the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). That is the world's largest free trade agreement. It involves all of ASEAN plus China, Japan, (Republic of) Korea, Australia and New Zealand. It has come into force just last month. I think the combination of that plus the post-pandemic recovery would give quite a boost to trade and investments in ASEAN. Then we also discussed opportunities for the future, including smart cities, digital economy, fintech, cyber security. So there is stuff to do both in the immediate aftermath of pandemic as well as for the future. We also reviewed external dimensions, for instance, the relationship between ASEAN and its partners like the US, China and India. We are looking forward to a series of meetings later this year, possibly further upgrades to strategic partnerships with India and the US. We are still discussing those details and what options are there.
Another sensitive topic for ASEAN has also been the South China Sea. We are all hoping to see some progress for the negotiations for the COC - the Code of Conduct. That does not remove the disputes over boundaries and entitlements, but it is still an important confidence building venture, to show that we can manage differences or even disputes in peaceful ways. We will have to watch how that develops. All in all, it has been a good meeting.
One other point before I get to the last topic on Myanmar, is that there was also determination not to allow the Myanmar issue to hijack the ASEAN agenda. We have got things to do, and we focus on the important strategic projects and our relationships within and without our region. We will deal with Myanmar, but it will not hijack our agenda. I think that was a good way for us to approach this.
Finally, let me come to Myanmar. To be frank with you, we are very disappointed. It is now more than one year. The violence remains, innocent lives are lost, (and) poverty is increasing. I dread to think of the impact of COVID-19 on a population that is facing such strife. Even in the best of times dealing with the pandemic, can you imagine dealing with it under such political strife and violence? We see no sign of reconciliation, of negotiation between the key stakeholders. It is a very dismal picture. To be honest with you, because we have seen no progress since our leaders met in Jakarta on the 24th of April last year, there has been no progress on the ASEAN Five-Point Consensus. That is why we held on and maintained this position that we would only invite a non-political representative from Myanmar to attend. In the end, the non-political representative was not here physically, but they linked into the meeting virtually and they were able to hear everything that everyone said. In a sense, they still continue to participate in a hybrid form, at a non-political level. This is really a sign of our disappointment, and our hope to see some progress. We obviously had discussions openly and quietly amongst ourselves on the critical role that the Special Envoy Prak Sokhonn will play. Without getting into details, let me just put it to you this way. The Special Envoy is there to help but the military authorities in Myanmar need to show good faith, need to be sincere and need to be open with him. One particular litmus test is how much access they will give him. If he is not given access to all the stakeholders, that severely constrains his role and actually makes it harder for any resolution. But I think we should also be realistic. This is not something that is going to be solved overnight. Frankly, it could take years. This is something that can only be solved by the people within Myanmar and by their efforts. My sense of it right now – both sides think they can win, and both sides are not talking or negotiating at all. That is the reason for my pessimism. Let me stop there and take questions.
Vanessa Lim (CNA Digital): I just have two questions. One, could you please share with us what Singapore raised during the retreat? Second, you mentioned that the leaders agreed that what is happening in Myanmar will not hijack or take away from ASEAN’s agenda. But with the countries all linked, how will ASEAN balance this development and also ensure harmony in the region?
Minister: To summarise what I said earlier, number one, do not let this hijack our agenda. Number two, post-pandemic recovery options. Number three, fulfil and pursue the RCEP. Number four, our relations with our external partners – America, China, Australia, New Zealand, (and) Europe. That is a lot of homework to pursue on that front. That was what most of the discussion within the ASEAN meeting consisted of. Of course, (we also discussed) future opportunities, smart cities, digital economy, (and) fintech.
On your second question, the first point I said is that we are not going to let it hijack our agenda, which means it does not dominate or exclude our consideration of other opportunities. But you are right. In the end, Myanmar is a member of ASEAN and any instability, any problems, any violence, any fomenting of fundamentalism or extremism in any corner of ASEAN is a threat to us all. In that sense, you are right. You cannot pretend that this is not a problem and that there is no threat to all of us. We are realistic, and we are clear-eyed about that. Your point, however, is that given this, what else can you do? That is where we are offering the offices of the Special Envoy. We are continuing to take a principled position that whilst we will not interfere, we will not give legitimacy to the actions which the military have taken and are taking and inflicting on their own people. Having said that, there are obviously administrative wrinkles. For instance, how will we interpret international agreements that ASEAN is party to? Who gets to sign on behalf of Myanmar? Will Myanmar get to enjoy the benefits of these agreements? These are delicate issues which the lawyers and all the capitals are going to have to come to grips with. But I would say that whilst these are important, it is important not to lose the big picture – that ASEAN is more than just one country. It is not going to be stopped because one member is in turmoil. Second, that ASEAN can and will take principled positions and is prepared to state it. The third point worth emphasising is because we are so different, there is bound to be some diversity of opinion. But the fact that we can have a difference of opinion, diversity even, that we can still sit together, we can work constructively, we can advance the agenda on common areas or productive areas even whilst we deal with some of the more difficult issues which are caused by the coup in Myanmar. All in all, whilst I said that I am disappointed and dismayed, in fact it was Prime Minister Hun Sen who told me yesterday that he is dismayed by the situation in Myanmar and by their response to his overtures, to his attempts to help. Having said that, I am not pessimistic about ASEAN. We remain a dynamic growth, high-potential growth region in the world. We remain relevant to all the superpowers and major countries and blocs in the world. People do want to engage us, and our challenge is to maintain our unity in the midst of the diversity, and our relevance both on the international stage strategically and especially economically. On that score, I would say that I think ASEAN is actually doing reasonably well despite all the challenges.
Muhammad Faris Alfiq Bin Mohd Afandi (Mothership): Singapore has expressed disappointment on the lack of progress in implementing the Five-Point Consensus in Myanmar. So is there a need for us, or for ASEAN itself to relook or refine the agreement so that progress can be made as soon as possible?
Minister: I think we are on the right track. We have taken a position; we have expressed disapproval. At the same time, we have been careful not to interfere directly in the internal politics of a member. I think what we need right now is strategic patience. I have been in this game long enough to know that when you are in a hurry, and hasty, you are often ceding negotiating advantage to the other side. So be clear that you are on the right track, be patient, and wait for opportunities to arise. As I have said earlier, the situation in Myanmar is one that has gone on for seven or eight decades. They have never – so far – been able to arrive at a sense of national unity, of common purpose, of shared values and norms. You know, for instance, many people think democracy is just about having elections and the votes. But actually, democracy depends upon values and norms shared by the population at large. They have not yet reached that stage, and that is why even when the NLD (National League for Democracy) was in charge, it was really a democracy in transition. It was a process, they had not yet reached their destination. The coup last year was a setback, a major setback, and I feel so sorry for the young people especially in Myanmar, who have grown up in a digital world, had such high hopes, and now are deeply disappointed because their futures are blighted. But we need to be clear about what we can do and what we cannot; we need to be both principled and realistic. I believe we are. In the meantime, in the short term, they need humanitarian assistance. Speaking from the point of view of Singapore, we have contributed funds, we have contributed oxygen concentrators, we have contributed medical equipment to them, and in a way where we do not get involved in the local politics, but we just want to help our friends in Myanmar. So humanitarian assistance is another big item on the agenda and ASEAN will also do this through the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance. So be patient, continue to do good. I must confess I am one of the believers in this “starfish on the beach” story, you know, the story that when the tide has gone down, and there are thousands of starfish stranded on the beach; even if you cannot save them all, those that you can pick up and put back into the sea, you have saved – every life is worthwhile. That is my philosophy, my approach to this.
Leong Wai Kit (CNA): I would like to circle back to the point you made about the litmus test. So, if and when Special Envoy does go to Myanmar, the Myanmar army has previously said that not all NLD members are terrorists. They have said that about three quarters are moderates and they have indicated that if ASEAN delegates do visit Myanmar, these NLD members may be allowed to meet with them. Can I ask whether you would then consider such a meeting as having “passed the litmus test”, and whether or not this also constitutes progress made in the Five-Point Consensus?
Minister: Well, I have not heard directly, so I am not in a position to vouch for what they have said, or even what they actually intend to do. The larger point I am making is the real question should not be posed to the Special Envoy, who is burdened with this. The real question is whether or not the military authorities are sincere and are really trying to achieve national reconciliation and dialogue. The onus is on them, not on the Special Envoy. Let us wait and see what happens. Let us see what access he is given. If you were asking me for advice, I would say that I cannot imagine any solution in Myanmar right now, without Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. But it is not my decision, it is not my call – but that would be my advice to them.
Tan Tam Mei (The Straits Times): I have a question about the unity of ASEAN over the issue of Myanmar. ASEAN has worked together to exclude the Myanmar junta from the bloc meetings. But do you think that this has an effect on putting pressure on the junta? And also, how serious is the division amongst the ASEAN members over the Myanmar issue? And how will this affect the bloc going forward?
Minister: That is a good set of questions. First, I just need to again emphasise (that) we are not excluding Myanmar. Myanmar remains a member of ASEAN. The second point is we have not even excluded them, the current military authorities from our meetings, in a sense that even though we have said we are not inviting political representatives, even today, they dialled in. They had access to our meetings. I am not sure I would call it an exclusion, but I would call it conveying a signal. A signal of disappointment, of dismay, that despite the fact that our leaders arrived at a consensus in April last year, there has been absolutely no progress. So it is a signal rather than an exclusion.
On whether there is a divide (in ASEAN), I will put it to you this way. There are variations in the way we look at this. You see things a bit differently. Secondly, I would say that certainly for the countries who actually share a border with Myanmar, who are concerned about refugee flows, who are concerned about violence coming across the boundaries. I think they have legitimate concerns. To a far higher degree, countries like us with no borders, we can talk about principles, we can talk about complying with rules, but they have a problem. So I would say yes, there are some countries, especially those with a long border (with Myanmar) who will have more proximate concerns. So, there is a variation in the way we see this. Frankly, there is also a variation in the burden that falls upon the different countries in ASEAN. But I would not call it a division. Because if you judge it by our actions, we have been able to maintain a unified position. ASEAN came up with a Five-Point-Consensus – all the leaders did. When it was clear, in the latter part of last year, that there was no progress, this decision on excluding political representation from our meetings, as I said earlier, not excluding from meetings, but you still have access, you can listen, you are aware of everything that is going on, there are no secrets. But we are sending you a signal. That position has been maintained even in this meeting here in Cambodia. I would say let us judge by our actions, rather than pick on the obvious variation in perceptions and burdens that fall upon all of us. I would say, so far, we have been able to maintain unity where it counts. We have been able to act collectively and certainly in the case of humanitarian assistance through the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance. We are working collectively. So far, so good.
Ng Hui Min (Lianhe Zaobao): In ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institutes latest survey which was released yesterday, actually over 70% of the respondents from Southeast Asia actually find ASEAN too slow and ineffective, unable to cope with the dynamic changes in the region. That is quite a sizeable portion, over 30% thinks that ASEAN’s response to Myanmar is not good enough. What is your take on this? Are there other diplomatic channels that ASEAN is looking at, in order to put pressure or encourage the junta to implement the 5PC (Five-Point Consensus).
Minister: Yes, I read that survey. Let me give you my take on it. First, I am glad that people even care about ASEAN to criticise it. That is already valuable in its own right. Second, there is always this impatience with ASEAN – “Why do you take so long? Why are you so careful with what to say? Why are you so deliberate in what you do?”. I often remind people that this is a design feature and not a bug in ASEAN. It is worthwhile remembering that there is no regional organisation with the extent of diversity that we have in ASEAN. That is why we need to operate on the consensus principle; that is why great amounts of negotiations, discussions, and meetings need to occur before we actually settle on a decision. But when we do, we are able to act. Again, when you zoom out and look at what ASEAN has achieved over the last few decades, I think it is worthwhile. We have achieved peace. We have achieved economic development. We have achieved economic integration – our economies are poised for significant growth over the next ten, twenty years and more. People will say the glass is half empty, and I think it is half full, and filling.
Specifically, on Myanmar, I think you would know my answer. I do not think there is going to be a quick and easy solution. In fact, if you are in a hurry, you will actually weaken your own ability to influence, to negotiate, to persuade, and to cajole. It does not mean that I approve of what the Tatmadaw, the military authorities are doing – every life lost every day is a tragedy. But we do need to approach this systematically, carefully, and deliberately. Again, I would say that I share the sense of urgency that people in ASEAN have. But we have to persuade, cajole, push; and it is a very diverse group of countries that we are trying to modernise. As I said, even in the case of Myanmar, understanding that the different members of ASEAN are affected differently by what happens in Myanmar.
Ng Hui Min (LHZB): Are there growing concerns about the intensifying competition between the US and China in Southeast Asia?
Minister: (The) short answer is yes. Now, let me give you the long answer. The relationship between the US and China is the most consequential dynamic relationship which will impact the world and particularly us in Southeast Asia. No question about that. So are we concerned? Yes, we are concerned. What is our approach? Our approach as far as ASEAN is concerned, number one, is to keep our centrality, our unity, and our relevance. Let me cite you some data as to why ASEAN is relevant in the interface between the US and China. The US has more invested in Southeast Asia than it has invested in India, China, Japan, and (Republic of) Korea, combined. Investment in some senses is even more important than trade because trade is a transaction; investment is a commitment. On the other hand, ASEAN’s largest trading partner is China. Now, that is not surprising; China is the largest trading partner for many countries in the world. But another fact that most people have not yet appreciated – if you go and ask China who is your largest trading partner? ASEAN has overtaken the EU (European Union) and US to become China’s largest trading partner, which means that China has got real skin in the game too, with us. If you look at geography, by definition, Southeast Asia sits right in the middle between the Pacific Ocean and the Indian Ocean, between continental Southeast Asia and maritime Southeast Asia. Geographically, there is no question that we are at the centre of it all. If you look at the economic prospects for Southeast Asia, both in terms of a rising middle class, in terms of digital opportunities, in terms of its ability to arbitrate – I am using arbitration in economic sense – as the economic balance changes across the Pacific, we are in the game because it is obvious that people will also look at establishing factories, establishing regional offices in Southeast Asia.
The point is if – and this is a big if – there is no hot war between China and the US, then the prospects are great for us. We remain connected, we remain in the centre of that web – of that economic web between the US, China, India, the EU (European Union). If you look at what we are doing now across South America – and you know, for instance, Singapore just became an associate member of the Pacific Alliance of South American countries – can you see that we are optimally poised to take advantage of it? Now, of course, if there is an outright conflict and a real bifurcation of supply chains, of economic standards between the US and China, then we will have a problem. But even then, you will notice the position that we are taking both from a Singapore perspective as well as ASEAN. For instance, I was just in Beijing a week ago. A couple of months ago, Prime Minister (Lee) met President Biden. Both sides know that we do not want to choose sides. Both sides know that we want to keep ASEAN as an open and inclusive architecture, not to be forced to take sides and not to become carved out into exclusionary zones. Whilst we cannot control the agenda of superpowers, we cannot decide whether there is going to be war or peace, it does not mean we cannot exercise autonomy, that we cannot exercise choice, and that we cannot exercise collective action. That really is the strategy for ASEAN in the years ahead – no guarantees on outcome, but prepare ourselves well for opportunities and also prepare for downsides and incidents. It is going to be an exciting ride (for) the next few years.
. . . . .