Minister Dr Vivian Balakrishan: It has been a very hectic four or five days packed with meetings. I think it was very necessary, it was constructive and very useful. The first point I would make is that it reaffirms ASEAN’s convening power. I think this whole stretch of days, we have had something like 25 Foreign Ministers and not only the nine of us from ASEAN, but all our partners, so that includes China, Korea, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, India and further afield, Foreign Ministers from the United Kingdom (UK), Switzerland, Norway, Canada. Everyone still felt it was essential and useful to meet, and that reflects well on ASEAN.
The key themes which were defined and created by Laos, who is the current ASEAN Chair, is “Resilience and Connectivity”. Frankly, that is very apt at this point when the world is actually in a volatile and somewhat precarious phase. You have got the war in Ukraine continuing, you have got the situation of war in Gaza. You have got unresolved problems in Myanmar, and then of course, there was concern with the situation in the South China Sea. But when ASEAN met, the first thing we did was to look internally, and our focus was on building up economic resilience. That basically meant integrating our economies, lowering barriers to the movement of ideas, of capital, investments and infrastructure. It also meant focusing on the future, especially the digital economy and the green economy.
Specifically on the digital space, we have committed to completing the Digital Economy Framework Agreement (DEFA) negotiations by next year. The purpose of this is to facilitate cross-border flows, transactions and data to make it easier to do business and to deliver digital services across borders within ASEAN. Of course, it also means making sure there are no infrastructure or interoperability issues. So that is one big cluster of work that we have set for ourselves.
Then of course, there is our green energy transformation and dealing with climate change. The key project here which we need to push is the ASEAN Power Grid. This will require not only considerable investments into the infrastructure and the engineering of it, but also the politics and the economics of it. (We need) to align everyone's interests so that everyone can see this as meaningful and is prepared to invest in it, and to do so in a way which will enhance the overall resilience and competitiveness of all ASEAN members collectively. So, these are the two areas, the digital and the energy side, which are future-oriented.
Having dealt with that, there were the usual political issues. Unfortunately, the situation in Myanmar continues to be of grave concern. Over the last few days, the reports that are emerging is that the security situation and the extent of control that the army has, even within Myanmar, is under greater challenge. And yet, there is still no sign of any reconciliation or breakthrough. So, we have maintained our current arrangements; at the Foreign Ministers’ level and at the Summit level, Myanmar would not be represented at the political level. Nevertheless, it was good to have Permanent Secretary of the Foreign Ministry of Myanmar Aung Kyaw Moe, their most senior civil servant, present so that ensures that Myanmar continues to be a full member, has access to all the information and knows what decisions we are making. At the same time, whilst we do not know how long it will take for Myanmar to resolve its internal problems, it will not paralyse or divide us in ASEAN. So that was useful.
The other area of concern closer to ASEAN of course, was the South China Sea. Over the last few days, we had briefings from the Philippines and also from China. Whilst we do not have all the details, what is clear is that there has been some kind of provisional agreement made and there are reports today that the Philippines was able to resupply their small group of soldiers on the Second Thomas Shoal, and without incident. So that is positive, but as I said, these are early days and what we need to look for is long-term trends.
In terms of the Code of Conduct, we are now into our third reading of the single draft negotiating text. In fact, we have been in this phase since August last year. Again, I just want to emphasise that these are not easy negotiations, but the fact that they are going on and continuing, is still reason for hope. And in any case, we cannot afford to stop because while territorial disputes and sovereignty claims may take a very long time to resolve, the most important thing for all of us, and especially for Singapore, although we have no claims in the South China Sea, is peace and stability so trade can flow, and cooperation between ASEAN and its partners can continue. While it takes time to resolve these long standing disputes, I would say that is a small step in a positive direction.
Further afield, you have got Ukraine, you've got Gaza – they are tragedies. But I would say, ASEAN has been able to achieve consensus on a position and you will see that quite well-described in the Joint Communique, which should be published. So, all in all, good meetings (that demonstrated) the convening power of ASEAN, focused on building up resilience, enhancing connectivity, on the future and also wherever possible, to make progress in resolving disputes or areas of contention, but most importantly, maintaining ASEAN unity, centrality and relevance.
Tan Hui Yee (Straits Times): What is the main major geopolitical challenge that ASEAN is facing right now, and how have the meetings this week tried to address that?
Minister: Well, I would say with the exception of Myanmar, which quite frankly has slipped backwards, the rest of ASEAN has recovered. The setback that COVID imposed on all of us is now in the past. So, I would say we are now back at 2019 levels, and looking beyond. So, ASEAN itself is actually in a healthy state.
The (main) reason for concern is the geopolitical situation. As I said, there are wars going on right now in Europe and in the Middle East. The geopolitical contest between the United States and China, it's not over by a long way. (There have been) some positive signs – US President Biden and PRC President Xi met in San Francisco last November, and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi have been meeting quite regularly over the last few months. So at least there's dialogue going on and that is positive in its own way. But it's not a definitive solution, because the fundamental problem is a lack of trust between two superpowers.
The challenge for ASEAN in this state of the world is to tell everyone, we don't want to repeat what is happening in Europe – where is the line, where are the security barriers, and conflict between superpowers. Similarly, we do not want the situation in Gaza to be repeated. So, our clear and consistent message to all our major external partners is, Southeast Asia is different. We are not drawing a line to divide us. We do not want to be forced to choose sides. We want to focus on economics, on trade, on investments. Our paradigm is an open and inclusive strategic architecture, or to use, SM Lee Hsien Loong’s metaphor, (we have) overlapping circles of friends, and these circles are expanding. So, the key strategic challenge for ASEAN in such an unsettled world (is to) remain united, remain coherent, focus on economics and not fall into the problems, the very severe fundamental problems which have beset Europe and the Middle East. It is too early to say that we are completely out of danger. My own view is that the situation in the Middle East continues to have a significant risk of escalation. If you add the situation in Europe and the Middle East, and the fact that it's the same cast of states on opposing sides in both those arenas, it is a cause for concern.
But the point is Southeast Asia, assuming we can maintain ourselves as an oasis of peace, stability and security (that) in fact has got good economic prospects, that is what we want to focus on. So, I would say that is the key challenge; not to fall into the strategic traps that have occurred in other parts of the world, and we all understand that, we all agreed on it, and we are working assiduously to ensure this remains a calm and secure, forward-looking area.
Wong Siew Fong (Lianhe Zaobao): Just following up on your comments on the South China Sea. Philippines and China have been increasingly engaging their partners in the region on the South China Sea. How might that affect the region?
Minister: I am not sure I would describe it that way. Clearly, if you look over the past one and a half years, tensions were rising between the Philippines and China. But I would say, at least in the last few days, last few weeks, there has clearly been an increased effort at diplomacy at meetings. Without having access to the details, it's clear that there is some kind of provisional agreement and if they can work out a modus vivendi, I think that is positive. In the meantime, (we should) continue the negotiations on the Code of Conduct, build up confidence, have ways to resolve disputes peacefully and then focus on the economic prospects.
China is a major trading partner for all ASEAN countries, including the Philippines. In fact, if you flip the question the other way around, ASEAN is China's largest trading partner. There's more trade between China and ASEAN than there is between China and the United States, or China and the EU. So, it really does not make sense to have disputes that lead to conflict or to raised tensions, or to prevent collaboration, investment and trade. Again, I never want to be complacent about these things, but the point is, good sense still prevails in Asia.
Leong Wai Kit (Channel News Asia): Minister, there have been calls to make the Troika mechanism more flexible, less rigid and more inclusive. In that spirit, what will Singapore bring to these discussions, given that such platforms will benefit from unique perspectives and proposals? I believe Malaysia has said it is making efforts towards elections in Myanmar.
Minister: I do not want to be caught in the mechanics of it. The fundamental problem in Myanmar is that it is a large, wealthy country with a large and diverse population, multiple languages, multiple religions, and even multiple ethnic identities. Unfortunately for Myanmar, in the last 75, 80 years, they have never quite achieved a consensus (driven) national identity which everyone could come together and commit to. Because of that, it has been very difficult for them – they have got ethnic armed organisations, and they've got tensions between civilians and the military. But this did not just happen three years ago. It has actually been, unfortunately, a decades-long problem. The reason I am saying this and the point I emphasised to my colleagues is that we need strategic patience. The last time there was a coup was in 1988, and it took almost 28 years before a civilian government led by Daw Aung San Suu Kyi of the National League for Democracy (NLD) took power in 2016. I hope it would not take 28 years, but the point is that Myanmar is a unique, complicated place, and so long as we subscribe to the fact that external interference is not going to make things better – in fact, it is going to complicate matters, it is very important for us to be careful.
Humanitarian assistance, encouraging national reconciliation starting with the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the other political detainees, followed by real dialogue, and then working out the political compromises and arrangements, all that needs to be done, but all that needs to be done within Myanmar. So we need to be very careful and restrained in our attitudes.
For us in Singapore, we have conveyed to all sides that we think this current arrangement with a military government is a deadend. It is not going to achieve national reconciliation. If you look at Myanmar's economy, it is now about 9% less than what it was in 2019. One third of its people are in poverty, another one-third are facing economic insecurity. So the current arrangements are not tenable. You see that on the security situation, the military is not actually in command of large swathes of land and of its borders. So I (have) explained this at some length so you understand not to expect a quick and easy solution, but we express our views, we provide humanitarian assistance, we keep lines open to all stakeholders, and where we can help at the right time, right place, right sequence of actions, we will do so. So that is why I do not want to be too caught up with details about where whether it is a Troika or Troika Plus. As far as Singapore is concerned, we keep our lines of communication open and we will help where we can, quietly.
Julia Yee (Mothership): We hope that Myanmar will agree to implement the Five Point Consensus, but what are the next steps available to ASEAN if the military government does not agree?
Minister: To be frank, there has been very little progress on the Five Point Consensus and that is because all the stakeholders, and in particular the military, are not yet ready to sit down, release their detainees, have real dialogue and negotiations to make progress. The point is, when you reach this kind of situation, the answer is not to give up on the Five Point Consensus. In fact, ASEAN has reaffirmed the Five Point Consensus, but we will have to wait for some time for the ground situation to evolve to the point where all the stakeholders agree that it is in their own long term interest to sit down and talk to one another. Right now, there is just too much kinetic or military activity on the ground and that is not the opportune moment for these sorts of dialogues and negotiations to occur.
Tan Hui Yee (Straits Times): What did PRC Minister Wang Yi say about Singapore being a model for the West, and what was your response?
Minister: He was commending the smooth transition of the succession of prime ministership in Singapore. He offered that maybe Singapore could be a model to other places. I said no, Singapore does not offer ourselves as a model to other places, nor do we seek to emulate other people's political systems. Every country is unique and has unique national circumstances. The purpose and the ultimate objective of any political system is to deliver good governance and in order to deliver good governance, whoever is in charge must understand the circumstances, the vulnerabilities, the limits and the potential. The government of the day must understand where we came from and whilst it has a view on the future, it must also have a long-term view so that we make decisions in the national interest for the long term.
So we have evolved our system in that we do not hold ourselves out as a model for anyone else, because every country is unique. You cannot cut and paste policies, and it's also a reminder that we do not intend to cut and paste political models from elsewhere. We will evolve our own model, fit for (our) purpose and fit for the future.
Leong Wai Kit (Channel News Asia): Minister, earlier you mentioned that a non-political representative from Myanmar, Permanent Secretary Aung Kyaw Moe attended and since the start of the year, they have been doing so. What has been the impact of his participation on events and meetings?
Minister: Well, at least we do not have an empty chair. Actually in the past, even though there was an empty chair, they (Myanmar) had access to the audio feed, so they knew exactly what was said and they had access to all the documents. Myanmar was never cut off from information. Now with the Permanent Secretary of Myanmar in the room with us, he is also able to convey the views of his military leadership that he reports to. We listen to it, but we are not bound by it.
Leong Wai Kit (Channel News Asia): Permanent Secretary Aung Kyaw Moe said that they are going to normalise ties with ASEAN and they are confident they can do it very soon. How has the reception of those expressed views been?
Minister: All these things begin at home. You have to normalise the situation at home, then you can normalise your external relations. Foreign policy ultimately begins at home.
Thank you very much.
. . . . .