News Forum - Will Myanmar junta leader be given a seat at ASEAN summit?

[Thaiger]

A summit of the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations will take place later this month and delegates are debating whether to include Myanmar or not. The troubled nation is a member of the association, but other nations are debating whether to recognise and invite the military junta leader that overthrew the elected government in Myanmar in February to the ASEAN summit this month. After a summit in April to address the political turmoil in Myanmar, a 5-point plan was agreed upon for the military to work towards restoring peace in the country. But after months of stagnation […]

The post Will Myanmar junta leader be given a seat at ASEAN summit? appeared first on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[MikeW]

He shouldn't be allowed of course there's another one that should not be allowed either 

[NCC1701A]

no.

[Soidog]

Many of these countries will be struggling with the whole debate. How can Thailand’s leaders lecture leaders in Myanmar? They are one and the same. Military men who sieged power by military force. That’s what they have done in Myanmar. The same is true for the dictator in Cambodia Hun Sen. Corruption is rife in Loas, Vietnam and Indonesia. The whole of SE Asia is one hell of a political mess and has been hundreds of years and will be for many more to come. Laughable really, as all of this debate is to appease other countries such as the U.S 

[AussieBob]

No.  But will they be - probably. Otherwise, most of the 10 members would be banned. Only Malaysia and Singapore are democratic States. 

[Rain]

11 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

No.  But will they be - probably. Otherwise, most of the 10 members would be banned. Only Malaysia and Singapore are democratic States. 

Really?

Democratic in what sense?

[palooka]

18 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

No.  But will they be - probably. Otherwise, most of the 10 members would be banned. Only Malaysia and Singapore are democratic States. 

Maybe not so democratic but they have made inroads to reach this. People have a voice, not a rubber bullet as in Thailand, or a real bullet as in Myanmar and some of the other countrys.

[AussieBob]

12 minutes ago, Rain said:

Really?

Democratic in what sense?

Not ruled by military junta/monarchy - what else could that mean. Sure - not as 'perfect' as in a western Democracy you may know, but a Democracy none the less.

[Bluesofa]

33 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

No.  But will they be - probably. Otherwise, most of the 10 members would be banned. Only Malaysia and Singapore are democratic States. 

That could open a can of worms.
Now I don't know if this has changed in more recent years, but a couple of decades ago I remember a Malay tour guide proudly saying that the only person who had the opportunity to be president of Malaysia was an indigenous Malay. Chinese Malays and Indian Malays were both barred.

[AussieBob]

18 minutes ago, Bluesofa said:

That could open a can of worms.
Now I don't know if this has changed in more recent years, but a couple of decades ago I remember a Malay tour guide proudly saying that the only person who had the opportunity to be president of Malaysia was an indigenous Malay. Chinese Malays and Indian Malays were both barred.

A common issue all over the world. Many 'indigenous' populations have or are looking at precluding 'foreigners' from taking up the senior posts in Government.  I can remember when the coup in Fiji resulted in a new Constitution that barred anyone not an indigenous Fijian from senior roles in Govt and across all the public service. New Zealand has a specific amount of seats in Parliament that are only for the indigenous peoples. Complicated issue - no black and white. 

[gummy]

35 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

not as 'perfect' as in a western Democracy

Mmmm, Now that could be an interesting discussion thread on it's own.

[Bluesofa]

5 minutes ago, AussieBob said:

A common issue all over the world. Many 'indigenous' populations have or are looking at precluding 'foreigners' from taking up the senior posts in Government.  I can remember when the coup in Fiji resulted in a new Constitution that barred anyone not an indigenous Fijian from senior roles in Govt and across all the public service. New Zealand has a specific amount of seats in Parliament that are only for the indigenous peoples. Complicated issue - no black and white. 

Complicated issue - no black and white. Very witty, Wilde!

I wonder how long it takes to become 'indigenous'?
A lot of the Chinese and Indian Malays have been in Malaysia for generations, some for a hundred or two hundred years.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, not taking sides.
 

[gummy]

7 minutes ago, Bluesofa said:

Complicated issue - no black and white. Very witty, Wilde!

I wonder how long it takes to become 'indigenous'?
A lot of the Chinese and Indian Malays have been in Malaysia for generations, some for a hundred or two hundred years.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, not taking sides.
 

Now just to diverse in answer to your question (  " I wonder how long it takes to become 'indigenous'? " )  this is an interesting definition;

https://pediaa.com/difference-between-native-and-indigenous/

[AussieBob]

9 minutes ago, Bluesofa said:

Complicated issue - no black and white. Very witty, Wilde!

I wonder how long it takes to become 'indigenous'?
A lot of the Chinese and Indian Malays have been in Malaysia for generations, some for a hundred or two hundred years.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, not taking sides.
 

No problemo - that is exactly the key factor of concern. How long does it take?  Can we all claim against any current Government for the genocide that forced our ancestors to move somewhere else.  The history of the people of the world is continuous wars, invasions and conquering of other groups, cities, societies, states and countries.  Where is that line drawn?

[Bluesofa]

7 minutes ago, gummy said:

Now just to diverse in answer to your question (  " I wonder how long it takes to become 'indigenous'? " )  this is an interesting definition;

https://pediaa.com/difference-between-native-and-indigenous/

Quoting your link:

"indigenous is often used to the non-white, original inhabitants of a place and the usage of native to refer to non-white, original inhabitants of a place can cause offense."

I know I'm splitting hairs here, but it seems that quite often it's a politically used term. The irony is that Chinese and Indians can't really be described as white.

[AussieBob]

41 minutes ago, Bluesofa said:

Quoting your link:

"indigenous is often used to the non-white, original inhabitants of a place and the usage of native to refer to non-white, original inhabitants of a place can cause offense."

I know I'm splitting hairs here, but it seems that quite often it's a politically used term. The irony is that Chinese and Indians can't really be described as white.

Yep.  I will stand by by statement:  "There is no black and white"

 

[Nobodysfriend]

" ... but other nations are debating whether to recognise and invite the military junta leader that overthrew the elected government in Myanmar in February to the ASEAN summit this month. ..."

 

Dear Mr. Hlain , leader of the murderous unelected Junta in Myanmar ... if you are granted a seat in the Asean summit that would mean that the rest of the Asean leaders are inviting a criminal and murderer of innocent protestors , women and even kids to their table .

Shame on them all if they do this .

 

[gummy]

3 minutes ago, Nobodysfriend said:

" ... but other nations are debating whether to recognise and invite the military junta leader that overthrew the elected government in Myanmar in February to the ASEAN summit this month. ..."

 

Dear Mr. Hlain , leader of the murderous unelected Junta in Myanmar ... if you are granted a seat in the Asean summit that would mean that the rest of the Asean leaders are inviting a criminal and murderer of innocent protestors , women and even kids to their table .

Shame on them all if they do this .

 

Err, the PM was Commander-In-Chief of the RTA in 2010 when innocent people were killed in Bangkok so ASEAN have already set that precedent, so no doubt any others responsible for illegal killing of its citizens can join the "club"

[Soidog]

8 hours ago, Bluesofa said:

Complicated issue - no black and white. Very witty, Wilde!

I wonder how long it takes to become 'indigenous'?
A lot of the Chinese and Indian Malays have been in Malaysia for generations, some for a hundred or two hundred years.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, not taking sides.
 

I’m sure it’s different in many countries, but here in the U.K. it seems to take about 5 minutes and then you are classed as indigenous. Well at least it does in the sense that you can do anything truly indigenous people can do once a citizen.
 

Take a look at the British Parliament or indeed the British cabinet members as an example. 7 of the 29 cabinet members are from ethnic background with 2 of those 7 being born outside of the U.K.  If you are a citizen then you can be an MP. In fact, you don’t even need to be British! If you are a citizen of a commonwealth country (which includes Malaysia!) or Ireland, you can be a British MP. You don’t even have to be resident in the country. Meanwhile, most of the world are arguing over genetics. 

[gummy]

17 minutes ago, Soidog said:

I’m sure it’s different in many countries, but here in the U.K. it seems to take about 5 minutes and then you are classed as indigenous. Well at least it does in the sense that you can do anything truly indigenous people can do once a citizen.
 

Take a look at the British Parliament or indeed the British cabinet members as an example. 7 of the 29 cabinet members are from ethnic background with 2 of those 7 being born outside of the U.K.  If you are a citizen then you can be an MP. In fact, you don’t even need to be British! If you are a citizen of a commonwealth country (which includes Malaysia!) or Ireland, you can be a British MP. You don’t even have to be resident in the country. Meanwhile, most of the world are arguing over genetics. 

Yep and Further more if you are a British citizen on dialysis desperately needing a kidney transplant but you are over 55 you lose out to a Polish emigre. Result my wife died and I left the UK for good.

[Soidog]

1 minute ago, gummy said:

Yep and Further more if you are a British citizen on dialysis desperately needing a kidney transplant but you are over 55 you lose out to a Polish emigre. Result my wife died and I left the UK for good.

I’m sorry to hear of your loss @gummy 

For me, many of the things the U.K. does aim to be morally high and often argued to be “fair”. However, there seems this push to continue to take this to higher and higher levels, often at the cost to indigenous people. That in itself is difficult to accept sometimes, but even more so  when you see how little that goes on in most countries of the world. I’ve always said, you only have one home country. If you dilute the rights of people living there and open up your country to the extent we have where it’s very cultural fabric has changed, then I’m afraid there is no where else you can go that affords you the same rights. 
 

Its often a fine line between protecting the rights of local people and racist policies. I have no problem people coming to live, work, love and pray to your god in my country. Just do it peacefully and with respect to the culture that exits already. Please don’t try to make it like it was from where you came from.  

[Rain]

9 hours ago, AussieBob said:

Not ruled by military junta/monarchy - what else could that mean. Sure - not as 'perfect' as in a western Democracy you may know, but a Democracy none the less.

Yet, those beloved Western "democracies" that you romantically and blindly promote are nothing close to democratic - societal or political. 

The term that you might be looking for is: Oligarchy....or even better, Corporatocracy. 

[gummy]

2 minutes ago, Soidog said:

I’m sorry to hear of your loss @gummy 

For me, many of the things the U.K. does aim to be morally high and often argued to be “fair”. However, there seems this push to continue to take this to higher and higher levels, often at the cost to indigenous people. That in itself is difficult to accept sometimes, but even more so  when you see how little that goes on in most countries of the world. I’ve always said, you only have one home country. If you dilute the rights of people living there and open up your country to the extent we have where it’s very cultural fabric has changed, then I’m afraid there is no where else you can go that affords you the same rights. 
 

Its often a fine line between protecting the rights of local people and racist policies. I have no problem people coming to live, work, love and pray to your god in my country. Just do it peacefully and with respect to the culture that exits already. Please don’t try to make it like it was from where you came from.  

yep sorry about my earlier terse response, just wrong day wrong time.

[Rain]

9 hours ago, Bluesofa said:

Complicated issue - no black and white. Very witty, Wilde!

I wonder how long it takes to become 'indigenous'?
A lot of the Chinese and Indian Malays have been in Malaysia for generations, some for a hundred or two hundred years.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, not taking sides.
 

Generations?

How about centuries. 

Need to brush up on your history. Real history that isn't of an Eurocentric bent.

[Bluesofa]

2 minutes ago, Rain said:

Generations?

How about centuries. 

Need to brush up on your history. Real history that isn't of an Eurocentric bent.

How many centuries is it? I wrote a hundred or two hundred years. That is a couple of centuries.

Why isn't it generations? Two hundred years is a lot of generations.