Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05RANGOON296
2005-03-08 10:37:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Rangoon
Cable title:  

BURMA: ASEAN AMBASSADORS RESPOND TO RAZALI CLAIMS

Tags:  PREL PHUM PGOV BM 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 RANGOON 000296 

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EAP/BCLTV, EAP/PIMBS
COMMERCE FOR ITA JEAN KELLY
USPACOM FOR FPA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/07/2015
TAGS: PREL PHUM PGOV BM
SUBJECT: BURMA: ASEAN AMBASSADORS RESPOND TO RAZALI CLAIMS

REF: A. STATE 36025

B. RANGOON 0266

C. 04 KUALA LUMPUR 4670

Classified By: COM Carmen Martinez for Reasons 1.4 (B,D)

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 RANGOON 000296

SIPDIS

STATE FOR EAP/BCLTV, EAP/PIMBS
COMMERCE FOR ITA JEAN KELLY
USPACOM FOR FPA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/07/2015
TAGS: PREL PHUM PGOV BM
SUBJECT: BURMA: ASEAN AMBASSADORS RESPOND TO RAZALI CLAIMS

REF: A. STATE 36025

B. RANGOON 0266

C. 04 KUALA LUMPUR 4670

Classified By: COM Carmen Martinez for Reasons 1.4 (B,D)


1. (C) Summary: The Chief of Mission (COM) met separately
with the Singaporean, Indonesian, and Malaysian ambassadors
in Rangoon to hear their views on Burma's ASEAN chairmanship
in 2006. They dismissed the idea that their governments were
prepared to be more activist on the issue of the Burmese
assuming the chair. Based on the comments of all three
ambassadors, UNSYG Special Envoy Razali seems overly
optimistic in suggesting that any of their countries will do
more than "quietly remind" the Burmese of the need to meet
certain international standards and actually propose that
Burma step aside from the 2006 chairmanship. Regarding
Razali's continued role in Burma, the Malaysian ambassador
was pessimistic, predicting that the ruling State Peace and
Development Council (SPDC) would under no circumstances allow
the Special Envoy (who has been shut out of the country since
March 2004) to return until after the referendum on the new
Constitution. End summary.


2. (C) On March 4, the COM met with Singaporean ambassador
Thambynathan Jasudasen to hear his views regarding Burma
assuming the ASEAN chairmanship in July 2006 and hosting the
ASEAN Summit o/a December 2006. When asked if he thought
that there was any possibility that Singapore might suggest
to the Burmese to step aside and pass the chairmanship to
another country (Ref A),Jasudasen responded "If we asked
that, the problem is then where do you stop?" He said that
if Burma was asked to step aside because of human rights
issues "then what about Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam?"


3. (C) Jasudasen said there were only a few ASEAN members
with the "weight" to ask Burma to step aside. In his view,
Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, or the Philippines "have the
weight - Singapore doesn't have the weight." He said
Thailand has too many difficult bilateral issues with Burma,
Indonesia is too concerned with domestic issues in the wake
of the tsunami, Malaysia is unwilling, leaving only the

Philippines. (FYI: the Philippines would be the next country
in the succession order after Burma for chairmanship; in 1999
the Philippines took over as host of the 3rd annual ASEAN
Informal Summit when Burma relinquished their turn as host of
the event. End FYI.) However, he did not believe that the
Philippines would make any strong push for ASEAN consensus to
have Burma relinquish its turn, despite the blunt advice on
democratization that President Arroyo appears to have
delivered to Burmese Prime Minister Soe Win during his recent
state visit to Manila (see Ref B). The Singaporean summed up
the situation by saying that everyone recognized the need for
the Burmese government to make changes and that there was a
downside to having Burma as ASEAN chair, but the problem was
"Who will bell the cat?"


4. (C) On March 7th, the COM met with Indonesian ambassador
Wyoso Prodjowarsito and with Malaysian ambassador Dato Cheah
Sam Kip, on separate occasions, to discuss the same topic.
In each case, their reaction to the subject of passing over
Burma for the ASEAN chairmanship was similar to that of the
Singaporean. Both dismissed the idea that their governments
were prepared to be more activist on Burma as regards the
chairmanship and noted there had been no such official
instructions from their capitals on the matter. Both
ambassadors mentioned recent calls by ASEAN parliamentarians
(including from Malaysia and Indonesia, Ref C) to deny Burma
the ASEAN chair. However, they stressed that these
viewpoints were not those of their respective governments.
The Malaysian ambassador said he did not think the ASEAN
parliamentarians would have much luck getting their anti-SPDC
presentation aired at the March 9-11 ASEAN-EU meetings in
Jakarta.


5. (C) Both ambassadors were explicit about their private
frustrations dealing with the Burmese regime. The Malaysian
said he "couldn't understand their logic" and blamed the SPDC
for the situation it found itself in vis a vis the
international community. He said that ASEAN governments,
especially his own, found Burma to be "a great
embarrassment," but it was not clear how to change the SPDC's
behavior. Direct pressure, both ambassadors agreed, would be
counterproductive. The Malaysian asserted that the GOB will
"never do anything you ask them to do, even if it's in their
interest." He predicted that the policy of "quiet pressure"
could continue in hopes the SPDC would take some steps to
appease the international community before July 2006. The
Indonesian ambassador echoed this, saying it was too
difficult for ASEAN leaders to directly criticize Burma,
especially as the GOB is increasingly comfortable with the
attentions lavished on it by China and, increasingly, India.
However, the Indonesian added, he hoped the GOB would be
willing to undertake some political reform before July 2006
to avoid the embarrassment of a boycott by the United States
and perhaps other western countries. All three ambassadors
thought it likely that the Burma situation would be discussed
during the upcoming ASEAN foreign ministers meeting in Cebu,
Philippines at the end of March (none of the three thought it
would be a major topic -- perhaps raised tangentially as part
of the "regional developments" portion of the agenda).

Comment


6. (C) Given the comments of the Singaporean, Indonesian,
and Malaysian ambassadors, UNSYG Special Envoy Razali seems
overly optimistic in suggesting that any of those countries
will do more than "quietly remind" the Burmese of the need to
meet certain international standards and actually propose
that Burma step aside from the 2006 chairmanship (Ref A).
Regarding Razali's continued role in Burma, the Malaysian
ambassador was very pessimistic, saying that it was his "best
guess" that the SPDC would under no circumstances allow the
Special Envoy (who has been shut out of the country since
March 2004) to return until after the referendum on the new
Constitution. (Note: the possible date for the referendum is
unknown, but it is unlikely to take place before the end of

2005. End note.) End comment.
Martinez