Latest news with #PeaceFormula
Malaysia Sun
3 days ago
- Business
- Malaysia Sun
ASEAN's Missed Opportunity for Beleaguered Myanmar
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) once again failed Myanmar at the summit in Kuala Lumpur from 26 to 27 May 2025 with a "Peace Formula", when the country plunged into a bloody civil war with "revolutionary" armed ethnic groups. ASEAN is an intergovernmental organization of ten Southeast Asian countries: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Host Malaysia, as the current chairman of ASEAN, delivered a meaningless statement on Myanmar and offered no new approaches to dealing with the crisis in the country, which has been beleaguered by a military dictatorship since 2021. Instead of dusting off their hands, the summit offered a toothless Five-Point Consensus (5PC) as a road map for addressing Myanmar's tribulations. The ethnic rebels are more concerned with holding their ancestral territories and establishing regional autonomy under a constitutional government. None of the rebels has a military plan to capture Myanmar's capital. To topple the military regime in Naypyidaw and form a national democratic government, the rebel groups have placed the responsibility upon the National Unity Government (NUG), a shadow government in exile under the political inspiration of Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. The ousted leader is presently serving jail terms on charges of sedition. Myanmar's capital, Naypyidaw, is besieged by ethnic rebels who have taken two-thirds of the country from the military junta led by General Min Aung Hlaing, who has ruled Myanmar as the State Administration Council (SAC) Chairman since seizing power in the February 2021 coup d'etat. In July 2024, he wore presidential robes in July 2024. To the Myanmarese, the obsession with the failed peace plan is beyond frustrating. They simply can't help wondering why ASEAN leaders remain so delusional when it comes to this "consensus", which has delivered nothing for Myanmar. Since ASEAN adopted the 5PC in 2021, the junta has never honoured it. First and foremost, the consensus calls for the immediate cessation of violence in Myanmar. This step has never been implemented by the junta. Instead of ending military rule, the regime has rained bombs on its citizens and blocked essential supplies, including healthcare facilities, not to mention the continued atrocities like arson and massacres. Over the past four years, more than 6,000 civilians have been killed by the military, including children, prompting the UN early this year to say that the junta had ramped up its violence against civilians to a level that was unprecedented in the four years since the generals launched their coup. Rather than taking the junta's total disregard for its plan as a blatant insult, ASEAN's leadership doggedly clings to the 5PC as its "main reference to address the political crisis in Myanmar," writes Hpone Myat in anti-establishment news portal The Irrawaddy. The news organization Irrawaddy, named after a yawning river in Myanmar, operates in exile in a neighbouring country for the safety and security of its staff. Myanmar has become the most dangerous place for journalists after the recent sentencing of Than Htike Myint to five years in jail under Myanmar's Counter Terrorism Law on 3 April. The military was holding 55 journalists in detention in June 2024, according to a report by the International Centre for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL). ASEAN's continued faith in the 5PC in the face of the regime's repeated intransigence is incomprehensible. In the light of this, the people of Myanmar are not sure whether to praise the bloc for its "consistency" or feel sorry for its naivety in dealing with the most ruthless regime on earth. Apart from the statement, remarks from the bloc's current chair, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, were out of context and deliberately did not touch base as the military junta is sinking into a quicksand. In April, Anwar met with junta chief Hlaing in Bangkok and held virtual talks with Myanmar's National Unity Government (NUG) in exile. Malaysian Premier Anwar Ibrahim should not have appeased Min Aung Hlaing, believing in the illusions that the General would restore peace in the country, riddled with civil strife. After a call from the ASEAN meeting in April, Hlaing promised a ceasefire by the Myanmar armed forces, Tatmadaw, and the ethnic rebels. His junta even signed an MOU with some rebels, but that ceasefire was broken within days. Hlaing's air force continued to bomb civilian areas, causing immense suffering, pain, and agony for the villagers. At the summit, he (Anwar) described those talks as "significant", saying both sides were open to engagement while highlighting Gen Hlaing's supposed willingness to engage in peace efforts despite dubbing NUG as a "terrorist organization". In his opening remarks to the summit in Kuala Lumpur, Anwar said ASEAN had been able to "move the needle forward" in its efforts to achieve an eventual resolution to the Myanmar crisis, adding that the steps may be small and the bridge may be fragile, but "even a fragile bridge is better than a widening gulf." There is not even a "fragile bridge", given his dishonesty and insincerity. His willingness to engage in peace talks is merely fictional and a hollow promise; Myanmar's generals have historically never been known for sincerely engaging in peace efforts. They only engage or join dialogue as a pretext to ease external pressures. No such talks have ever borne fruit. Ask any ethnic armed resistance organization or opposition politician in Myanmar, and they will enlighten you as to how historically untrustworthy the previous generals and Min Aung Hlaing are, laments Hpone Myat. ASEAN members have univocally urged the regime in Naypyidaw to extend a temporary ceasefire and engage in peace talks with its rivals at the summit, but did not spell out a timeline. Instead, the ASEAN urged that negotiations were needed and that Malaysia's Foreign Minister Mohamad Hasan would visit Naypyidaw in June regarding the mitigation of the crisis. Furthermore, the regional leaders' statement on an extended and expanded ceasefire in Myanmar can only be greeted with dismay. The leaders further called for "the sustained extension and nationwide expansion of the ceasefire in Myanmar," but the reality is the ceasefire has never existed on the ground, as the junta has consistently violated the truce from the very start, wrote The Irrawaddy. Instead of being unrealistic about the reality of present-day Myanmar, ASEAN should have adopted a serious resolution against the regime. Such moves would have put pressure on the junta by making it harder for it to survive, but also would have helped move the currently stalled resolution mechanism for Myanmar's crisis forward. To make that happen, the bloc must first drop its empty rhetoric and take meaningful steps, concludes Hpone Myat. Last week, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) raised concern over the deteriorating human rights situation and economic collapse in Myanmar, with violent military operations killing more civilians last year than in any year since the 2021 coup. The military operations have sparked an unfolding humanitarian crisis. "The country has endured an increasingly catastrophic human rights crisis marked by unabated violence and atrocities that have affected every single aspect of life," said Volker Trk, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. Myanmar's economy has lost USD 93.9 billion over the last four years, with inflation surging and the kyat (local currency) losing 40 per cent of its value. Over half the population now lives below the poverty line, facing food insecurity and soaring prices, which has worsened since the March 28 earthquake, according to the U.N. Possibly, ASEAN has lost all moral position to pressurise the military junta, since Justice for Myanmar accused 54 companies in Southeast Asian countries ASEAN of supplying the regime with funds, jet fuel and technology. "ASEAN's failure to address corporate complicity has allowed the [regime] to intensify its brutal campaign of terror that has killed thousands of civilians and displaced millions with total impunity," said Yadanar Maung, spokesperson of Justice for Myanmar, while calling on the leaders of ASEAN to end their support to the regime in Naypyidaw. First published in the Stratheia Policy Journal, Islamabad, Pakistan on 03 June 2025 Source: Pressenza
Malaysia Sun
3 days ago
- Business
- Malaysia Sun
ASEANs Missed Opportunity for Beleaguered Myanmar
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) once again failed Myanmar at the summit in Kuala Lumpur from 26 to 27 May 2025 with a Peace Formula, when the country plunged into a bloody civil war with revolutionary armed ethnic groups. ASEAN is an intergovernmental organization of ten Southeast Asian countries: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam. Host Malaysia, as the current chairman of ASEAN, delivered a meaningless statement on Myanmar and offered no new approaches to dealing with the crisis in the country, which has been beleaguered by a military dictatorship since 2021. Instead of dusting off their hands, the summit offered a toothless Five-Point Consensus (5PC) as a road map for addressing Myanmars tribulations. The ethnic rebels are more concerned with holding their ancestral territories and establishing regional autonomy under a constitutional government. None of the rebels has a military plan to capture Myanmars capital. To topple the military regime in Naypyidaw and form a national democratic government, the rebel groups have placed the responsibility upon the National Unity Government (NUG), a shadow government in exile under the political inspiration of Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. The ousted leader is presently serving jail terms on charges of sedition. Myanmars capital, Naypyidaw, is besieged by ethnic rebels who have taken two-thirds of the country from the military junta led by General Min Aung Hlaing, who has ruled Myanmar as the State Administration Council (SAC) Chairman since seizing power in the February 2021 coup dtat. In July 2024, he wore presidential robes in July 2024. To the Myanmarese, the obsession with the failed peace plan is beyond frustrating. They simply cant help wondering why ASEAN leaders remain so delusional when it comes to this consensus, which has delivered nothing for Myanmar. Since ASEAN adopted the 5PC in 2021, the junta has never honoured it. First and foremost, the consensus calls for the immediate cessation of violence in Myanmar. This step has never been implemented by the junta. Instead of ending military rule, the regime has rained bombs on its citizens and blocked essential supplies, including healthcare facilities, not to mention the continued atrocities like arson and massacres. Over the past four years, more than 6,000 civilians have been killed by the military, including children, prompting the UN early this year to say that the junta had ramped up its violence against civilians to a level that was unprecedented in the four years since the generals launched their coup. Rather than taking the juntas total disregard for its plan as a blatant insult, ASEANs leadership doggedly clings to the 5PC as its main reference to address the political crisis in Myanmar, writes Hpone Myat in anti-establishment news portal The Irrawaddy. The news organization Irrawaddy, named after a yawning river in Myanmar, operates in exile in a neighbouring country for the safety and security of its staff. Myanmar has become the most dangerous place for journalists after the recent sentencing of Than Htike Myint to five years in jail under Myanmars Counter Terrorism Law on 3 April. The military was holding 55 journalists in detention in June 2024, according to a report by the International Centre for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL). ASEANs continued faith in the 5PC in the face of the regimes repeated intransigence is incomprehensible. In the light of this, the people of Myanmar are not sure whether to praise the bloc for its consistency or feel sorry for its naivety in dealing with the most ruthless regime on earth. Apart from the statement, remarks from the blocs current chair, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, were out of context and deliberately did not touch base as the military junta is sinking into a quicksand. In April, Anwar met with junta chief Hlaing in Bangkok and held virtual talks with Myanmars National Unity Government (NUG) in exile. Malaysian Premier Anwar Ibrahim should not have appeased Min Aung Hlaing, believing in the illusions that the General would restore peace in the country, riddled with civil strife. After a call from the ASEAN meeting in April, Hlaing promised a ceasefire by the Myanmar armed forces, Tatmadaw, and the ethnic rebels. His junta even signed an MOU with some rebels, but that ceasefire was broken within days. Hlaings air force continued to bomb civilian areas, causing immense suffering, pain, and agony for the villagers. At the summit, he (Anwar) described those talks as significant, saying both sides were open to engagement while highlighting Gen Hlaings supposed willingness to engage in peace efforts despite dubbing NUG as a terrorist organization. In his opening remarks to the summit in Kuala Lumpur, Anwar said ASEAN had been able to move the needle forward in its efforts to achieve an eventual resolution to the Myanmar crisis, adding that the steps may be small and the bridge may be fragile, but even a fragile bridge is better than a widening gulf. There is not even a fragile bridge, given his dishonesty and insincerity. His willingness to engage in peace talks is merely fictional and a hollow promise; Myanmars generals have historically never been known for sincerely engaging in peace efforts. They only engage or join dialogue as a pretext to ease external pressures. No such talks have ever borne fruit. Ask any ethnic armed resistance organization or opposition politician in Myanmar, and they will enlighten you as to how historically untrustworthy the previous generals and Min Aung Hlaing are, laments Hpone Myat. ASEAN members have univocally urged the regime in Naypyidaw to extend a temporary ceasefire and engage in peace talks with its rivals at the summit, but did not spell out a timeline. Instead, the ASEAN urged that negotiations were needed and that Malaysias Foreign Minister Mohamad Hasan would visit Naypyidaw in June regarding the mitigation of the crisis. Furthermore, the regional leaders statement on an extended and expanded ceasefire in Myanmar can only be greeted with dismay. The leaders further called for the sustained extension and nationwide expansion of the ceasefire in Myanmar, but the reality is the ceasefire has never existed on the ground, as the junta has consistently violated the truce from the very start, wrote The Irrawaddy. Instead of being unrealistic about the reality of present-day Myanmar, ASEAN should have adopted a serious resolution against the regime. Such moves would have put pressure on the junta by making it harder for it to survive, but also would have helped move the currently stalled resolution mechanism for Myanmars crisis forward. To make that happen, the bloc must first drop its empty rhetoric and take meaningful steps, concludes Hpone Myat. Last week, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) raised concern over the deteriorating human rights situation and economic collapse in Myanmar, with violent military operations killing more civilians last year than in any year since the 2021 coup. The military operations have sparked an unfolding humanitarian crisis. Over half the population now lives below the poverty line, facing food insecurity and soaring prices, which has worsened since the March 28 earthquake, according to the U.N. Possibly, ASEAN has lost all moral position to pressurise the military junta, since Justice for Myanmar accused 54 companies in Southeast Asian countries ASEAN of supplying the regime with funds, jet fuel and technology. Saleem Samad
Daily Maverick
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Bringing back abducted Ukrainian children a tough assignment for SA
It will be a delicate but critical assignment for South Africa to secure the return from Russia of the 400 abducted Ukrainian children whom Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky last month asked President Ramaphosa to help bring home. Zelensky gave Ramaphosa the list of 400 children he says Russia abducted and deported to Russia, when they met in Pretoria on 24 April 2025. Ramaphosa accepted what could be a tricky mission. It will require South Africa to walk a fine line between its humanitarian concerns and its friendship with Russia. Pretoria's concern for the children began as far back as June 2023 when Ramaphosa led a peace mission of African leaders to Kyiv to meet Zelensky and then to St Petersburg to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin, to present a peace plan. Returning the Ukrainian children was part of the plan, but Putin dismissed this, insisting that Russia had merely moved children out of harm's way in a war zone. The issue was highly charged politically and remains so as the International Criminal Court (ICC) had issued warrants of arrest for Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, Russia's Commissioner for Children's Rights, on 17 March 2023, indicting them 'for the war crime of unlawful deportation of population (children) and that of unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation'. Ramaphosa and Zelensky evidently got on well at their meeting in June 2023 in Kyiv. This began to thaw the relations between the two countries, which had been chilly because of Pretoria's steadfast refusal to condemn Russia's invasion. This was most evident in South Africa's abstention from a series of resolutions in the UN General Assembly in 2022 and 2023, condemning the invasion as a violation of the UN Charter's demands that countries respect one another's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Zelensky invited Ramaphosa to participate in the international discussions on his own 10-point Peace Formula that were just then about to begin. Ramaphosa accepted and sent national security adviser Sydney Mufamadi and director-general of International Relations and Cooperation Zane Dangor to participate in several rounds of talks around the world, culminating in a summit in Switzerland in June 2024. The return of the abducted children was also one of the points of Zelensky's Peace Formula. To date, Ukraine has verified 19,546 children who were deported or forcibly transferred, though it believes there are more. At last count, it said 1,307 had been returned to Ukraine, either through their families, or through NGOs or governments, particularly Qatar and the Vatican. SA's mediator role South Africa has definitely remained interested in the children, says Ukrainian legal expert Kateryna Rashevska, the lead on International Justice and legal analysis at the Regional Centre for Human Rights in Ukraine and also an expert on Ukraine's Bring Kids Back UA task force. She recalls visiting South Africa in November 2023 and meeting officials in the Presidency and Dirco. 'I saw how this topic really interested the South Africans and how for them, it is also not only a Ukrainian matter, but … for the whole international community.' There were intermittent later reports about South Africa's efforts to bring back some of the children, but none of any success. Raveshka is not sure why, but she assumes that some preparations were made to mediate. 'In particular, a representative office of Bring Kids Back UA was established in South Africa.' South Africa's efforts became more formal and focused in October 2024 when it participated, through its High Commissioner to Canada Moe Shaik, in the Ministerial Conference on the Human Dimension of the (Zelensky) Peace Formula in Montreal. The conference focused on trying to return prisoners of war, unlawfully detained civilians and deported children and included steps to strengthen the International Coalition for the Return of Ukrainian Children, which had been formed in February 2024. At the Montreal conference, Pretoria offered to serve as an intermediary – alongside the Vatican and Qatar – 'to support and negotiate the return of children'. Ukraine had wanted South Africa to formally join the international coalition, but the country did not do so. Asked why not, Chrispin Phiri, spokesperson for Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Ronald Lamola, would say only, 'The coalition is one of the initiatives to address the issue of Ukrainian children. South Africa is working on a separate initiative together with Qatar and the Holy See (who are also not part of the coalition) to address the return of the children. We are engaging with both sides on the matter to ensure the return of the children.' Raveshka explained why she believed South Africa did not want to join the coalition. She said that she believed Pretoria's thinking was similar to Qatar's, that most of the members of the coalition were Western nations, 'which are perceived by the Russian Federation as enemy states'. Joining this coalition could harm South Africa's efforts to get the children back, she said. However, Raveshka said that even after Montreal, there was no vision about how South Africa could help. 'But after the visit of President Zelensky, after the transfer of this list of 400 children, it became more clear.' A delicate mission South Africa will now have to present this list to Russia and ask it to return the children to Ukraine. This delicate mission would seem to imply that Pretoria thinks Russia has done something wrong, or even committed crimes. But Raveshka said she supposed that South Africa would follow Qatar's approach, and that would be not to use words such as 'deportation' or 'abduction' or 'international crime'. 'It will be like South Africa helps Ukraine to reunify families separated because of war. So, for Ukraine, it is acceptable to use this wording because our first priority is the repatriation of children and then accountability.' Raveshka said once South Africa handed over the list to Russia, Children's Commissioner Lvova-Belova's office would probably check the information about the children provided by Ukraine to select those who could be returned. This would include verifying the legal guardians of the children. Raveshka said several children on South Africa's list were particularly at risk because they had been forcibly removed to Crimea and elsewhere from the Kherson Regional Children's Home and the nearby Oleshky Specialised Boarding School. These well-respected institutions cared for children with special needs, such as orphans or children with disabilities. Ukrainian media reports have said that parents, guardians and other carers are anxious because many of those removed from the orphanages are now not receiving the special care from the Russians that they need. They want them sent home. 'Some of them have biological parents in Ukraine, some of them have legal guardians in Ukraine, others have foster families who are ready to care for them after their repatriation,' Rashevska said. 'Ukrainian institutions are also ready to take them in,' she said. She foresaw problems in the recovery of several children on the list who had already been adopted by Russian families. Ukrainian authorities believe that about half of the children from the Kherson Regional Children's Home, for instance, are now with Russian families. One child was known to have been adopted by a high-ranking Russian official. 'However, this in no way means that South Africa should not focus its efforts on the return of these children. On the contrary, the situation is so complex that only an intermediary state can effectively influence the reunification of these children with their relatives in Ukraine.' She said the list of 400 names was prepared by competent Ukrainian bodies who had verified all the information. The Russians often claimed the Ukrainian lists were inaccurate, she said. 'But I am sure, I can tell you, because I know people who work on this list, that these are real children who are needed here in Ukraine, who have families, but unfortunately they are in captivity of the Russian Federation. Sometimes Russians are even not confirming where these children are.' Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha told local journalists in Pretoria that the challenge of identifying the children had been aggravated by Russia changing the names and identities of those it had deported. Moscow then gave them Russian citizenship or handed them over to Russian families, says Rashevska. Nonetheless, Sybiha was confident that Pretoria would achieve 'positive results' and said it was helpful that Ramaphosa 'has direct communication with President Putin…' Coordinated approach Rashevska notes that other countries like Qatar have also been given lists of children to try to bring home. During recent peace talks conducted by the US in Saudi Arabia, Ukraine also gave US officials a list of names. Rashevska said Russia was not prepared to cooperate with the Biden administration, but they now seemed to be open to discussion on the children with the Trump administration. It is understood that Saudi Arabia has also been given a list of 500 children. 'So, Ukraine is just trying to use all possibilities in order to return more and more,' said Rashevska. She said she hoped at least some children on South Africa's list would be returned. Any failures would be attributable to Russia, not to any lack of political will by South Africa. She believed Moscow would be particularly reluctant to return any children old enough to testify in the ICC case. Rashevska thought it was important to highlight 'that the participation of South Africa in the repatriation of Ukrainian children is very important, not only because it is a chance for families and their children to be reunified, but also because it is a sign that it is not only a matter for Ukraine when children are stolen or abducted during armed conflict,' she said. 'For demonstrating this solidarity with Ukraine, we are very grateful to South Africa.' Ramaphosa's spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said: 'The outcome of the process of securing the return of Ukrainian children is going to require the full cooperation of the parties directly affected in the matter and interested parties with an interest in ensuring a lasting peace in Ukraine and the region. 'President Ramaphosa sees the return of the children as one of the key confidence-building measures that will underpin the peace process. 'Therefore, it's not going to be for South Africa alone to determine the process and outcome of such an exercise. It's going to take all parties involved to finally resolve this issue.' DM
Yahoo
09-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Zelenskyy believes Victory Plan can be basis for Trump's plan
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy believes that the Victory Plan proposed by Ukraine can be the basis for US President Donald Trump's plan to end the Russian-Ukrainian war. Source: Zelenskyy in an interview with the UK broadcaster ITV News Quote: "We wrote this in the Victory Plan... The fundamental documents were prepared by Ukraine. Yes, they can be the basis for Trump's plan, for Trump's plan with Ukraine. Definitely, without Ukraine, there can be no plan, I'm sure. Ideally Trump's plan would also include the presence of Europe." Details: The president reminded that the Peace Formula spells out what a just peace for Ukraine is based on international law. Quote: "Any plan, if it brings 10%, 20%, 30% from the basis of a just peace – that's good steps, good steps forward. But I am confident that we can't talk about a just peace while evil is unpunished." Details: When asked about his actions if Trump offers an unacceptable option for Ukraine to end the war, Zelenskyy emphasised: "We can't be in a opposition with the USA. This is not convenient for us, a country in war. And this is not convenient for President Trump, who is the president of a strong America, and Putin's victory is not convenient for him. If there is opposition, God forbid, between the positions of Ukraine and America – I don't even want to think about this – then only Putin will win from this. Putin's victory is a loss for the Western world, Europe and America." At the same time, when asked whether he wanted to be a president of victory or a president of peace, Zelenskyy said that 'it is hard to differentiate between them'. Quote: "We are fighting for peace today. I think that peace for a lot of Ukrainians that's a victory. Because, I really do think that because Putin could not fully occupy us, he has already lost... But the victory which you're thinking of, one that is loud. Well listen, it's not that important. All these parades, they're things that Putin loves. For us, it's about ending the war, to live, to develop our country and well, an understanding of how to integrate all these territories." Details: He also expressed surprise that the entire world had not been able to stop Putin in these three years. "So, stopping – slowing down, not letting him ruin us – it [the world] managed to do it. But to put him in his place, really put him in his place. Hit him over the hands, as they say, the world couldn't manage it. This, frankly, surprises me. It's not the lack of capability, but a failure of will," Zelenskyy said. Support UP or become our patron!
