For nearly two decades, Washington’s policy stance towards Myanmar has oscillated between moral outrage and strategic neglect. No one denies that Myanmar’s past includes human rights abuses, but the question is: How long will we let that dictate US foreign policy instead of thinking strategically about the future?
As an economist and a former member of Congress, I have spent my career examining economic ethics, weighing moral claims against competing interests. I believe America’s sanctions-obsessed approach to Myanmar has only weakened our country’s position in one of Asia’s most consequential geopolitical crossroads.
President Trump, however, has signalled a possible shift in that policy stance. First of all, diplomatic engagement with Myanmar is not an endorsement of the country’s government; it is merely an investment in American Influence, regional stability and long-term economic security. Furthermore, there is no counterproposal that will leave the US and Myanmar better off.
Recently, Myanmar’s multiphase national elections, monitored by international observers and accompanied by prisoner releases, have prompted cautious openness from the Trump administration. Mr Trump has deliberately avoided the sanctimonious megaphone diplomacy that characterized earlier US policy, choosing instead to preserve the possibility of dealmaking. That restraint matters, as diplomacy requires open doors and levelheadedness.
Critics argue that US engagement in Myanmar legitimizes a flawed political process. I disagree. As economists understand, incentives shape outcomes. Total disengagement through sweeping sanctions and public condemnation has not improved governance in Myanmar. It has, however, created a power vacuum that has been eagerly filled by America’s adversaries.
China already operates a major oil and gas pipeline from Myanmar’s coast to Yunnan Province, locking in strategic energy access and political influence. Russia, eager to expand its footprint in South-East Asia, stands ready to deepen military and economic ties wherever the United States retreats. If America is serious about strengthening our geopolitical position, we cannot afford a policy of absence. The status quo is not working.
There is also a hard-headed economic case for engagement. Myanmar sits atop significant reserves of oil, natural gas and rare earth minerals. These resources are indispensable to modern energy systems, advanced manufacturing and national defence. The global scramble for critical minerals is intensifying, and dependence on single-country supply chains has proved strategically reckless.
Investing in energy and critical mineral opportunities in Myanmar would diversify supply chains while giving the United States economic stakes that translate into diplomatic influence. America’s broader Indo-Pacific strategy depends on credible engagement with South-East Asia, including through forums such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Quiet diplomacy at regional summits, confidence-building measures along borders and economic reentry all signal that the United States intends to remain a serious player.
Many US companies exited Myanmar after the 2021 sanctions regime was put into place by a Biden executive order, surrendering ground to state-backed Chinese firms. With those measures set to expire early this year unless renewed, Washington faces a choice: either double down on a strategy that has ceded US influence or recalibrate towards a strategic engagement that advances US interests.
The US Treasury’s recent decision to remove certain Burmese individuals from sanctions lists, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s positive reference to Myanmar’s elections and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s instructions to State Department officials to avoid prejudging electoral legitimacy overseas all suggest that a more nuanced approach is possible.
Senator Mitch McConnell, meanwhile, preferring the old US strategy of disengaging and handing wins to our adversaries, has dismissed Myanmar’s elections outright.
The United States should push for peace, humanitarian aid and political inclusion in the countries where we are engaged diplomatically. Those goals, however, can be achieved only from a seat at the table. The president’s playbook is very clear in the 2025 National Security Strategy document: “Flexible Realism – US policy will be realistic about what is possible and desirable to seek in its dealings with other nations. We seek good relations and peaceful commercial relations with the nations of the world without imposing on them democratic or other social change that differs widely from their traditions and histories. We recognize and affirm that there is nothing inconsistent or hypocritical in acting according to such a realistic assessment or in maintaining good relations with countries whose governing systems and societies differ from ours, even as we push like-minded friends to uphold our shared norms, furthering our interests as we do so.”
Strategic engagement with Myanmar offers the United States a chance to strengthen our position against our adversaries, secure critical resources and promote stability in a geopolitically crucial region of the world. Because walking away at this crucial moment would be strategically unsound, Congress should back President Trump on this strategic recalibration because American interests demand it.
Dave Brat is a PhD economist. He represented Virginia’s 7th Congressional District from 2014 to 2019.
gnlm
For nearly two decades, Washington’s policy stance towards Myanmar has oscillated between moral outrage and strategic neglect. No one denies that Myanmar’s past includes human rights abuses, but the question is: How long will we let that dictate US foreign policy instead of thinking strategically about the future?
As an economist and a former member of Congress, I have spent my career examining economic ethics, weighing moral claims against competing interests. I believe America’s sanctions-obsessed approach to Myanmar has only weakened our country’s position in one of Asia’s most consequential geopolitical crossroads.
President Trump, however, has signalled a possible shift in that policy stance. First of all, diplomatic engagement with Myanmar is not an endorsement of the country’s government; it is merely an investment in American Influence, regional stability and long-term economic security. Furthermore, there is no counterproposal that will leave the US and Myanmar better off.
Recently, Myanmar’s multiphase national elections, monitored by international observers and accompanied by prisoner releases, have prompted cautious openness from the Trump administration. Mr Trump has deliberately avoided the sanctimonious megaphone diplomacy that characterized earlier US policy, choosing instead to preserve the possibility of dealmaking. That restraint matters, as diplomacy requires open doors and levelheadedness.
Critics argue that US engagement in Myanmar legitimizes a flawed political process. I disagree. As economists understand, incentives shape outcomes. Total disengagement through sweeping sanctions and public condemnation has not improved governance in Myanmar. It has, however, created a power vacuum that has been eagerly filled by America’s adversaries.
China already operates a major oil and gas pipeline from Myanmar’s coast to Yunnan Province, locking in strategic energy access and political influence. Russia, eager to expand its footprint in South-East Asia, stands ready to deepen military and economic ties wherever the United States retreats. If America is serious about strengthening our geopolitical position, we cannot afford a policy of absence. The status quo is not working.
There is also a hard-headed economic case for engagement. Myanmar sits atop significant reserves of oil, natural gas and rare earth minerals. These resources are indispensable to modern energy systems, advanced manufacturing and national defence. The global scramble for critical minerals is intensifying, and dependence on single-country supply chains has proved strategically reckless.
Investing in energy and critical mineral opportunities in Myanmar would diversify supply chains while giving the United States economic stakes that translate into diplomatic influence. America’s broader Indo-Pacific strategy depends on credible engagement with South-East Asia, including through forums such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Quiet diplomacy at regional summits, confidence-building measures along borders and economic reentry all signal that the United States intends to remain a serious player.
Many US companies exited Myanmar after the 2021 sanctions regime was put into place by a Biden executive order, surrendering ground to state-backed Chinese firms. With those measures set to expire early this year unless renewed, Washington faces a choice: either double down on a strategy that has ceded US influence or recalibrate towards a strategic engagement that advances US interests.
The US Treasury’s recent decision to remove certain Burmese individuals from sanctions lists, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s positive reference to Myanmar’s elections and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s instructions to State Department officials to avoid prejudging electoral legitimacy overseas all suggest that a more nuanced approach is possible.
Senator Mitch McConnell, meanwhile, preferring the old US strategy of disengaging and handing wins to our adversaries, has dismissed Myanmar’s elections outright.
The United States should push for peace, humanitarian aid and political inclusion in the countries where we are engaged diplomatically. Those goals, however, can be achieved only from a seat at the table. The president’s playbook is very clear in the 2025 National Security Strategy document: “Flexible Realism – US policy will be realistic about what is possible and desirable to seek in its dealings with other nations. We seek good relations and peaceful commercial relations with the nations of the world without imposing on them democratic or other social change that differs widely from their traditions and histories. We recognize and affirm that there is nothing inconsistent or hypocritical in acting according to such a realistic assessment or in maintaining good relations with countries whose governing systems and societies differ from ours, even as we push like-minded friends to uphold our shared norms, furthering our interests as we do so.”
Strategic engagement with Myanmar offers the United States a chance to strengthen our position against our adversaries, secure critical resources and promote stability in a geopolitically crucial region of the world. Because walking away at this crucial moment would be strategically unsound, Congress should back President Trump on this strategic recalibration because American interests demand it.
Dave Brat is a PhD economist. He represented Virginia’s 7th Congressional District from 2014 to 2019.
gnlm
Chinese President Xi Jinping exposed his latest premise in the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization Plus Meeting, known as the “Global Governance Initiative (GGI)” for safeguarding world peace with the Shanghai Spirit – mutual trust, solidarity and respect. Given the international turmoil, crises, geopolitical tensions and institutional gaps in global governance, the GGI suggests five keys to realign the international order, which is currently malfunctioning.
The original commitment to peace with UN values is tested.
It has been 80 years since the United Nations was established to shape the world with its core values of equality, justice and mutual respect. During this eight-decade period, it is true that the world has flourished with prosperity and peace brought by the United Nations. People of various nations have witnessed rewards and incentives that the world gained as a result of the cooperation of nations multilaterally over the years.
Yet today, the United Nations and multilateralism are being challenged. Aggressive major power countries and their allies intentionally ignore the important UN resolutions; tanks have passed through the UN posts; shells have crossed the blue line; and bombs have hit the UN watchtower. “Peace is never abstract – it stands on the edge of life and death.”
Furthermore, byproducts and side effects were produced in the mechanism of the rules-based international order. In this matter, neocolonialism, neo-conservatism and Cold-War mentality emerged as secondary phenomena in the post-World War II international order. When those unexpected, flawed ideologies are getting stronger in the years that follow, the peaceful post-World War II global order will be disrupted. Major countries place themselves in the position of global outliers by shaping the world with unipolar power. The concept of Manifest Destiny infected the equal-based multilateralism.
Thus, it becomes the responsibility of all nations for humanity to maintain the original commitment to peace and to improve the global governance system in line with the principles of the United Nations.
Epoch-making for fairer and more equitable international relations
Current global geopolitics has entered into turbulence and hostility. Without a doubt, nations are at the crossroads between unity and division, cooperation and confrontation, and zero-sum and win-win objectives. In response to such dysfunction of the global governance system, China calls for adhering to sovereign equality, abiding by the international rule of law, practising multilateralism, a people-centred approach, and taking real actions.
Keywords of the Global Governance Initiative – sovereignty, international rule of law, multilateralism, people-centred approach and real actions – are deemed to be the right momenta in reshaping the global order into a fairer, more reasonable and more pragmatic one with advocacies for the Global South. Peace needs to be formulated without undermining the national interests of the nations.
The Global Governance Initiative encourages cooperation and integrity by upholding multilateralism to defend international justice for building a synergetic shared future. In addition, the announcement of the newly proposed initiative at the SCO+ Meeting is the symbolic strategy of being embedded with the Shanghai Spirit from Amazon to the Mekong. That shows the solidarity of Eurasia and Africa; in other words, the power of the Global South.
This latest initiative does not intend to build a parallel power towards the United Nations, but to restore the original inspirations of founding the United Nations. In fact, the United Nations is the place where countries can resolve issues on an equal basis, and where dialogue can be put at the forefront instead of waging wars in resolving disputes. “War cannot solve problems and sanctions will only complicate them,” – Wang Yi.
Myanmar-China’s comprehensive strategic partnership supports GGI
Myanmar fully supports the Global Governance Initiative and its aim, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing asserted during his recent visit to Chengdu, following his days in Tianjin, Beijing, and Harbin of China. The Senior General noted: “Among the various sizes of countries with developed, developing or poor statuses, some major power countries are exerting coercive pressures on other countries both with equal strength and lesser strength by means of politically, economically, financially and militarily. President Xi highlighted this fact and suggested that reform is required.”
Time flies. This year marks the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Myanmar-China bilateral ties have reached their highest this time after being tested over time, turbulence, experiences, and propaganda strategy. Bound by history, the two intertwined nations are now committed to formulating a comprehensive strategic partnership in various sectors, which somehow upholds the consolidation of the Chinese proposed initiatives: Belt and Road Initiative, Global Development Initiative, Global Security Initiative, Global Civilization Initiative, and now the Global Governance Initiative.
What is more, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing also pledged during his recent trip to China that his administration will prioritize formulating a strategic partnership with China.
Since the two countries were colonized in bygone history, we have learned very well about the bitterness of being suppressed; the hostility of invasion; the atrocities of the invaders; and the sacrifices of many souls in fighting to get back the sovereignty. Standing shoulder to shoulder, both countries reject any form of hegemonism, neocolonialism and neo-conservatism.
Myanmar and China will work side by side in reaffirming the UN-centred international system by promoting an equal and orderly multipolar world. Multipolarity is a fact. It emboldens an inclusive global governance system by uplifting the voices of the South countries.
Constructor Versus Destructor
Instead of waging coercive tactics, sympathy and love for mankind should be placed. Instead of engaging in forcible diplomacy, dialogue should be upheld. Instead of monopolizing the global dominance, mutual trust and mutual respect should be strengthened. Instead of bullying others, a few major countries should collaborate and coordinate. Fruitful prosperity should be shared among nations across different continents; there must not no forgotten continent or country. As time goes by, unilateralism will end by itself. Only the milestones of humanity made by a constructive and people-centred approach will long exist, while destructive motives for mankind will definitely fail in the end.
GNLM
Chinese President Xi Jinping exposed his latest premise in the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization Plus Meeting, known as the “Global Governance Initiative (GGI)” for safeguarding world peace with the Shanghai Spirit – mutual trust, solidarity and respect. Given the international turmoil, crises, geopolitical tensions and institutional gaps in global governance, the GGI suggests five keys to realign the international order, which is currently malfunctioning.
The original commitment to peace with UN values is tested.
It has been 80 years since the United Nations was established to shape the world with its core values of equality, justice and mutual respect. During this eight-decade period, it is true that the world has flourished with prosperity and peace brought by the United Nations. People of various nations have witnessed rewards and incentives that the world gained as a result of the cooperation of nations multilaterally over the years.
Yet today, the United Nations and multilateralism are being challenged. Aggressive major power countries and their allies intentionally ignore the important UN resolutions; tanks have passed through the UN posts; shells have crossed the blue line; and bombs have hit the UN watchtower. “Peace is never abstract – it stands on the edge of life and death.”
Furthermore, byproducts and side effects were produced in the mechanism of the rules-based international order. In this matter, neocolonialism, neo-conservatism and Cold-War mentality emerged as secondary phenomena in the post-World War II international order. When those unexpected, flawed ideologies are getting stronger in the years that follow, the peaceful post-World War II global order will be disrupted. Major countries place themselves in the position of global outliers by shaping the world with unipolar power. The concept of Manifest Destiny infected the equal-based multilateralism.
Thus, it becomes the responsibility of all nations for humanity to maintain the original commitment to peace and to improve the global governance system in line with the principles of the United Nations.
Epoch-making for fairer and more equitable international relations
Current global geopolitics has entered into turbulence and hostility. Without a doubt, nations are at the crossroads between unity and division, cooperation and confrontation, and zero-sum and win-win objectives. In response to such dysfunction of the global governance system, China calls for adhering to sovereign equality, abiding by the international rule of law, practising multilateralism, a people-centred approach, and taking real actions.
Keywords of the Global Governance Initiative – sovereignty, international rule of law, multilateralism, people-centred approach and real actions – are deemed to be the right momenta in reshaping the global order into a fairer, more reasonable and more pragmatic one with advocacies for the Global South. Peace needs to be formulated without undermining the national interests of the nations.
The Global Governance Initiative encourages cooperation and integrity by upholding multilateralism to defend international justice for building a synergetic shared future. In addition, the announcement of the newly proposed initiative at the SCO+ Meeting is the symbolic strategy of being embedded with the Shanghai Spirit from Amazon to the Mekong. That shows the solidarity of Eurasia and Africa; in other words, the power of the Global South.
This latest initiative does not intend to build a parallel power towards the United Nations, but to restore the original inspirations of founding the United Nations. In fact, the United Nations is the place where countries can resolve issues on an equal basis, and where dialogue can be put at the forefront instead of waging wars in resolving disputes. “War cannot solve problems and sanctions will only complicate them,” – Wang Yi.
Myanmar-China’s comprehensive strategic partnership supports GGI
Myanmar fully supports the Global Governance Initiative and its aim, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing asserted during his recent visit to Chengdu, following his days in Tianjin, Beijing, and Harbin of China. The Senior General noted: “Among the various sizes of countries with developed, developing or poor statuses, some major power countries are exerting coercive pressures on other countries both with equal strength and lesser strength by means of politically, economically, financially and militarily. President Xi highlighted this fact and suggested that reform is required.”
Time flies. This year marks the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the two countries. Myanmar-China bilateral ties have reached their highest this time after being tested over time, turbulence, experiences, and propaganda strategy. Bound by history, the two intertwined nations are now committed to formulating a comprehensive strategic partnership in various sectors, which somehow upholds the consolidation of the Chinese proposed initiatives: Belt and Road Initiative, Global Development Initiative, Global Security Initiative, Global Civilization Initiative, and now the Global Governance Initiative.
What is more, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing also pledged during his recent trip to China that his administration will prioritize formulating a strategic partnership with China.
Since the two countries were colonized in bygone history, we have learned very well about the bitterness of being suppressed; the hostility of invasion; the atrocities of the invaders; and the sacrifices of many souls in fighting to get back the sovereignty. Standing shoulder to shoulder, both countries reject any form of hegemonism, neocolonialism and neo-conservatism.
Myanmar and China will work side by side in reaffirming the UN-centred international system by promoting an equal and orderly multipolar world. Multipolarity is a fact. It emboldens an inclusive global governance system by uplifting the voices of the South countries.
Constructor Versus Destructor
Instead of waging coercive tactics, sympathy and love for mankind should be placed. Instead of engaging in forcible diplomacy, dialogue should be upheld. Instead of monopolizing the global dominance, mutual trust and mutual respect should be strengthened. Instead of bullying others, a few major countries should collaborate and coordinate. Fruitful prosperity should be shared among nations across different continents; there must not no forgotten continent or country. As time goes by, unilateralism will end by itself. Only the milestones of humanity made by a constructive and people-centred approach will long exist, while destructive motives for mankind will definitely fail in the end.
GNLM
This year marks the 80th anniversary of the conclusion of World War II. Ending World War II and bringing back the peace to the world was a milestone in the history of mankind in fighting against flawed ideologies that violate the fundamental principles of human rights in nature, such as fascism, nazism, imperialism, militarism, expansionism and colonialism.
Millions of lives of people from all over the world were sacrificed in different theatres during World War II with the commitment to restore peace and terminate faulty ideologies. Thus, safeguarding the post-World War II international order is a duty for preserving the peace, or it is the responsibility of people of all nations to maintain security, harmony and tranquillity of the respective region of the world.
Generally speaking, the current international system is inherited from the post-World War II international order; it adopts terms and conditions prescribed in declarations, documents and treaties that were made during the period of late or ending World War II; together with the foundation and establishment of the United Nations.
The “One China” policy, officially and internationally accepted by a total of more than 180 countries in their diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China, is a universal consensus on the stage of the international community and a basic norm in international relations since the founding of the PRC in 1949. The “One China” concept is an important part of the post-World War II international order.
There is only one China
Historical documents suggest that the imperial central governments of China, since earlier periods from the Song and Yuan dynasties, all set up administrative bodies to exercise jurisdiction over Penghu and the Chinese Taipei islands. In the 1600s, Dutch colonialists invaded and occupied the southern part of Chinese Taipei. However, Chinese forces expelled the Dutch invaders from the island. Since the late 1600s, the Qing dynasty has ruled over the island. Thus, Chinese Taipei’s status as a province of China extends further back in history even than the very founding of many modern nations.
What is more, certain dominant agreements made in the context of or in the aftermath of World War II, such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, affirmed the full return of Chinese Taipei territory under the sovereignty of mainland China. The 1943 Cairo Declaration stated that “… Northeast China, Chinese Taipei and the Penghu Islands, should be restored to China.”
Again, the Potsdam Proclamation reiterated in 1945 that “The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out”, urging Japan to follow and abide by the provisions of the Cairo Declaration as soon as possible. Both the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation were signed or confirmed by China, the United Kingdom and the United States. After Japan’s formal surrender in September 1945, China recovered all of its rights and interests over islands located not only in the East China Sea but also in the South China Sea.
In October 1945, the Kuomintang then-government of China, announced its resumption of full sovereignty over Chinese (Taipei). The then-Chinese government held the grand ceremony in Taipei of accepting Japan’s surrender of the Chinese Taipei of China. Therefore, the sole sovereignty of the Chinese mainland’s government in Chinese Taipei Island has already been reaffirmed and secured since 1945.
Chinese Taipei is an inalienable part of China
Bound by history and blood, all Chinese nationals, regardless of different political paradigms, fought against the invaders together by standing shoulder to shoulder during World War II. It is observed that their kinship is unbreakable in nature. Any attempt that tries to divide and rule between the Cross-Straits Relations is merely provoking or assaulting the affections of brothers of and same blood.
Following the Chinese civil war, the Communist Party of China replaced the former administration in China and founded the New China in 1949. Although the administrative system changed, sovereignty over all Chinese territories in both mainland and islands in the East and South China Seas remained its status quo in the Chinese territories in international relations. The change in administration was a matter of domestic governance. China’s territorial integrity and sovereignty have remained unchanged in the international arena.
Despite of making efforts by some nations to create “Two Chinas in the United Nations” or “One China, One Chinese Taipei”, the sole and full right to represent China legitimately at the United Nations was restored to the People’s Republic of China in 1971 as per the UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, which acquired a two-thirds supermajority of approval. Myanmar was one of the nations that voted in favour. Resolution 2758 expelled the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the United Nations. It formally seated the PRC as the only legitimate representative of China and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.
Ethics in Diplomacy
“One China policy” or the political concept of “Chinese Taipei is a province of China” is the universal consensus, which is widely adopted by the United Nations. Every nation that builds diplomatic ties with the PRC understands and agrees that “there is only one China in the world; both the mainland and Chinese Taipei belong to one China”.
When a country expands diplomatic relations with another, it is its obligation to respect the partner’s constitution, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the commitments outlined in bilateral communiqués. Violating agreements or adopting double standards behind formal relations is both malicious and inconsistent manner for responsible diplomacy.
Because they (the two sides of the Cross-Straits) are brothers and same blood, should the international community therefore uphold the PRC’s commitment to peaceful reunification by encouraging the Cross-Straits Relations? Friends should recognize and embrace the PRC’s practice of “One Country Two Systems” as a constructive framework for achieving the objective of peaceful reunification. No geopolitical exploitation or power manipulation should be attempted by using China’s domestic affairs having the intention of gaining global influential power.
gnlm
This year marks the 80th anniversary of the conclusion of World War II. Ending World War II and bringing back the peace to the world was a milestone in the history of mankind in fighting against flawed ideologies that violate the fundamental principles of human rights in nature, such as fascism, nazism, imperialism, militarism, expansionism and colonialism.
Millions of lives of people from all over the world were sacrificed in different theatres during World War II with the commitment to restore peace and terminate faulty ideologies. Thus, safeguarding the post-World War II international order is a duty for preserving the peace, or it is the responsibility of people of all nations to maintain security, harmony and tranquillity of the respective region of the world.
Generally speaking, the current international system is inherited from the post-World War II international order; it adopts terms and conditions prescribed in declarations, documents and treaties that were made during the period of late or ending World War II; together with the foundation and establishment of the United Nations.
The “One China” policy, officially and internationally accepted by a total of more than 180 countries in their diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China, is a universal consensus on the stage of the international community and a basic norm in international relations since the founding of the PRC in 1949. The “One China” concept is an important part of the post-World War II international order.
There is only one China
Historical documents suggest that the imperial central governments of China, since earlier periods from the Song and Yuan dynasties, all set up administrative bodies to exercise jurisdiction over Penghu and the Chinese Taipei islands. In the 1600s, Dutch colonialists invaded and occupied the southern part of Chinese Taipei. However, Chinese forces expelled the Dutch invaders from the island. Since the late 1600s, the Qing dynasty has ruled over the island. Thus, Chinese Taipei’s status as a province of China extends further back in history even than the very founding of many modern nations.
What is more, certain dominant agreements made in the context of or in the aftermath of World War II, such as the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, affirmed the full return of Chinese Taipei territory under the sovereignty of mainland China. The 1943 Cairo Declaration stated that “… Northeast China, Chinese Taipei and the Penghu Islands, should be restored to China.”
Again, the Potsdam Proclamation reiterated in 1945 that “The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out”, urging Japan to follow and abide by the provisions of the Cairo Declaration as soon as possible. Both the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation were signed or confirmed by China, the United Kingdom and the United States. After Japan’s formal surrender in September 1945, China recovered all of its rights and interests over islands located not only in the East China Sea but also in the South China Sea.
In October 1945, the Kuomintang then-government of China, announced its resumption of full sovereignty over Chinese (Taipei). The then-Chinese government held the grand ceremony in Taipei of accepting Japan’s surrender of the Chinese Taipei of China. Therefore, the sole sovereignty of the Chinese mainland’s government in Chinese Taipei Island has already been reaffirmed and secured since 1945.
Chinese Taipei is an inalienable part of China
Bound by history and blood, all Chinese nationals, regardless of different political paradigms, fought against the invaders together by standing shoulder to shoulder during World War II. It is observed that their kinship is unbreakable in nature. Any attempt that tries to divide and rule between the Cross-Straits Relations is merely provoking or assaulting the affections of brothers of and same blood.
Following the Chinese civil war, the Communist Party of China replaced the former administration in China and founded the New China in 1949. Although the administrative system changed, sovereignty over all Chinese territories in both mainland and islands in the East and South China Seas remained its status quo in the Chinese territories in international relations. The change in administration was a matter of domestic governance. China’s territorial integrity and sovereignty have remained unchanged in the international arena.
Despite of making efforts by some nations to create “Two Chinas in the United Nations” or “One China, One Chinese Taipei”, the sole and full right to represent China legitimately at the United Nations was restored to the People’s Republic of China in 1971 as per the UN General Assembly Resolution 2758, which acquired a two-thirds supermajority of approval. Myanmar was one of the nations that voted in favour. Resolution 2758 expelled the representatives of Chiang Kai-shek from the United Nations. It formally seated the PRC as the only legitimate representative of China and a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council.
Ethics in Diplomacy
“One China policy” or the political concept of “Chinese Taipei is a province of China” is the universal consensus, which is widely adopted by the United Nations. Every nation that builds diplomatic ties with the PRC understands and agrees that “there is only one China in the world; both the mainland and Chinese Taipei belong to one China”.
When a country expands diplomatic relations with another, it is its obligation to respect the partner’s constitution, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the commitments outlined in bilateral communiqués. Violating agreements or adopting double standards behind formal relations is both malicious and inconsistent manner for responsible diplomacy.
Because they (the two sides of the Cross-Straits) are brothers and same blood, should the international community therefore uphold the PRC’s commitment to peaceful reunification by encouraging the Cross-Straits Relations? Friends should recognize and embrace the PRC’s practice of “One Country Two Systems” as a constructive framework for achieving the objective of peaceful reunification. No geopolitical exploitation or power manipulation should be attempted by using China’s domestic affairs having the intention of gaining global influential power.
gnlm
In a world marked by differences in culture, religion, language, and ethnicity, the ideals of peace and unity in diversity stand as powerful principles that can bring people together. While diversity often presents challenges, it also offers great strength. When people from different backgrounds learn to live together peacefully, they build societies that are more energetic, inclusive, and resilient.
Diversity means that people are different in many ways in their beliefs, appearances, lifestyles, and histories. Every culture holds unique wisdom and beauty, and every person’s perspective can contribute to the richness of society. However, diversity also brings challenges. Misunderstanding, prejudice, and intolerance can cause division. This is why peace is essential. Peace is not merely the absence of conflict; it is the presence of harmony, mutual respect, and cooperation among people, despite their differences.
Unity in diversity means living harmoniously despite our differences. It recognizes that every individual has a unique identity shaped by their culture, beliefs, and experiences. Rather than allowing these differences to divide us, unity in diversity encourages us to respect, celebrate, and learn from them. Peace, in this context, is not just the absence of conflict but the presence of mutual understanding, tolerance, and cooperation. For example, international cooperation in science, humanitarian aid, and environmental protection shows how people from different nations can unite for the greater good.
In multicultural nations such as India, South Africa, or the United States, diversity is a natural part of daily life. Different communities live side by side, practising their own traditions while contributing to a shared national identity. Festivals, food, music, and languages vary from region to region, yet people often come together during national events or in times of need, showing solidarity that transcends individual differences.
However, achieving peace in a diverse society is not always easy. Misunderstandings and discrimination can lead to tension and conflict. To maintain peace, it is essential to promote education, dialogue, and empathy. The schools, media, and governments play an important role in spreading messages of unity and ensuring equal rights and opportunities for all citizens. When people feel respected and heard, they are more likely to contribute positively to society.
Unity in diversity also prepares us for a globalized world. As we interact more with people from different countries and cultures, the ability to work together peacefully becomes even more crucial. Peaceful coexistence not only benefits individual communities but also helps in addressing global challenges such as climate change, poverty, and conflict.
Building peace and unity in diversity requires dialogue, empathy, and education. Dialogue helps us understand one another’s experiences and challenges. Empathy allows us to put ourselves in others’ shoes and respond with kindness. Education teaches respect for cultural differences and prepares future generations to be global citizens. Governments, communities, and individuals all have a role to play in promoting these values.
In addition, peace and unity in diversity are not just ideals; they are necessities in today’s interconnected world. When we embrace our differences and choose understanding over division, we create stronger, more compassionate societies. Let us all work together to build a future where diversity is celebrated and peace is a shared reality for everyone.
GNLM
In a world marked by differences in culture, religion, language, and ethnicity, the ideals of peace and unity in diversity stand as powerful principles that can bring people together. While diversity often presents challenges, it also offers great strength. When people from different backgrounds learn to live together peacefully, they build societies that are more energetic, inclusive, and resilient.
Diversity means that people are different in many ways in their beliefs, appearances, lifestyles, and histories. Every culture holds unique wisdom and beauty, and every person’s perspective can contribute to the richness of society. However, diversity also brings challenges. Misunderstanding, prejudice, and intolerance can cause division. This is why peace is essential. Peace is not merely the absence of conflict; it is the presence of harmony, mutual respect, and cooperation among people, despite their differences.
Unity in diversity means living harmoniously despite our differences. It recognizes that every individual has a unique identity shaped by their culture, beliefs, and experiences. Rather than allowing these differences to divide us, unity in diversity encourages us to respect, celebrate, and learn from them. Peace, in this context, is not just the absence of conflict but the presence of mutual understanding, tolerance, and cooperation. For example, international cooperation in science, humanitarian aid, and environmental protection shows how people from different nations can unite for the greater good.
In multicultural nations such as India, South Africa, or the United States, diversity is a natural part of daily life. Different communities live side by side, practising their own traditions while contributing to a shared national identity. Festivals, food, music, and languages vary from region to region, yet people often come together during national events or in times of need, showing solidarity that transcends individual differences.
However, achieving peace in a diverse society is not always easy. Misunderstandings and discrimination can lead to tension and conflict. To maintain peace, it is essential to promote education, dialogue, and empathy. The schools, media, and governments play an important role in spreading messages of unity and ensuring equal rights and opportunities for all citizens. When people feel respected and heard, they are more likely to contribute positively to society.
Unity in diversity also prepares us for a globalized world. As we interact more with people from different countries and cultures, the ability to work together peacefully becomes even more crucial. Peaceful coexistence not only benefits individual communities but also helps in addressing global challenges such as climate change, poverty, and conflict.
Building peace and unity in diversity requires dialogue, empathy, and education. Dialogue helps us understand one another’s experiences and challenges. Empathy allows us to put ourselves in others’ shoes and respond with kindness. Education teaches respect for cultural differences and prepares future generations to be global citizens. Governments, communities, and individuals all have a role to play in promoting these values.
In addition, peace and unity in diversity are not just ideals; they are necessities in today’s interconnected world. When we embrace our differences and choose understanding over division, we create stronger, more compassionate societies. Let us all work together to build a future where diversity is celebrated and peace is a shared reality for everyone.
GNLM
Dear People of Myanmar,
Recently, a certain so-called “Independent Mechanism” released a report making some baseless accusations. Their august organization is facing severe budget cuts. There is a need to desperately seek funding for their continued travels and fine dining. Might they, once in a while, scarify for the sake of humanity by flying economy??? Not in their DNA!!! They have never faced such deep budget cuts from their BIG, BIG Uncle! Decades of unconscious wasteful spending are finally being halted. Fine wine and cheese in the Swiss Alps may have ended. No more walking down Rue du Rhone! In releasing the report, their targeted audience wishes to hear, they hope some other minions in the Western hemisphere might step up and fill the gap.
There is nothing “independent” about their reporting process, and above all, there is no “mechanism” with these self-righteous people who sit behind the desk in the ivory towers in Geneva and New York. There is no independent verification of their “cooked-up” reports. They verify their reports. It is akin to the judge and the accused being the same person. Nothing they do is transparent! It has been the practice that when reports are released by these incompetents, people automatically accept them as factual and truthful, just because “the Blue” is supposed to hold moral high ground. It is the perception that is far from reality.
Since Myanmar has announced elections for later in the year, these people can’t help themselves. Their motive is always about politics. To prolong their mandates. The longer the conflicts go on, the longer their employment! AN about their self-interest. Never for Myanmar and never for the people in disadvantaged countries. They will release more fabricated “reports”, “findings”, and so on. They will become more and more brazen in interference, and maybe even outright try to disrupt the elections. If Myanmar’s problems are solved, that’s the end of their mandate.
In desperation, they will become louder. But, each time they hit, hit them back harder. Hit them back louder. Continue to point out their decades-long misgivings, their scandals, the unspeakable pain they have inflicted on innocent, hopeless, hapless people they were mandated to protect. Haiti, Congo, Iraq. Financial scandals. Pedophilia. Prostitution. The list goes on and on! Among them, there are some of the lowest scums on earth. Not one of them has paid the price.
They are being forced to cut posts. Therefore, the incompetents from the “Mechanism” are desperate to hang on to their position. Without senselessly hounding a country like Myanmar, they have no jobs. When beggars become desperate, they’ll rob.
Some places in the world are being turned into hell on earth. These incompetent minor leaguers from Geneva and New York cannot do a thing. No one listens to them. In these instances, they shout from afar once in a while, just to justify their fast-fading relevance. When it comes to their Big Uncles, they can’t do a single thing. But let’s just beat up on smaller countries to justify their existence. These self-obsessed “holier than thou” people should be investigated. Everyone has skeletons in their closet!
Let us remember one of their colleagues, a certain Judge, who is on paid leave for sexual misconduct. He denied. Of course! What is to be expected? Where there is smoke, there is fire! The Supremo in New York has been silent about the case. Has the so-called “women’s” office offered support to the aggrieved? How about their so-called “oversight office”?
Geopolitical dynamics have changed. Myanmar is far from isolation. Myanmar has friends. Stand firm. Count on your friends and plough full speed ahead with the best path forward for Myanmar, as determined by the domestic realities.
On the way, bon voyage to the Great Envoy, who will be making a happy trip to New York for a useless talkfest in a few weeks. Have fun with the so-called “civil society” groups. After all, these groups will decide the fate of the world!!! Right? Let’s continue to give speeches to empty halls!!!
(The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.)
GNLM
Dear People of Myanmar,
Recently, a certain so-called “Independent Mechanism” released a report making some baseless accusations. Their august organization is facing severe budget cuts. There is a need to desperately seek funding for their continued travels and fine dining. Might they, once in a while, scarify for the sake of humanity by flying economy??? Not in their DNA!!! They have never faced such deep budget cuts from their BIG, BIG Uncle! Decades of unconscious wasteful spending are finally being halted. Fine wine and cheese in the Swiss Alps may have ended. No more walking down Rue du Rhone! In releasing the report, their targeted audience wishes to hear, they hope some other minions in the Western hemisphere might step up and fill the gap.
There is nothing “independent” about their reporting process, and above all, there is no “mechanism” with these self-righteous people who sit behind the desk in the ivory towers in Geneva and New York. There is no independent verification of their “cooked-up” reports. They verify their reports. It is akin to the judge and the accused being the same person. Nothing they do is transparent! It has been the practice that when reports are released by these incompetents, people automatically accept them as factual and truthful, just because “the Blue” is supposed to hold moral high ground. It is the perception that is far from reality.
Since Myanmar has announced elections for later in the year, these people can’t help themselves. Their motive is always about politics. To prolong their mandates. The longer the conflicts go on, the longer their employment! AN about their self-interest. Never for Myanmar and never for the people in disadvantaged countries. They will release more fabricated “reports”, “findings”, and so on. They will become more and more brazen in interference, and maybe even outright try to disrupt the elections. If Myanmar’s problems are solved, that’s the end of their mandate.
In desperation, they will become louder. But, each time they hit, hit them back harder. Hit them back louder. Continue to point out their decades-long misgivings, their scandals, the unspeakable pain they have inflicted on innocent, hopeless, hapless people they were mandated to protect. Haiti, Congo, Iraq. Financial scandals. Pedophilia. Prostitution. The list goes on and on! Among them, there are some of the lowest scums on earth. Not one of them has paid the price.
They are being forced to cut posts. Therefore, the incompetents from the “Mechanism” are desperate to hang on to their position. Without senselessly hounding a country like Myanmar, they have no jobs. When beggars become desperate, they’ll rob.
Some places in the world are being turned into hell on earth. These incompetent minor leaguers from Geneva and New York cannot do a thing. No one listens to them. In these instances, they shout from afar once in a while, just to justify their fast-fading relevance. When it comes to their Big Uncles, they can’t do a single thing. But let’s just beat up on smaller countries to justify their existence. These self-obsessed “holier than thou” people should be investigated. Everyone has skeletons in their closet!
Let us remember one of their colleagues, a certain Judge, who is on paid leave for sexual misconduct. He denied. Of course! What is to be expected? Where there is smoke, there is fire! The Supremo in New York has been silent about the case. Has the so-called “women’s” office offered support to the aggrieved? How about their so-called “oversight office”?
Geopolitical dynamics have changed. Myanmar is far from isolation. Myanmar has friends. Stand firm. Count on your friends and plough full speed ahead with the best path forward for Myanmar, as determined by the domestic realities.
On the way, bon voyage to the Great Envoy, who will be making a happy trip to New York for a useless talkfest in a few weeks. Have fun with the so-called “civil society” groups. After all, these groups will decide the fate of the world!!! Right? Let’s continue to give speeches to empty halls!!!
(The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.)
GNLM
In a world increasingly characterized by diversity, complexity, and rapid change, unity has become more important than ever before. Unity is the state of being joined together in harmony, working towards common goals despite differences in background, opinion, or identity. In the modern world marked by globalization, technological advancement, political polarization, and environmental challenges, unity is not just a desirable ideal but a vital necessity. It serves as the foundation for peace, progress, and stability in societies across the globe.
- Unity as a Source of Strength: The modern world faces numerous challenges climate change, economic inequality, global pandemics, terrorism, and social injustice, to name a few. These are not problems that can be solved by isolated individuals or nations acting alone. Instead, they require cooperation, mutual understanding, and collective action. Unity brings together people from different walks of life, combining their ideas, skills, and resources to address problems on a larger scale. As the saying goes, “United we stand, divided we fall.” When people are united, their collective strength is far greater than the sum of their individual capabilities.
- Unity in Diversity: One of the most striking features of the modern world is its diversity. Never before have people of different races, religions, cultures, and languages lived and interacted so closely. While this diversity can be a tremendous source of innovation and creativity, it can also lead to misunderstandings, conflict, and division if not managed wisely. Unity does not mean uniformity; it means respecting differences while finding common ground. In multicultural societies, unity ensures social cohesion and helps prevent the rise of discrimination, hatred, and violence. Countries that embrace unity in diversity, such as Canada, Singapore, and South Africa, serve as examples of how peaceful coexistence and national development can go hand in hand.
- Unity in the Face of Global Crises: Recent global events have shown how interconnected our lives are. The COVID-19 pandemic was a wake-up call for humanity. It crossed borders, affected millions of lives, and disrupted economies around the world. In response, unity became essential as nations shared medical knowledge, scientists from different countries collaborated on vaccines, and communities came together to support one another. Likewise, the fight against climate change requires global unity. No single country can protect the planet alone.
- Political and Social Unity: In many parts of the world today, political polarization and social fragmentation are growing concerns. When societies are divided along political, religious, or ideological lines, progress is delayed, and mistrust prevails. Unity, in this context, involves open dialogue, compromise, and the ability to work toward shared goals despite differences. Political unity can ensure effective governance, protect democratic values, and create a sense of national identity. Social unity, on the other hand, strengthens communities, reduces crime and conflict, and fosters a culture of empathy and mutual support.
- Unity in the Digital Age: The internet and social media have transformed how people communicate and connect. While these tools have the power to unite people across continents, they also have the potential to create echo chambers, spread misinformation, and fuel division. In the digital age, unity means using technology responsibly to promote understanding, share accurate information, and build online communities based on respect and truth. The importance of digital unity lies in building a virtual world that supports real-world harmony and cooperation.
- The Role of Education Leadership: Unity must be nurtured, and this starts with education. Schools and universities should teach values such as respect, tolerance, teamwork, and civic responsibility. When young people are raised to value unity, they grow into adults who build inclusive societies. Moreover, effective leadership is essential in fostering unity. Leaders who rise above personal or political gain to bring people together, whether in government, business, or civil society, can inspire hope and drive meaningful change.
- From Unity to Success: Unity is the cornerstone of success. It is the invisible force that binds individuals into a team, communities into nations, and dreams into achievements. Whether in a family, a workplace, or an entire country, unity creates strength, inspires action, and drives progress. The path from unity to success is not always easy, but it is always powerful and transformational. For example, in a workplace, a united team is more likely to meet its goals, innovate, and grow. In a classroom, students who help each other learn more and perform better. In a country, citizens who work together can build a better future for the next generation.
- The Power of Unity: Unity means working together toward a common goal with shared values and mutual respect. When people are united, they support each other through challenges and celebrate achievements together. This sense of togetherness builds trust, reduces conflict, and brings out the best in everyone. In nature, we see unity in the flight of birds moving in harmony or the teamwork of ants building their colony. In human society, unity can be even more impactful. History is full of examples where unity has led to extraordinary success, whether in freedom movements, humanitarian missions, or scientific breakthroughs.
- Unity in Action: In daily life, unity can be seen in families where love and cooperation create a strong foundation. In schools, unity among students and teachers fosters a positive learning environment. In communities, unity helps solve problems such as poverty, disease, and disaster response more effectively. When people stand together, even the most difficult situations can be overcome. At the national level, unity is essential for peace, development, and resilience. A nation divided by conflict or hatred cannot progress. But when its people are united across different backgrounds, religions, or beliefs, success becomes achievable not just economically, but socially and culturally.
- Challenges to Unity: Achieving unity is not without its challenges. Differences in opinions, selfish interests, and prejudice can divide people. But through communication, empathy, and a shared vision, unity can be preserved. Leadership also plays a key role. True leaders unite people, not divide them.
As our challenges grow more complex and our societies more diverse, unity offers the only sustainable path forward. Unity is not just a feeling; it is a powerful force that leads to real, meaningful success. From the smallest team to the largest nation, unity creates the foundation for achievement, growth, and peace. If we want to move from where we are to where we dream to be, we must walk the path of unity. In an age of uncertainty, unity remains our greatest strength and perhaps our only hope for a better future.
Photo - Freepik
In a world increasingly characterized by diversity, complexity, and rapid change, unity has become more important than ever before. Unity is the state of being joined together in harmony, working towards common goals despite differences in background, opinion, or identity. In the modern world marked by globalization, technological advancement, political polarization, and environmental challenges, unity is not just a desirable ideal but a vital necessity. It serves as the foundation for peace, progress, and stability in societies across the globe.
- Unity as a Source of Strength: The modern world faces numerous challenges climate change, economic inequality, global pandemics, terrorism, and social injustice, to name a few. These are not problems that can be solved by isolated individuals or nations acting alone. Instead, they require cooperation, mutual understanding, and collective action. Unity brings together people from different walks of life, combining their ideas, skills, and resources to address problems on a larger scale. As the saying goes, “United we stand, divided we fall.” When people are united, their collective strength is far greater than the sum of their individual capabilities.
- Unity in Diversity: One of the most striking features of the modern world is its diversity. Never before have people of different races, religions, cultures, and languages lived and interacted so closely. While this diversity can be a tremendous source of innovation and creativity, it can also lead to misunderstandings, conflict, and division if not managed wisely. Unity does not mean uniformity; it means respecting differences while finding common ground. In multicultural societies, unity ensures social cohesion and helps prevent the rise of discrimination, hatred, and violence. Countries that embrace unity in diversity, such as Canada, Singapore, and South Africa, serve as examples of how peaceful coexistence and national development can go hand in hand.
- Unity in the Face of Global Crises: Recent global events have shown how interconnected our lives are. The COVID-19 pandemic was a wake-up call for humanity. It crossed borders, affected millions of lives, and disrupted economies around the world. In response, unity became essential as nations shared medical knowledge, scientists from different countries collaborated on vaccines, and communities came together to support one another. Likewise, the fight against climate change requires global unity. No single country can protect the planet alone.
- Political and Social Unity: In many parts of the world today, political polarization and social fragmentation are growing concerns. When societies are divided along political, religious, or ideological lines, progress is delayed, and mistrust prevails. Unity, in this context, involves open dialogue, compromise, and the ability to work toward shared goals despite differences. Political unity can ensure effective governance, protect democratic values, and create a sense of national identity. Social unity, on the other hand, strengthens communities, reduces crime and conflict, and fosters a culture of empathy and mutual support.
- Unity in the Digital Age: The internet and social media have transformed how people communicate and connect. While these tools have the power to unite people across continents, they also have the potential to create echo chambers, spread misinformation, and fuel division. In the digital age, unity means using technology responsibly to promote understanding, share accurate information, and build online communities based on respect and truth. The importance of digital unity lies in building a virtual world that supports real-world harmony and cooperation.
- The Role of Education Leadership: Unity must be nurtured, and this starts with education. Schools and universities should teach values such as respect, tolerance, teamwork, and civic responsibility. When young people are raised to value unity, they grow into adults who build inclusive societies. Moreover, effective leadership is essential in fostering unity. Leaders who rise above personal or political gain to bring people together, whether in government, business, or civil society, can inspire hope and drive meaningful change.
- From Unity to Success: Unity is the cornerstone of success. It is the invisible force that binds individuals into a team, communities into nations, and dreams into achievements. Whether in a family, a workplace, or an entire country, unity creates strength, inspires action, and drives progress. The path from unity to success is not always easy, but it is always powerful and transformational. For example, in a workplace, a united team is more likely to meet its goals, innovate, and grow. In a classroom, students who help each other learn more and perform better. In a country, citizens who work together can build a better future for the next generation.
- The Power of Unity: Unity means working together toward a common goal with shared values and mutual respect. When people are united, they support each other through challenges and celebrate achievements together. This sense of togetherness builds trust, reduces conflict, and brings out the best in everyone. In nature, we see unity in the flight of birds moving in harmony or the teamwork of ants building their colony. In human society, unity can be even more impactful. History is full of examples where unity has led to extraordinary success, whether in freedom movements, humanitarian missions, or scientific breakthroughs.
- Unity in Action: In daily life, unity can be seen in families where love and cooperation create a strong foundation. In schools, unity among students and teachers fosters a positive learning environment. In communities, unity helps solve problems such as poverty, disease, and disaster response more effectively. When people stand together, even the most difficult situations can be overcome. At the national level, unity is essential for peace, development, and resilience. A nation divided by conflict or hatred cannot progress. But when its people are united across different backgrounds, religions, or beliefs, success becomes achievable not just economically, but socially and culturally.
- Challenges to Unity: Achieving unity is not without its challenges. Differences in opinions, selfish interests, and prejudice can divide people. But through communication, empathy, and a shared vision, unity can be preserved. Leadership also plays a key role. True leaders unite people, not divide them.
As our challenges grow more complex and our societies more diverse, unity offers the only sustainable path forward. Unity is not just a feeling; it is a powerful force that leads to real, meaningful success. From the smallest team to the largest nation, unity creates the foundation for achievement, growth, and peace. If we want to move from where we are to where we dream to be, we must walk the path of unity. In an age of uncertainty, unity remains our greatest strength and perhaps our only hope for a better future.
Photo - Freepik
‘Never let facts get in the way of a story.’
This saying appears to be the defining mantra governing Timor Leste’s leadership, recently represented by its Charge d’Affaires in Nay Pyi Taw. Dili, it seems, now affirms a ‘dedication to upholding the principles of the ASEAN Charter’, and to ‘strengthening ties with Myanmar’. The restraint and composure shown by Myanmar to even entertain the Timorese representative should be commended.
The audacity is breathtaking. Timor Leste’s leaders have cavorted with terrorists who have butchered and seek to kill Myanmar citizens further. Its President, Jose Ramos Horta, has disgustingly validated representatives of a group of terrorist grifters and philanderers now sliding into irrelevance with each passing day. At one point, Timor Leste even called for Tatmadaw soldiers to betray their oaths. Horta further repeated outright lies from disgraced Yanghee Lee’s disreputable outfit – a worthless gaggle of former UN has-beens now working as groupies for terrorists in Myanmar to cling to any shred of relevance. Horta would later bark ‘condemnations’ of Myanmar’s planned elections, thus endorsing threats made against civilians involved in the country’s election process. Such calls for insurrection and interference in the domestic affairs of another sovereign country go far beyond the meaningless platitudes common to the cheap Western activist spiel spat out on social media.
These overtures should come as no surprise. Modern Timor Leste and Horta’s Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor (FRETELIN) was born through many years of subjecting Timorese and ethnic Indonesians to terroristic atrocities while being cradled by the paws of Western bias in their favour. FRETELIN thugs – very similar to the terrorists operating in Myanmar – forced rural bystanders into ‘protected villages’ in measures which led to massive bouts of famine, starvation and killing tens of thousands of civilians. As founder, Horta and his fellow FRETELIN terrorists oversaw the wanton slaughter of political rivals for many years, including innocent Timorese civilians who voted against independence.
Their campaign of “Mati An” in the 1970s saw the group murder thousands of its own members for ‘counterrevolutionary’ activities – actions adopted by the ABSDF (North) in their massacres in Pajaung and by the many lowlife terrorist cells roaming Myanmar today. This politicide extended to its main rival, the Timorese Democratic Union (UDT). Radio broadcasts by FRETELIN called for the execution of ‘traitors’, from UDT, riling up civilian bystanders into abetting the group’s atrocities.
And yet, Horta and FRETELIN received zero accountability for these crimes. The Serious Crimes Unit (SCU), a joint UN-Timor entity set up in 1999 to investigate war crimes, disproportionately focused on crimes by pro-Indonesia militias while ignoring or, at worst, covering up FRETELIN atrocities. FRETELIN-backed gangs disrupted independent investigations and threatened and even killed family members of FRETELIN victims. These heinous campaigns of terror somehow resulted in Horta being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in 1996 – another example of the award’s diminished legitimacy. So long as the terrorist in question serves the interests of the winds of the ‘international community’, said terrorist and his affiliates will be beyond reproach, with their only requirement being to occasionally spout Western liberal talking points.
This mindset of unchecked immunity has translated into Timor-Leste’s relations with Myanmar. Horta and his government believe there are no consequences for supporting terrorists from another country – the same kind of mindset seen in the (often vacuous) heads of Western European diplomats. Dili thinks it can mouth off and abet calls for terrorism in Myanmar with impunity and saunter into becoming an ASEAN member state.
We should remember this: Timor Leste is playing the Gambia playbook. It has marketed itself as a sock-puppet for the Western neoliberal rulers, getting overwhelmingly trounced in domestic opinion polls, in return for increased regional visibility and other perks. No genuinely productive citizen in the West currently has the time to cheer on the vapid, moral grandstanding exercises made overseas by their governing and ruling classes as they struggle with debt, immigration and soaring costs of living.
Myanmar, for context, has always sought harmony and peace in its international relations. The country’s governing and long-held foreign policy doctrine remains rooted in non-interventionism. Myanmar just so happens to be also one of those conflict landscapes where lazy, grandstanding statements, articles, books and entire careers as ‘country experts’ and academics can be manufactured by simply regurgitating terrorist propaganda. Six-figure salaries and consulting fees are drawn by ‘experts’ and activists repeating the same empty, biased nonsensical script, with paraphrased versions of the same junk published in outlets largely overseen by editors who couldn’t point out Shan State from Taninthayi Region on a map.
These experts rely on the work of local quislings only too willing to betray the country for the privilege of being labelled ‘brave dissidents’. Just like how FRETELIN’s terrorist gangs and PDF terrorists murder political opponents, discussions that go against the prevailing, anti-Myanmar government narrative are silenced and not allowed any genuine consideration – a legacy of the ‘safe space’ narrative environment cultivated by the despicable tyrants of western liberal hegemonic institutions. As such, this echo chamber becomes ripe for countries like Timor Leste and people like Horta and his sidekick, Xanana Gusmao, to partake in this exercise of moral grandstanding to increase their own visibility for ulterior motives. Horta condemns Myanmar, while flagrantly ignoring the terrorists that he calls his ‘friends’.
This prevailing context and Myanmar’s longstanding diplomatic posture do not mean the country’s government is toothless. Myanmar will not stand meekly in the face of disrespect that has crossed far beyond any acceptable thresholds. Myanmar thus must not compromise in its stand of opposing Timor Leste’s entrance into ASEAN.
Should Timor Leste be admitted, the country will only use its membership as a pulpit to take swipes at Myanmar and its interests, flagrantly disregarding the ASEAN charter’s non-interference provisions simply because its leadership have been bred and taught that they can act with impunity for being a Western neoliberal attack mouthpiece. Myanmar is under no obligation to entertain this delusion. In the same way, Horta demonstrates a disregard for facts to write his own saviour story. Myanmar should disregard its country’s desires in favour of focusing on its own interests. Let Horta and his cronies first clean up Timor Leste’s own house-still stained with and smelling of the blood of his opponents, before it dares lecture on Myanmar and cavort with terrorists.
Source: GNLM
(Explanation: This article is just the author’s opinion.)
‘Never let facts get in the way of a story.’
This saying appears to be the defining mantra governing Timor Leste’s leadership, recently represented by its Charge d’Affaires in Nay Pyi Taw. Dili, it seems, now affirms a ‘dedication to upholding the principles of the ASEAN Charter’, and to ‘strengthening ties with Myanmar’. The restraint and composure shown by Myanmar to even entertain the Timorese representative should be commended.
The audacity is breathtaking. Timor Leste’s leaders have cavorted with terrorists who have butchered and seek to kill Myanmar citizens further. Its President, Jose Ramos Horta, has disgustingly validated representatives of a group of terrorist grifters and philanderers now sliding into irrelevance with each passing day. At one point, Timor Leste even called for Tatmadaw soldiers to betray their oaths. Horta further repeated outright lies from disgraced Yanghee Lee’s disreputable outfit – a worthless gaggle of former UN has-beens now working as groupies for terrorists in Myanmar to cling to any shred of relevance. Horta would later bark ‘condemnations’ of Myanmar’s planned elections, thus endorsing threats made against civilians involved in the country’s election process. Such calls for insurrection and interference in the domestic affairs of another sovereign country go far beyond the meaningless platitudes common to the cheap Western activist spiel spat out on social media.
These overtures should come as no surprise. Modern Timor Leste and Horta’s Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor (FRETELIN) was born through many years of subjecting Timorese and ethnic Indonesians to terroristic atrocities while being cradled by the paws of Western bias in their favour. FRETELIN thugs – very similar to the terrorists operating in Myanmar – forced rural bystanders into ‘protected villages’ in measures which led to massive bouts of famine, starvation and killing tens of thousands of civilians. As founder, Horta and his fellow FRETELIN terrorists oversaw the wanton slaughter of political rivals for many years, including innocent Timorese civilians who voted against independence.
Their campaign of “Mati An” in the 1970s saw the group murder thousands of its own members for ‘counterrevolutionary’ activities – actions adopted by the ABSDF (North) in their massacres in Pajaung and by the many lowlife terrorist cells roaming Myanmar today. This politicide extended to its main rival, the Timorese Democratic Union (UDT). Radio broadcasts by FRETELIN called for the execution of ‘traitors’, from UDT, riling up civilian bystanders into abetting the group’s atrocities.
And yet, Horta and FRETELIN received zero accountability for these crimes. The Serious Crimes Unit (SCU), a joint UN-Timor entity set up in 1999 to investigate war crimes, disproportionately focused on crimes by pro-Indonesia militias while ignoring or, at worst, covering up FRETELIN atrocities. FRETELIN-backed gangs disrupted independent investigations and threatened and even killed family members of FRETELIN victims. These heinous campaigns of terror somehow resulted in Horta being awarded a Nobel Peace Prize in 1996 – another example of the award’s diminished legitimacy. So long as the terrorist in question serves the interests of the winds of the ‘international community’, said terrorist and his affiliates will be beyond reproach, with their only requirement being to occasionally spout Western liberal talking points.
This mindset of unchecked immunity has translated into Timor-Leste’s relations with Myanmar. Horta and his government believe there are no consequences for supporting terrorists from another country – the same kind of mindset seen in the (often vacuous) heads of Western European diplomats. Dili thinks it can mouth off and abet calls for terrorism in Myanmar with impunity and saunter into becoming an ASEAN member state.
We should remember this: Timor Leste is playing the Gambia playbook. It has marketed itself as a sock-puppet for the Western neoliberal rulers, getting overwhelmingly trounced in domestic opinion polls, in return for increased regional visibility and other perks. No genuinely productive citizen in the West currently has the time to cheer on the vapid, moral grandstanding exercises made overseas by their governing and ruling classes as they struggle with debt, immigration and soaring costs of living.
Myanmar, for context, has always sought harmony and peace in its international relations. The country’s governing and long-held foreign policy doctrine remains rooted in non-interventionism. Myanmar just so happens to be also one of those conflict landscapes where lazy, grandstanding statements, articles, books and entire careers as ‘country experts’ and academics can be manufactured by simply regurgitating terrorist propaganda. Six-figure salaries and consulting fees are drawn by ‘experts’ and activists repeating the same empty, biased nonsensical script, with paraphrased versions of the same junk published in outlets largely overseen by editors who couldn’t point out Shan State from Taninthayi Region on a map.
These experts rely on the work of local quislings only too willing to betray the country for the privilege of being labelled ‘brave dissidents’. Just like how FRETELIN’s terrorist gangs and PDF terrorists murder political opponents, discussions that go against the prevailing, anti-Myanmar government narrative are silenced and not allowed any genuine consideration – a legacy of the ‘safe space’ narrative environment cultivated by the despicable tyrants of western liberal hegemonic institutions. As such, this echo chamber becomes ripe for countries like Timor Leste and people like Horta and his sidekick, Xanana Gusmao, to partake in this exercise of moral grandstanding to increase their own visibility for ulterior motives. Horta condemns Myanmar, while flagrantly ignoring the terrorists that he calls his ‘friends’.
This prevailing context and Myanmar’s longstanding diplomatic posture do not mean the country’s government is toothless. Myanmar will not stand meekly in the face of disrespect that has crossed far beyond any acceptable thresholds. Myanmar thus must not compromise in its stand of opposing Timor Leste’s entrance into ASEAN.
Should Timor Leste be admitted, the country will only use its membership as a pulpit to take swipes at Myanmar and its interests, flagrantly disregarding the ASEAN charter’s non-interference provisions simply because its leadership have been bred and taught that they can act with impunity for being a Western neoliberal attack mouthpiece. Myanmar is under no obligation to entertain this delusion. In the same way, Horta demonstrates a disregard for facts to write his own saviour story. Myanmar should disregard its country’s desires in favour of focusing on its own interests. Let Horta and his cronies first clean up Timor Leste’s own house-still stained with and smelling of the blood of his opponents, before it dares lecture on Myanmar and cavort with terrorists.
Source: GNLM
(Explanation: This article is just the author’s opinion.)
JerusalemCNN
A planned “humanitarian city” inside Gaza intended to hold hundreds of thousands of Palestinians would be a “concentration camp,” former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has warned.
Defense Minister Israel Katz said last week he had told the military to advance plans for the zone, which would eventually contain the entire population of Gaza. The area would be built on the ruins of the city of Rafah in southern Gaza, and once Palestinians enter the zone, they would not be allowed to leave. Katz also vowed to implement a plan for the emigration of Palestinians from Gaza.
“It is a concentration camp. I am sorry,” Olmert told The Guardian newspaper on Sunday. “If they (Palestinians) will be deported into the new ‘humanitarian city’, then you can say that this is part of an ethnic cleansing.”
In response to Olmert’s comments, the Prime Minister’s Office called him a “convicted felon disgracing Israel on CNN.” In a statement, the office said: “We evacuate civilians. Hamas blocks them. He calls that a war crime?” Olmert was freed from prison in 2017 after serving 16 months on corruption charges.
Olmert has previously blasted the conduct of the Israeli military in Gaza and the country’s political leadership. In May, he said he could no longer defend Israel against accusations of war crimes. “What is it if not a war crime?” he asked rhetorically in an interview with CNN. He said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and far-right members of his government are “committing actions which can’t be interpreted any other way.”
More than 58,000 people have been killed in Gaza since the start of the war, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health.
The latest comments from Olmert, who served as Israel’s prime minister from 2006-2009, go much further in criticizing the country’s intentions in Gaza, however, especially since comparisons to Nazi concentration camps in Israel is considered virtually unthinkable. But Olmert said it was the “inevitable interpretation” of the plans.
“When they build a camp where they (plan to) ‘clean’ more than half of Gaza, then the inevitable understanding of the strategy of this (is that) it is not to save (Palestinians). It is to deport them, to push them and to throw them away,” Olmert told the Guardian.
Katz’s plans for what he dubbed the “humanitarian city” were discussed at a meeting with Netanyahu on Sunday evening, according to a source familiar with the matter. But after Israeli news outlets reported that it would take months to build the zone and billions of dollars, the source said Netanyahu asked to make its establishment shorter and less expensive.
Yair Lapid, the head of Israel’s opposition, blasted the plans as an attempt by Netanyahu to let his far-right government partners “run wild with extreme fantasies just to preserve his coalition.” In a statement on social media, Lapid called to “end the war and bring back the hostages.”
Michael Sfard, an Israeli human rights lawyer, told CNN last week that Katz’s plan amounts to the forcible transfer of a population in preparation for deportation. Both of these are war crimes, Sfard said.
“If they are done on a massive scale – whole communities – they can amount to crimes against humanity,” Sfard added, dismissing the notion that any departure from Gaza could be considered voluntary.
Ref : CNN
JerusalemCNN
A planned “humanitarian city” inside Gaza intended to hold hundreds of thousands of Palestinians would be a “concentration camp,” former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has warned.
Defense Minister Israel Katz said last week he had told the military to advance plans for the zone, which would eventually contain the entire population of Gaza. The area would be built on the ruins of the city of Rafah in southern Gaza, and once Palestinians enter the zone, they would not be allowed to leave. Katz also vowed to implement a plan for the emigration of Palestinians from Gaza.
“It is a concentration camp. I am sorry,” Olmert told The Guardian newspaper on Sunday. “If they (Palestinians) will be deported into the new ‘humanitarian city’, then you can say that this is part of an ethnic cleansing.”
In response to Olmert’s comments, the Prime Minister’s Office called him a “convicted felon disgracing Israel on CNN.” In a statement, the office said: “We evacuate civilians. Hamas blocks them. He calls that a war crime?” Olmert was freed from prison in 2017 after serving 16 months on corruption charges.
Olmert has previously blasted the conduct of the Israeli military in Gaza and the country’s political leadership. In May, he said he could no longer defend Israel against accusations of war crimes. “What is it if not a war crime?” he asked rhetorically in an interview with CNN. He said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and far-right members of his government are “committing actions which can’t be interpreted any other way.”
More than 58,000 people have been killed in Gaza since the start of the war, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health.
The latest comments from Olmert, who served as Israel’s prime minister from 2006-2009, go much further in criticizing the country’s intentions in Gaza, however, especially since comparisons to Nazi concentration camps in Israel is considered virtually unthinkable. But Olmert said it was the “inevitable interpretation” of the plans.
“When they build a camp where they (plan to) ‘clean’ more than half of Gaza, then the inevitable understanding of the strategy of this (is that) it is not to save (Palestinians). It is to deport them, to push them and to throw them away,” Olmert told the Guardian.
Katz’s plans for what he dubbed the “humanitarian city” were discussed at a meeting with Netanyahu on Sunday evening, according to a source familiar with the matter. But after Israeli news outlets reported that it would take months to build the zone and billions of dollars, the source said Netanyahu asked to make its establishment shorter and less expensive.
Yair Lapid, the head of Israel’s opposition, blasted the plans as an attempt by Netanyahu to let his far-right government partners “run wild with extreme fantasies just to preserve his coalition.” In a statement on social media, Lapid called to “end the war and bring back the hostages.”
Michael Sfard, an Israeli human rights lawyer, told CNN last week that Katz’s plan amounts to the forcible transfer of a population in preparation for deportation. Both of these are war crimes, Sfard said.
“If they are done on a massive scale – whole communities – they can amount to crimes against humanity,” Sfard added, dismissing the notion that any departure from Gaza could be considered voluntary.
Ref : CNN
During the summit, PM Modi will exchange views on key global issues, including the reform of global governance, peace and security, responsible use of artificial intelligence, climate action, global health and economic and financial matters.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is set to visit Brazil from July 5 to 8 to participate in the 17th BRICS Summit, which will be held in Rio de Janeiro from July 6 to 7. This high-level gathering of world leaders is a part of PM Modi’s five-nation tour, which also includes stops in Ghana, Trinidad & Tobago, Argentina and Namibia. The tour is being undertaken with the aim at strengthening India’s bilateral and multilateral ties.
PM Modi’s agenda in BRICS Summit
During the summit, PM Modi will exchange views on key global issues, including the reform of global governance, peace and security, responsible use of artificial intelligence, climate action, global health and economic and financial matters. He is also expected to hold several bilateral meetings on the sidelines, including talks with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to broaden the strategic partnership between India and Brazil in areas such as trade, defence, energy, space, technology, agriculture and health12.
All about PM Modi’s five nation tour
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is set to hold his first full-fledged bilateral meeting with Argentina’s President Javier Gerardo Milei during his upcoming visit to the country. While the two leaders have previously met on the sidelines of multilateral forums, this will be their first structured dialogue.
The agenda is expected to cover defence cooperation, trade and investment, rare earth minerals, agriculture, as well as traditional and renewable energy. India is also likely to raise its longstanding concerns over cross-border terrorism during the BRICS engagements involving Brazil and Argentina.
Four-nation tour begins with Ghana
PM Modi’s tour will begin in Ghana from July 2 to 3, where he will be hosted by newly elected President John Dramani Mahama. The visit comes as Ghana undergoes economic restructuring. Key areas of discussion will include agriculture, the establishment of a vaccine development hub in West Africa, critical mineral cooperation, digital public infrastructure, and the revival of cultural exchange programmes, according to Foreign Secretary Mr. Ravi.
Visit to Trinidad and Tobago
PM Modi will then travel to Trinidad and Tobago from July 3 to 4. This marks the first visit by an Indian Prime Minister to the Caribbean nation since 1999. The visit aims to deepen historical and cultural ties and expand cooperation in areas of mutual interest.
Final stop: Namibia
The final leg of the tour will take Modi to Namibia, where he will pay tribute to the country’s decolonisation icon Sam Nujoma, who passed away on February 8. During this visit, India and Namibia are expected to sign an agreement enabling unified payment inter-operability, a step that could significantly boost financial cooperation.
All you need to know about the 17th BRICS Summit
The 2025 BRICS Summit marks a significant moment as Brazil assumes the rotating presidency of the bloc, which now includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and newly joined members such as Indonesia, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia has also been invited to join, reflecting the group’s expanding influence.
The summit will be held at the Museum of Modern Art in Rio de Janeiro and is expected to bring together leaders from across the Global South to address pressing global challenges and advance the BRICS agenda. Under the theme “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance,” Brazil’s BRICS presidency has outlined a few key priorities.
These include:
- Improving global health through equitable access to medicines.
- Tackling neglected tropical diseases.
- Boosting trade and investment by promoting local currencies and alternative payment systems.
- Advancing climate action with a BRICS Climate Leadership Agenda.
The summit will also focus on responsible AI governance, reforming global peace and security systems and strengthening BRICS’ internal structure for more effective decision-making.
The 2025 summit takes place amid a shifting geopolitical landscape and ongoing efforts by BRICS to expand its influence and offer an alternative platform for emerging economies. The bloc’s expansion and focus on inclusive governance underscore its ambition to play a more prominent role in shaping global economic and political norms.
During the summit, PM Modi will exchange views on key global issues, including the reform of global governance, peace and security, responsible use of artificial intelligence, climate action, global health and economic and financial matters.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is set to visit Brazil from July 5 to 8 to participate in the 17th BRICS Summit, which will be held in Rio de Janeiro from July 6 to 7. This high-level gathering of world leaders is a part of PM Modi’s five-nation tour, which also includes stops in Ghana, Trinidad & Tobago, Argentina and Namibia. The tour is being undertaken with the aim at strengthening India’s bilateral and multilateral ties.
PM Modi’s agenda in BRICS Summit
During the summit, PM Modi will exchange views on key global issues, including the reform of global governance, peace and security, responsible use of artificial intelligence, climate action, global health and economic and financial matters. He is also expected to hold several bilateral meetings on the sidelines, including talks with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to broaden the strategic partnership between India and Brazil in areas such as trade, defence, energy, space, technology, agriculture and health12.
All about PM Modi’s five nation tour
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is set to hold his first full-fledged bilateral meeting with Argentina’s President Javier Gerardo Milei during his upcoming visit to the country. While the two leaders have previously met on the sidelines of multilateral forums, this will be their first structured dialogue.
The agenda is expected to cover defence cooperation, trade and investment, rare earth minerals, agriculture, as well as traditional and renewable energy. India is also likely to raise its longstanding concerns over cross-border terrorism during the BRICS engagements involving Brazil and Argentina.
Four-nation tour begins with Ghana
PM Modi’s tour will begin in Ghana from July 2 to 3, where he will be hosted by newly elected President John Dramani Mahama. The visit comes as Ghana undergoes economic restructuring. Key areas of discussion will include agriculture, the establishment of a vaccine development hub in West Africa, critical mineral cooperation, digital public infrastructure, and the revival of cultural exchange programmes, according to Foreign Secretary Mr. Ravi.
Visit to Trinidad and Tobago
PM Modi will then travel to Trinidad and Tobago from July 3 to 4. This marks the first visit by an Indian Prime Minister to the Caribbean nation since 1999. The visit aims to deepen historical and cultural ties and expand cooperation in areas of mutual interest.
Final stop: Namibia
The final leg of the tour will take Modi to Namibia, where he will pay tribute to the country’s decolonisation icon Sam Nujoma, who passed away on February 8. During this visit, India and Namibia are expected to sign an agreement enabling unified payment inter-operability, a step that could significantly boost financial cooperation.
All you need to know about the 17th BRICS Summit
The 2025 BRICS Summit marks a significant moment as Brazil assumes the rotating presidency of the bloc, which now includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and newly joined members such as Indonesia, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia has also been invited to join, reflecting the group’s expanding influence.
The summit will be held at the Museum of Modern Art in Rio de Janeiro and is expected to bring together leaders from across the Global South to address pressing global challenges and advance the BRICS agenda. Under the theme “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance,” Brazil’s BRICS presidency has outlined a few key priorities.
These include:
- Improving global health through equitable access to medicines.
- Tackling neglected tropical diseases.
- Boosting trade and investment by promoting local currencies and alternative payment systems.
- Advancing climate action with a BRICS Climate Leadership Agenda.
The summit will also focus on responsible AI governance, reforming global peace and security systems and strengthening BRICS’ internal structure for more effective decision-making.
The 2025 summit takes place amid a shifting geopolitical landscape and ongoing efforts by BRICS to expand its influence and offer an alternative platform for emerging economies. The bloc’s expansion and focus on inclusive governance underscore its ambition to play a more prominent role in shaping global economic and political norms.
Diplomatic relations between Myanmar and China have reached their diamond jubilee anniversary on 8 June 2025. The state-level grand celebration of the 75th anniversary of the Myanmar-China diplomatic tie was held in Nay Pyi Taw yesterday.
Bound by history, Myanmar and China have been sharing the intertwined fates with fraternal ties since prehistoric times.
The most ancient tie between the two countries was evidenced as early as 4 BC; there was a trade route linking China’s Sichuan and Yunnan provinces with Myanmar. Again, in the Chinese Tang Dynasty from 618-907 AD, a team of musicians and dancers from Myanmar’s Pyu Dynasty visited the capital of the Chinese Tang Dynasty and exchanged cultures. The very first Myanmar diplomat to China can be traced back to Myanmar’s Bagan Dynasty in the 12th century when the Venerable Sayadaw Shin Ditha Pamauk arrived in Beijing for negotiations, which concluded as a success story of an ancient diplomatic milestone between the two countries with mutual respect and understanding.
Sharing the geographical origins of mountains, hills and rivers, the two countries experienced similar historical paths, particularly in World War II when the world stood against fascism eighty years ago. While Russia (former Soviet Union) fought Nazi Germany together with its allies in the European frontline, Myanmar and China fought the Japanese fascists in the Asian frontline respectively. Historical records estimate that around 20 million Chinese sacrificed their lives and souls in the battles resisting the Japanese aggression, while Myanmar lost at least one million citizens in the struggle to expel Japanese fascist forces.
Myanmar and China established a strategic partnership as early as in fighting back the Japanese invasions, notably through the construction of the Yunnan-Myanmar Road, connecting Kunming in China’s Yunnan Province and Lashio in Myanmar’s Shan State. This vital route played a crucial role in the supply chain for China in resisting Japanese aggression. Chinese forces provided reciprocal support to the Myanmar Army in combatting Japanese invaders, especially in the frontline in northern Myanmar and the southern part of China. More than just neighbouring countries, Myanmar and China stood as allies in defending their sovereignty against foreign invasion. This reflects their Swe Myo Pauk Phaw spirit in the shared struggle against colonialism during the 1940s.
Accordingly, since World War II, Myanmar and China have already developed the groundwork for a “Community of Common Destiny for Mankind” or a “Shared Future” through their efforts.
The sense of a shared future and shared interests reflects togetherness on the road to building peace, development and prosperity, which will be shared among each other by recognizing differences and diversities with mutual respect and trust.
Today, the world is reshaping the international order toward a global environment with peace, justice and equality which guarantees for non-hegemonic arena; the People’s Republic of China is one of the steering nations in this mechanism guided by the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, of which, both Myanmar and China were pioneering signatories dating back in 1954.
What is more, Myanmar was the first non-communist country that recognized the new China after its founding of the People’s Republic of China on 1 October 1949. Furthermore, Myanmar is the very first neighbouring country to China that peacefully agreed to finalize the bilateral border demarcation; and the two countries have never ever had any disputes over their shared boundary ownership.
Under the Swe Myo Pauk-Phaw (fraternal) tie, Myanmar and China uphold mutual support in the international diplomatic realm. As an all-weather friend of China, Myanmar consistently supports the ‘One China’ policy and firmly rejects any acts of aggression against China carried out from Myanmar territory. Reciprocally, China has persistently maintained its steadfast diplomatic support to Myanmar on the international stage in every successive era.
However, without a doubt, the threats posed by neocolonialism have repeatedly sought to weaken this deep-rooted solidarity between the two Asian nations, which have been sharing affection for thousands of years with mutual respect. Both countries, Myanmar and China, firmly reject hegemonism, any attempts to distabilize the region, and neocolonial interference in any disguise, standing together in unity and supporting each other through every challenge.
The concept of a shared future and shared interests for a common destiny are the core values that should be vested in the global trend of multipolarity. The two leaders, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing of Myanmar and President Xi Jinping of the PRC jointly upheld the United Nationscentered international system and the international order underpinned by international law and safeguarded the legitimate rights and interests of developing countries when they met in Moscow in early May at the sideline of the Grand Celebration of 80th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union. Their meeting reached an important consensus on building the Myanmar-China community with a shared future.
Senior General Min Aung Hlaing and President Xi Jinping exchanged congratulatory messages on the occasion of the diamond jubilee anniversary of the bilateral tie on Sunday.
Senior General Min Aung Hlaing emphasized that the longstanding “Pauk-Phaw” friendship, which was cultivated by successive generations of leadership, has continued to grow stronger over time. In 2011, this enduring relationship was elevated to a Comprehensive Strategic Cooperative Partnership. President Xi Jinping’s historic visit to Myanmar in 2020 marked a new chapter in bilateral relations, during which both nations reaffirmed their commitment to building a Myanmar-China community with a shared future.
In return, Chinese President Xi Jinping also highlighted in his congratulations that the friendship between Myanmar and China has stood the test of time and grown even stronger, adding that upholding the jointly advocated Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and the Bandung Spirit, the two countries have been committed to good neighbourliness, deepened mutually beneficial cooperation, and firmly supported each other on issues regarding their respective core interests and major concerns, setting a fine example of friendly exchange between countries.
China, as a rising power with strong economic and political unity, having a highly esteemed cultural status, consistently shares weals and woes in multi-faceted issues. China’s vast and immediate assistance in the recent major earthquake in Myanmar deserves earnest recognition as a milestone in the humanitarian efforts in Myanmar. The people of Myanmar always express our heart-touched gratitude to the government and the people of China for their timely and generous humanitarian assistance in earthquake management. What is more, it is our sincere appreciation to China for its unwavering support in Myanmar’s efforts to achieve long-lasting peace and stability, national reconciliation, and socioeconomic development.
The enduring ties between Myanmar and China bearing the Pauk Phaw spirit will stand lasting over to our future generations and descendants for the next thousands of years with resilient love.
Source: The Global New Light of Myanmar
Diplomatic relations between Myanmar and China have reached their diamond jubilee anniversary on 8 June 2025. The state-level grand celebration of the 75th anniversary of the Myanmar-China diplomatic tie was held in Nay Pyi Taw yesterday.
Bound by history, Myanmar and China have been sharing the intertwined fates with fraternal ties since prehistoric times.
The most ancient tie between the two countries was evidenced as early as 4 BC; there was a trade route linking China’s Sichuan and Yunnan provinces with Myanmar. Again, in the Chinese Tang Dynasty from 618-907 AD, a team of musicians and dancers from Myanmar’s Pyu Dynasty visited the capital of the Chinese Tang Dynasty and exchanged cultures. The very first Myanmar diplomat to China can be traced back to Myanmar’s Bagan Dynasty in the 12th century when the Venerable Sayadaw Shin Ditha Pamauk arrived in Beijing for negotiations, which concluded as a success story of an ancient diplomatic milestone between the two countries with mutual respect and understanding.
Sharing the geographical origins of mountains, hills and rivers, the two countries experienced similar historical paths, particularly in World War II when the world stood against fascism eighty years ago. While Russia (former Soviet Union) fought Nazi Germany together with its allies in the European frontline, Myanmar and China fought the Japanese fascists in the Asian frontline respectively. Historical records estimate that around 20 million Chinese sacrificed their lives and souls in the battles resisting the Japanese aggression, while Myanmar lost at least one million citizens in the struggle to expel Japanese fascist forces.
Myanmar and China established a strategic partnership as early as in fighting back the Japanese invasions, notably through the construction of the Yunnan-Myanmar Road, connecting Kunming in China’s Yunnan Province and Lashio in Myanmar’s Shan State. This vital route played a crucial role in the supply chain for China in resisting Japanese aggression. Chinese forces provided reciprocal support to the Myanmar Army in combatting Japanese invaders, especially in the frontline in northern Myanmar and the southern part of China. More than just neighbouring countries, Myanmar and China stood as allies in defending their sovereignty against foreign invasion. This reflects their Swe Myo Pauk Phaw spirit in the shared struggle against colonialism during the 1940s.
Accordingly, since World War II, Myanmar and China have already developed the groundwork for a “Community of Common Destiny for Mankind” or a “Shared Future” through their efforts.
The sense of a shared future and shared interests reflects togetherness on the road to building peace, development and prosperity, which will be shared among each other by recognizing differences and diversities with mutual respect and trust.
Today, the world is reshaping the international order toward a global environment with peace, justice and equality which guarantees for non-hegemonic arena; the People’s Republic of China is one of the steering nations in this mechanism guided by the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, of which, both Myanmar and China were pioneering signatories dating back in 1954.
What is more, Myanmar was the first non-communist country that recognized the new China after its founding of the People’s Republic of China on 1 October 1949. Furthermore, Myanmar is the very first neighbouring country to China that peacefully agreed to finalize the bilateral border demarcation; and the two countries have never ever had any disputes over their shared boundary ownership.
Under the Swe Myo Pauk-Phaw (fraternal) tie, Myanmar and China uphold mutual support in the international diplomatic realm. As an all-weather friend of China, Myanmar consistently supports the ‘One China’ policy and firmly rejects any acts of aggression against China carried out from Myanmar territory. Reciprocally, China has persistently maintained its steadfast diplomatic support to Myanmar on the international stage in every successive era.
However, without a doubt, the threats posed by neocolonialism have repeatedly sought to weaken this deep-rooted solidarity between the two Asian nations, which have been sharing affection for thousands of years with mutual respect. Both countries, Myanmar and China, firmly reject hegemonism, any attempts to distabilize the region, and neocolonial interference in any disguise, standing together in unity and supporting each other through every challenge.
The concept of a shared future and shared interests for a common destiny are the core values that should be vested in the global trend of multipolarity. The two leaders, Senior General Min Aung Hlaing of Myanmar and President Xi Jinping of the PRC jointly upheld the United Nationscentered international system and the international order underpinned by international law and safeguarded the legitimate rights and interests of developing countries when they met in Moscow in early May at the sideline of the Grand Celebration of 80th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union. Their meeting reached an important consensus on building the Myanmar-China community with a shared future.
Senior General Min Aung Hlaing and President Xi Jinping exchanged congratulatory messages on the occasion of the diamond jubilee anniversary of the bilateral tie on Sunday.
Senior General Min Aung Hlaing emphasized that the longstanding “Pauk-Phaw” friendship, which was cultivated by successive generations of leadership, has continued to grow stronger over time. In 2011, this enduring relationship was elevated to a Comprehensive Strategic Cooperative Partnership. President Xi Jinping’s historic visit to Myanmar in 2020 marked a new chapter in bilateral relations, during which both nations reaffirmed their commitment to building a Myanmar-China community with a shared future.
In return, Chinese President Xi Jinping also highlighted in his congratulations that the friendship between Myanmar and China has stood the test of time and grown even stronger, adding that upholding the jointly advocated Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence and the Bandung Spirit, the two countries have been committed to good neighbourliness, deepened mutually beneficial cooperation, and firmly supported each other on issues regarding their respective core interests and major concerns, setting a fine example of friendly exchange between countries.
China, as a rising power with strong economic and political unity, having a highly esteemed cultural status, consistently shares weals and woes in multi-faceted issues. China’s vast and immediate assistance in the recent major earthquake in Myanmar deserves earnest recognition as a milestone in the humanitarian efforts in Myanmar. The people of Myanmar always express our heart-touched gratitude to the government and the people of China for their timely and generous humanitarian assistance in earthquake management. What is more, it is our sincere appreciation to China for its unwavering support in Myanmar’s efforts to achieve long-lasting peace and stability, national reconciliation, and socioeconomic development.
The enduring ties between Myanmar and China bearing the Pauk Phaw spirit will stand lasting over to our future generations and descendants for the next thousands of years with resilient love.
Source: The Global New Light of Myanmar