Near Wellington, New Zealand, is a wind farm set in the hills which
produces some 150 MW, enough for the power requirement of the city. There
are 62 wind turbines, windmills really, mounted on 100m high towers, each
with three blades, 30 m in length.  They are scattered over 55 sq km of
farmland.  Beneath them are cows and sheep grazing happily.  The farmers
get paid and find the extra income attractive.  Some environmentalists
object arguing that the turbines make noise  and  are a visual blight on
the landscape.  I did not find them unattractive and had to concentrate to
hear the low drone in the wind.  The landscape was spectacular.  I was
reminded of my visit to the Netherlands as an undergrad many years ago when
I made a special train journey to see a series of Dutch windmills in the
pretty countryside.

I had the pleasure of hosting Indian Road Transport Minister Kamal Nath to my constituency at Bedok Reservoir.  We are old friends.  We first met when he was Environment Minister when he generously donated to our zoo two Indian rhinos. Later we worked together when he was Commerce Minister.  I attended his son’s wedding in Delhi a few years ago, wearing my Nehru suit.  At the last Indian GE when Congress achieved great success, he was the campaign manager.  As Road Transport Minister, he is well on his way to building 20 km of highways a day!

When he arrived, I showed him  Bedok Reservoir.  We then adjourned to a nearby coffeeshop for dinner which consisted of chicken rice, Indian rojak, fried carrot cake, fruits and other local dishes.  He brought along the Indian High Commissioner and two Indian entrepreneurs, Mr Raju of GMR which owns one of our power stations and Mr Malvinder Singh of Fortis.  After dinner, I took them on a visit to two HDB apartments where we were warmly hosted first by a Malay family, then by a Chinese family.  We then walked across to my MPS at Blk 713.

Singapore is a small country where an MP can be easily accessible to residents.  Minister Nath’s constituency in Madhya Pradesh is twenty times the size of Singapore with 1.5 million voters many of whom earn less than US$1 a day.

I’d love to introduce and share the latest project my company Present Purpose in partnership with The Lo & Behold Group, are doing which is now open to the public – Camp Pong.  A pop up project that revolves around ping pong, music and good times,  it’s open for just a few short months before we transform the space into a lifestyle concept store and cafe  (more on that at a later date)

The idea of Camp Pong has been pinging about in my head for awhile since picking up on the trend of ping pong being played socially amongst the creative community in cities like New York, LA and London over the past few years.

When we were offered a commercial space at the brand new Scape building we thought it was the perfect location and opportunity to exact this concept as a pop up, giving people a new way to socialize and interact beyond the usual options, thus Camp Pong was born.

Located at #02-24 of *Scape at 2 Orchard link, (next to Orchard Cineleisure) Camp Pong is open 7 days a week,  2pm to 12am Sun to Thurs and till 2am on Friday and Saturday.

Ping Pong tables are available for hire at $10 per half-hour slot. For reservations or corporate hire, please call 68201680 or email camppong@presentpurpose.com

DJs spin an eclectic mix daily so you can make it your new daily hangout. A well stocked bar of Heineken, cocktails, & housepours ensure that things stay lively while adding a spin to the odds of winning.

Dressing up is highly encouraged, especially on weekends. Whether it’s head-to-toe sweatbands, superhero costumes, spandex, or complete New Balance or Fred Perry decked out glory- it’s your call. Its fun, it’s silly, it will add to the laughs. Take advantage of the ample UV lights and shine!

For more updates on Camp Pong join the ‘Camp Pong’ facebook group or follow us at twitter.com/presentpurpose

More on the Camp Pong Championships happening in July and how you can take part, coming up.

日本善于利用空间，很小的店也可以很丰富的菜单，口味也做的很好，服务更是让我佩服。

各行各业也都很有创意，我想新加坡零售业整体素质还得向他们学习，观摩。

My bite sized picks of what’s happening and where you should be, across Singapore’s nightlife, music and events landscape. Here’s a link to this weekend’s edition, putting fashion parties in the spotlight in honour of Audi Fashion Festival this week. Hope it comes in handy!

http://www.insing.com/news/night-owl-get-dressed-and-get-partying/id-7bb71500?nav=41000

TRANSCRIPT OF MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS GEORGE YEO’S REPLY TO THE PARLIAMENTARY QUESTION, 26 APRIL 2010

____________________________________________________________

QUESTION:

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) whether Singapore had provided the Romanian authorities with the evidence related to the accidents involving the Romanian diplomat Dr Silviu Ionescu; (b) whether Singapore has been assured by the Romanian authorities that charges will be brought against Dr Ionescu in Romania; and (c) whether Singapore can take legal action against Dr Ionescu for casting aspersions on the integrity of Singapore’s judicial system.  

REPLY:

1                  Since I last updated this House on 22 February 2010 on the hit-and-run accident involving the Romanian Embassy vehicle, there have been a number of important developments.  

2                  On 31 March 2010, the State Coroner found that Dr Silviu Ionescu was the driver responsible for the accident on 15 December 2009 and furthermore, that he was acting in his private and not official capacity at that time.

3                  The Romanian Government has officially withdrawn Dr Ionescu from Singapore with effect from 5 January 2010.  This means that he is no longer an accredited diplomat in Singapore. 

4                  Taken together with the findings of the Coroner’s Inquiry, this has significantly changed the situation. 

5                  The privileges and immunities which diplomats enjoy during their posting in a country to which they are accredited are different from the privileges and immunities they enjoy after leaving their country of accreditation at the end of their posting. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations clearly recognizes these differences.

6                  Article 39.1 of the Vienna Convention states that a diplomat’s privileges and immunities begin from the moment he enters the country of his posting.  These privileges and immunities include freedom from detention and arrest and immunity from the jurisdiction of the criminal courts of the receiving State.  As long as a diplomat remains accredited to a receiving State, his privileges and immunities in that State would apply to all his actions, whether official or private.

7                  When Dr Ionescu left Singapore on 17 December 2009, he was still a diplomat officially accredited to Singapore.  Therefore, as I explained to Members on 22 February 2010, Dr Ionescu could not be prevented from leaving Singapore as he enjoyed diplomatic immunity.   In any case, the police had at that time not completed their investigations and it was not yet established that Dr Ionescu was the driver of the vehicle that caused the accident on 15 December last year.

8                  In fact, even if Dr Ionescu did not leave Singapore after the accident, so long as he was an officially accredited diplomat we could not have arrested him unless the Romanian Government waived his immunity.  His immunity would have covered anything he did, whether official or private. This is international law which we have to respect.

9                  But the situation now is different and a different provision of the Vienna Convention applies.

10                Article 39.2 of the Vienna Convention stipulates that, after a diplomat’s posting ends and he leaves his country of accreditation, some of his privileges and immunities would also end.  While he would still enjoy immunity for official acts, he would no longer enjoy immunity for private acts.

11                The State Coroner has now found, among other things, that Dr Ionescu was not acting in an official capacity at the time of the accident.  The Romanian Government has withdrawn him from Singapore.  Therefore Dr Ionescu does not now enjoy and cannot now claim immunity for the accident.  

12                On 1 April 2010, a day after the Coroner announced his findings, the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) preferred actions against Dr Ionescu and issued a warrant of arrest against him.  On the same day, MFA summoned the Romanian Ambassador Mr Aurelian Neagu, who is resident in Tokyo, for a meeting in MFA and that meeting took place on 9 April 2010.

13                Ambassador Neagu was officially informed of the findings of the Coroner’s Inquiry and the charges against Dr Ionescu.  MFA asked the Romanian Government to do all it could to persuade Dr Ionescu to return to Singapore to stand trial.

14                The Romanian Government’s consistent position has been that it cannot compel Dr Ionescu to return to Singapore because there is no Extradition Treaty between Romania and Singapore. 

15                Mr Speaker Sir, it is a fact that there is no Extradition Treaty between Romania and Singapore.  That is why we have asked the Romanian Government to do all it can to persuade Dr Ionescu to return to Singapore.  We cannot demand that they arrest Dr Ionescu or compel him to return to Singapore. 

16                We have however stressed to the Romanian authorities that although Dr Ionescu had been suspended from the Romanian Foreign Ministry, he has not been dismissed and is still formally an employee of the Romanian Government.  As such, the Romanian Government has a clear obligation to see that justice is served.  If it is not possible to persuade Dr Ionescu to return to Singapore, we made clear that we expected the Romanian Government to investigate and prosecute him under Romanian law. 

17                The Romanian Government has not disputed its obligations and has repeatedly assured Singapore that it shares our interest in seeing that justice is served. 

18                Ambassador Neagu has informed us that the Romanian Prosecutor’s Office had started criminal investigations against Dr Ionescu on charges of “homicide by negligence, leaving the scene of an accident and false statements”.  But Ambassador Neagu explained that Romania would need to conduct its own investigations in accordance with Romanian law.

19                To this end, the Romanian Government had proposed the establishment of a joint commission or Joint Technical Working Group to discuss the legal aspects of the case and the evidence against Dr Ionescu.  On 9 April 2010, we informed the Ambassador that we agreed to this proposal. 

20                In fact, as early as 16 March 2010, the Minister for Law had assured his Romanian counterpart of our willingness to cooperate with the Romanian Government to the fullest extent possible under our law.  However, we could not then formally agree to their proposal for a joint commission before the Coroner had given his findings on 31 March 2010.  Singapore could not prejudge the outcome of the Coroner’s Inquiry or the decision of our Attorney-General’s Chambers to prefer charges against Dr Ionescu.

21                When MFA met Ambassador Neagu on 9 April 2010, he was given documents relevant to the case.  In fact, these documents had been given to the Charge d’Affaires of the Romanian Embassy earlier during the course of the Coroner’s Inquiry, but the Charge d’Affaires told MFA he did not then understand they were for his government’s use.  A certified copy of the full records of the Coroner’s Inquiry was given to the Romanian Embassy on 12 April 2010.

22                The Romanian Government has been acting properly.  It is natural that their own legal authorities would want to conduct their own investigation, study the documents we have given them and to discuss the evidence with our legal authorities before coming to a decision on the criminal investigation that they have initiated against Dr Ionescu.  We are now waiting for the Romanian side to propose specific dates to begin these discussions.

23                The Romanian Ambassador has told us that they are working on dates for a member of their prosecutor’s office and a member of their police to visit Singapore, but there are certain administrative formalities that they had to observe before doing so.  We have to allow the Romanian authorities some time to go through their own internal procedures.

24                On 23 April 2010, the Romanian Foreign Ministry sent us a TPN asserting that Dr Ionescu’s diplomatic immunity “continues to subsist” and cites Article 39.2 of the Vienna Convention to support this contention. We are puzzled as it seems to imply that Romania is now claiming that Dr Ionescu was engaged in official duties at the time of the accident and we do not understand how this can possibly be the case.  On the other hand, reports in the Romanian media suggest that some of Dr Ionescu’s assets in Romania have been seized and that the Romanian police may be preparing to arrest him. We have not been able to confirm these media reports, but the Romanian police has informed INTERPOL that the competence to prosecute Dr Ionescu remains with Romania and that criminal proceedings against him have started in Romania for crimes committed in Singapore. With these conflicting accounts, the sooner the Romanian legal experts visit us to clarify the situation, exchange views and review the evidence with our legal experts, the better.

25                We have continually stressed to Ambassador Neagu that the Romanian Government should not underestimate the outrage that Singaporeans feel about this case and that justice must not only be served, but seen to be served and served expeditiously.  If not, as the MFA statement has already made clear on 9 April 2010, bilateral relations will be harmed. 

26                I believe that the Romanian Government understands this, and would not want to see the entire country’s good name tarnished by the actions of one rogue diplomat.  Romania is a member state of the EU which prides itself on its reputation as a community of values.  Bucharest understands that more than Romania’s own reputation is at stake and that it must live up to the EU’s high standards.

27                MFA has also repeatedly stressed to the Romanian authorities that it is not in their interest to allow Dr Ionescu to continue making wild statements against Singapore.  They only further inflame public opinion against Romania because the average man in the street does not distinguish between Dr Ionescu and the country, particularly since he is still formally employed by the Romanian Government. However, the Romanian authorities have told us that as a Romanian citizen, Dr Ionescu has the right to say what he pleases and while they can advise him, they cannot compel him to be silent. 

28                Mr Speaker Sir, we have no reason to disbelieve what the Romanian authorities have told us.  The Romanian authorities have, quite properly, disassociated the Romanian Government from Dr Ionescu’s statements.

29                Dr Ionescu’s wild statements show that he is desperate.  It is obvious from the comments of Romanian netizens that even his own countrymen do not believe him.  Other diplomats in Singapore have told us that Dr Ionescu has disgraced the entire diplomatic corps, which is unfair.  Dr Ionescu is not hurting Singapore.  He is only hurting himself and his own country.

30                Despite the impatience we naturally feel, we must however be disciplined and carefully observe due process. We are a country that respects the law.  This reputation is an invaluable asset that we must preserve by handling the case calmly and in accordance with our legal system and our international legal obligations.

31                Now that the Romanian authorities have begun their criminal investigations of Dr Ionescu, we must give them time to complete these investigations and not prejudge the outcome.  As I have said, the next step is for the Romanian Government to propose dates for their prosecutor’s office and police authorities to visit Singapore.  We have told the Romanian Ambassador that we expect this visit to take place by May this year and that there should not be undue delay.    

32                When I was in the Vatican in St. Peter’s Square a few days ago, quite by chance, both the Romanian Foreign Minister Mr Teodor Baconschi and myself were waiting to see the Holy Father after his public audience.  I asked if I could have a quick word with him.  He agreed immediately and we pulled to one side and had a conversation.  I stressed to him the anguish felt by Singaporeans about this case.  He immediately responded by saying that he sympathized, and assured me that this matter is receiving the highest attention by the Government and the full legal course was being observed.  He assured me that justice would be done.  I told him that we cherish the good relations between our two countries and I asked for his agreement for me to make public our exchange in the Vatican.  He did not demur, and it was with his approval, therefore, that I issued that statement alongside with my statement that I had met with the Pope.  So, from my conversation with Foreign Minister Baconschi, I felt reasonably assured that the Romanian Government is taking this matter seriously, but they are required to observe their due process because this matter must go up to Romanian courts, and they too must follow procedures carefully.

.    .    .    .    .

TRANSCRIPT OF MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS GEORGE YEO’S REPLIES TO SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTIONS, 26 APRIL 2010

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong: First I would like to commend the Minister for his firm handling of the case. It is important that Romania does not underestimate our determination and resolve to pursue this case to ensure that justice is served. Can I ask the Minister if Romania has given an indication of how long the criminal investigations would take in their country? Also given that Romania does not seem to share the same understanding as Singapore that Ionescu does not have diplomatic immunity, is there a higher international body that we can turn to resolve this?

Minister: Legally speaking, there is no higher authority we can appeal to. Because of some disagreement or confusion over the interpretation of Article 39.2 of the Vienna Convention, the earlier Interpol Red Notice has been suspended.  This is part of Interpol’s procedures, in that if there are differing views, they would pursue the matter further before reactivating the Red Arrest Notice.  All these require the two sides to meet.  They have already said that members of the Prosecutor’s office and Police would come to Singapore.  We told them not to delay this and to come as quickly as possible in May.  Let us clarify the position between ourselves and enable the process in Romania to go forth with our fullest cooperation.  Separately, MFA has asked our Ambassador in Brussels to visit Romania with members of our own Attorney-General’s Chambers, in order to familiarize themselves with the legal procedures and processes in Romania.  We are also engaging a lawyer to hold a watching brief for us in Romania.

.   .   .   .   .

MFA PRESS STATEMENT

MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS GEORGE YEO’S VISIT

TO THE HOLY SEE

20 – 21 APRIL 2010

Minister George Yeo made an official visit to the Holy See from 20 – 21 April 2010.   Minister Yeo had a short audience with His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI on 21 April 2010.  Minister Yeo conveyed the good wishes of the President, Prime Minister and the people of Singapore, and a letter from President S R Nathan inviting the Pope to visit Singapore next year in conjunction with the 30^th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations.  The Pope thanked President Nathan for the invitation and gave his blessings to the people and government of Singapore.

While in the Vatican, Minister Yeo also had meetings with President of the Pontifical Commission and President of the Governorate of Vatican City State Cardinal Giovanni Lajolo, Secretary for Relations with States Archbishop Dominique Mamberti, and Secretary of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace Mario Toso, to discuss ways to enhance bilateral cooperation.  In particular, Minister Yeo proposed cooperation in inter-faith dialogue. 

Minister Yeo also called on Archbishop Emeritus of Boston Cardinal Bernard Francis Law and Prelate of Opus Dei Monsignor Javier Echevarria, whom he met in Singapore last year.

.         .         .         .         .

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS

SINGAPORE

22 APRIL 2010

Although I had been to the Vatican a few times, this was my first as
Foreign Minister.  I had a good discussion with my counterpart, Secretary
for External Relations, Archbishop Mamberti on 20 April 2010 .  We
discussed ways to enhance bilateral relations and also the Vatican’s
relations with China and Vietnam.  I also visited the Pontifical Council
for Justice and Peace.  At the recommendation of former US Amb to
Singapore, Steve Green, I called on Cardinal Bernard Law at one of Rome’s
great basilicas, Santa Maria Magiorre.  He received me warmly and invited
me to join him for Mass the following morning at his private chapel.  In
the evening, I hosted dinner at a Chinese restaurant for some of our
Catholic religious working or studying in the Vatican – a diocesan priest,
a Dominican brother and three Canossian nuns – most of whom I knew in
Singapore.

Following the official visit by the PM and Foreign Minister of Andorra to
Singapore in the last two years, I made an official visit to this mountain
principality from Barcelona.  It was the first by a Singapore minister and
I must say I had a thrill seeing the Singapore flag fluttering in the
Pyrennes.

Andorra is a small country, a little smaller than Singapore, with fewer
than 40,000 citizens.  But it has a history which goes back to the 12th
century and a per capita income of over US$40,000.  Andorra is a democracy
with two co-princes as Heads of State, the President of France and the
Catholic Bishop of the neighbouring Spanish region.  Carefully balancing
the interests of France and Spain, it avoided occupation by Napoleon and
Hitler.  Its economy now depends heavily on tourism, especially skiing in
winter.  Andorra also has five banks which operate in many countries.

Foreign Minister Xavier Espot enveloped me with the warmth of his
hospitality.  He is a businessman, a lawyer by training.  For him, serving
as Foreign Minister is national service, a responsibility he hopes not to
have to shoulder too long.  He brought me to see the ancient parliament
house where I called on the Vice President Esteve Lopez.  In it is an old
shelf which could only be opened with seven keys, each held by a
Councillor.  Only when all were present could new laws be passed.  After an
excellent lunch, we visited a well-preserved village called Ordino.
Property prices in Andorra are sky high.

Xavier and I agreed to explore ways for our countries to work together,
particularly in Asia.  Tourism in both directions is an obvious area.
He’ll get his business chamber to organise a visit to Singapore and
promises to come himself in the near future.

 Question: Minister, what are the key issues confronting ASEAN during this Summit?

Minister: We had very good discussions yesterday evening about the regional architecture and how it should evolve to meet the coming challenges. This is a big subject. It requires very careful thinking among us and whatever step we take should be taken in a very considered way. All of us agreed that in this evolving regional architecture, ASEAN centrality should be affirmed and that what we do should serve the interest of all the major powers and not merely of particular groups. In fact, this is the strength of ASEAN’s weakness. To paraphrase the Indonesian President, “we have zero enemies, a thousand friends,” and this should also be at the heart of ASEAN diplomacy. I must say that the Vietnamese Chair has been very good, very effective. We covered all the agenda items in good time. Since the implementation of the ASEAN Charter early last year, the ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta has done very good work. We now have the Committee of Permanent Representatives. This time round there were formal briefings by the Chair. I can say that we made good progress and the institution is coming along nicely.

Question: Are the Thai and Myanmar situations overshadowing other issues in this Summit?

Minister: The situation in Bangkok is worrying and is a sombre backdrop to our discussions. I have had discussions with Khun Kasit on the side and I really hope that the situation there will not lead to violence, that good sense will prevail and the parties involved will continue to talk.

Question: What about the Myanmar elections issue, was that brought up?

Minister: Yes. It wasn’t the central issue but a number of us, both at the open meetings and on the side, have expressed our hope that this last step in their roadmap to democracy will be marked by national reconciliation.

Question: How long will it take for ASEAN to build the ASEAN community from vision to action?

Minister: We have targeted the establishment of an ASEAN community by 2015. We are all set on that and we are determined to make that happen.

Question: But when will action begin because now it is a mere vision?

Minister: Action has already started ever since we started improving our connectivity, opening up our markets to one another, encouraging our people to interact and cooperate – these are ongoing processes.

Question: Could you tell in one sentence, what is your impression of the Summit in Hanoi?

Minister: I would say that the Vietnamese Chair has been very impressive, very effective, very disciplined and making sure that we make progress within the time that we have.

Question: ASEAN Foreign Ministers have just signed the Protocol, the DSM [Dispute Settlement Mechanism] Protocol, how significant is this?

Minister: Well, we made a political statement.  It is not yet a legal document because there are still bits not yet done, but it [the statement] commits us politically to having a dispute settlement mechanism which will give our agreements a concrete reality.

Question: What should be done for ASEAN to keep the central role in a bigger picture – regional cooperation and architecture?

Minister: It is very important that we stay in the driver’s seat, and we stay in the driver’s seat not because it is a matter of right, but because we are able to steer the car in a way which all the passengers can accept to be in their interests, in our collective interests, and in a manner which is fair and transparent. So this requires activity on our part. We can’t be passive. We must always be seen to be responding to an evolving larger situation.

Question: What is your comment on the prospect of an East Asian community?

Minister: We discussed that a lot last night. We discussed the three options. How we should bring in the larger powers, in particular the US and Russia into the evolving regional architecture; and to do it in a way which ensures our long-term interests are protected.

Question: Has the South China Sea maritime issue been discussed?

Minister: Among the Ministers, no. We did not discuss it because the officials have had good agreement on this.

Question: Minister, how likely is it that ASEAN could welcome the US and Russia into the discussions as possibly ASEAN plus 8?

Minister: Step-by-step we are still clarifying our own thoughts on the subject. The leaders will discuss it today and tomorrow, and I think we need to get the Ministers to study it in greater detail. Not just Foreign Ministers but also Economic Ministers and Defence Ministers, so I would say let us not rush to do something which we may regret later but let us put our thinking hats on and work out an outcome, a solution which would be good for everybody.

Question: Sir, if the South China Sea issue has not been discussed at the ministerial level, at what level has it been discussed at this meeting and what have been the developments?

Minister: Oh, it is very much on the agenda. The officials have been discussing it. But for our meetings last night and today, we were discussing other subjects instead. It is not as if it is not important to us. It is just that officials have handled it and there is no need for the Ministers to discuss it further at this point in time.

Question: Sir, is there a feeling of surrender that there will be no real inclusive democratic election in Myanmar? What is the feeling ASEAN about it?

Minister: I’m sorry?

Question: What is the feeling of ASEAN about it? That it seems impossible to have an inclusive real democratic election in Myanmar.

Minister: I think their internal processes are still going on. There are intense discussions; I hope between the government and the political parties and I hope within the political parties themselves. But the coming months will be critical months for Myanmar.

Question: So you are still hopeful? That there will be reforms?

Minister: We hope that they will continue to move forward…

Question: What were the comments?

Minister: …ASEAN’s position is one of a continuing engagement with Myanmar.

Question: If Myanmar….

Minister: From Singapore’s own position, it has been disappointing that because of the way the election laws have been crafted, it is not possible for the NLD to participate in the elections. But I believe they will find a way to participate in some other way. I was talking to Pak Marty, the Foreign Minister of Indonesia, how there was a similar situation in the past in Indonesia and the PDI, Partai Demokrasi Indonesia, reincarnated in the form of the PDI-P. So well, let’s see. It is an evolving domestic situation in Myanmar.

Question: But is Myanmar open to accommodate, still accommodate the opposition…?

Minister: No, in the end, what happens in Myanmar is for the Myanmar people to decide. We are outsiders. Of course we wish them well, we hope that they will progress quickly, but in the end it is for the Myanmar people to decide.

Question: So apparently like the Thai Prime Minister…

Minister: Where are you from?

Question: I’m from Reuters. So he cancelled the trip to come to participate in this meeting, so what is your reaction about it?

Minister: I fully understand why Khun Abhisit may not be able to come because he has just declared a state of emergency. It affects all Thai people, in the sense of personal safety and law and order, and I think if he is not able to come to this Summit, all the leaders will understand fully.

Question: Minister, don’t issues like that detract from ASEAN’s wish to move forward together as a community?

Minister: Issues like what?

Question: Issues like the unrest in Thailand, do they not detract from us in its wish to move forward as a community? Is it not a distraction to that goal?

Minister: No, ASEAN is not a collective grouping only for good times. The character of ASEAN is formed by how we react to crises, whether it is to natural disasters, or to man-made crises. It is precisely at times like this, when we have got to respond to difficult situations, that our character is formed.

Question: So what was the comment of the Foreign Minister of Myanmar last night when the issue about what was going on in his country was discussed?

Minister: We were not criticising him or lecturing him or telling him what to do. We were just making observations and suggestions, and he took them in a good spirit.

Question: What was his comment?

Minister: I think you better ask him.

Question: If Myanmar does not progress, if it backslides. Is there the chance of ASEAN doing anything substantive to criticise it or to punish it? Or will you simply continue to engage?

Minister: No, we are not in position to punish Myanmar. The reality of the strategic situation is that Myanmar’s two biggest neighbours, China and India, will continue to engage the country. For this reason, the Western embargo has not worked. ASEAN takes a very realpolitik position which is that if China and India remain engaged in Myanmar, we have to. And it is better that Myanmar remain in the ASEAN sphere than being a buffer state in between the two biggest countries on earth.

Question: Do you think that ASEAN can issue a statement or say anything in support of the government of Abhisit at this moment? Obviously, they are under threat from the Red Shirts protesters. Do you think ASEAN should say something too?

Minister: Things are happening minute by minute. I just heard that Khun Abhisit may not be able to come. If he’s not able to come, I’m quite sure he will issue a statement. I’m sure there will be a response from the Chair, and I’m sure there will be a response from the Leaders of ASEAN. But I have no doubts in my mind that the Leaders of ASEAN fully understand why he may not be able to come and join us for this meeting. Not because Thailand makes light of ASEAN, but because our first responsibility must be to our own people. The safety, the well-being of the Thai people are at stake here. He should be there where he is needed the most.

Question: Could any development regarding the…..

Minister: Can I be released now?

[Laughter]

Minister: Thank you.

. . . . .

On Monday, I flew to Jakarta to take part in a panel discussion on the 2011
World Development Report as a member of its advisory council, mainly to
talk about the ASEAN experience.  Took the opportunity to catch up with
Thant Myint-U who wrote the excellent book about Myanmar, “The River of
Lost Footsteps” over lunch.  Before returning to Singapore, I called on
former Vice President Jusuf Kalla who hosted me to tea at his residence.
He is now Chairman of the Indonesian Red Cross, as always, bubbling with
ideas.

When I accepted the invitation by Kuo Jian Hong to attend the opening
performance of Liao Zhai Rocks!, it was principally because of my affection
for Kuo Pao Kun. 

Pao Kun played a major role in nurturing Singapore drama
and many of those now involved are directly or indirectly influenced by
him.  This year is the 45th Anniversary of The Theatre Practice and Liao
Zhai Rocks! is the 250th production.

I read Liao Zhai in English translation many years ago and was delighted
with the way it has been given a modern treatment.  These Taoist tales may
seem silly at one level but are deeply philosophical at another.  The
fusion of old and new worked well.

Pao Kun’s wife, Lay Kuan, who sat next to me complained that the music was
too loud.  I told her that it should have been a little louder to create
the mood.  Maybe it was the opening night and there were too many VIPs
around.  I had not seen Lay Kuan since the performance of  ‘If there are
seasons’ and remarked that she looked very well.  She told me that she now
meditates several hours a day.

Old Chang Kee was once again the main sponsor and got other entrepreneurs
to give their support as well.

Dinner with Singaporeans

Over the years, I have had the pleasure of opening Keppel facilities in the
Philippines, Brazil and, a few days ago, in Baku.  Keppel has a wonderful
can-do spirit.  The strength of the company is not only in the technology
but also in the culture.  On my last night in Baku, I joined the Keppel
staff for dinner and karaoke at their service apartment.  A Malaysian chef
served delicious local fare.