Rilek1Corner

Category: Komentar

Send in your opinion to [email protected].
Kirimkan pandangan anda kepada [email protected].

  • Pakistan Has A Drinking Problem

    Pakistan Has A Drinking Problem

    Pakistan was recently mesmerized by a bottle of Scotch whisky. On Oct. 30, as hundreds of supporters of the opposition party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (P.T.I.) were making their way to the capital Islamabad, with the declared intent of shutting down the city, the police searched the car of a P.T.I. politician and discovered a bottle of Johnny Walker Double Black.

    Most Pakistanis had not seen a bottle of whisky in the news in a long time. Although there’s no ban on showing alcohol in the media, the subject rarely comes up in TV news. But this one bottle of whisky, waved around by a policeman, was broadcast on a loop. It became an emblem of the opposition’s immorality.

    The politician claimed it contained honey. Yet later that evening, on a current affairs TV show, he put a sobering question to the other guests, “Which one of you doesn’t drink?” Complete silence.

    If they said yes, they’d be implicating themselves. If they said no, nobody would believe them. For Muslims in Pakistan, drinking alcohol is prohibited and talking about it is taboo. Drinking and denying it is the oldest cocktail in the country.

    It wasn’t always like this. The country was founded in 1947 by Mohammed Ali Jinnah, who was known to indulge in the occasional drink. Alcohol shops and bars were banned in 1977 by Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, a person who had publicly proclaimed, “Yes, I do drink alcohol, but at least I don’t drink the blood of the poor.”

    That year, facing protests over an allegedly rigged election that his party had won, Mr. Bhutto decided to declare prohibition. He probably believed that he and his comrades would continue to enjoy their Scotch in private. He was hanged two years later.

    Since those days, Pakistan’s rich have continued to enjoy their liquor at home and members’ clubs, but the less privileged have been persecuted and flogged, and are at risk of being imprisoned, for possessing and consuming alcohol.

    It’s true that most people in Pakistan don’t drink because they are Muslim. But many more don’t drink because they are Muslim and poor. Nobody abstains from drinking because it’s prohibited by law.

    When alcohol was banned by Mr. Bhutto, an exception was made for non-Muslims. They would be issued licenses and allotted a quota. Non-Muslim visiting foreigners would be able to order a drink in their hotel rooms, but the hotels would make them fill out a form saying they needed the alcohol for medicinal purposes.

    In the province of Sindh, where I live, licensed shops, usually called wine stores, have operated even since prohibition. The stores are supposed to sell only to non-Muslims, but they don’t discriminate. Owners have to pay off the police, though, and any dispute can result in the shops having to close down.

    The laws can be cruel and absurd. Last summer, the local police in Karachi banned liquor stores from keeping freezers, in order to stop consumers from buying a cold beer. Apparently chilled beer was a threat to our faith and to peace, but warm beer was just warm beer.

    In late October, a High Court judge ordered the closure of all these stores after accepting a petition that said alcohol is prohibited not only in Islam but in Christianity and Hinduism, too. This ban means that only those who can afford imported liquor will keep buying from a flourishing network of bootleggers.

    Others will have to buy one of the many versions of moonshine brewed all over the country, which routinely blind and kill consumers. Two years ago, when liquor stores were shut in Sindh over the Eid holiday, more than 25 people died after drinking home-brew. Survivors report that if the stuff doesn’t kill you or blind you, it isn’t that bad.

    Members of Parliament and law enforcers and industrialists and bureaucrats and young professionals and even some religious scholars can drink with impunity. A taxi driver trying to score a beer on the go risks a jail term or losing his eyesight to moonshine.

    It’s a law-and-order issue, you see. The rich drink in their own homes and frolic or puke on their own lawns, but the assumption is that if the poor get drunk in public spaces, they’ll make a nuisance. Which is why those who can afford fine scotches can also afford to give everyone else lectures about our religious duties. It seems that those who suck the blood of poor people want to make sure it’s not tainted with cheap alcohol.

    No wonder Pakistanis go to any lengths to ensure they’re not seen drinking, even when they smell like a barrel of liquor. I once had dinner with a 74-year-old grandfather who sipped from his spiked bottle of cola but worried that one of the children at the table would get their Pepsis mixed up with his.

    I’ve tried to interview my neighborhood liquor-shop owner, but he has discouraged me. There are enough problems in Pakistan, why don’t you write about them? But is this Bombay Sapphire knockoff you’re selling any good? How would I know? he said, I have never had a drop. Not even for medicinal purposes.

    Source: The New York Times

  • Amber Alert As Singapore Slips In Several World Rankings

    Amber Alert As Singapore Slips In Several World Rankings

    For a country that prides itself on staying ahead of the competition, Singapore has slipped down several global rankings over the past year or so.

    From competitiveness and ease of doing business to the ability to nuture and attract talent from around the world, the Republic’s competitors have caught up. Even though Singapore remains one of the top performers globally measured by various yardsticks, the competition is heating up.

    Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say warned as much last month: “Imagine, if we ever allow our cheaper competitors to become better than us, one day, they will be cheaper and better than us. Likewise, if we ever allow our better competitors to become cheaper than us, one day, they will be better and cheaper,” he said at a productivity conference.

    Deloitte’s 2016 Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index, published in March, ranked the Republic at 10th place – dropping one spot from the previous edition three years ago, with Singapore projected to slip further by 2020.

    Swiss business school IMD’s 2016 World Competitiveness Ranking released in May saw Singapore falling one position to fourth, increasing the distance to traditional rival Hong Kong which claimed pole position after moving up from second place previously.

    In October, Singapore lost its coveted status as the world’s easiest place to do business, after an unbroken 10-year streak: Dragged down by factors such as cost and regulatory compliance – which observers had noted were important for security and anti-money laundering efforts – the Republic came in second behind New Zealand in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index.

    Most recently, Singapore tumbled five places to 15th in the World Talent Report 2016 released by IMD earlier this week – largely due to lower scores in appeal to overseas talent, and investment and development of home grown talent.

    While these rankings painted a sullen picture for Singapore, experts whom TODAY spoke to said there is no cause for panic or alarm. Still, it is worth looking at where Singapore needs to do better, at a time when its economy is at a crossroads.

    ESSEC Asia Pacific dean Kevyn Yong noted that countries are catching up with Singapore, and it may not be the case that the Republic is losing competitiveness. He said: “Having said that, we should pay attention to these things and never take them for granted… we should always stay vigilant and prepared, to think ahead and think of how we can reinvent ourselves.”

    ‘CHEAPER COUNTRIES BECOMING BETTER’

    Singapore’s rise from Third World to First within a generation has been well-documented. Along the way, it shot up international rankings and became known as one of the most competitive economies around the world, with its clean government, strong infrastructure, an educated workforce and a business-friendly environment.

    But as the saying goes, it is more difficult to stay on top than to get there.

    One reason behind Singapore’s loss of relative competitiveness is the higher labour cost after the Government tightened inflows of foreign manpower. That has resulted in higher business costs and is particularly harmful to the manufacturing sector which, according to the Deloitte study, sees cost competitiveness as the second most influential driver of overall competitiveness.

    The manufacturing sector contributes close to 20 per cent of Singapore’s gross domestic product (GDP) and hires more than 500,000 people. In recent years, some big companies — such as Seagate, Broadcom and Coca-Cola — have relocated all or part of their operations to cheaper locations such as Malaysia, Thailand and even Ireland.

    But experts noted that it is natural that some activities, especially lower-value added ones, exit the market as Singapore transitions into a higher-value added economy. Mr Richard Wong, vice president of Frost & Sullivan’s public sector and government practice, said: “Looking at the direction that the Government is gearing the economy towards, it is somewhat natural that some of these light manufacturing activities or production and assembly related activities that are not very high tech and those that take up a lot of space move out of Singapore. As the Singapore workforce is very educated, these jobs may not be that appealing also.”

    Indeed, some of the companies that relocated part of their operations chose to retain the higher-value added functions in Singapore. Seagate, for instance, manufactures hard disk media at its Woodlands plant and last year expanded its research and development (R&D) presence here with a S$100 million centre.

    Still, Singapore is set to face stiff competition in higher-value added activities, including in electronics, biomedical and chemicals production, as neighbouring nations make their own way up the value chain. Malaysia’s Iskandar special economic zone, for instance, had declared that it intends to attract higher-value added industries, while rapid economic development in Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam would also see them vie for a slice of the pie. With their quicker economic growth, large young workforce and bigger domestic markets, these countries would give Singapore a run for its money, experts have said.

    Meanwhile, Hong Kong, a long-time rival to Singapore’s status as Asia’s business hub, is pulling ahead by capitalising on itsproximity and ties with China to attract investments.

    The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s World Investment Report 2016 found that Hong Kong was the second highest recipient of foreign direction investments (FDI) globally last year with US$175 billion flowing into the economy. This far outpaced Singapore who received US$65 billion in the same year and placed seventh worldwide.

    “China’s economy has a more significant impact on Hong Kong’s economy, relative to Singapore’s economy. With the speed of innovation and growing economy in China, it’s only natural for Hong Kong’s economy to be relatively more competitive,” said Prof Yong.

    ‘BETTER COUNTRIES BECOMING CHEAPER’

    At the big boys’ table, countries such as South Korea and Japan – which dominate the higher-value added manufacturing space – are ahead of Singapore in terms of innovation. The 2016 Bloomberg Innovation Index placed South Korea on top of the global rankings, with clear daylight between the country and its closest Asian competitors Japan (4th) and Singapore (6th).

    The South Koreans have consistently been among the highest spenders on R&D. Data by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development showed that South Korea spent around 4.3 per cent of its GDP on R&D in 2014. In comparison, Singapore’s expenditure in this area was 2.2 per cent of its GDP.

    Observers have credited South Korea’s aggressive spending in R&D for helping the country transform from one of the poorest nations in the 1960s to a high-tech economy and home to leading innovative companies such as Samsung and LG.

    Experts noted that regardless of which development stage Singapore’s rivals are at, the size of their labour force gives them an edge over the Republic. SIM University senior lecturer Walter Theseira said: “In larger countries, labour and talent shortages are less acute because of domestic migration and the larger scale of their labour force. The main way we have remained competitive is to be very open to foreign labour, but that is a policy that has considerable political costs.”

    He added: “(There) is almost certainly a catch-up process from both the developing and developed world, and that is not something Singapore can do anything about. What will be crucial is (increasing) Singapore’s strengths and advantages in high value added sectors of the economy.”

    Experts said the key for Singapore to stay competitive is innovation – a strategy which the Government has identified. Various schemes and assistance measures have been launched to nudge businesses to be more innovative, amid the constraints on land and labour.

    PwC Singapore’s strategy leader Richard Skinner described innovation as the “magic bullet” to spur growth and competitiveness. “Innovation is a necessity if Singapore is to remain competitive,” he said. Prof Yong added that innovation can help businesses achieve scale more effectively, which will in turn result in greater cost-efficiency.

    He pointed out that at the same time, Singapore should not abandon its strengths in resource-heavy activities such as water treatment innovations, in which Singapore is a global leader. There is also the need for new ideas to be created in the country, instead of simply adapting workable concepts into the domestic context, he added. “Singapore has always been very good at implementing innovations and we should keep that. But it is no longer sufficient to adopt a successful innovation from elsewhere, say Amazon, and create our own version of it. We need new ideas like Grab and MoolahSense,” he said.

    He reiterated: “Singapore competitiveness may not be driven by being the cheapest option, but we can be competitive by creating the most value.”

    In the manufacturing space, the Republic can utilise its hub status to anchor other Southeast Asian countries to compete globally as a regional bloc, said Ms Ng Jiak See, Deloitte Southeast Asia’s industrial products and services sector leader. “Aside from cultivating strong industrial competencies in R&D and a diverse and high quality supplier base, Singapore should also think about its ecosystem approach,” she said.

    Should Singapore fail to restructure and loses competitiveness, “everything is at stake”, Mr Skinner warned. “If competitiveness declines, foreign inbound investment from small and medium enterprises to multinational corporations alike will decelerate, leading to decreased economic vibrancy and dynamism,” he said. “This will in turn have an adverse effect on innovation, job creation and trade, ultimately leading to a decline in competitiveness and attractiveness as an investment destination and the vicious circle will repeat itself.”

    For local companies and the thousands of workers they employ, whether Singapore continues to stay ahead of the chasing pack could make a difference between boom and bust.

    Mr Melvin Tan, managing director of engineering firm Cyclect, said the company has benefitted from foreign inbound investments as it clinched projects with the Formula 1 Grand Prix and Universal Studios Singapore. “These projects allowed us to offer jobs to Singaporeans. Without them and the income that they bring us, we won’t have a reason to hire,” he said.

    Mr Lawrence Chong, chief executive of innovation and design consultancy Consulus, added: “Singapore is increasingly seen as a place where new policies, new ways of urban planning are experimented, and where ideas are being created. That’s our trump card when we compete internationally, so if Singapore fails to reinvent, that’s bad news for us.”

     

    Source: TODAY Online

  • Help From A Stranger Turns Her Life Around

    Help From A Stranger Turns Her Life Around

    Things were looking bleak but a chance meeting with a stranger helped Ms Jaycie Tay, who was twice incarcerated and dropped out of school, defy the odds to achieve a diploma. And the 32- year-old twice-divorced mother of four is now gunning for a degree, as well as a brighter future.

    It was late 2013 and Ms Tay had attended a course funded by the Government and a halfway house earlier in the day. She was training to be a florist.

    Ms Tay, who was on the last leg of her 18-month sentence for drug offences, was waiting for a bus in Yishun to return to halfway house The Turning Point when she met Mr John Shu, a now 50-year-old mechanic. He had to take a bus that day as his motorcycle was in the workshop. The pair started talking and soon struck up a friendship.

    She began to confide in Mr Shu, who is married with a 22-year-old daughter in polytechnic and a 19-year-old son working as a chef.

    She shared her life story and her desire to pursue a diploma to give her children a better future. She had worked as a waitress and a retail assistant, among other jobs, but they paid less than $2,000 a month.

    She said her parents, who are divorced, were not supportive of her plans to upgrade herself. And she did not have the $5,000 needed for the course fees.

    Besides, she was getting treatment for depression then and the people around her felt she could not cope with handling a messy divorce, caring for her children and going back to school all at once.

    Mr Shu said: “Her wish to get an education is a good thing. And since her family is not supporting her and no one supports her, I thought I would support her and give her a way out.”

    Mr Shu, who earns just over $2,000 a month, gave her about $6,000 to pay for her diploma and other expenses. This was a few months into their friendship. He said he and his wife, who works as a hawker, can get by on their income.

    Ms Tay began her studies shortly after her release in 2014 and graduated with a diploma in marketing management from Kaplan Higher Education Institute eight months later.

    Hitting the books was a huge change for a girl who was introduced to drugs by her friends as a teenager. She was only 18 when she was jailed for one year for drug offences. When she became a mother at the age of 20, she quit drugs.

    But she returned to drugs to escape from her woes when her first marriage broke down. She has two children from that union, a 12-year-old daughter and a 10-year-old son. Her first husband has custody of them.

    Her second husband was also a drug abuser and they were arrested at the same time for drug offences.

    About four years ago, the couple was jailed and their daughter, only a baby at the time, was left in the care of her in-laws. The girl is now five.

    Ms Tay’s second sentence, served at the Drug Rehabilitation Centre at Changi Women’s Prison, “shook” her up. “I saw how the other drug addicts ended up with nothing. Their children did not want them; they had no house and no money. I did not want to be like them.”

    Behind bars, an inmate encouraged her to further her studies. And with Mr Shu’s help, she became a diploma holder.

    His help did not end there. While studying for her diploma, she found herself unexpectedly pregnant with her fourth child – with her second husband. Their marriage was on the rocks. She wanted a divorce and was worried about her finances.

    Mr Shu said: “I encouraged her not to abort as the baby is innocent. I told her that if she can’t afford to raise the child, I will help her. I will help her all the way.”

    Ms Tay said Mr Shu paid for her visits to the gynaecologist and even cooked for her when she was recuperating from the childbirth during her confinement month.

    “He never asked for his money back or for anything in return,” she said. “Others have made unpleasant remarks (implying we are having an affair) but we are clean.”

    Ms Tay, who is working as an administrative assistant, said she has offered to repay part of the sums that he gave her, but he has declined. She declined to reveal her pay.

    “He has helped many people, not only me… Some (of his friends) have taken advantage of him.”

    Mr Shu, a primary school graduate, said in a mix of Mandarin and Hokkien: “Why should I calculate so much about helping others? I already have one foot in the grave and if I need help in the future, others would help me.”

    He said he is just glad that she managed to get her life back on track, adding: “I see Jaycie as a family member, like my younger sister.”

    Last month, Ms Tay started a part- time course – Bachelor of Business Studies in Management – at Kaplan. The degree is awarded by University College Dublin. She won a bursary from the Yellow Ribbon Fund Star Bursary to pursue the degree. She said the fees cost over $20,000.

    “I never thought a stranger (who became a friend) would help me so much. I hope that by sharing my story, other former offenders can also feel there is hope in life,” she said.

     

    Source: The Straits Times

  • Trump’s Breezy Calls To World Leaders Leave Diplomats Aghast

    Trump’s Breezy Calls To World Leaders Leave Diplomats Aghast

    On Thursday, the White House weighed in with an offer of professional help. The press secretary, Josh Earnest, urged the president-elect to make use of the State Department’s policy makers and diplomats in planning and conducting his encounters with foreign leaders.

    “President Obama benefited enormously from the advice and expertise that’s been shared by those who serve at the State Department,” Mr. Earnest said. “I’m confident that as President-elect Trump takes office, those same State Department employees will stand ready to offer him advice as he conducts the business of the United States overseas.”

    “Hopefully he’ll take it,” he added.

    A spokesman for the State Department, John Kirby, said the department was “helping facilitate and support calls as requested.” But he declined to give details, and it was not clear to what extent Mr. Trump was availing himself of the nation’s diplomats.

    Mr. Trump’s conversation with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan has generated the most angst, because, as Mr. Earnest put it, the relationship between Mr. Sharif’s country and the United States is “quite complicated,” with disputes over issues ranging from counterterrorism to nuclear proliferation.

    In a remarkably candid readout of the phone call, the Pakistani government said Mr. Trump had told Mr. Sharif that he was “a terrific guy” who made him feel as though “I’m talking to a person I have known for long.” He described Pakistanis as “one of the most intelligent people.” When Mr. Sharif invited him to visit Pakistan, the president-elect replied that he would “love to come to a fantastic country, fantastic place of fantastic people.”

    The Trump transition office, in its more circumspect readout, said only that Mr. Trump and Mr. Sharif “had a productive conversation about how the United States and Pakistan will have a strong working relationship in the future.” It did not confirm or deny the Pakistani account of Mr. Trump’s remarks.

    The breezy tone of the readout left diplomats in Washington slack-jawed, with some initially assuming it was a parody. In particular, they zeroed in on Mr. Trump’s offer to Mr. Sharif “to play any role you want me to play to address and find solutions to the country’s problems.”

    That was interpreted by some in India as an offer by the United States to mediate Pakistan’s border dispute with India in Kashmir, something that the Pakistanis have long sought and that India has long resisted.

    “By taking such a cavalier attitude to these calls, he’s encouraging people not to take him seriously,” said Daniel F. Feldman, a former special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan. “He’s made himself not only a bull in a china shop, but a bull in a nuclear china shop.”

    Husain Haqqani, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington, said his government’s decision to release a rough transcript of Mr. Trump’s remarks was a breach of protocol that demonstrated how easily Pakistani leaders misread signals from their American counterparts.

    “Pakistan is one country where knowing history and details matters most,” Mr. Haqqani said, “and where the U.S. cannot afford to give wrong signals, given the history of misunderstandings.”

    At one level, Mr. Trump’s warm sentiments were surprising, given that during the campaign, he called for temporarily barring Muslims from entering the United States to avoid importing would-be terrorists.

    His conversation with Mr. Sharif also came a day after an attack at Ohio State University in which a Somali-born student, Abdul Razak Ali Artan, rammed a car into a group of pedestrians and slashed several people with a knife before being shot and killed by the police. Law enforcement officials said Mr. Artan, whom the Islamic State has claimed as a “soldier,” had lived in Pakistan for seven years before coming to the United States in 2014.

    Mr. Obama never visited Pakistan as president, even though he had a circle of Pakistani friends in college and spoke fondly of the country. The White House weighed a visit at various times but always decided against it, according to officials, because of security concerns or because it would be perceived as rewarding Pakistani leaders for what many American officials said was their lack of help in fighting terrorism.

    “It sends a powerful message to the people of a country when the president of the United States goes to visit,” Mr. Earnest said. “That’s true whether it’s some of our closest allies, or that’s also true if it’s a country like Pakistan, with whom our relationship is somewhat more complicated.”

    Mr. Trump’s call with President Nursultan A. Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan raised similar questions.

    Mr. Nazarbayev has ruled his country with an iron hand since 1989, first as head of the Communist Party and later as president after Kazakhstan won its independence from the Soviet Union. In April 2015, he won a fifth term, winning 97.7 percent of the vote and raising suspicions of fraud.

    The Kazakh government, in its account of Mr. Trump’s conversation, said he had lavished praise on the president for his leadership of the country over the last 25 years. “D. Trump stressed that under the leadership of Nursultan Nazarbayev, our country over the years of independence had achieved fantastic success that can be called a ‘miracle,’” it said.

    The statement went on to say that Mr. Trump had shown solidarity with the Kazakh government over its decision to voluntarily surrender the nuclear arsenal it inherited from the Soviets. “There is no more important issue than the nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation, which must be addressed in a global context,” it quoted Mr. Trump as saying.

    Mr. Trump’s statement said that Mr. Nazarbayev had congratulated him on his victory, and that Mr. Trump had reciprocated by congratulating him on the 25th anniversary of his country. Beyond that, it said only that the two leaders had “addressed the importance of strengthening regional partnerships.”

    Source: The New York Times

  • Focus On Resolving Difficulties In Rakhine Rather Than Exaggerating Them, Says Suu Kyi

    Focus On Resolving Difficulties In Rakhine Rather Than Exaggerating Them, Says Suu Kyi

    Amid international accusations that the Myanmar military is leading a crackdown against the Rohingya Muslim minority in Rakhine, Myanmar State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi said she wants to make the situation better.

    Asked if the problem is intractable, she said no. “We have managed to keep the situation under control and to calm it down,” she stated.

    “But I would appreciate it so much if the international community would help us to maintain peace and stability and to make progress in building better relations between the two communities instead of always drumming up calls for, well, for bigger fires of resentment, if you like.”

    Speaking in an exclusive interview with Channel NewsAsia’s Lin Xueling on Friday (Dec 2) during her official visit to Singapore, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate called for understanding from the international community and explained that the issue is a highly sensitive and delicate one.

    “It’s not just Muslims who are nervous and worried. The Rakhine are worried too, they are worried about the fact that they are shrinking as a Rakhine population percentage-wise, and of course, we cannot ignore the fact that the relationship between the two communities has not been good and we want to try to make it better.

    “But it doesn’t help if everybody is just concentrating on the negative side of the situation in spite of the fact that there were attacks against police outposts which began on Oct 9.”

    The attacks were blamed on “terrorists” although the government had previously pointed at the Rohingya Solidarity Organisation, and since then, troops have poured into an area along the border with Bangladesh, which is largely home to the Rohingya minority.

    Thousands have fled their homes as security forces hunt down more suspects who may be in hiding. Myanmar’s army has denied reports from activists that civilians have been killed, gang raped or had their homes torched.

    When it was put to her that it is not solely the international community that is the root of the problem, Ms Suu Kyi said: “I know that. I’m not saying there are no difficulties, but it helps if people recognise the difficulty and are more focused on resolving these difficulties rather than exaggerating them so that everything seems worse than it really is.”

    ASSESSMENT OF HER ADMINISTRATION

    One result that Myanmar’s de-facto leader is satisfied with is “the fact that the ministers are not corrupt”, Ms Suu Kyi said when asked about what she is most pleased with in the nine months since her administration took over. She noted, however, that “some of the junior officers are still not quite what we would wish them to be”.

    Ms Suu Kyi expressed hope that things can be improved, as she drew inspiration from Singapore’s example: “When I went to meet your corruption investigation bureau, they gave me a piece of paper, on which one of the things they said was that corruption is a fact of life, not a way of life. I like that very much, because this is how it is in our country. People accept it not as a way of life, although they recognise that is the fact of life, which means that the practice of corruption has not become embedded in our culture and that is very encouraging.”

    On Myanmar’s journey from half a century of military rule to a democratically-elected civilian-led government, Ms Suu Kyi, despite being one of the world’s most prominent democracy icons, made it clear it is not driven by her alone.

    “I have to keep reminding people that I was under house arrest for 15 years and they’ve (the military) only managed to retain public support during that period, and we managed to keep our party going in spite of the great difficulty. So, you must not underestimate the ability of many, many ordinary members of our political party, and our members are really the public, and we are very close to the public.”

    She is optimistic that Myanmar, and whoever succeeds her, will be able to stay on the path of democracy. “How successful I am, as a leader, will be decided by how dispensable I can make myself, and I hope that I’ll be able to make myself totally dispensable, that they will not need me to go on, neither my party, nor my country.”

     

    Source: ChannelNewsAsia