In an exclusive interview with malaysiakini last Friday, Razali explained that Iris Technologies, a company in which he has a 30 percent stake, had established a general interest in Burma even prior to his appointment as special envoy.

“Iris’ interest in (Burma) happened before I became the special envoy but it was a general interest. Then it developed into something specific.

“I have never once spoken to the leaders in (Burma) about Iris,” he said.

He claimed that opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi herself had no problems with his involvement in Iris when he spoke to her about it.

“She has complete trust in my integrity,” he said.

However, Razali was quick to add that regardless of whether he had the trust of others, what mattered ultimately was whether he was confident that he was right for the job.

“At the end of the day, you have to think if you are qualified or not. If you are no longer qualified because of certain involvement, you should step down. I think I am qualified.”

Razali’s part ownership of Iris Technologies was first revealed last May when a Rangoon-based newspaper reported a deal for the Malaysian company to supply 5,000 electronic passports to the Burmese government.

In the ensuing controversy, the UN secretary-general’s office said it was satisfied that there was no conflict of interest in Razali’s dual role, and that Razali’s contract with the organisation did not carry any restrictions on business activities.

Disappointed with Asean

Meanwhile, Razali said the UN continues to approve of his efforts to push forward the Burmese reconciliation process.

“Every six months they come and say please do it for another six months. Basically, while some people raised their eyebrows, nobody wanted me to actually drop this. In fact, I got another contract recently, without asking,” he said.

The UN envoy, however, expressed disappointment with Asean leaders for not doing more to encourage progress in the Burmese talks.

“(The Eight Asean Summit in Phnom Penh) has just taken place. I do not know how many leaders took the trouble to talk about this quietly,” he said.

Razali said that while respecting Asean’s principle of non-interference, it is still possible for the individual leaders to express their views, in a similar manner as Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

“I think (Mahathir) has done a huge amount of work in trying to help the UN and bring about a situation of national reconciliation in (Burma) at the highest level...As far as the other Asean leaders are concerned, I am somewhat surprised that they have not expended energy to that extent,” he said.

During a high-level official visit in August, Mahathir was said to have urged Burma’s generals to engage in dialogue with opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

Sense in meeting

Initially expected to meet with Suu Kyi, Mahathir left Burma instead with a message from the military government that it would only proceed with change at its own pace.

Asked why the proposed meeting did not materialise, Razali declined to provide any reasons but added that it made sense for the two leaders to meet.

“I was told that Suu Kyi wanted to meet with (Mahathir) and (Mahathir) also would have liked to meet with her...I think it would help the government of (Burma) and Suu Kyi in their understanding and perspective of the issues.

“I am surprised that they have not met. I do not want to speculate on why (but)..I think it makes a lot of sense for them to meet,” he said.

Razali is due to arrive in Rangoon today on his ninth visit to Burma since his appointment as special envoy two years ago.

He is expected to revitalise the move towards a dialogue between the military government and Suu Kyi which had stalled after initial optimism over the opposition leader’s release from house arrest in May.

In 1990, Suu Kyi and her National League of Democracy won a landside victory in democratic elections but this was not recognised by the country’s military junta. 

Razali Ismail's Q&A: Asean leaders should have done more about Burma

United Nations special envoy to Burma Razali Ismail defends his involvement in a company which does business with the Burmese military government in this second and final part of an exclusive interview with malaysiakini.


Malaysiakini: Were you already involved with Iris Technologies before you became UN special envoy?

Razali: I joined Iris nearly four years ago. About two and a half years ago, I became the UN envoy. Iris’ interest in Myanmar (*formerly known as Burma) happened before I became the special envoy but it was a general interest. Then, it developed into something specific. I have never once spoken to the leaders in Myanmar about Iris.

Iris is a technology (company) that wins contracts by itself. Iris’ technology is the most obvious one to have because this is the way how passports will go — electronically. I have never at any moment felt that there was conflict of interest. Purists can say otherwise, as one journalist did. So I asked him if he wanted me to resign. Would everybody be happy if I resigned?

We seem to try to splash things up to so many parts. I have been in the US, I have been to the UK and Europe, and the connections between business and politics have always been there but you must be accountable. Here, in the context of accountability, I have done nothing at all. There is not an iota of conflict involved.

So you don’t think it has affected your credibility?

No, I think the UN looked at it and thought there was nothing there. If they didn’t like it, they could have stopped my contract. I would be quite happy not to be special envoy, I have other things to do in my life. I was sort of shanghaied to do this job. If they don’t think that I am the right person to do it then they can always terminate the contract.

Are they happy with what you are doing now?

Well, every six months they come and say please do it for another six months. Basically while some people raised their eyebrows, nobody wanted me to actually to drop this. In fact, I got another contract recently, without asking.

Will this silence your critics?

No, it will not silence them. There are always people who want to be such purists. It is not so simple. Life is not so compartmentalised.

You are a very busy businessman in addition to your UN work. If the Myanmar parties and the UN want you to expand your role, would you have the time?

There are a lot of things I want to do. I want to do some environmental things. I want to do some farming, I want to grow trees. We should try to do forest plantation. We should not cut trees anymore. Down the road, say 20 years from now, we should cut trees only from plantations. We should already begin. It is already beginning in Sabah and Sarawak, and we should do it here in the peninsula.

I also want to do better with the Yayasan Salam (state-owned Salam Foundation) which wants to help in national integration and push the concept of active citizenship. So, this has already taken a lot of my time and I am beginning to feel like a fellow who is punched-drunk — you know, running from pillar to post.

But Myanmar is like a magnet, it draws you in. It is not just the political things but also the people, the rights of people to have a chance to do better for themselves. And the personalities are very, very interesting so if I can play a role then I will do it.

Why were you picked as envoy? Could it be because of your position as special advisor to Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad?

The (UN) secretary-general (Kofi Annan) has advisors to tell him who to (choose) and I was picked. I don’t think it has any connection to my job with the prime minister of Malaysia but I am sure they took into account the relationship between Malaysia and Myanmar.

When Asean embraced Myanmar, one of the reasons given was that the move would open up dialogue with the military government. But there is little visible effort to push for reconciliation talks between the junta and the opposition.

How can you say that? The prime minister of Malaysia...

But he is a Malaysian leader. What about Asean?

Here I am speaking as a Malaysian. I think Dr Mahathir has done a huge amount of work in trying to help the UN and bring about a situation of national reconciliation in Myanmar at the highest level. He continues to have that concern and he also wants to get businesses (going) in Myanmar. That would help Myanmar.

As far as the other Asean leaders are concerned, as a Malaysian or even as a UN special envoy, I am somewhat surprised that they have not expended energy to that extent.

What kind of efforts do you expect?

In the case of Asean, while respecting the question of non-interference strongly, it is still possible to express your view on a particular situation. After all, we have common borders. There is mobility across borders and people move from one side to the other and there is also (migrant) labourers from Myanmar. There is also the fear of HIV spread, and the fear of the movement of narcotics, whatever their place of origin. So, all Asean countries, particularly the ones physically neighbouring Myanmar, have the right to make known their views and hope that there will be peace, reconciliation and economic development.

As the prime minister says: Prosper your neighbour. This is the only thing that will work. We don’t want a situation similar to what Western Europe did to Eastern Europe during the Cold War — to try to starve and bankrupt Eastern Europe.

To some extent they did succeed but the price they have to pay to rebuild the economies is huge. So why don’t we do it this way? We help to develop these countries as much as we can, not just Myanmar but also Laos and Vietnam. In the context of constructive engagement, Asean countries can play the necessary role to bring about the evolution of political structure in Myanmar.

Similar to what Mahathir is doing now?

Yes, without headlining and without trying to get kudos from it — just quietly. The (8th Asean Summit in Phnom Penh) has just taken place. I do not know how many leaders took the trouble to talk about this quietly.

As the special advisor to Mahathir, are you required to brief him on the Myanmar situation?

Yes, as much as possible. As often as the PM has the time, I brief and talk to him on this and that about Myanmar. I also express my views over a few other things. I think the honour is mine.

I have gained more from that designation than I have given to the PM so I am very grateful for that. I am honest enough to realise that the PM has done me a favour. I haven’t really helped him enough in advising him.

It was said that Suu Kyi wanted to meet with Mahathir during his visit to Myanmar in August. Subsequently, they did not meet. Do you know the reason for it?

I was told that Suu Kyi wanted to meet with Dr Mahathir, and Dr Mahathir also would have liked to meet with her. I am surprised that they have not met.

I think it would help the government of Myanmar and Suu Kyi in their understanding and their perspectives of the issues. I hope they meet. I do not want to speculate why they did not meet, I have no right to do that. I think it makes a lot of sense for them to meet.

According to Human Rights Watch, the military has been involved in persecuting Muslim minority groups. Malaysia is home to a sizeable community of Muslim Rohingyas who say they face persecution.

I am aware of what has taken place and there are huge numbers of internally displaced people. Some of them have come here. A solution must be found eventually, if not sooner.

I think if there is political reconciliation, all these issues will begin to be solved. If these Muslims from the Arakan area have citizenship, then the government would have to accept that they are citizens. If they do not have citizenship, then it is another matter. If they are citizens, all rights of citizenship must be given to them.

That is the disputed point.

In a better climate when there is national reconciliation, all these things will have to be examined. But you can’t just plonk this out and make this a red flag — that the military government is terrible. That is not putting the whole picture there.

Various groups outside can always have their favourite flogging horse. Everybody has that. Here too, maybe there are politicians who feel that as Muslims, we have to help them. Maybe there are grounds for all this but please look at it in context.

There are also reports from human rights groups alleging rape of Shan women, use of child soldiers, slavery, ethnic and religious persecution.

I deal with the reconciliation process. These (other) matters are dealt with by Dr Paulo Sergio Pinheiro who is the UN special envoy for human rights.

However, they do impact on what I have to do. All the allegations must be investigated. It would not be wise not to investigate them. One has to know the truth. Sometimes things are said and they have their own momentum.

I am not saying that these allegations are blown out of proportion but we have to be very careful because these are very emotive things. Women being raped and (persecution of) ethnic groups are terrible but one has to be cool-headed about these things. It is also very easy to make allegations.

So far you have met with Suu Kyi and the government separately. Any chance for you to meet them together?

My role is that of a facilitator. I do not really mediate. That has been an arrangement that has suited everybody given their sensitivities and all that. Of course, the UN is prepared to consider all possibilities if, for some reason or other, the UN has to do more and I am asked to be more involved. If all parties agree, there is no problem.

Do you see your role evolving to one of a mediator or do you see yourself stepping out at some point?

One has to be very careful about this because the Myanmar parties are very sensitive and very clear in their minds that they want to do it their way. This is a homegrown process of national reconciliation and as far as the UN is concerned and the international community is concerned, as long as the results are there we have no right to say this or that.

If there is a need recognised by all parties that I should do more then, of course, I would do it.

You have said that you met with several ethnic minority group leaders. Who are they are which groups do they represent?

They are the leaders of ethnic political parties that are considered legal. They have an alliance called the (United Nationalities Alliance).

Some exiles from Myanmar have said that the people are now at a breaking point.

I think the events of 1988 are not something that one should contemplate for the future. I think there must be other ways of doing this. It is the right of the people to take to the streets if things are desperate, but things are not that desperate.

If you look at (Suu Kyi’s) philosophy, she does not want any of those things. She wants to persuade the government that it is in everybody’s interest, including the military government to evolve into a situation where there is national reconciliation and a proper government.

What about news that people are starving?

People are undernourished and people are poor in certain areas. They need infrastructure development. They need power, their lights are sometimes shut off. There is no reason why 50 million people in Myanmar should live like that. Myanmar is not in some remote corner of the world. Myanmar is part and parcel of Asean, a burgeoning area of growth. The people in Myanmar should benefit like other people in Asean, so it is not acceptable.


[*Note: Since 1989, Burma was renamed Myanmar by the military government. However, many (including malaysiakini) have not embraced the name change as the decision was made by an illegal and illegitimate government.] By Yap Mun Ching