Military council leader Min Aung Hlaing’s recent press conference remarks in Belarus have drawn criticism from media experts for conflating unrelated concepts of economic sanctions and computer software. During the March 7 press conference, Min Aung Hlaing made confusing statements suggesting that economic sanctions would somehow lead to increased consolidation and competition among computer software, demonstrating a fundamental misunderstanding of both concepts.
U Toe Zaw Latt, Secretary of the Independent Press Council Myanmar (IPCM), pointed out that Min Aung Hlaing appears to have completely misunderstood the meaning of economic sanctions and computer software, noting that these two concepts have no logical connection. Despite the military council’s newspapers publishing these statements in both Myanmar and English languages, media professionals have highlighted that his remarks make no logical sense and reveal a concerning lack of understanding of basic international relations terminology.
A veteran journalist from Myanmar drew parallels to previous instances of military leaders misusing English terms, recalling how former leader Thein Sein had incorrectly used terminology related to the 2008 Constitution. The journalist emphasized that Min Aung Hlaing’s attempt to connect sanctions with software demonstrated a clear misunderstanding of both concepts. This language barrier was further evidenced during Min Aung Hlaing’s meetings with Russian President Putin and the Belarus President, where he relied entirely on interpreters, unable to communicate directly in English.
Adding to the concerns about the military leader’s diplomatic conduct, on March 4, Min Aung Hlaing presented Putin with a book that dubiously referred to him as the ‘King of Mice’ according to what was claimed to be a Buddhist prophecy, despite lacking any historical or documentary evidence for such claims. Critics note that these incidents – from misusing important international relations terminology to presenting unsubstantiated historical claims – reflect poorly on the military council leader’s capabilities and understanding of diplomatic protocol. The combination of linguistic confusion and questionable diplomatic gestures has led to increased scrutiny of the military council’s ability to engage effectively in international relations.
