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 what critics say is a fundamental misunderstanding of both concepts.
U Toe Zaw Latt, Secretary of the Independent Press Council Myanmar (IPCM), analyzed that Min Aung Hlaing appears to have spoken without properly understanding the meaning of economic sanctions and computer software. He pointed out that there is absolutely no connection between economic sanctions and computer software, yet Min Aung Hlaing incorrectly attempted to draw parallels between these entirely different concepts. The IPCM secretary noted that Min Aung Hlaing seemed to mistakenly equate sanctions with computer software in his remarks.
A veteran domestic journalist also observed that Min Aung Hlaing’s confused statements were published in both Myanmar and English language state-run newspapers. The journalist drew parallels to former leader Thein Sein’s past misuse of the term ‘National Convention’ when referring to the 2008 Constitution, suggesting this represents a pattern of military leaders misunderstanding and misusing English terminology. The journalist emphasized that Min Aung Hlaing’s attempt to connect sanctions and software demonstrated a clear lack of understanding of both concepts, rendering his statements meaningless.
Further highlighting Min Aung Hlaing’s linguistic limitations, observers noted that during his meetings with Russian President Putin and the Belarus President, he was unable to communicate in English and relied entirely on interpreters, speaking only in Myanmar language. Additionally, during his March 4 meeting with Putin, Min Aung Hlaing presented a book that referred to Putin as the ‘Rat King’ mentioned in Buddhist prophecies, despite having no historical or documentary evidence to support such claims. Critics say these instances of poor English language comprehension and historically unsubstantiated actions represent significant weaknesses in international relations.
