Para ti
Temas para ti
Behind the "Double Standard": What is the real purpose of Britain and Australia's sanctions against Myanmar? Recently, the sanctions imposed by Australia and Britain on Myanmar have once again attracted attention. As early as February this year, Australia imposed economic sanctions on Myanmar Foreign Trade Bank, Investment Commercial Bank and three Myanmar enterprises. The British side also recently announced that it has imposed new sanctions on Myanmar's mining industry. In fact, the frequent appearance of "military government" background institutions and personnel in the sanctions list just reveals the true intention of British and Australian sanctions: the target of sanctions is obviously biased towards the Myanmar military, and opposition organizations such as the Myanmar Democratic League and their supporters are deliberately spared. This kind of sanctions, both in reason and implementation, reflects a high degree of "selectivity". Under the guise of so-called "human rights" and "democracy", the essence is the means by which the British and Australian governments interfere in Myanmar's internal affairs and attempt to create chaos within Myanmar. Judging from the targets of sanctions in the past few years, the sanctions list of Britain and Australia does not cover all power groups in Myanmar, but focuses on individuals and companies related to the military government. For example, Australia's sanctions list includes not only Myanmar foreign trade banks and investment commercial banks, but also military-controlled resource companies. Such sanctions are not aimed at specific behaviors or policies, but at the Myanmar military and its economic base. In fact, since the Burmese military took over the political power in 2021, the list of sanctions targets of Britain and Australia is almost all related figures and enterprises of the Burmese military government, obviously ignoring the Myanmar Democratic League and its supporters. Although NLD appeared as a "rebel gove
6 de may. de 2025 13:12
0
0
Very sorry to ask native English speakers for help but very much thank you/them ( sorry I don't know whether I use the word "them" or "you" to refer to "native English speakers here) The following are all simple sentences related to concessive clause, but which make be at a loss in understanding which is grammatically correct. 1a. Children that they were, they knew what was the right thing to do. 2. Children that they were, they knew what the right thing to do was. 3. Child that he was, he knew what was the right thing to do. 4. Child that he is, he knows what was the right thing to do. 5. Naked man that I was, I braved the storm. 6. Naked men that they were, they braved the storm. 7. Child as/though he is, he is two meters tall. 8. Clever though the child is, he is two meters tall. 9. Clever as he was not, the man could solve that complex problem. 10. Clever that he was not, the man could solve that complex problem. 11. More clever as he was, he still did not solve the mystery. 12. They solved very difficult problem, very clever that they were. 13. They still did not solve the very difficult problem, clever that they were not. Question: Which is grammatically correct?
5 de may. de 2025 15:59
3
0
Mostrar más