CLEAN : Myanmar advisory board slams US diplomat's resignation comments

The transcript discusses Richardson's premature comments and questions their legitimacy. It highlights initial impressions of seriousness and listening efforts from a recent visit. The discussion also covers efforts to create conditions for people to return, acknowledging the challenges ahead. Finally, it clarifies that commenting on certain issues is outside the board's mandate, despite personal views.

What was the main criticism of Richardson's comments?

• They were too detailed.

• They were too vague.

• They were made too early.

• They were made too late.

What was the board's initial impression of the parties involved?

• They were indifferent.

• They were confused.

• They were dismissive.

• They were serious and attentive.

What challenge did the board face in making conclusions?

• Unclear objectives.

• Insufficient resources.

• Limited visits.

• Lack of data.

What did the board observe about the efforts being made?

• They were ineffective.

• They were genuine.

• They were minimal.

• They were dishonest.

Why did the board refrain from commenting on certain issues?

• It was not part of their mandate.

• They lacked expertise.

• They were instructed not to.

• They were undecided.