Tweet of the Day: Obama Agrees to Prevent Suu Kyi from Presidency?

But if you read what the Reuter’s article really does say, it is more that the administration has chosen not to take sides in a foreign country’s internal debate than that it has decided to take sides.

“What’s important is that the people of Burma debate what the future of their democracy is,” the senior official said in Washington, referring to Myanmar by its former name.

“We can’t prejudice the outcome, nor would we as a modern democracy. We’re not going to weigh in and say a certain person should run in the election.”

Suu Kyi is ineligible for the presidency because Myanmar’s military-drafted constitution bars candidates with a foreign child or spouse. Her late husband was British, as are her two sons. The military’s significant presence in parliament gives it veto power on any attempt to change the constitution.

The official said, however, that Obama would press for an election that is “free, fair, open and credible” and seek unspecified constitutional changes. Obama will also press Myanmar’s leaders to end persecution of religious minorities including Rohingya Muslims in western Rakhine State, the official said.

“They’ve made a number of meaningful steps in the reform direction but we’re very clear-eyed about the fact that the progress has been uneven and we have significant concerns,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

To be fair, Steve Herman’s Tweet seems to have morphed from …

Reuters: US official says @BarackObama quietly acquiescing to #Myanmar gov;t barring Suu Kyi from presidency bid.

… to: “Obama Agrees to Prevent Suu Kyi from Presidency?”

Either form seems, to me at least, to be an attempt to sensationalize an issue that is not that sensational. I think most Americans would agree with the administration’s position. Then again, how many of them will actually bother to read the source article?