I'm all for helping people out - but the choice here is less than substantiated, as there is the same persecution happening in many places in the world, and has been all along. Why was a high profile violation of another nation's sovereignty chosen in this particular instance? This is foolish grand-standing in contradiction of diplomacy, and respect for laws.
If the purpose of helping persecuted gays, or persecuted anybody's was genuine, then why is this government not accepting hundreds of thousands of people each month from all over the world? And why would a foreign minister be one to be involved, since the action voids the very intention of the role of a foreign minister? And why choose a country with which relations are currently in a troubled place? And why make it public? It's as if all the very worst choices for every aspect of this action were identified, and then turned into action.
It's as if a point was wanted to be made that this government possesses no good judgment.