10-13-2007, 12:46 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Burma quagmire </b>
Pioneer.com
Lookback : Bibhu Prasad Routray
<i> ]When starting a car, the driver never has a view of what lies just an inch ahead of the front wheel. India's 'Look East' policy is something like that -- we don't have a clear policy on Burma, but we have plans all the way up to glitzy Singapore. This was clear last fortnight when South Block found itself rudely awakened by the din of the pro-democracy movement in Burma and ended up betraying utter confusion at the heart of its policy on an important neighbour. Saturday Special focusses this week on New Delhi's latest foreign policy disaster</i>
In terms of flip flops in diplomacy, there have been few precedents to what New Delhi displayed on its Burma policy over the past fortnight. It all started with a muted silence on the spate of violence unleashed by the military on the pro-democracy activists in Burma led by the Buddhist monks. When the world reacted with rage and disgust to the way the military crushed the opposition, India appeared to reinforce its (alleged) realism by appearing unconcerned with what it termed as an "internal affair" of Burma.
But, soon afterwards,<b> India's External Affairs Minister cautiously called for an "investigation" into the violence. But, the newly appointed Army Chief continued to underline how important Burma remains to India. However, at the time of writing, India seems to be headed towards an 180-degree shift, but in all too unconvincing note. New Delhi is now pleading for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, without, of course, failing to flatter the military junta with gas collaboration offers</b>.
While strategists can claim this to be the triumph of realpolitik over emotions, the episode nonetheless was demonstrative of India's 'neither-here-nor-there' policy on Burma.
Up to 1995, India appeared to be behind the pro-democracy forces. The Narasimha Rao Government conferred the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding on Aung San Suu Kyi. But, in 2000, India made a U-turn by establishing ties with the rogue junta. One of the avowed objectives of such a radical shift -- some people called it 'pragmatism' -- was to checkmate China's growing influence in Burma. Others included achieving energy cooperation and finding an answer to the problem of militancy in India's North-East.
India, however, continues to be torn between 'pragmatism' and 'idealism', a policy that convinces neither the junta nor the pro-democracy activists in Burma. While throwing its support behind the men in uniform, India sometimes suffers guilt trips. That's why it occasionally ponders whether supporting the forces of democracy could have been a better choice.
<b>India provides financial assistance to Burma, builds its roads, revamps its refineries, and assists its railway and telecommunication projects. The overseas arm of India's Oil and Natural Gas Commission -- ONGC Videsh Ltd -- and Gas Authority of India Limited are involved in several oil fields of Burma. India assumes that confrontation in any form with the junta must be avoided. Thus, large-scale human rights abuses perpetrated by the junta are overlooked. At the same time, however, India continues to play host to about 52,000 refugees from Burma. </b>
On the security front, Burma has paid little heed to India's concerns. Hundreds of militants operating in India's North-East maintain their bases in the Sagaing division. In December 2001, as many as 192 cadre of the United National Liberation Front, a Manipur-based militant outfit, were arrested by the Burmese Army. As India waited for their extradition, all of them were set free by February 14, 2002 in four phases. In 2006, India started supplying military hardware, including four Islander maritime patrol aircraft, 105 mm light artillery guns, naval gun-boats, mortars, grenade-launchers, rifles and other small arms to the junta with the hope that the military would launch a Bhutan-like operation against the militants. However, Burma has chosen to respond with intermittent operations, a trend that has continued since the late 1980s.
Of late, a cosy relationship has evolved between the military officials and the North-Eastern militants. The militants have generously gifted money and vehicles to the military, who, in turn, have periodically tipped them off about impending operations. Four decades of military rule has left Burma in a state of arrested political and economic development. The world before the junta is made of two types of countries -- it has to choose between allies like China and sanction imposers like the US and the European Union. Its economic performance has been pathetic. The per capita gross domestic product is just $1,800. While inflation in 2005 remained at a staggering 17.6 per cent, its economy expanded at a snail's pace by three per cent in 2006.
The half-literate Generals have used the economic assistance to bolster their stay in power, rather than driving the country towards development and prosperity. Its economic policies have been pure irrational, forcing the people to take desperate measures, even when odds are pitted heavily against them.
As the military trampled over the voices of opposition in the streets of Rangoon, India, as the world's largest democracy on Burma's western border, was expected to play a greater role. Little, however, was realised. The ambivalence has left India with no influence among the Generals in that country, who have demonstrated no desire to return India's favours in consolidating their stay in power.
--<i> The author is Research Fellow, Institute for Conflict Management, New Delhi</i><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Pioneer.com
Lookback : Bibhu Prasad Routray
<i> ]When starting a car, the driver never has a view of what lies just an inch ahead of the front wheel. India's 'Look East' policy is something like that -- we don't have a clear policy on Burma, but we have plans all the way up to glitzy Singapore. This was clear last fortnight when South Block found itself rudely awakened by the din of the pro-democracy movement in Burma and ended up betraying utter confusion at the heart of its policy on an important neighbour. Saturday Special focusses this week on New Delhi's latest foreign policy disaster</i>
In terms of flip flops in diplomacy, there have been few precedents to what New Delhi displayed on its Burma policy over the past fortnight. It all started with a muted silence on the spate of violence unleashed by the military on the pro-democracy activists in Burma led by the Buddhist monks. When the world reacted with rage and disgust to the way the military crushed the opposition, India appeared to reinforce its (alleged) realism by appearing unconcerned with what it termed as an "internal affair" of Burma.
But, soon afterwards,<b> India's External Affairs Minister cautiously called for an "investigation" into the violence. But, the newly appointed Army Chief continued to underline how important Burma remains to India. However, at the time of writing, India seems to be headed towards an 180-degree shift, but in all too unconvincing note. New Delhi is now pleading for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, without, of course, failing to flatter the military junta with gas collaboration offers</b>.
While strategists can claim this to be the triumph of realpolitik over emotions, the episode nonetheless was demonstrative of India's 'neither-here-nor-there' policy on Burma.
Up to 1995, India appeared to be behind the pro-democracy forces. The Narasimha Rao Government conferred the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding on Aung San Suu Kyi. But, in 2000, India made a U-turn by establishing ties with the rogue junta. One of the avowed objectives of such a radical shift -- some people called it 'pragmatism' -- was to checkmate China's growing influence in Burma. Others included achieving energy cooperation and finding an answer to the problem of militancy in India's North-East.
India, however, continues to be torn between 'pragmatism' and 'idealism', a policy that convinces neither the junta nor the pro-democracy activists in Burma. While throwing its support behind the men in uniform, India sometimes suffers guilt trips. That's why it occasionally ponders whether supporting the forces of democracy could have been a better choice.
<b>India provides financial assistance to Burma, builds its roads, revamps its refineries, and assists its railway and telecommunication projects. The overseas arm of India's Oil and Natural Gas Commission -- ONGC Videsh Ltd -- and Gas Authority of India Limited are involved in several oil fields of Burma. India assumes that confrontation in any form with the junta must be avoided. Thus, large-scale human rights abuses perpetrated by the junta are overlooked. At the same time, however, India continues to play host to about 52,000 refugees from Burma. </b>
On the security front, Burma has paid little heed to India's concerns. Hundreds of militants operating in India's North-East maintain their bases in the Sagaing division. In December 2001, as many as 192 cadre of the United National Liberation Front, a Manipur-based militant outfit, were arrested by the Burmese Army. As India waited for their extradition, all of them were set free by February 14, 2002 in four phases. In 2006, India started supplying military hardware, including four Islander maritime patrol aircraft, 105 mm light artillery guns, naval gun-boats, mortars, grenade-launchers, rifles and other small arms to the junta with the hope that the military would launch a Bhutan-like operation against the militants. However, Burma has chosen to respond with intermittent operations, a trend that has continued since the late 1980s.
Of late, a cosy relationship has evolved between the military officials and the North-Eastern militants. The militants have generously gifted money and vehicles to the military, who, in turn, have periodically tipped them off about impending operations. Four decades of military rule has left Burma in a state of arrested political and economic development. The world before the junta is made of two types of countries -- it has to choose between allies like China and sanction imposers like the US and the European Union. Its economic performance has been pathetic. The per capita gross domestic product is just $1,800. While inflation in 2005 remained at a staggering 17.6 per cent, its economy expanded at a snail's pace by three per cent in 2006.
The half-literate Generals have used the economic assistance to bolster their stay in power, rather than driving the country towards development and prosperity. Its economic policies have been pure irrational, forcing the people to take desperate measures, even when odds are pitted heavily against them.
As the military trampled over the voices of opposition in the streets of Rangoon, India, as the world's largest democracy on Burma's western border, was expected to play a greater role. Little, however, was realised. The ambivalence has left India with no influence among the Generals in that country, who have demonstrated no desire to return India's favours in consolidating their stay in power.
--<i> The author is Research Fellow, Institute for Conflict Management, New Delhi</i><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->