India-Myanmar relation

[ramana]

Need to revive this thread...







Pioneer Op-Ed By Maj Gen. Ashok Mehta

EDITS | Wednesday, July 21, 2010 | Email | Print | | Back





Realpolitik over morality



Ashok K Mehta



The picture is indelible. US President George W Bush strode, against the magnificent backdrop of the Purana Qila, to the microphone on the improvised stage from where he addressed India during his visit to New Delhi in 2006. He didn’t quite say what India wanted to hear, least of all, on Myanmar. He said, “India’s leadership is needed in a world that is hungry for freedom. Men and women from North Korea to Burma to Syria to Zimbabwe to Cuba yearn for their liberty…” and urged India to back American efforts to help the people of Myanmar get back their liberty. India’s response was a sharp setdown. “India does not believe in thrusting democracy down others’ throats,” said an official spokesman on the same day, when asked to respond to Mr Bush’s exhortation.



American policy towards Myanmar is changing. For the first time since 1966, a US President, Mr Barack Obama, met leaders of South-East Asian nations, including Myanmar, last year. Although it was a ceremonial occasion — the 32nd anniversary of Washington’s relations with ASEAN — the meeting was attended by the Prime Minister of Myanmar.



Now, ahead of Mr Obama’s proposed visit to India, one of the most important foreign visitors for India is due to come to New Delhi next week —Senior General Than Shwe, the head of the Burmese military junta. Gen Than rarely travels out of Myanmar (few invite him). But after Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao’s visit to Myanmar earlier this year, Gen Than Shwe’s trip to Delhi assumes new significance.



First, the physical facts about Myanmar. Its biggest trade partners are neighbour Thailand and Singapore, besides China and India. Investments in oil and gas are virtually global. Western NGOs use devious routes to visit Yangon. India, which sent Buddhism and later its last Mughal Emperor to Burma has had to rework its relations from one of isolation to constructive engagement of the military junta. It did not abandon Aung San Suu Kyi or democracy but, guided by realpolitik and national interests, cultivated the Generals for inducing internal reform.



While this policy switch addressed India’s security concerns — namely North-East rebel sanctuaries and China’s influence in Myanmar — it did little to hasten democratic change. India’s need of Myanmar is for connectivity to the North-East denied by Bangladesh; as a bridge to the East; and for oil and gas as an alternative to Iran. A strong and effective military-to-military relationship has been developed over the years. Yet India has to ensure that it is not on the wrong side of history.



Myanmar is the only ASEAN country with land borders with four insurgency-ridden states. With its western flank resting on the epicentre of terrorism in Pakistan, India can ill-afford an unstable easternfrontier. The Generals run the most durable military regime anywhere and cannot be wished away as long as China and Russia have their veto.



But these are the bare facts. The complexity is introduced by two elements: The fact that the military regime has said elections would be held in Myanmar soon; and that Myanmar’s ethnic minorities are playing merry hell on its border with China.



An excellent report by ICRIER for the Asia Society outlines the problems that Myanmar has in engaging with the outside world. On the one hand, the regime is demonised and ostracised, while more repressive regimes elsewhere are tolerated and even feted. This leads Myanmar and the ruling regime to foster intense nationalism, which feeds on strong suspicion of foreign countries, especially neighbouring countries.



This nationalism is handy when Myanmar deals with China. Largely because of the void left by Western countries as well as India till 1988, China moved in to ‘assist’ Myanmar in a very big way. While this engagement suited Myanmar fine, China, tired of being lambasted by the international community for supporting a variety of repressive regimes all over the world, has now begun suggesting to the Myanmarese junta that it loosen its grip a bit.



The problem is, while Myanmar is grateful to the Chinese, it fears them — especially in northern Myanmar (Mandalay) where unbridled immigration from China has practically turned the region and its Shan and Kachin states into part of the Yunnan province in China. China is also constructing river, road and rail transport infrastructure through Myanmar to connect landlocked Yunnan province with the Bay of Bengal. If China were to acquire full sway over Myanmar, it would control the economy and surround India’s north-eastern States. There is evidence to suggest it is getting there. Effectively, it is clear that Myanmar has the potential to hurt India more than it can hurt Myanmar.



There is much that India can do: Offer Myanmar food-processing plants, create facilities for Myanmar to exploit and possibly export natural gas (because bringing it to India through a pipeline is not feasible). China has cottoned on to this. During Mr Wen Jiabao’s visit in June, Myanmar and China agreed to fast-track the $ 1.5 billion oil pipeline and a $ 1.04 billion gas pipeline, the construction of which started in October last year.



The pipelines will run parallel to each other and enter China at the border city of Ruili in Yunnan province and terminate in Kunming, capital of Yunnan while the 2,806-km natural gas pipeline will extend to Guizhou and Guangxi. The pipeline will diversify China’s crude oil import routes from West Asia and Africa, and avoid the sea route through the piracy-prone Strait of Malacca.



Now why didn’t we think of that? But then, it is to New Delhi that Gen Than is coming, not to Beijing. India should put aside its residual discomfort at supporting a military regime and offer Myanmar development aid and help in the spirit of generosity. All said and done, with China, Myanmar’s relationship is instrumentalist. The regime recognises this and is looking for other baskets in which to place its eggs. India should be able to offer this, even if at the cost of annoying China. New Delhi makes a big deal of its Africa policy and denies it is in a race with the Chinese in the continent. Why not develop the same approach to Myanmar, which is a neighbour after all ?