[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index
][Thread Index
]
Message from Burma (The Indian Expr
Subject: Message from Burma (The Indian Express July 3, 1996)
INDIA HAS TO DO AN IDEOLOGICAL BALANCING ACT IN
YANGON
India should learn from ASEAN's policy of constructively engaging
Myanmar, argues K P Nayar
EVENTS in Yangon in the last fortnight have once again brought into
focus India's inability to reconcile its security interests in Myanmar
with its professed commitment to democracy in the neighbouring
country. Western reports, lapped up by the Indian media in recent
week, have concentrated on the crowd - averaging about 5,000 -
which regular gather at Aung San Suu Kyi's residence to listen to her.
It is an indication of the confidence of Myanmar's ruling State Law
and Order Restoration Council (SLORC) that, un-mindful of the stir
that Suu Kyi is creating in the western media. It is concentrating its
energies on an event that will soon make the dissident's leader crowds
insignificant and, perhaps, irrelevant.
The event that the military government in Yangon is carefully
preparing for is a tour of Buddhist relics from China which are due to
arrive in Myanmar in December. This will be the second such
exposition of Buddhist relics from China in Myanmar.
The first such exhibition about three years ago caused a major
sensation across the country. Millions of people came out to pay their
respects to the relics, many of them parting with precious possessions
as their tribute to the exposition.
For many Myanmarese it was an event of a lifetime. There is a lesson
in this for India as scenes of wild jubilation and religious fervour seen
across Myanmar three years ago are set to be repeated.
It was during Rajiv Gandhis prime minister-ship that India promised
Yangon that Buddhist relics from this country would be sent to
Myanmar. But nothing came of it in several years and after many
reminders.
In 1992, the Chinese stepped into the vacuum created by the
unfulfilled Indian promise and offered to send to Myanmar the sacred
relics in their possession. The government in Yangon was delighted
and the Chinese made full use of what they saw as an opportunity to
endear themselves to the deeply religious people of Myanmar.
By the time India realised that it had lost a good opportunity and
offered to send the relics last year, the government in Yangon had
made up its mind. It turned down the offer which was communicated
through P. Chindambaram, then Commerce Minister in the
Narasimha Rao government, during his visit to Yangon.
For several years now, India's Myanmar policy has flip-flopped
wildly, alternating between a realisation of the security dimensions of
Indo-Myanmarnese ties and the interests of a powerful lobby in New
Delhi which would like to see Suu Kyi in power.
The Rao government gave in to the demands of India's security
interests and turned around a relationship which was stagnating and
rapidly yielding ground to the Chinese.
As a result, in 1992, joint operations were initiated to ensure border
management and tackle drug trafficking and arms smuggling. A year
later, through a landmark agreement, trade along the 1,700 km, Indo-
Myanmarese border was legalised.
The thread of what the Rao government set in motion needs to be
urgently picked up by the United Front government. As External
Affairs Minister I. K. Gujral prepares to go for the ASEAN's post-
ministerial meeting in Indonesia next month, he could consider taking
a leaf out of the South-East Asian grouping's policy of engaging
Myanmar to shape India's own ties with Yangon.
The ASEAN sees the army as a stabilising influence in Myanmar and
believes that sanctions and pressure can have no effect on the military
government. In support of this argument it points out that America
has imposed sanctions against Myanmar for six years now, to little
avail.
Indeed, ASEAN leaders believe that their policy of constructive
engagement has produced more political liberalisation in Myanmar
than have treats of sanctions from elsewhere.
As the Gowda government reviews its options on Myanmar, one
proposal which ought to engage its attention is the idea of a " lower
silk route" from India to China and beyond via Myanmar.
The proposal, still in an embryonic stage, has potential for creating
enduring links among India, Myanmar and China to tap the
opportunities which are opening up in all three countries.
For India the proposal is also crucial because of its implications for
the security situation in the North-East. Viable and meaningful
exchanges across the Indo-Myanmarnese border can lead not only to
better border management but also reduce the incentive in that part of
the country to militancy.
If the arrangement works well Myanmar could, in the long run,
become India's gateway to South-East Asia. The possibilities are
tantalising, but they can be realised only through a show of political
will which upholds the national interest above all else.
To begin with, such a policy would have to eliminate from the action
the bleeding hearts who cry out for democracy in Myanmar, and
ensure a readiness to deal with the legal and effective government in
charge in Yangon.
= = = = = = = = = = =
Editor
Indian Express
June 24, 1996
Re: "India has to do ideological balancing act in Yangon"
by K. P. Nayar Jun. 24.
Sir,
It can not be taken as an indication of confidence of the
SLORC that thousands of people assembled to listen to Aung San
Suu Kyi for which military rulers did not prevent yet. Because being
the disciplined regular weekend gatherings speaking on importance of
rule of law and interpretation of democracy and etc. do not tender
any reason to restrict by the power mongers.
The argued point of tactics of a show of Buddha relics from China in
December, if it is true, is not the right choice to counter Suu Kyi's
media popularity. That was why SLORC hurriedly ordered the
involuntary state-sponsored rallies through out Burma
instantaneously after the NLD conference marking the 6th
anniversary of the election. Not six months later.
Nor is the western media which covers such events either.
Considerable coverage appeared in the Asiaweek, the Bangkok Post,
the Nation, the Asian Age and all of Indian papers. Not only the USA
and UK but Japan, Thailand and Australia expressed their different
austerity of concern on the fresh crack-down against the arrest of 262
elected members. While the Sri Lankan politicians correctly
pronounced to support democracy in Burma, I. K. Gujral wanted to
bring SLORC closer to the SAARC and a senior journalist, K. P.
Nayar advocated for a constructive engagement.
The word, constructive is beautiful itself. But the people of Burma
would be happy of constructive relation with neighbors providing
that the relation is productive to the good of the people. What the
people long for is clearly a popular democratic administration. Which
is, in a democracy, more meaningful of respecting the men-in-power
or the people-under-suppression. India is the best country to give out
the accurate answer, isn't it?
Many governments think about the interests of their respective
countries. All businessmen look for the profit. The basic is alike then.
I wonder if India which has been admired for Gauttma Buddha and
Gandhiji would be bound to such a silly idea of self-supporting
policy.
Does anybody think a military government can last long in this
civilized era? Does any government want to sit precariously on such a
policy of so-called constructive engagement with de facto fickle
government in Burma?
At the moment ASEAN may consider the army as a stabilizing
structure in Burma. But ASEAN could not and would not hesitate to
deal with a new popular government when the mandate of the people
is honored in a near future. How was the pervious military dominated
BSPP regime before the SLORC?
I don't think the NE question can be solved just by a better
cooperation with military junta because the root of NE cause does
not lie on whether or not presence of a democratic government in
Burma. Meanwhile I do agree that relation with Burma is significant
for India. That does not necessarily mean affaire d'amour with the
SLORC.
Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burmese democrats anticipate India to
play a major role in the struggle. So may I hope the new coalition
democratic government will reverse some miscalculated, incorrect,
immoral convictions?
Tint Swe
Member of Parliament (Burma), Tel/Fax: 550-6715
D-11, Gujranwala Apt., J-Block, Vikas Puri, New Delhi. 18
= = = = = = = = = END OF TEXT = = = = = = =
Message from Myanmar
from: The Indian Express (New Delhi) July 3, 1996
Letter to the Editor
Sir: It cannot be taken as an indication of confidence of the
SLORC that thousands of people assembled to listen to Aung
San Suu Kyi. The military rulers have not prevented it yet.
Because disciplined regular weekend gatherings, speaking on
the importance of rule of law and interpretation of democracy
etc. do not offer any reason for such a step.
A show of Buddha relics from China in December, if it is true,
is not right choice to counter Suu Kyis media popularity. That
was why SLORC hurriedly ordered the state-sponsored rallies
throughout Burma instantaneously after NLD conference
marking the sixth anniversary of the election. Not six months
later.
The western media do not cover such events. Considerable
coverage appeared in The Asiaweek, The Bangkok Post, The
Nation, The Asian Age and all India papers. While the Sri
Lankan politicians supported democracy in Burma, I. K. Gujral
wanted to being SLORC closer to the SAARC and a senior
journalist, K. P. Nayar, advocated a constructive engagement.
The word constructive is beautiful. But the people of Burma
would be happy of constructive relations with neighbours
provided the relation are productive and for the good of the
people. What the people long for is clearly a popular
democratic administration.
Many governments think about the interests of their respective
countries. All businessmen look for profit. I wonder if India,
which has been admire for Gautan Buddha and Gandhiji, would
be bond to such a silly idea of self- supporting policy.
Does anybody think a military government can last long in this
civilised era? Does any government want to sit precariously on
such a policy of so- called constructive engagement with a de
facto fickle government in Burma?
At the moment ASEAN may consider the Army as a stabilising
structure in Burma. But ASEAN could not and would not
hesitate to deal with a new popular government when the
mandate of the people is honoured in the near future. How was
the previous military- dominated BSPP regime before the
SLORC?
I dont think the problem can be solved just by better co-
operation with the military junta. I do agree that good relations
with Burma are significant for India. That does not necessarily
mean affaire d amour with the SLORC.
Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burmese democrats anticipate India
to play a major role in the struggle. So many I hope the new
coalition democratic government will reverse some
miscalculated, incorrect, immoral convictions?
TINT SWE
Member of Parliament (Burma)
NEW DELHI
******END******