[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

VIEWS ON INDO-BURMA RELATIONSHIP



Date : 27th September 1998

Views on Indo-Burma Relationship

The relationship between India and Burma was sever and cold after the
military staged a coup in September 1988 and its continuing crack down on
the democratic forces in Burma. The Government of India distanced itself
from the military junta and expressed its support to the democratic
movement in Burma. However, the relationship between the two countries has
been slowly cordial in terms of cooperation in trade and
counter-insurgency in the border. This was particularly seen after the
then Indian Foreign Secretary Mr. J.N. Dixit's visit to Rangoon in March
1993. In January, 1994, Burma's Deputy Foreign Minister U Nyunt Swe made
an official visit to New Delhi. During his visit, the two countries signed
a bilateral agreement to regularize and promote informal trade across the
land border into India's North Eastern States. The border trade was
officially inaugurated on 12th April 1995 at Moreh, a border township of
India. Since that time, there have been regular meetings and exchanges
between the two countries.

In the past three weeks, there were reports in the Indian newspapers that
India has offered to supply arms to Burma. One Indian newspaper quoted
Cabinet secretariat sources and wrote that this offer was made by the
Indian defence secretary to Brig. Kyaw Win, Deputy Director of Defence
Services Intelligence of Burma during the latter visit to India in March
this year. The offer was, reportedly, in response to Burmese government's
cooperation extended to New Delhi in tackling North-East insurgency
groups. Burma's pro-democracy activists based in India were concerned with
the reports. MIZZIMA News Group conducted extensive interviews during the
last one week with certain individuals regarding the report of India's
arms-offer in particular and Indo-Burma relationship in general. We are
posting the interviews (of the Chairman of an NGO, a Research fellow of
Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, spokesperson of a Burma
pro-democracy organization and Defense Minister of India.) unedited to the
Burmanet for the Burma observers, interested individuals and groups. The
first two interviewees used the term "Myanmar" in stead of the term
"Burma".

MIZZIMA News Group
1944, Outran Line,
Kingsway Camp,
Delhi - 9        Tel/Fax : 0091-11-7115491

_________________________

(Interview with Mr.. Deenadayalan, Chairman of the Other Media. The Other
Media is a networking organization of peoples' md it is based in Delhi. It
has been actively supporting Burma's struggle for democracy and Mr.
Deenadayalan is also a member of Friends of Burma organization.)

Highlight : "Though Indian state is supposed to be the largest democracy
in the world, the kind of its expression and manifestation in terms of its
relationship with neighbouring countries has showed that is has also been
undemocratic of promoting forces which are not democratic. This is a very
clear indication in terms of its support to Burmese government.."


Q :	Recently, there have been reports in the media that India offered
to supply arms to Burma in response to Burmese government's concerted
efforts in helping India to fight North-East insurgents. What is your
response to the reports?
A:	I have seen the reports. So myself it was not very surprising for
me. It was for many reasons. One is the relationship between Indian
intelligence and movements in neighbouring countries has been there for
very long time as it is for strategic purposes. And we also know that
there is a very strong rumours even before the present government came
into power that Indian government had clandestinely tried to channel arms
and ammunition to the Burmese government even in the past. But now as I
told you sometimes back that now they are doing it much more blatantly and
openly. Earlier they were doing it quiet which again indicates towards the
kind of policy the present government is having. One knows the political
position of BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) government on the whole question
of nationalities and those aspects of states as such they are much more
patriotic in terms of their own's articulation. And we know from their own
manifestos and policies with regards to Kashmir and the struggles that are
taking place in North-East. They want to deal with the political
discontents in the border areas by force and they don't mind co-opting the
help of the neighbouring countries in bringing by force in finding
solutions to the political issues in these borders. And it is not new to
me at all. 

The unfortunate repercussion of this is going to be reflected both within
this country and also in terms of its foreign policy definitely. Though
Indian state is supposed to be the largest democracy in the world, the
kind of its expression and manifestation in terms of its relationship with
neighbouring countries has showed that it has also been undemocratic of
promoting forces which are not democratic. This is a very clear indication
in terms of its support to Burmese government that it doesn't matter to
the government of India, the present government especially, if Burmese
government violates the human rights of people in Burma whether people
knows that there is a declared martial law in Burma and there have been
undemocratic set up. But in spite of its, they would like to indirectly
and directly support the government if the government directly and
indirectly helps solve its own problems within the birder. And with
another word, legitimizes undemocratic process in the neighbouring
countries which has to be condemned.

Q:	As you know, there is a strong lobby in India which supports
democratic movement in Burma. But, on the other hand, many people in India
are feeling that India should normalize the relationship with the military
regime in Burma too. Particularly, this view is getting stronger in the
bureaucrats. What is your comment on that?
A:	This again is an indication in terms of the policy that the
government takes now. It is not on the values of democracy. It is not on
the values of secularism. It is not on the highest principles by which a
state is governed now. The state is governed basically now by economic
interest. For me, it is a clear indication that the government of India
though it professes that it is committed to certain deeper values of
democracy, secularism but it remains in words. But in action, you will see
that since the time of opening up of its own borders for multinational
companies for multilateral industries or even financial institutions to
come into this country. It is very clear indication that they have
succumbed to the pressure of economic interest both outside and also from
within. And what is very clear indication in terms of its policy towards
neighbours is that as long as its economic interest are furthered by this
relationship, it is satisfied and it doesn't matter in that process if it
is going to violate the democratic principles in another country. This is
precisely what is happening. So this is not something new. It has been set
up because of the process of globalization too. India is caught up in the
process of globalization very seriously. And it is an indication.

Q:	China was providing arms to Burma. There are many people in India
saying that we also should go to Burma to counter China's hand in Burma.
What is opinion on that?
A:	We know that any state for the matter for its own survival has
used many bogies and many excuses. And China bogey is another bogey India
government is using. It is in the name of protecting its own interest
vis-a-vis Chinese interest. They also have bringing in certain
legitimization with regards to Pokram test. The whole Pokram test the
justification they are giving again is because of China. But I think
ultimately if you understand and examine, these all are indications of its
own insecurity. It is not so much that India feels, it doesn't have
confidence in its own professed principles basically. It is supposed to be
a leader of Non-Aligned Movement. Where does it stand now. It is being a
kind of marginalised in the last meeting of NAM. In South Africa it is
very evident that India was marginalised because what it professes and
what it practices are totally different thing. It is very clear indication
when it comes into even its relationship to Burma or democratic movement
in Burma.

Q:	I would like to go into insurgency problems in North East India.
To counter anti-India insurgent groups, Indian government seems to have a
strong argument to crack down Burma's anti-government armed groups which
are reportedly linked with some of the North-East insurgent groups. What
is your view on this argument?
A:	The way that I look at the issue of insurgency or containing of
insurgency whether it is in Burma or India is entirely different. What the
Indian government is trying to do by its own policy in terms of insurgency
is by negotiating with Burma in terms of supplying arms and ammunition to
them so that they will be equipped better to fight against Indian
insurgent groups. But what guarantee is there that arms and ammunition is
not going to be used by Burmese government to oppress its own people.
There is no guarantee. That is one thing. Second thing is that what
government of India trying to do is trying to deal with the symptoms of
the problems. The insurgency exists because of the lopsided development
policy of the government. Second thing is lack of the political will to
solve the political problems of the people. We always say that we need to
find political solutions to the problems of North East insurgency. Because
these are political issues. We cannot think in terms of military
intervention and military solution to a political issue. And we stand by
it. And this attitude of the government of trying to deal with the
political issues with arms and ammunition is not going to bring about the
solutions at all. On the contrary, it is going to breath more violence. It
is going to breath more insurgency in the North East. It is not going to
solve the problems at all.

Q:	As you are aware that there is escalating confrontation between
the military government and NLD in Burma. How should the people of India
and government of India respond to the current political situation in
Burma?
A:	It is an important issue. One of the things I always felt is that
lack of response by even democratic people who profess that they stand by
principles of democracy, especially those political parties who know and
say that democracy is one of the basic principles by which the political
party is governed, they themselves do not respond to situation where
democratic principles are being violated continuously. Political parties
are failed and I am surprised that in this country political parties are
not responding to the problems of neighbourhood and much more so with
regard to Burma. I have read a very few statements coming out from
political parties in support of pro-democracy struggle in Burma. Both
intelligentsia and academics, student communities also have not responded
concretely to the democratic struggle in Burma. So I always felt that
there has to be a mass action from within this country. If it is for
democracy within this country, it does to get reflected in its own
expression of solidarity with other people who are also struggling for
democracy. This has not been manifested at all as far as India is
concerned. So it is very sad stage of affairs. So I feel that there has to
be a conscious campaign by those people who are committed to democratic
principles should stand for struggles of democracy whether it is in this
country or in its neighbourhood. There has to be campaign within and also
without. These have to happen continuously. I remember in one of your
meetings, the present Planning Commission Chairperson Jaswant Singh had
come and spoken at that time when he was in opposition promising support
and expressing solidarity to the democratic struggles in Burma. What is
happened to him now. He is in very powerful position in the government as
a Chairperson of the Planning Commission (of the government). At least has
he expressed the support and solidarity verbally? I haven't seen his
statement. This is the problem most of the political parties and
leadership have vested interest. They use the terms of democracy in larger
values and articulated just for the sake of survival and also for the
political gains. It means nothing to them.

Q:	So, what are your suggestions to build up the solidarity movement
for democracy in Burma among the people of India?
A:	There are one or two things which I am concerned about even in
terms of the struggle in Burma for pro-democracy. The pro-democratic
struggle itself should find some kind of consulted expression. But
unfortunately this consulted expression is not there. Even the expression
is divided. That I think you are aware of it and I am aware of it. To some
extent, there has to be certain amount of conscious coordination in
articulating demands for democratic Burma even by those who are
participating in it, who are now outside and within. There is a certain
amount of confusion among the minds of the Indian people also in terms of
perceiving this reality of democratic struggle in Burma.

Even within the struggle for democracy in Burma, there are also a lot
other problems. You are talking about what kind of new Burma you should
have. You are talking about whether the present form of the governance
should go or should be there or should it be a democratic governance. So
what kind of the state you will have. It will be whether federated one or
confederation of states. There are debates and discussions that are taking
place. Even the debates and discussions will have to find currency in
India among the people. And so my own suggestion is that you need to
evolve an effective campaign among political parties, student leaders and
with independent mass movements. There are now independent mass movements
which are emerging in the present political reality in this country. We
need to also appeal to them and I am not very sure what kind of concerted
efforts are being made to address and appeal to mass organizations and
movements in this country. There has to be a very conscious, very clear
campaign demanding solidarity to the struggles that are taking place. It
has to also happen in the way that you evolve your own programmes within
this country, not only to keep alive your political activities but also in
the process of keeping alive your political activities, you have to co-opt
local support. So that slowly you will be able to broaden your solidarity
support within this country. You need to evolve some concrete programmes
for that because even NGOs' support to your issue has been tentative. Even
in Delhi, for example. I don't know of organizations who have come out of
the way and expressed solidarity to your people. Every time you organized
demonstrations, for example, how many Indians from this country
participate in it.

THE END of Interview One.
______________________

(Interview with Dr. Swaran Singh, Research fellow of Institute for Defense
Studies and Analyses - IDSA which is based in Delhi.)


Highlight : "I think it is perfect that after waiting ten years now India
has gradually started showing a certain change in its Burma policy and
government has been taken a positive view of evolving relation with
military junta there."


Q:	What is your view on recent media reports of India offering arms
to Burma?
A:	Yes, there has been report lately of India has offered some sort
of defence equipment to Burmese authorities. That was perhaps expected
also. If you look at what actually involves in relations of these two
countries, India and Burma have no border problems, no ethnic or other
problems. The only problem which is central to India and Burma is the
level of violence which continues to be there for last 10, 20 years on
their borders. And both the countries have been suspecting each other
being involved in promoting and embetting this kind of violence.
Therefore, I think, removing or at least controlling and gradually
eliminating that violence from both sides on the border remains number one
priority for these two countries. India has been trying for long years
now, if you remember, it started in 1993 when the first time Indian
foreign secretary visited Burma. There was a certain change of thinking
then, you know, that you need to deal with authorities there and you can
not go on waiting for democracy to come in Burma. And since then a lot of
things have happened and if you see a lot of economic cooperation has
certainly taken place. But if you see what is the objective from both
sides, then as I said, the cooperation between what I called violence
management agencies has to be achieved. Now these can be intelligence
agencies from both sides, police from both sides, paramilitary
organizations and even defence establishment from both sides. Now because
that has to be based at higher level of mutual confidence and mutual
understanding of each other's problems. And therefore simple cultural
exchange, economic cooperation cannot actually, directly have an effective
method of resolving the level of violence which has continued in the
border region of India and Burma. And entire North East has been suffering
for long years because of that. And then let us see, there are two ways of
looking at how one country decides policy on the other country. One is how
the international community is viewing that country and how international
community is reacting towards the country. If you see, China was the first
country after 1988 massacre to show tremendous level of indulgence. At one
stage, people were talking of serenization of Burma that shows China was
fully in control of what was happening in Burma. There were two major
defence contracts singed in 1992 and later in 1994. One of  US $ 1.2
billion and other one of $ 400 millions supplied them tremendous equipment
which  was also followed by tremendous increase in the numbers of manpower
of military in Burma.

But that did not deter the international community now after 1995. When
Albright, the then US permanent representative to United Nations visited
to Burma, it  resulted in all other countries, be European countries,
especially ASEAN countries fully coming into investment and cooperating
with Burma, co-opting Burma into the ASEAN. And therefore, these are the
international response, you see. Gradually all of the countries responding
positively and accepting Burmese authorities whatever they are now. There
can be value judgments on these things. But you have to see that
international trend is in favour of building relationship with military
authorities in Rangoon. Should India follow international trend. That is
question number one. Second question is how Burma has been evolving
internally. There is a definite view, I think a lot of people think like
that internally also, Aung  San Suu Kyi herself has softened her stand
over the years. And she has often shown some radical views have come and
sometimes she has protested and always things have been appearing likely
to change. But overall in last 6, 7 years, her stand appears to have
softened. So internally, there is a greater acceptance, at least
apparently greater acceptance of military junta in Burma. Should India
then continue to be exclusive and still willing to support democracy
support. Now this is one aspect of the problem. Then, if you look at the
other aspects of the problem which is how India formulates its foreign
policy internally. How domestic opinion gradually becomes dominant in
formulating in changing foreign policy from one side to another. There was
a strong lobby in this country for supporting democracy movement in Burma.
But as you see looking at these changes worldwide and internally in Burma,
there is a parallel lobby in India which has been long time persistently
asking that India should now build relations with military junta in Burma.
Have state to state relationship and there is a huge number of people who
are fallen with in between who generally supports democracy saying you
should continue supporting democracy but at the same time evolve and build
a relationship with junta. Because they are in power now for 10 years. And
one cannot go on waiting indefinitely and let the violence in North East
of India and border areas of Burma go on. You have to find the solution
and let me say solution always comes in a package form and what you have
to see is what is the net result whether that is positive. If that is
positive that becomes a basis for a country to decide its policy vis-a-vis
another country. There is definitely going to be somebody somewhere who is
going to be negatively effected by what is happening and what will happen.
But definitely there is a point of view here that we should build
relations. As I said, since the violence is the number one obsession from
both sides, the national interest of both countries should demand
resolving these violence which exists on the border for long years. And
therefore that demand I think is certain level of cooperation, mutual
confidence especially in what I said violence management agencies which
can go up to defence co-operation and paramilitary cooperation and
intelligence agencies, etc.. etc...

Q:	What are the kinds of weapons India has reportedly offered to
supply Burma?
A:	As regards you know India offering certain category of defence or
defence related equipment to Burma, let me start by saying like this.
India in early '90s had decided formally in principle that we will now
promote and expend our defence exports. There was a certain amount of
shines before this which was overcome and we decided to sell weapons and
other defence related equipment. There was a certain level of increase
until 1995. When it reaches its peak of 5,000 million Rupees. And then
there was a certain drop. In 1996, 1997 has shown in gradual little
improvement. What I am trying to say here is that since India decided in
principle to sell defence equipment and defence related other things like
trucks, communication networks, bridges, there is now a drop and India
should therefore start looking for new areas where it can sell its defence
and related equipment. On the other side, if you look at Burma, the last
two major deals in purchasing defence equipment and weapons, that was in
1992-94. Both with Chinese. And since then they have not purchased any.
They have not signed any major contract on purchasions and other equipment
for defence forces. That makes a party which perhaps are now looking for
new sources to obtain defence related equipment. And perhaps that matches
these two countries well together. But one word of caution here has to be
given is that if you look at the India's defence exports, they can no way
be compared with Chinese. Because Chinese are the only country in this
world which is known to have been supplied ballistic missiles. So when we
talk of Chinese contracts with Burma India contracts can never ever be as
offensive in terms of the categories of weapons. India is generally known
to supply more of logistics communication networks and defence what it is
called "deem to be defence" equipment which is not exactly weapons. Even
when you talk of kind of weapons India has been supplying, it is generally
very small category of weapons of rapid fire weapons in terms of guns,
rifles, pistol, etc..etc... Therefore, Burma can not expect India to give
them certain category of weapons which will ever as powerful as they have
already obtained from Chinese. But I think from both sides it is a clear
understanding at least from the Indian side, the understanding is very
clear that what we are aiming at is increasing the level of mutual
confidence, increasing the level of transparency between two
establishments and because the core interest here is resolving violence in
North East of India and on their side of the border. That in a way makes
imperative to achieve a level of cooperation between defence related and
violence management agencies of two sides. That remains the motive. Not
just selling weapons.

Q:	India is known to have been supporting democratic movement in
Burma. Will it be contrary to this stand that India supplies arms to
Burmese military regime and cracks down the anti-Burmese government armed
groups in the process of handling North East insurgents?
A:	Now, whether these kinds of exports from Indian defence
establishment will have some effect on what you call people on the
periphery. People who supports democratic movement of Burma, but have been
operating perhaps more like insurgents. Now there are two dimensions to
it. One is that it is difficult always to define these categories of
people as freedom fighters or insurgents. Each person will have different
definition on it. But looking at purely India's interest, I think there is
a feeling in India, these groups have been having a certain effect which
is negative on India security and there is certain co-relationship between
their operations and operations of various insurgency movements in India's
North East which then I think forces India to go and achieve a certain
level of mutual understanding with authorities in Rangoon and try to
resolve our problems. In fact, as I said everything comes in a package.
What a country sees in deciding its foreign policy or any policy is that
what is the outcome, net output exactly.  There are going to be some
negative effects definitely of whatever the decision a country takes.
Perhaps some of these groups whom you mentioned a[B supporting the NLD at
the centre and a lot of their supporters are operating from the outskirts
and side areas and not in the mainstream of the country will get merely
negatively effected ofcourse. But it is a package as I said.

Q:	So, what could be the future military cooperation between the two
countries?	
A:	I think looking at the strategic importance of Burma, very clearly
except for last one year of financial crisis in East Asia, South East Asia
was emerging as herb of international activities what had decided that
both China and India were looking at Burma as their steeping stones of
walking into South East Asia and achieving a major level of participation
in the region. Therefore, if you see, China achieved certain level of
indulgence which was partly got it at least forced upon by their decision
makers in terms of developing engagement in East Asia. Similarly, I think
the[B is definitely an element of truth in saying that India's engagement,
if that has to be used as an expression, with Burma definitely has an
element of India's Look East Policy. And therefore whether we want to
concentrate just on what is happening inside, I said there are changes
even inside, but even on the other end of spectrum which is in South East
Asia. All these South East Asia countries have accepted Burma as it is.
They are not even willing to talk about internal problems in the meetings.
That is the terrible [Bbject. And then I think it makes it at the basic
level, even if you have the strong lobby in India of people who want to
support democracy movement in Burma, unless and until something happens
inside Burma, unless and until international opinion is of that kind ,
India finds it I think definitely very difficult to stand it alone. There
are people who have accused India and Indians accused India of trying to
stand alone which makes very difficult for a country, especially a country
like India which is also gradually trying to evolve and find acceptance in
international community as a major actor in Asia, then you cannot take
very controversial decision. And therefore, you can't just go by one
particular factor and decide your policy. You have to take in view in
series of factors aings that have been happening and therefore I th2
k it is perfect that after waiting ten years now India has gradually
started showing its certain change in Burma policy and government has been
taki_____________