External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna has returned from a three-day official visit to Myanmar without meeting Aung San Suu Kyi, the opposition leader and international democracy icon who was freed in late 2010 by that country's military regime after several years under house arrest. He left that chore to Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao. The Minister's visit was billed as India's first high-level interaction with the “new civilian government.” It would be best to drop the pretence. The Myanmar government is not civilian by any standards. It is run by the Union Solidarity and Development Party, a military proxy that unsurprisingly won a sham election in October 2010. Ms Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy boycotted the election as the junta introduced new rules to keep the Nobel Laureate out of the process. The newly elected Parliament, dominated by the military and its proxies, chose USDP leader Thein Sein as the new “civilian” President in March 2011 after he was handpicked by Senior General Than Shwe, the head of the junta's outgoing State Peace and Development Council. President Sein was a serving general until last year and the Prime Minister in the SPDC regime. A junta loyalist, he is expected to maintain continuity with the junta's policies. Thanks to WikiLeaks, we know that the Indian foreign policy establishment thinks Ms Suu Kyi's “day has come and gone,” and that India's engagement with the Myanmarese military is based on security considerations in the North-East and its fears of losing influence to China. But if this is India's state policy, it should say this openly instead of projecting its dance with the generals as “engagement” with civilians.
India and Myanmar have come a long way in their bilateral ties since New Delhi's barely remembered conferment of the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding on Ms Suu Kyi in 1991. Engagement with the generals has paid India dividends: Myanmar is no longer soft on militant groups that operate in India's North-East; New Delhi is involved in a dozen ventures in the energy, agriculture, power, telecommunications, and infrastructure sectors. The construction of a $110 million “multi-nodal” Kaladan transport project linking the landlocked North-East with Sittwe seaport in Myanmar is well under way, and Mr. Krishna's visit has netted more MoUs. But while New Delhi furthers its ties with Myanmar's men in uniform, it will live on India's conscience that it quietly abandoned the Gandhian Ms Suu Kyi. Only last week, on the occasion of her 66th birthday, she reiterated a plea to India to live up to its democratic credentials by “engaging more” with Myanmar's democracy activists. It seems even that was too much to ask.
Man does not live by bread alone. There is honour in holding on to your principleseven it does not bring in 'moolahs' and MoUs. The Largest democracy, if it can't help other fledgling ones, especially in the near neighbourhood, cannot claim for leadership of the region by becoming chamchas of wolf's in sheep's clothing or military masquerading as civilain government in Myanmar. I stongly disaprove this tactic of Indian government vis-a-vis Myanamar.
It is a crying shame that India has shamelessly abandoned Aung San Suu Kyi, the living Gandhi as she had come to be recognized. Manmohan Singh's money-minded government did not consider her worth a visit by our foreign minister during his recent 'high level interaction with the new civilian government' which is neither genuinely civilian nor one democratically elected. No surprise because the response of our government to the release of Aung San Suu Kyi was extremely lukewarm. In the November of 2010, when she got freedom after spending 15 of the last 21 years, our foreign minister - note, not the prime minister- welcomed the event as a step taken by Myanmar Janta "towards national reconciliation". Surely India did not mean by "national reconciliation" a step towards restoration of democracy, civil liberties and freedom from human rights abuses. By reconciliation our government meant Suu Kyi falling in line. A nation, like an individual, must have character, a set of beliefs.
Just a correction, Jawaharlal Nehru award was conferred to Ms Aung San Suu Kyi in 1993.
However, the article looks at the humanitarian part, which is understandable and expected from a soft state like India. But it is undeniable that China has already capitalized on India keeping distance with military govt. Based on India's long term interests with a border nation, it is important to maintain good relations whoever in the office. My personal view converges with India foreign policy on Myanmar - Aung San Suu Kyi's day has come and gone. And it is important to maintain good relations with a border nation.
What can one expect from the world biggest democracy without democratic value? India is just opportunist! Whether it's Egypt/Syria/Libya/Myanmar ..etc, there is no positive response from India to the people' struggle. Democratic value has been bargained for bilateral relations or economics gains. Yes, it's time we shed our pretence and stand up for democracy no matters what the price may be.
India and Myanmar share common historical ties with Buddhism as important link.Indo-Myanmar relations have always been friendly. SAARC has been a non starter since inception mainly due to intransigence of Pakistan and the fear of opening its markets to competition. India has developed rapidly since SAARC was conceived. India should look beyond South Asia towards East. - Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia are expanding economies and have common cultural links. India should partner with these countries for economic cooperation as part of a larger ASEAN.India already has a free trade agreement with Srilanka. India should have a similar arrangement with Myanmar.China is consolidating its economic ties with these nations and India should do too. India should actively pursue its policy of 'Look East' to foster relationships with Myanmar. China maintains a close watch not only on its citizens but seizes every opportunity to build economic and defence ties. The once dominant Indian community has faded from the mainstream of Myanmar public. Indians are no more than memory in Myanmar today and our government has done nothing to improve upon this. ndia can share its expertise in areas like industry, trade, English language skills, health care, Pharmaceuticals, railways and other related fields which would consolidate our relationship The decision of China to build an energy corridor from Yunan to Myanmar giving it access to the Bay of Bengal has serious strategic and political implications. It is surprising that China is making such rapid strides and is consolidating itself with our neighbours, Myanmar, Bangladesh, Nepal, Srilanka and Pakistan. Myanmar is a resource rich nation and India should make effort to reinforce its historical relationship for the benefit of both.
We cannot deny that India is most tolerate among neighbouring countries,on opposition democratic activists and refugee from Burma. Also we trying to understand India's effort to taking Burmese generals away from from China to contain its widespread influence over Burma. But we witness all effort by India has vain and no match with China over Burma under military Generals, India has far behind China Its resulted far behind India's expectation from its engagement with Generals rather generals get more political credibility in international. It is sad memoir and it will remain our heart till last breath was that Mr.Deo, petroleum minister of India, Land of Buddha and Gandhi, visited to Burma and signed agreements with Generals in 2007 while Buddhist monks had been killed by Generals when they stage peaceful procession without slogan but chanting Buddha mentra for peace and prosperity in country and world. So Mr Krishna skip to meet our leader cannot make supprise us, but add more pain
Do nations stand for 'ideals'? At what point does a nation choose 'Pragmatism' over its 'Ideals'.So far,the twenty first century shows us that Geo-political realities are the only things which matter to countries all over.Given that, Ms.Suu Kyi's plight, while sad, is certainly not surprising.
You administered in your editorial a nice counsel. The gesture of External Affairs Minister, S.M.Krishna, has been an act of ingratitude and grcelessness. His callous indifference to meet the Nobel Laureate, Ms. Suu Kyi, constitutes a slur on our traditional reputation. The antecedents of Myanmar are not that laudable, particularly those of the Union Solidarity and Development Party. Yes, it is time we dropped the pretence on Mynamar.
Security of our country comes first. It's not wrong to appease Mynmar Government if India's interest is safeguarded against Chinese clandestine and covert support to the Militants in North East. We should be like US Government. For the US Government only its national interest comes as first and the last priority for which it will go to any length to achieve security of its country and its citizens at other nations cost. So be India. Having surrounded by countries who are constantly jealous about India growing stature and prosperity, India should never lose opportunity to extend its hands of friendship with any country who are willing to accept our friendship.
This is another clear example of India sitting on the fence where freedom and democracy are concerned....funny that from the world's largest democracy who calls foul sometimes when China attacks as I well recall in 1962. It has been the same with Libya and the Middle East countries. India wants to be taken seriously as a major global player and awarded a permanent seat at UN Security Council...well as Obama said in your Lok Sabha for that you need to stand up and be counted. Deference to murderers and autocrats and others does not engender world respect and never will.
After the Myanmar got into the hands of military rule, India stoned walled it's relation with Myanmar. This happened during Nehru's era. The PM of Myanmar disposed of by military general happened to be good friend of Nehru . In world of international politics , one country has to chose what it suit to it . As America does, it may support unrest in Libya and on pretext of protecting civilian can bombard any place in Libya or else in world or prefer to remain silent in case of Bahrain where it has good relation with Govt and also it's naval fleet is stationed there . Indian has long followed the policy of ignoring Myanmar because of military rule. The outcome of it become obvious by increase China's presence in Myanmar and it's govt's significant inclination toward China. By following look east policy , India has succeeded in getting a marginal support and lost good will from ASEAN countries. SM Krishna's visit to Myanmar without meeting Ms Suu Ky ,should not be given undue importance.
The article does make sad reading. India should realise that in the long run, when the world would have to position themselves vis-a-vis India and China, it is only India's democratic credentials that would actually give it some clout, because this IS our strength. If India has to make a better impression on the world stage, it has to do so by adhering strictly to its own values and conscience rather than jumping into what will be a shortlived commercial race with China.
Like it or not, We are very good only at becoming lions at smaller countries in SAARC regions, rest else where people know our stature.
Whatever may be the nuumber of MoUs acheived by India in Myanmar, it will be a great disappointment that our Foreign Minsiter did not visit the leader of the oppsoition Ms Suu Kyi during his visit. Not a happy thing.
The Foreign Ministry has figured out that our policy must be determined by our long term interests. In pursuit of markets and resources, China has learned to hobnob with some of the worst dictators and countries in the world today. Also gone is their pretense of third world solidarity. India too must learn to pursue her interests regardless of what the editors of this paper, often hypocritical themselves, believe.
Please Email the Editor