India's Strategic Interests in Burma

[asad71]

February 2011
© 2010, Institute of Peace
and Conflict Studies (IPCS)
New Delhi 110029
INDIA

Shyam Saran on India's Strategic Interests in Burma

Myanmar is of extreme strategic and economic importance for India. The two nations share a
1,600km land border and a long maritime boundary in the strategically important Bay of Bengal
and Andaman Sea; they are bound by religious, cultural and ethnic linkages and four of India’s
politically-sensitive Northeastern states share international borders with Myanmar. India has
been pursuing friendly relations with its eastern neighbour since the early 1990s with the goal
of countering China’s influence in the region as well as exploiting the tremendous energy resources
of Myanmar. Critics have however, argued that India’s Myanmar policy is flawed and
have called for a re-valuation.
Medha Chaturvedi from the IPCS spoke to Ambassador Shyam Saran, acting Chairman of Research and Information
System for Developing Countries (RIS), a New Delhi based autonomous think-tank under the Ministry of External
Affairs, on the subject. Ambassador Saran was a former Indian Ambassador to Myanmar and later, Indian Foreign
Secretary and the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy on Climate Change
Medha Chaturvedi: What is the historical perspective of modern relations between India and Myanmar?
Shyam Saran: There have been historical and cultural linkages between India and Myanmar, in particular, through
the spread of Thervada Buddhism to the country. During the Second World War, parts of Burma were taken over by
the Japanese forces along the Irrawaddy River. However, the Arakan peninsula was somewhat untouched. Sittwe
port was one of the routes used to ferry supplies to the northeast of India. The goods were then taken up to Palewa
town where the transport encountered rapids and human porters were used to ferry goods across to Mizoram where
they followed the river again.
The Kaladan River rises in the Chin Hills in Myanmar, flows through Mizoram and back into Myanmar’s Sittwe Delta. It
was infrequently used as a trade route because of all the rapids and other obstructions. However, Sittwe has been an
important port even historically since the rule of the Sultans :army1: over Arakan. It was, from ancient times, among the
three most important trading sea ports in the Bay of Bengal, especially for India. Later, Myanmar became a major
rice exporter. The coastal trading route followed for this trade between India, Myanmar and Sri Lanka lay through
Kolkata in India, Sittwe and Yangoon in Myanmar to Chennai in India, and finally to Colombo in Sri Lanka. However,
in addition to rice trade, this route was also used for illegal trade in drugs and for human trafficking. Thus, Sittwe’s
importance cannot be underestimated.
With Myanmar being ruled as part of the British Indian Empire till its separation in 1937, there was a heavy Indian
presence in trade and utilities and services, including education, railways, power, and business. Yangon’s population
at the time was over 60 per cent Indian.
MC: Politically, India-Myanmar relations have seen several ups and downs. What are the reasons
for this?
SS: Strong personal relations, first between Gen. Aung San and Jawaharlal Nehru and then between Nehru and Burmese
Prime Minister U Nu, contributed to good relations between the two countries. Then came the period of Retrenchment
starting in the 1950s when the Indian Chettiyar community was dispossessed of their land by Gen. Ne
Win following his military coup. He started imposing Burmanization/Nationalization from 1961-64 due to which
350,000 Indians were dispossessed and had to return to India.
At this time, critical sectors like the railways, public services, banking, insurance, wholesale retail, trade, and commerce,
were all taken back from declared foreigners, including Indians. Burmese language was declared the official
language and as a result, Yangon University, which was the best in the region, suffered. Except the absolute lowest
rung of labour, Indians were disallowed from every other employment.
There were continued friendly relations between the two countries despite these developments as Burma was a
crucial transport hub of Southeast Asia at that time. However, due to the decline of the Burmese economy, this role
too disappeared. Burma retreated into a shell. The long years of Ne Win’s rule ended in 1987 due to discontent in the
army, and the economic crisis, a result of his isolationist policies. Prices of commodities were at an all time high and
inflation skyrocketed. The National League for Democracy (NLD) took advantage of the situation and emerged as the
voice of the people.
At the same time, Myanmar was facing constant challenges of insurgencies from its ethnic armed groups on the peripheries
of the country. The challenge was to maintain political unity despite insurgencies. Myanmar faced pressures
from China and other large neighbours to maintain its sovereignty. Elections in 1988 did not sort out
the ethnic problem and posed a challenge to the military in neutralizing the ethnic groups. With China’s
help, Myanmar managed to get most of the ethnic armed groups to sign Arms for Peace and ceasefire
agreements.
After this, for many years, there were very thin India-Myanmar relations despite some positive political
exchanges like the visit of the then Indian Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi, to Myanmar in 1987. Meanwhile,
relations between Myanmar and China started improving as they found themselves on the same
side of ostracization: Myanamar for the military takeover post-1988 elections and China for the Tiananmen
Square incident in 1989.
MC: Why were India’s relations with Myanmar not consistently good for a long time?
SS: India assumed that the longevity of the military regime was limited which did not prove to be true.
Having neutralized the insurgencies by ethnic groups, the junta tried to bring together the civilians and ethnic groups. When it realized that this regime was here
to stay, New Delhi started its constructive engagement policy with Yangon. India-Myanmar relations point out the salience of threat perception that Chinese influence
in Myanmar poses to India’s position in the region. China has majorly expanded in Myanmar and this has facilitated China’s entry into the Bay of Bengal.
India needs to have a countervailing presence in Myanmar to ensure its own interests are not jeopardized.
MC: Would Aung San Suu Kyi’s release after the elections last year have any impact on India’s relations with Myanmar?
SS: India had a democratic connection with Myanmar along with the element of support for Aung San Suu Kyi and her Indian connection, due to her education in
India. During the early years of military rule, India was a big supporter of Suu Kyi, bestowing upon her the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding
in 1992. The reluctance in maintaining friendly relations by India was to the Chinese advantage as they made inroads in Myanmar around the same time. After
the release of Suu Kyi, some transformation for Myanmar is on the cards and India needs to be alert to the developing situation as it unfolds. Tensions between
ethnic groups, military and civilians may escalate, forcing the government to take some strong actions. A second Panglong agreement under Suu Kyi will lead to
some progress for India in the country.
MC: Sittwe lost its importance for sometime in between. To what do you attribute this change?
SS: Sittwe lost its importance due to many reasons. The rice trade saw a sharp decline after its independence. Moreover, the Myanmar government neglected the
Arakan region due to its ethnic diversity and Muslim population. Also, connectivity between Arakan and the rest of Myanmar was difficult.
MC: How is Sittwe important for India in the present context?
SS: Sittwe’s importance for India has magnified under the shadow of access problems between Southeast Asia and the Indian Northeast due to the presence of
Bangladesh and India’s difficult relations with the country. :excl: y. So, India took into account the history of this route as a solution to the access problem and tried to put
the Sittwe route back in place as an alternate access route from its Northeast. India was also looking for closer trade relations with Myanmar and the development
of onshore and offshore gas blocks there. Even China has a stake in some of Myanmar’s onshore blocks in Arakan and is looking to acquire some offshore
blocks in the Bay of Bengal.
MC: What should be the focus of development in Sittwe in the present scenario?
SS: It would be beneficial for India to develop the gas blocks present in Myanmar for our domestic use by drawing a pipeline between the Indian Northeast and
Bonai village in Sittwe. The idea should be to enhance river transport and develop a point to get off from boats and a highway up to Mizoram to support the idea
of having a gas pipeline. Under the river project, certain measures need to be taken on an immediate basis. The development of Sittwe is critical. Obstructions
upstream of Kaladan River should be removed for the smooth transport of large container ships up to Palewa town.
MC: What is India’s present status on oil and natural gas trade with Myanmar?
SS: There is the possibility of Myanmar becoming a major source of energy and Assam oil belts spilling into Northern Myanmar. It is a zone of energy security for
India which needs to be maintained. In India, no development has really taken place in terms of gas and oil purchases. It has remained only an idea which has not
yet materialized into an organized plan of action. It has not been followed up properly so far. A detailed project report (DPR) on infrastructure of the Sittwe Project
has already been drawn up and the government has sanctioned funds for it. As far as my information goes, construction on the A1 and A3 gas blocks has also
begun. The problem with India’s energy interests in Myanmar is that even if it develops A1 to A7 energy blocks or any other offshore Bay of Bengal blocks, how
will be it be transported back to India? The original plan for the Kaladan project was to provide a transit route from Sittwe to Bongaigaon in Assam through the
river. Energy transit is not India’s primary concern with this project as we lost out on A1 and A7 blocks.
MC: What is the Chinese interest in Myanmar’s gas reserves?
SS: Chinese interest lies in building the pipeline from A1 to A7 blocks from Myanmar to China. For that, they want to develop deep sea water ports on west Arakan
alongside a petrochemical complex. India was earlier looking for control of these ports.
MC: Do you think India should have done more to explore and develop its stake in Myanmar’s natural resources?
SS: India should have been more aggressive in exploring and developing gas reserves available in Myanmar. At present, we only hold a 30 per cent stake in A1
and A3 blocks, and that too we are forced to sell to China because of the absence of a proper pipeline between India and Myanmar. China is purchasing gas from
all seven known gas blocks in Myanmar (A1 to A7 blocks). There is no officially known proven surplus in Myanmar gas blocks for export except in A1 and A3 blocks
in Yadana and Yatagun areas. There are estimates of a surplus, but nothing concrete so far.
MC: What is Myanmar’s interest in aligning with India as a trade partner?
SS: In Myanmar’s interest, the Indian government is planning to assist it with technology and infrastructure to set up gas-based power and fertilizer plants. This is
because after meeting their contracted amount to Thailand, Myanmar is left with no surplus gas for its own consumption. However, there is no clarity on where to
build these factories. If they are built in Yangon, a transport corridor first needs to be made between Yangon and Arakan region due to geographical constraints.
MC: Are there any more gas blocks available for India to develop? If so, can India formulate a more aggressive strategy to acquire and
develop them?
SS: Yes, there are some unexplored gas blocks still available even along the Arakan region. There are also some known unexplored oil fields in northern Myanmar
contiguous to Assam. But, is the Indian government ready to make that investment in exploring and developing them? It is unlikely that there are any more offshore
blocks available though.
MC: Why is Myanmar inclined towards China as a trading partner rather than India?
SS: Myanmar is inclined towards China to trade their available gas and energy because India is not taking a firm strategic decision on this issue.
MC: Are the regional cooperation agreements of any help in energizing India-Myanmar relations?
SS: Regional cooperation agreements are certainly important catalysts for energizing development in the Indian Northeast. Such platforms are critical in the Bay of
Bengal economic community in terms of India’s Look East policy as these measures are not subject to Pakistan-related problems in the SAARC. After Myanmar’s
integration into ASEAN in 1997, it became a big part of the Look East Policy as Myanmar was considered India’s gateway to ASEAN countries because of a contiguous
land and maritime border. It was for this reason that India invited Myanmar to join BIMSTEC in December 1997. India realized that no Bay of Bengal community
initiative could be successful without the inclusion of Myanmar. Many cross-border highways are being planned to connect India to Myanmar and beyond, like
the Rhi-Tidim and Rhi-Falam projects or the Moiwa-Chindwin-Thailand trilateral highway project. As with Bhutan, India can find a strong cooperation for hydroelectricity
with Myanmar based on the upcoming 2000MW Tamanthi river project in Chindwin.
MC: Should India pursue a parallel alternate strategy to engage with Myanmar?
SS: If India develops institutional linkages with Myanmar through cultural exchanges, the problems of integration between the two nations can be handled effectively.
With China, and especially its south, the question is whether it should be a part of the Bay of Bengal community. Myanmar has a lot of agricultural land and
is the chief source of pulses for India. India’s food security is thus significantly dependent upon agricultural exchanges with Myanmar. India at present enjoys a
large presence in Myanmar; but slow delivery from the Indian side is hampering the true potential of this cooperation. India-Myanmar trade is increasingly gaining
steam and it will continue to grow as long as Myanmar remains an agro-based economy. Military-military training can provide an opportunity to have a countervailing
presence to China in the region. India is right to not get involved in Myanmar’s domestic politics. India must be more aggressive in developing border
trade now as western Myanmar is where most of trade with India takes place.
MC: Are the recently signed MoUs on criminal matters an indication of positive counterinsurgency operations between the two nations
along the India-Myanmar border in India’s Northeast? What results are they expected to yield?
SS: The MoUs are a positive step. Myanmar has so far been helpful and forthcoming in helping deal with insurgency problems in India’s Northeast. The MoUs are
only a culmination of what has been informally going on for the past decade.
MC: The perception however, is that Myanmar is less than interested in dealing with Northeast Indian insurgents in its territory. Why is
this the case?
SS: Many of the insurgent groups operating along the India-Myanmar border are well-armed and highly trained. Myanmar has helped flush some of them out but
there is not much incentive for Myanmar to take any action against them. For instance, Myanmar lost 20-25 soldiers in an operation against an NSCN (K) faction
recently. Unless, India is willing to provide them with better logistical support and a stake in the maintenance of better relations, Myanmar would not be very
keen on helping India with its insurgency problem. The Tamanthi river project is one more such multi-modal projects in the pipeline which will provide an incentive
to Myanmar for stable border management. There are various other constructs to India-Myanmar relations. India’s four highly sensitive states in its Northeast
share a common border with Myanmar. In these states, insurgency and ethnic unrest are constant problems that spill across the border as well, and having a
hostile Myanmar would only make matters worse for India. Even if Myanmar is not helpful in tackling these problems for India, which it is at present, it is still
reassuring that it does not intend on getting hostile and hosting China against India if the need arises.
If we want Myanmar to be helpful in dealing with insurgencies which have sanctuaries on the Myanmar side, we have to give them a stake in keeping the border
safe. Therefore, the Indian government-initiated cross-border projects like the Tamu-Kalewa highway, Tamanthi River hydroelectricity and offshore blocks in Bay
of Bengal and the A1 and A7 gas blocks in Arakan region become important. India needs to push for infrastructure and energy projects in Myanmar. Since 1997,
when the Myanmar army conducted a large scale operation against NSCN (K) and ULFA camps around the border areas, Myanmar’s attitude has been very positive
on anti-insurgency operations along the border.

 

[asad71]

Arakan FFs tricked by RAW into Andaman Islands with Kyang Raja still rot in Indian captivity - that is, those who were not shot in cold blood.



Dear friend

Campaign Success!

34 resistance fighters from Burma, who had been held in prison in India for more than 13 years, despite never having committed a crime, were released this month.

Burma Campaign UK and other organisations worldwide have been campaigning for their release and in February this year, 38 organisations in 18 countries took part in a global day of action in support of the 34.

They were arrested 13 years ago on Landfall Island by the Indian Military. They appear to have been tricked by a rogue Indian Military intelligence official, who had told them they could land there with the permission and support of the military. These thirty-four resistance fighters never intentionally broke any Indian law. They thought they were in India with the permission of the Indian government.

The thirty-four come from two ethnic nationalities in Burma, Arakanese and Karen, which face persecution from the dictatorship ruling Burma. We are now working to make sure they are guaranteed safety and support, and that they will not be deported back to Burma. We are approaching European countries that may offer them sanctuary.

Political prisoners on hunger strike
Nearly 30 political prisoners, including seven women and three Buddhist Monks, are staging hunger strikes to demand better prison conditions.

Today, the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (AAPP) reported that 7 of the political prisoners who have been on a hunger strike in Insein Prison have been placed in solitary confinement in military dog cells, which are small cells where dogs are usually kept and notorious for brutal torture and extreme punishment.

AAPP has also learnt that the other political prisoners who have been on hunger strike may be transferred to remote prisons as a punishment.

On 16 May, Burma’s new dictator, Thein Sein, announced that all prisoners would have their sentences reduced by one year, and that those on death row would have their sentences commuted to life imprisonment. This was designed to avoid releasing senior opposition leaders, many of whom were given sentences of 65 years or more after the pro-democracy uprising in 2007. One political prisoner is serving a 104 year sentence.

There had been speculation that there would be a mass prisoner amnesty, which happens regularly in Burma. However, Thein Sein is increasingly showing himself to be as or more hard-line than former dictator Than Shwe. In the first few months of becoming dictator, Than Shwe first acknowledged that there were political prisoners, and then released 427 political prisoners. Thein Sein’s government denies political prisoners even exist.

You can take action to help free political prisoners here:
http://www.burmacamp...risoners-action

 

[asad71]

1. Shyam Saran has been an outstanding diplomat for his nation. His grasp of the subject, ie, India's interests in Burma, is remarkable.

2.A leaders of the Karen Freedom Fighters with close ties with the Arakanese and particularly Muslims, Khaing Raza was executed by R&AW alongside 6 of his senior colleagues at Fortress Andaman. Of the group lured in by RAW, 31 were released by the Supreme Court of India after CBI could not substantiate the charges of gun-running and waging war against India against them. Three of them still remain in jail, while two others have died over the years. This was the infamous Op Leech of RAW.

3. As a sequel to this incident where RAW misused IN resources, IN Chief of the time developed serious differences with Def Minister George Fernandez. The IN Chief Adm Vishnu Bhagwat, was fired - the first such case in India. George was always a supporter of the Burmese freedom-fighters, and had in fact provided some of them with office space in his house.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Interesting.

The Defence Minister and RAW are apparently of different Govts and the world!!

 

[Zabaniyah]

‘Maybe Myanmar is our Pakistan’

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

OK I am slow.

What does the cartoon indicate?

What is the Chinese man with a bag of Indian Rs with a cow behind signify?

And why is the apparently Myanmar woman holding a bouquet from India?

And Uncle Sam behind her?

Who is this pinstriped suit myopic chap who appears to have walked over the Myanmar lady even while she was standing, if one goes by the footprints doing?

 

[LaBong]

OK I am slow.

What does the cartoon indicate?

What is the Chinese man with a bag of Indian Rs with a cow behind signify?

And why is the apparently Myanmar woman holding a bouquet from India?

And Uncle Sam behind her?

Who is this pinstriped suit myopic chap who appears to have walked over the Myanmar lady even while she was standing, if one goes by the footprints doing?

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

OK I am slow.

What does the cartoon indicate?

What is the Chinese man with a bag of Indian Rs with a cow behind signify?

And why is the apparently Myanmar woman holding a bouquet from India?

And Uncle Sam behind her?

Who is this pinstriped suit myopic chap who appears to have walked over the Myanmar lady even while she was standing, if one goes by the footprints doing?

bwahhahhahaha