Myanmar-in-Transition Opens more Space for India

Myanmar, during the last two years, has undergone many changes of
considerable political and strategic significance both for the domestic
as well as international audiences. These changes relate to two
important aspects – change in the political outlook of the country and
change in the dynamic of Myanmar’s engagement with the outside world.
Moreover, these changes have been driven primarily by the growing
confidence of continuance and consolidation of power within the military
leadership and its willingness to engage the outside world.
Change within Myanmar
The change within Myanmar has occurred in two key areas – change in
the outlook of the ruling regime and initiatives including
politico-constitutional reforms towards national reconciliation. First,
the government of the military regime has been replaced by a
civilian-looking regime supported by paraphernalia of political and
administrative institutions. The new constitution, adopted in 2008, has
changed the name of the country from Union of Myanmar to Republic of the
Union of Myanmar governed by a bicameral legislature. The political
model of Myanmar, in fact, follows quite closely the Indonesian model of
Pancasila Democracy under the authoritarian regime of Suharto with both
the elected and military-nominated members. The national government is
headed by a President. The government, under the new constitution, has
also set up various politico-administrative institutions, such as Union
Election Commission, Union Supreme Court, Financial Commission,
Constitutional Tribunal, and Union Civil Services Board, to facilitate
administrative and governance matters. Second, the government, since the
elections in 2010, has taken various reform measures in the direction
of gradual political relaxations and greater popular participation in
the national political processes. The government has released a few
hundred political prisoners in different phases, considered by many as a
substantial step towards reforms and democratisation. The government
released the leader of National League for Democracy, Aung San Suu Kyi
in November 2010 and has also allowed her to enter into active politics
of the country.
The NLD decided in November 2011 to re-register itself as a political
party and Aung San Suu Kyi has decided to join the political process by
contesting the by-election under the NLD platform, scheduled to be held
in April 2012. The latest step in the direction of national
reconciliation came on 13 January 2012 when the national government
announced to release more than 300 political prisoners. The national
government has taken steps towards greater accommodation of opposition
groups. Moreover, the government has also embarked on entering into
ceasefire agreements and peace processes with the ethnic insurgent
groups.
A democratising Myanmar offers the Indian government a scope for
engagement over wide-ranging issues of governance and
institution-building. The democratic India remains the largest and best
practicing democracy in its vicinity, possessing decades of experience
of managing dissent and diversity. Moreover, a democratising Myanmar
bridges the gap between India’s normative positions of pro-democracy and
its pragmatic approach of constructive engagement with the military
leadership. India, despite its engagement with the military-ruled
Myanmar, found it difficult to reconcile the domestic support for
democratic movements in Myanmar and the strategic imperative of engaging
the latter. This reconciliation can allow India to concentrate its
resources on developing relations with Naypyidaw. Finally, a
democratising Myanmar allows India to tap onto the biggest resource base
of engagement – pro-democracy leaders and support groups operating in
India. The return of these exiles to their country can further help
India strengthen its constituencies within the political leadership of
Myanmar.
India can also benefit from the possibility of greater coordination and
investment of resources and strategies in combating transnational crimes
in India’s northeast, such as armed insurgency, trafficking in drugs,
arms and human beings, and illegal cross-border migration. Moreover, the
positive changes in Myanmar may reduce the flow of illegal cross-border
movement of people that has proved to be an important carrier and
conduit of cross-border trafficking in arms and drugs and overall
instability along the border.
Myanmar Comes out of Closet
The new leadership has shown willingness to engage the wider world
and diversify the avenues of its strategic engagement. The normalisation
of political processes has further sped up Naypyidaw’s global and
regional rehabilitation. Leaders from various countries, including
important global and regional actors, have visited Naypyidaw during the
last six months. They have not only welcomed the change taking place in
Myanmar’s bodypolitik but also expressed their willingness to lift
sanctions, resume aids and assistance, and initiate cooperation over
various issues of development and governance. Both the United States and
European Union have indicated to lift the sanctions in the wake of
reform measures taken under the new leadership of Thein Sein. Moreover,
Myanmar will also be taking over as ASEAN Chair in 2014, indicating an
important trend towards the country’s regional rehabilitation and
growing global recognition of the regime, a process that can further
stir up more political reforms in the country.
Myanmar’s growing engagement with the outside world has two important
sub-texts – (a) widening horizon of Myanmar’s role as an important
factor in the great-power relations, and (b) less pressure on
India-Myanmar relations both from the West as well as from China.
Myanmar is today regarded as an important variable not only in the
Sino-Indian rivalry but also in the Sino-US rivalry. The visit of the US
Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton in January 2012 is understood as
the US attempt to break into the Chinese sphere of influence as a part
of its larger policy of re-asserting supremacy in Asia. On the other
hand, Myanmar has shown gradual detachment from its erstwhile patron –
China, indicating its desire to diversify its cooperation with other
powers.
In the face of growing domestic opposition, the Myanmarese government
scrapped the Chinese hydropower project over Myitsone river worth
US$3.6 billion. There is growing resentment within Myanmar’s leadership
as well as people against the dynamic of Myanmar-China engagement that
can be termed as neo-colonial pattern of resource-extraction by the
superior player. Myanmar’s decision to engage the wider world allows
more space for India to engage the country. While the West is going to
be more reconciliatory of India’s engagement with Myanmar, China will be
less wary of Naypyidaw’s engagement with India and more of the growing
role of the US in the country.
In other words, India can engage Myanmar more freely and widen the
arena of engagement including defence and security cooperation.
Nevertheless, the opening up of Myanmar also poses an important
challenge to India’s engagement with Myanmar. In the presence of other
players, India has to be more attentive to Myanmar’s concerns and
proactive in its policy initiatives for bilateral and multilateral
cooperation. Otherwise, India might see the strategic space being taken
over by other players both from the West as well as the East.