Senior General Than Shwe is almost certain to have his entire cabinet elected to Parliament, and the regime wishes to convey that it is relaxing its controls. The release of Suu Kyi, it hopes, will qualify it for some relaxation of economic sanctions.
Change?
Neither the regime’s tight grip on society, nor its international standing, will change substantially with Suu Kyi’s release. It is therefore essential that the junta follows up on her release with moves to engage with her on gradual political change. If the junta believes Suu Kyi has been rendered ineffective by long years of incarceration, it is mistaken. The spirited manner in which her freedom has been welcomed at home and in the world’s capitals demonstrates how indispensable she remains to Myanmar’s future.
Suu Kyi has appealed for national reconciliation. She told the BBC in an interview: ‘I don’t want to see the military falling. I want to see the military rising to dignified heights of professionalism and true patriotism. I think it’s quite obvious what the people want; the people just want better lives based on security and on freedom.’ That is the right approach. Her father, Aung San, was a soldier. The army has always been a part of Myanmar’s political life. It cannot be banished from it. But its role can be diluted by the ascendance of democratic forces.
Further, she has appealed to the world community for help.
‘This is the time for Burma when we need help.’
It is possible to speculate that she would like to see sanctions eased. As in Cuba, where sanctions have failed to remove Fidel Castro or his brother Raul, sanctions have punished the people more than the rulers. The West has consistently supported sanctions. India, however, is among those opposing sanctions, despite harsh criticism.
India’s diplomatic tightrope
Initially, India vocally supported the pro-democracy forces led by Suu Kyi. Chinese inroads into Myanmar subsequently alarmed Indian officials, and India went silent over the suppression of dissent. The situation has been so complex that when India awarded Suu Kyi the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding during a major anti-militant joint operation on the Indo-Myanmar border, Myanmar immediately withdrew from the operation in anger.
This is only one expression of India’s sympathy for Suu Kyi, who grew up in New Delhi. During a March 2006 visit to Myanmar, former President A.P.J. Abdul Kalam stated to Than Shwe, who had famously referred to Suu Kyi as ‘my daughter’, that ‘in India we respect our daughters’. The message was clear.
The diplomatic relationship between India and Myanmar has been further complicated by India’s legitimate security concerns along the 1,645km Indo-Myanmar border. Militancy and insurgency are issues in the isolated northeastern region. It has secured Myanmar’s limited, but crucial, cooperation in combating it. To be fair, Myanmar has neither encouraged militancy nor has it taken an overt pro-China line, two points on which it has proved to be a good neighbour. India did alter its tone and emphasis to ease the situation, but it has not sought to cultivate favour either on solidarity with Suu Kyi or on engaging Myanmar’s rulers.
Like Bangladesh and Myanmar’s Southeast Asian neighbours, India has walked a diplomatic tightrope, defying the West. Myanmar is one of the few issues on which it disagrees with the United States. Hence, it is hardly surprising that New Delhi ignored the mild rebuke President Barack Obama delivered during his visit. India has not rushed in with condemnation of the Myanmar election, instead calling it ‘an important step towards the national reconciliation process being undertaken by the government of Myanmar’. External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna stated, ‘As a close neighbour of Myanmar, we are confident that the release of Suu Kyi will contribute to efforts for a more inclusive approach to political change,’.
India has been criticised for working with the military regime. But the fact is that while Western governments insist on sanctions, multinational corporations from these countries have been extensively engaged in Myanmar’s development, and in exploring the largely untapped resources. According to Burma Campaign UK, over the last decade, an increasing number of international corporations have left Myanmar or declared their unwillingness to consider operating there. Some companies have withdrawn, asserting that their decision to do so was taken for ‘business’ reasons, while others have made explicit their concern regarding the political and human rights situation in Myanmar.
Neither the situation in Myanmar, nor dealing with it, is easy. It is best done without making value judgments based on political or business expediency. The world must feel concerned. But sanctions are counter-productive and need easing.
The challenges before Suu Kyi are huge. She will need to move with great caution and yet steely determination. The idealist that she is, she knows that without accompanying political changes in Myanmar her freedom will mean little.
The current impasse has persisted for far too long. The country needs to emerge from the isolation it has been in since General Ne Win’s coup d’etat of 1962. The key to Myanmar’s future lies with how much of a role Suu Kyi can play in the days ahead. Being Buddhists, Myanmars know that their salvation lies within.
Mahendra Ved is a New Delhi-based writer and columnist.
This article was originally published here in the New Strait Times on November 22, 2010.