As soon as it was obvious that Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) had won an overwhelming majority in Myanmar’s multi-party election, Prime Minister Narendra Modi called the woman revered as “The Lady” and conveyed that “India stands ready to assist in Myanmar’s progress and development.”
It was not a routine congratulatory message, but rather an expression of interest by India to shape the democratic evolution of a neighbouring country that is the doorway to Southeast Asia.
The stunning comeback for Ms Suu Kyi, who was robbed of a similar win in 1990 and, subsequently, subjected to 15 years of imprisonment and harsh crackdowns on her party by the country’s military rulers, has evoked relief and satisfaction in a naturally sympathetic India.
Ms Suu Kyi was educated in India and has often said that her worldviews are inspired by its pluralism and competitive democracy. Many Indians hold her in high esteem as a contemporary Nelson Mandela-like figure whose non-violent struggle was based on the vision of Mahatma Gandhi.
India’s generosity in sheltering Myanmarese refugees, including ethnic minorities and NLD functionaries, fleeing military persecution is also recalled with fondness by people of varied backgrounds in Myanmar.
Yet, towards the later part of ruthless rule by a military junta from 1988 to 2011, India deliberately sidled up to Myanmar’s Army to counter anti-India secessionist militant groups sheltering across the border. Since the junta was a client regime of China, which used to finance and arm rebels from India’s northeastern region within Myanmar’s territory, the Indian government also hoped to shrink the Chinese shadow by engaging with the Myanmarese military.
New Delhi justified this policy on pragmatic national security grounds and rebuffed appeals from Indian civil society and human rights groups to push for democratisation of Myanmar. The disconnect between the official Indian position on Myanmar and the moralistic concerns of Indian social actors was reflected in Ms Suu Kyi’s remark in 2012, that she was “saddened that India had drawn away from us during our most difficult days”, while insisting she never lost faith in the Indian people.
Now, though, with Ms Suu Kyi proving her legendary survival skills and resilience in the election and besting the generals, most of whom could not even win their individual parliamentary seats in an NLD wave, it is no longer a zero-sum game proposition for India to either be with the Myanmar military or the democratisers.
New Delhi has to invest much more in making up for lost ground with the NLD, while not discontinuing security-based exchanges with the Myanmar Army. This dual-track approach is necessitated by the refusal of the Myanmarese military to quit politics or relinquish its command over the economy and policymaking. Military higher-ups have not lost sleep over the debacle of their favoured Union Solidarity and Development Party (USPD) in the elections, as they took out preemptive insurance by reserving an “eminent domain” for the Army, not just in Parliament but also in key state institutions and economic realms. The Army-imposed Constitution bars Ms Suu Kyi from becoming President and reserves the most powerful ministries of defence, interior and border affairs for the military.
Looking ahead, Ms Suu Kyi faces two challenges, viz. managing the nation’s affairs via a loyal “proxy President” while technically being just a member of Parliament, and fulfilling the expectations of Myanmarese people for civil liberties, peace, federalism and economic development, despite lacking full civilian control over state institutions.
The NLD’s anthem has a stirring line — “Go, go, go away dictatorship”. But what Ms Suu Kyi has secured is a hybrid regime that is more democratic than that of the USPD, but a less-than-perfect democracy she and her people yearn for.
As a compassionate Buddhist who practices embracing one’s enemies, “The Lady” aims to convince the incorrigible Army establishment to work together with her in the interest of Myanmar’s long-suppressed citizens. To support her monumental cause, New Delhi must not only promote the Indian Army’s security coordination with Myanmar’s military, but, more importantly, assist in moulding a successful multi-ethnic federal polity by training the next generation of non-violent activists to follow Ms Suu Kyi, who is now a septuagenarian.
India has a plethora of genuine grassroots organisations involved in training of community workers in participatory governance, democracy and peace and conflict resolution. They can be roped in by our government for specific initiatives to boost India-Myanmar people-to-people ties.
In foreign policy, the military-backed USPD government had been gradually distancing Myanmar from China’s sphere of influence in the last five years. Public opinion in Myanmar also turned increasingly bitter towards China’s plundering of their natural wealth and its exploitation of ethnic minority resentments to sustain hegemony.
Under the emerging double authority system, where Ms Suu Kyi and the military will henceforward share power, the trend of asserting Myanmar’s independence from China is likely to advance. India should be strengthening Ms Suu Kyi’s diplomatic hand to ensure that Myanmar’s residual China tilt weakens further.
It is only by being more proactive on the democracy front that India can carve out its own niche that is distinct from China, whose economic and strategic footprint in Myanmar remains formidable. Traditional Indian diplomatic lethargy and reluctance to “export democracy to other countries” has incurred costs and hurt its image at crucial junctures.
The irony of the world’s largest democracy failing to adequately play the democracy card in countries where it is strategically called for should not be prolonged under the Modi government, which has been pursuing an agile and ambitious foreign policy by breaking new ground in India’s foreign relations.
With Ms Suu Kyi at the pinnacle of her political career, the organs of the new government in Myanmar answerable to her will prioritise social development and nation-building, two areas where India has a comparative advantage as a developing country with a successful democracy.
The positive election outcome in Myanmar has opened space for India as a pivotal enabler of its slow, ongoing transition to democracy. The writer is a professor and dean of the Jindal School of International Affairs
