The Road to Moreh
January 6, 2012 by Team SAISA
Filed under foreign policy, geopolitics
Indo Myanmar relations in the recent times have been viewed in the Indian strategic circles as a function of Myanmar’s geography to marginalise Chinese influence and trade to get oil and gas. There then is the constituency for better relations resting on opening the land route to South East Asia and countering the ill effects of Chinese use of Myanmar, both at sea and land.
It is a known geographical fact that Myanmar is the only country that , at least theoretically, provides a land bridge to India in its quest to “act east”. All other land frontiers are virtually sealed with Pakistan and China sitting across its Western and Northern frontiers, land locking it in all directions. Purely from this geographical consideration India reversed its earlier policy of isolation of Myanmar in favour of engaging with the Junta.
A lot has happened since and Myanmar appears to be moving towards democracy with Chinese characteristics. Our earlier posts here, here and here have laboured on the need for India to Act East through Myanmar to safeguard its interests in the region vis a vis China. But can you reach out to those heights which China obviously rests on after a head start of over 30 years? Appears impossible. The debate over competition cum cooperation with China shall continue.
As per the latest book, ‘ Where China Meets India’ by Thant Mint U, “Neither India nor the countries of south-eastern Asia have so far been able to compare with what China has been offering and able to deliver. India is no further from Mandalay or even Maymyo than China, but contemporary Indian influences are practically non-existent … Will India ever become the ‘balancer’ of China in the region? … From a distance, China’s and India’s stated desires to find new links to and across Burma seem straight forward, [and] the question is only of their relative prowess. But here [in Myanmar] it was clear that it wasn’t all about Beijing and Delhi, and that Burmese fears and desires will also be a major factor in determining the future.”
It further states that “What China is lacking is its California, another coast that would provide its remote interior provinces with an outlet to the sea.”
What about India’s case for an access to South East Asia?
Apart from attempting to double its trade with Myanmar to $3 Billion by 2015, Indian initiatives to speed up the infrastructure projects at a time when the West has become sympathetic to the Burmese cause and China attempting an overreach to keep Myanmar in its orbit, are slow and tardy. The Kaladan multi modal transport corridor is still years away from completion while the ONGC Videsh has made little head way in oil exploration. The overall engagement of India lacks credibility, speed and commitment. Currently, two items — pulses and wood products — account for 97.5 per cent of Myanmar’s total exports to India. Similarly, buffalo meat and pharmaceuticals accounted for 45 per cent of India’s total exports to Myanmar.
India needs to take a deep breadth and a leap of faith in taking unilateral proactive initiatives to engage Myanmar in the field of infrastructure development both on land and at sea, oil and gas exploration, minerals, agriculture and above all in Human Resource Development – education and IT based services.The last would go a long way in building bridges by adopting a soft approach – something that India enjoys in Myanmar and China lacks.
Enough has been argued in the earlier posts on this strength of Indian civil and military diplomacy to engage Myanmar politically, economically and socially lest we have another China owned Myanmar situation on our East resembling our status with Pakistan on the West. Suu Kyi in her speeches post release has also called for a path of reconciliation rather than confrontation to see phased return of democracy to Myanmar, their style. India would do well to take lead from Syu Kyi’s statements and invest heavily into a meaningful relationship through its efforts in the field of Public Diplomacy.
The absolute apathy on the infrastructure front is evident in the conditions of India’s road to Moreh. To reach out to Myanmar this road has become the ultimate symbol of India’s commitment – potholed, neglected and delinquent.
If India is to engage earnestly with Myanmar it must build the road to Moreh – the gateway to South East Asia would then begin to open!
Related articles
- India, Myanmar to double bilateral trade to $3 b (thehindu.com)
- Time to Act “Myanmar” : Clinton Visit (southasianidea.com)
- The great game in Myanmar (thehindu.com)
- Hague Urges Freer Myanmar in Highest-Level U.K. Visit Since 1955 – Bloomberg (bloomberg.com)
- China fights back in Myanmar (globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com)
- Between China And India Lies Myanmar’s Future (npr.org)
Scathing, but does not SAARC see us a bit like the way we see the Americans as Ugly Americans? We talk big; offer unsolicited advise; have unclear policy and pathetic delivery; are hog bound with all parts of Governance making brownie points at national expense…
We have functionally lost Nepal; Bangladesh for Farakka and Teesta reasons is unhappy, Sri Lanka has gone China way, and Bhutan poised towards us but only just so.
We dump 25 pounders on Myanmar and rusted Mortars, are ambiguous towards its democratic braveheart, quake at the thought of confronting China and Look East with unseeing eyes.
We are like that only.
Sorry for this one but I have always wondered as to why do we insist on terming a land route as the “gateway to SE Asia” for a region that has always (historically) relied on sea routes for furthering their trade as well as diplomatic relations. SE Asian region is a region with a serious maritime mental makeup and frankly speaking roads do not mean much to them (as against the psyche of landed countries like ours or China).
Agreed that the road is crucial for trade (and symbolic for diplomacy) with Mynamar but are there sufficient justifications for extending the logic any further – beyond the borders of Myanmar ? You may like to think about this.
You are right. South East Asia looks at sea. But with Myanmar despite the Sittwe project, which you would have read about in earlier links on the post, India has been lethargic in opening up the land routes through a 1600KM border. This has fueled insurgencies, killed trade and reflected our absolute apathy towards creating a structural change in our relations with Myanmar.
Take China on the other hand. It is exploiting Myanmar as its South Western province for the benefit of Yunan. From Kyaukphu to Kunming Chinese pipelines, roads and rail connectivity are a sign of its commitment to overcome the Malacca dilemma.India could have developed this vital link via its land borders in addition to connecting up with sea to enter into the rice and gas bowls of Mandalay, Meiktila and on to Yangon.
The title of the post, as you rightly brought out, is more than symbolic – it reflects our lack of vision in managing our periphery better. See here for the economic implications of the road.
Could not disagree more with Manuhar.
Imagine a 12 lane super highway and Bullet Train equivalent linking India to SE Asia right up to Singapore and by fast hydrocraft to Indonesia. This is real, measurable projection of power which rivals sea connectivity. Add port Blair as the new free port at par with Singapore and suddenly we matter.
All this will happen of course, but we could have been/can still be leaders; a part we played rather well when the Brits were here.
All this will set China ablaze…if it survives its huge internal stresses that long, of course.
There is full merit for India to get closer, help Myanmar and even provide military support. The means and paths and decks have been cleared.
Till the Nuclear Deal was signed and is still to be consummated India had to toe a bit of USA’s line to be tough with the Military Junta but after Hillary’s visit and easing of restrictions on Su Ang’s party India can open up business opportunities for civilian companies with EXIM bank loans and grants as we did for Viet Nam and are doling out in Afghanistan, and open gates for military collaboration and tourism with airline connections and wean away the tourist traffic that goes to Malaysia …Mynmar is a better and cheaper destination and I speak as a visitor.