The people of Myanmar feel betrayed by India’

After he was released on bail for this 'non-violent hijacking', Myint has lived mostly in Delhi, from where he runs Mizzima News, one the most important independent news sources on Myanmar and a vocal supporter of the pro-democracy movement there. As his country is once again rocked by a wave of protests and the ensuing military crackdown, Myint speaks to Sajai Jose on the present situation in Myanmar, and the Indian government’s position on the issue.

In the last few days, there seems to be a lull in the Myanmar protests. What exactly is the current situation?
There no more protests in Yangon because the security forces have taken complete possession of the streets, and brutally clamped down on demonstrators. They’ve surrounded monasteries, and arrested monks and students. There have been rumours that the army tried to infiltrate the groups of monks, but these are not confirmed. What’s confirmed is that monks are still being arrested in large numbers, de-robed, and some of them are being sentenced to as much as 6 years in jail. We have reliable information that within the regime itself, there was some dispute between the generals themselves, with one section opposed to the idea of killing protestors, especially monks. But we have learnt that General Than Shwe, the ruler of Myanmar, is determined to maintain a hard-line approach to protests.The situation is unpredictable

How would you compare the recent events to the landmark pro-democracy protests of 1988?
In a way, the recent events were a repeat of ‘88. At that time, even parts of the military defected to join the protestors. The size of demonstrations were smaller. The regime applied a new strategy this time; to crackdown harshly in the capital Yangon, to take a less harsh approach in middle ground like Mandalay, and go soft in hotbeds like Pakokku. The protestors too used different tactics this time– you could call it guerilla protesting – they would gather in one place rapidly and start a demonstration, and when they’re attacked by the troops they would quickly disperse and then gather in another place.

The first demonstrations were triggered by a fuel price hike, although now it is much more than that. In a country that has large oil and gas reserves, why is it such a big issue?
Myanmar has gas and oil reserves, but no facilities to refine it. So the government sells it in its crude form, and for Myanmar’s own use, they have to buy refined oil and gas from other countries. Two years ago, the government hiked fuel prices by 200% but there were only minor protests. This time, they increased prices by 500% for natural gas, and more than double for petrol and diesel, and that too, without warning. Unexpectedly, people found that transport charges had gone up.

Now, minor protests had always been happening in Myanmar, calling on the junta for dialogue, to lower commodity prices, to release political prisoners and so on, that was nothing new. But this time, the protestors were joined by the ‘88 generation’, the popular student leaders of the 1988 protests, many of whom were arrested and served up to 10 and 15 years in jail. Now out of jail and once again active in the movement, they were the ones who catalysed the protests. They marched with the common people, and the demonstrations were completely peaceful. The government beat up monks who marched with them in Pakokku, and student leaders were arrested, but this only got more people involved in the protests.

When the whole world condemned the junta using strong words, a democratic India talked about ‘non-interference’. What’s your view on this? And what about Murli Deora’s trip to Yangon?
The protests were sparked off by the oil price hike, and in the middle of that, Murli Deora flew in to sign an oil deal with the regime! It’s ridiculous. You have to remember that India was one of the first countries to support the pro-democracy movement in its early days; and the Indian government gave the Jawaharlal Nehru Award to Aung San Suu Kyi. But after they made a deal with the junta, India cut off all ties with the pro-democracy forces. They don’t recognize the opposition leaders anymore, or the government in exile. Now, the people in Myanmar understand India’s compulsions to have ties with the junta, they know India has to protect its national interests. But India is not just working with the, India is supporting the generals, financing the generals, defending them in the international arena. So the people of Myanmar, and especially the political opposition, feel that India has let them down. They feel betrayed by the Indian government.

What are these ‘compulsions’ you mention?
I would argue that India’s Myanmar policy is not working, even in terms of national interest. There are three things. First, the need to counter Chinese influence in the region. Since 1988, China has a heavy presence in Myanmar, which India is has been trying to counter with little success; China has had the upper hand for over a decade. Meanwhile, the junta is playing both these countries against each other. The second factor is the need for military cooperation, due to the presence of insurgents from India’s Northeast in Myanmar. The junta takes advantage of this, and occasionally they make symbolic crackdowns on insurgents to keep India happy. But they don’t attack the big groups like ULFA and PLF.

India has always given specific information; here are the camps, these are the leaders, and they say, we’ll get back to you, and do nothing about it. When they’re asked about it, they say we have no weapons, and India has to give them weapons; this despite spending nearly half the national budget on arms. So, India is being played, and to this date, India hasn’t got any effective military cooperation from Myanmar. The third factor is trade and India’s need for Myanmarese resources like oil. But there too India is the loser. For Myanmar, India is the 4th largest importer, while India has a huge deficit in trade with Myanmar. So even from the point of view of realpolitik, of strategic national interest, India is getting a bad deal with the junta.

How do you think this will affect the relationship between the two countries?
Both countries have a very long historical relationship. Ask anyone in Myanmar, and they’ll tell you about Subhash Chandra Bose, about Nehru and Gandhi. Likewise, Aung San Suu Kyi is known to most Indians. But India’s current Myanmar policy has come not just at the expense of principles; it has also damaged the relationship between the people. The current feeling of betrayal is not a good thing for the future relationship of India and Myanmar. Sooner or later, there will be a democratic government in Myanmar. What will happen to India-Myanmar friendship then? Because the people who now feel betrayed by India will be in power then. Now, I’m not saying India should cut off all ties with the regime, but they should also extend some support to the genuine pro-democracy movement that is happening there. India has no comprehensive Myanmar policy; the current policy is very short-sighted.

How about the Chinese position – doesn’t it too amount to tacit support to the junta?
China is not giving ‘tacit support’ to the junta, they’re giving open support. And they’ve always done that, for more than a decade. According to our figures, in 1990, they gave the junta 1.2 billion dollars worth of arms. Over the past few years, they have signed over 200 Memoranda of Understanding with the junta for all kinds of projects. But the significant thing is that the Chinese are interacting with the opposition groups as well, like Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy. It was the Chinese ambassador who first congratulated the NLD when they won the elections in 1990. This is the difference between India’s and China’s approach to Myanmar.

Parties like NLD seem to have only a marginal role to play in the current protests, which are led mostly by students and monks. What’s the reason for this?
The political parties do play a role, especially the young leaders. In the case of the NLD, the leadership, especially the central committee members, have all become old, many of them have been put in jail, several are in exile, and as you know, Aung San Suu Kyi is under house, although she has the support of almost all the sections of Myanmarese society. But they’ve been issuing statements of support, working with other groups like the ‘88 Generation’ – the widely respected group of student leaders who led the pro-democracy protests in 1988. The fact is, the NLD is largely ineffective, and incapable of holding itself together without Suu Kyi, who is a very courageous, very dynamic leader. The junta knows this, and takes advantage of this.

How about the armed groups. There are several groups still fighting in the border areas. Have they tried to take advantage of the protests?
The armed struggle is still going on. Now there are two sets of groups, the first, that has struck a cease-fire with the government and attended the government’s National Convention, where they were basically told that “you can speak, but we don’t care what you have to say”. Groups like the Kachin Independence Organisation - earlier supported by India – had demanded autonomy but was ignored. They were forced into cease-fire, since they lost support from across the border. Now the junta gives such groups business contracts and other things. But other groups like KNU – Karen National Union – are still fighting, although their strength too has dwindled due to lack of support from outside. We have received reports that they took advantage of the recent shifting of troops to Yangon and attacked them and inflicted casualties. Some groups have issued statements supporting the protests, but the fact is that none of them have the fighting capacity any more to take on the military.

The monks play a central role in Myanmar society, and they’re now the key figures in the protests…
Once people saw the monks being beaten in public, it caused widespread outrage. The soldiers too are Buddhists. But the monks have always been involved in the pro-democracy movement. But after the 1990 crackdown, the pro-democracy groups among monks were in disarray, and many went into exile. But when the monks started to come together again, the government, from ‘94 onwards, has been trying to woo them, trying to control the ranks by and rewarding the leaders of the top sanghas, but obviously it hasn’t worked. This time, the leading monks rejected the approaches made by the government to ask them to rein in the monks.

There is a Myanmarese ‘government in exile’ that functions from abroad. You yourself are a dissident in exile, having lived in India for many years. What has been your experience like?
Most dissident activity is based in Thailand, as there are more than a million Myanmarese immigrants there. The rest are mostly in India, the US and so on. In Delhi there are about 1800 Myanmarese refugees who play an active role in the pro-democracy movement. With the growing relationship between the Indian government and the junta, there have been some attempts to curb our activities. For example, I can live here as a refugee, but I cannot get a work permit, get a bank account or a ration card. And naturally, the Myanmar embassy doesn’t like what we’re doing, our journalistic activities. But because India is a democracy, we get support from the media, civil society and others.

The media, and the Internet have played a big role in the protests...
The junta censored news, and blocked the Internet repeatedly. But there has been a huge contribution from ‘citizen journalists’, ordinary people, mostly youngsters, blogging about the events, taking pictures and videos of the protests and the military crackdown. At the peak of the protests, I was getting about 300 emails a day from such sources. Many young people have for some time perfected the skills of bypassing the government servers that control the Internet, and now they’re putting those skills to use. Short-wave radio also played a key role.