Turning back the pages: an appraisal of India’s Look East Policy

While addressing the East Asia Summit in Nay Pyi Taw in November, 2014, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said “Since entering office six months ago, my government has moved with a great sense of priority and speed to turn our Look East Policy into Act East Policy”. This turning of Look East into Act East does not mean that ‘Look East’ policy lacked, but it signifies its souring accomplishments which made the government to even increase the arena of this policy into ‘Move East’.

India’s Look East policy has been an effort to cultivate extensive economic and strategic relations with the nations of Southeast Asia in order to foster its standing as a regional power and to provide a counterweight to the strategic influence of the People’s Republic of China. Initiated in 1991, it has marked a strategic shift in India’s perspective of the world. Developed and enacted during the government of Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao, this policy has been rigorously pursued by all the successive administrations, irrespective of the party which came into power.

Ever since the Sino-Indian war of 1962, China and India have always been strategic competitors in South and East Asia. China has cultivated close commercial and military relations with India’s neighbour and rival Pakistan and competed for influence in Nepal and Bangladesh. After Deng Xiaoping’s rise to power in China in 1979, China began reducing threats of expansionism and in turn cultivated extensive trade and economic relations with Asian nations. China became the closest partner and supporter of the Military rule of Burma, which had been condemned by  the international community. In contrast, during the Cold War, India had a relatively hesitant relationship with many states in Southeast Asia and diplomatic relations with Southeast Asia were given a comparatively low priority. Then why a gradual increase in intimacy with the eastern neighbours occured?

‘Neighbours can’t be changed, so it is better to be friends with them’. This quotation applies for our homes as well as for the nations. Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and South-east Asian nations are small, have lesser resources ,in an overall context, than India; but from strategic perspective they are of extreme importance. Strengthening of ties with these neighbours is useful for all, as trade and efficient flow of goods across the border require less cost of transportation than the trade with other distant countries.  When it comes to east, Myanmar stands as the most promising partner. Although bilateral relations were stagnated with the military regime, India’s policy changed in 1993, making friendly overtures to the military junta. India signed trade agreements and increased its investments in Burma; although private sector activity remains low, India’s state corporations have landed lucrative contracts for industrial projects and the construction of major roads and highways, pipelines and upgrading of ports. Apart from this, India has also increased its competition with China over the harnessing of Burma’s significant oil and natural gas reserves, trying to establish a major and stable source of energy for its fast growing domestic needs. This trade with Myanmar is also countering Chinese monopoly over Burmese resources and reducing India’s dependence on oil-rich Middle Eastern nations. Although China remains Burma’s largest military supplier, India has seriously offered to train Burma’s military personnel and has sought their cooperation in curbing separatist militants and the heavy drug trafficking affecting much of  North-eastern part of India. China’s winning of contracts harnessing more than 2.88–3.56 trillion cubits of natural gas in the Rakhine State and development of naval and surveillance installations along Burma’s coast and the Coco Islands has provoked great concern and anxiety in India, which has stepped up its investment in port development, energy, transport and military sectors.

Apart from Myanmar, India has also established strong commercial, cultural and military ties with the Philippines, Singapore, Vietnam and Cambodia. These friendships are all the results of the Look East policy. India signed free trade agreements with Sri Lanka and Thailand and stepped up its military cooperation with them as well. It has numerous free trade agreements with East Asian economies, including a ‘Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement’ with Singapore and an ‘Early Harvest Scheme’ with Thailand, while it is negotiating agreements with Japan, South Korea, and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member states. These initiatives have widened the market for goods as well as the choice of a consumer. Ties have been strengthened with Taiwan, Japan and South Korea over common emphasis on democracy, human rights and strategic interests. South Korea and Japan remain amongst the major sources of foreign investment in India.

Commerce with South and East Asian nations accounts for almost an astounding 45% of India’s foreign trade. Although its efforts have met with considerable success, India lacks behind China in trade as well as other aspects of relation in the Eastern countries. India’s cultivation of friendly relations with the military regime of Burma and its reluctance to criticise or pressure it over human rights violations and suppression of democracy has evoked much criticism at home and abroad. But the contributions of the Look East policy ought to be recognised and praised as it has played a significant role in improving ties with the east.

ASEAN-India Strategic Partnership: A review on Connectivity Cooperation

The ASEAN-India relations that focus on the strategic partnership seem to be responding to the power shifts in the international system, as India tries to position itself as an important player in Southeast Asia. Interestingly, the words of India’s first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru in the Discovery of India (1944) seem truer than never before. To him, “The Pacific is likely to take the place of the Atlantic in the future as the nerve centre of the world. Though not directly a Pacific state, India will inevitably exercise an important influence there. India will also develop as the Centre of economic and strategic importance in a part of the world which is going to develop in the future.” It is in these foundations, that India’s foreign policy despite changes in government reflects continuity in its engagement with the world, particularly the eastern neighbours.

Before going further, it is to be noted that India has close bi-lateral relations with each of the ASEAN member countries and unlike other close neighbours, India and ASEAN has ‘no irritants’ in their relationship. Over the years, the ASEAN-India relations has grown from Sectoral Dialogue partnership in 1992 to a full dialogue partnership in 1995 and subsequently to a summit level interaction, with the first ASEAN-India Summit being held in 2002 in Phnom Penh. Since then it has been held annually. It is important to point out from beginning, that the signing of “Long Term Cooperative Partnership for Peace and Prosperity” with ASEAN at the third ASEAN-India summit in the Laotian capital, Vientiane 30^th November 2004, is considered as the corner stone of India’s Look East Policy. Apart from that, an intensifying India’s engagement with ASEAN is observed under the leadership of former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh when in December 2012, New Delhi hosted the ASEAN-India Commemorative Summit to mark the twenty years of its association, thus upgrading the India-ASEAN relationship to a Strategic Partnership. At the 12^th ASEAN-India meeting at Nay Pyi Taw, the External Foreign Minister, Sushma Swaraj, remarked that “The ASEAN-India strategic partnership owes its strength to the fact that our ‘Look East’ to ASEAN meets your ‘Look West’ towards India.” Similarly, Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his remarks at the same summit ‘reinforced his confidence in the India-ASEAN Strategic Partnership.’

As observed, the present international politics reflect a deeper interdependence of strategic partners between states. Writing in the Hindu newspaper, Nirupama Subramanian define ‘Strategic Partnership’ as those that, “are commonly associated with defense or security related issues, but a survey of formal strategic partnerships around the world reveal they can also be quite a hold-all, covering a wide range in bi-lateral relations, from defense to education, economic relations including trade, investment and banking.” The former Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh in 2012, when the ASEAN-India relations was upgraded to Strategic Partnership, points out that connectivity is the strategic priority in India-ASEAN relationships also adding the importance of digital links. Likewise, the strategic partnership as mentioned by the ASEAN leader, General Minh, focuses on improvement of people to people contact, expansion of transport and linkages, trade investments, development of communication technology, social and cultural exchanges and sharing of knowledge and culture and education. But priority change is stated by the present Prime Minister Modi in the 12^th ASEAN-India summit, 2014, as he advocates more for the Information Highways or so called as the ‘I-Highways’ than physical connectivity. As quoted, “However, in this age, more than physical connectivity, we need Information Highways or i-ways. My experience is that even where road connectivity is poor, we can create vast economic opportunities and employment through i-ways.”

However, it is crucial to point out that North-East India which is viewed as “the gateway to Southeast Asia,” physical connectivity is as important as the I-Highways. It is through physical connectivity that people-to people-contact, trade promotion, and other activities can take place. Proper physical connectivity through roads, railways, highways, etc., can help in promoting the ‘Made in India’ initiative, as improved connectivity will reduce costs and promotes supply. The projects like India–Myanmar–Thailand Trilateral Highway (IMTTH), The  Delhi–Hanoi Railway Link (DHRL),The Kaladan-Multimodal Transit Transport Project (KMTTP) in Myanmar which envisages connectivity between Indian ports and Sittwe port, and road and inland waterway links from Sittwe to India’s NER, the Mekong–India Economic Corridor (MIEC) which involves integrating the four Mekong countries, namely, Ho Chi Minh City (Vietnam) with Dawei (Myanmar) via Bangkok (Thailand) and Phnom Penh (Cambodia) and further linking to Chennai in India are crucial physical connectivity for leveraging ASEAN-India Strategic Partnership.

The other point worth highlighting is, as the Chinese are way ahead in the construction of road and railways and expanding towards South East Asia, it is therefore imperative that there should be a tangible improvement in the physical connectivity in the North East Region. Such improvement includes better connectivity within the region itself; and between the region and the rest of India. It is only when locating North East at the centre to India’s ‘Look East’ and ‘Act East’ policy that ASEAN-India strategic relations can be realized to its logical end.

With the new government starting its work on the present ASEAN-India relations, the full assessment on the ASEAN-India strategic partnership on the impact on global politics is too early to be commented upon. However, since the policy language has more or less been same, the present government needs to prove its mettle by cementing the work at the ground-level with the talks. What is observed is that the need of the hour is that a growing and increasingly confident India, should focus on the connectivity both physically from the North East region of India, maritime connectivity in the South and also I-Highways should be upgraded. It needs to move from rhetoric strategic partnership to a pragmatic strategic partnership.

Thus, for the success of ASEAN-India strategic partnership, a lot will depend on the ability to follow up at the ground level on the policies endorsed in various summits, dialogues, and other high-level meetings and engagements. As former Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh points out, the success of any India’s foreign policy, depend not only on the Ministry of External Affairs alone, but other ministries as well which need to do the follow-up, be it the Ministry of Road Transport or Highways or Shipping. Thus, the Central Government in coordination with the concerned Ministry and state governments needs to coordinate in tandem to get better dividends through this ASEAN-India strategic partnership.

Caroline Maninee
Research Scholar
Centre for Political Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi

Resurrecting Asia’s rice bowl: Burma

The wrath of time has spared none in the past nor it will in the future – be it humans, the extinct dinosaurs, ancient civilizations, cultures or even the modern nations. From time to time, it has cruelly struck mankind and changed the course of geopolitics. Since its independence in 1948 to the present, Myanmar has seen it all. It has suffered one of the most catastrophic identity crisis in the South East Asian region in terms of economy, governance style, ethnic riots, production of methamphetamine or even cross border trafficking. The transition of Rangoon from world’s former leading rice exporter to a ‘failed state’ has been quite much of a tragic blow to the Burmese policy makers who strictly restrained the nations’ progress during the military rule. After an era of global sanctions and isolation, Myanmar finally began re-engaging with the global economy in 2012 opening doors for foreign investment in rural, energy and agricultural sector.

2012 also considered as the ‘Year of Liberalization’ for Myanmar fetched investments from Asian Development Bank and several other international institutions which sanctioned millions of dollars in mining, tourism, infrastructure development and agricultural sector. For Myanmar’s economy, agriculture plays an indispensable role contributing over one third of GDP and two thirds of employment. With the reputation of a former world’s rice bowl, Myanmar’s fertile lands, diverse agro-ecological areas and rich natural biosphere reserves provide a prosperous fortune for its agricultural and plantation sector. Being an agricultural and rural economy, the new government of Myanmar after 2011 has spontaneously reformed and reviewed its rice policies, stressing on concerns like regional & national food security and green economy.

In the past South East Asian countries like China, Vietnam or Laos have all set an example of a new multi-modal transitional economy pressing the importance of rural and agricultural sector for significant economic reforms. It is clear that Myanmar’s fragile economy is in a crucial need of these reforms from its promising rural sector with agriculture as the lead. However there is yet a lot to be done in reforming the rural sector policies of the country.

Despite its potential for development, the agricultural sector of the country for decades has suffered from lack of infrastructure, rural indebtedness, power crisis, under developed banking systems, lack of agricultural research institutions, infrastructural connectivity, absence of agricultural investments and others. As being stated by leading economists, India’s promising investments like Indo-Myanmar Friendship road, followed by India Burma Thailand trilateral highway and Kaladan Multi Modal projects which will be operational by 2016 can bring a serious boom in Myanmar’s agricultural sector providing infrastructural connectivity, investments in energy sector and a double fold increase in its imports hence boosting bilateral trade. Myanmar is currently a leading exporter of pulses in the Asian continent and has an open-hearted objective of reclaiming its former ‘worlds’ rice bowl’ title. However, it is very much feared that the present agricultural policies endorsed by the government to intensify rice production (i.e foreign investments and modern technology), might in future prioritize only agri business and large scale commercial farming, putting completely aside the smallholder section.

The main aspect of this agricultural policy which deserves emphasis is promoting small holder agriculture in Myanmar as a medium of inclusive growth. With the current agrarian structure, the low level of irrigation, unavailability of labor and lack of economics of scale in rice and pulses production, small holder agriculture is more efficient in Myanmar for a long term basis.

It is an undeniable fact that ‘reciprocity’ or ‘mutuality’ is the founding pillar of Indo Myanmar bilateral relations. While Myanmar’s strategic location and importance in India’s Look East Policy makes it an indispensable neighbor, India’s vast market, labor pool, potential for high economic growth, reformist policy measures and expertise in knowledge based sectors can bring a revolution in Myanmar’s’ agricultural sector.

Indo-Myanmar Ties: The next road to South East Asia?

February 13th, 2001 was marked as an indispensable day in the history of Indo-Myanmar relations where the then Indian External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh initiated the proposal of the first ‘Indo- Myanmar Friendship Road’ or the ‘Indo Myanmar Thailand trilateral highway’ along with the former Construction Minister Saw Tun of Myanmar. This highway project which will be fully operational by 2016 has often been remarked as one of the most effective strategic moves by India to forge closer ties with Myanmar as well as enhance its own regional influence in the South East Asian continent countering the Chinese leadership. Over these years, Myanmar has been supportive in India’s struggle to counter insurgency in North East India, hence adding extra weightage to its strategic importance. Myanmar is the second largest neighboring country of India and maintains excellent economic, strategic and diplomatic ties.

Bilateral trade between both the countries has expanded significantly from US $ 12.4 million in 1980-81 to US $1070.88 million in 2010-11. Since its post globalization period, India has emerged as Myanmar’s fourth largest trading partner after Thailand, China and Singapore and second largest export market after Thailand. At the institutional level, the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) and the Union of Myanmar Federation of Chambers of Commerce and Industry (UMFCCI) has mutually agreed and signed many MoUs to review and set policy objectives for bilateral trade between both the countries. Rangoon has always been a centre point for New Delhi’s ‘Look East policy’ which was recently retitled as the ‘Act East policy’ by the present Indian Prime Minister, Mr. Narendra Modi during the East Asia Summit held in Myanmar.

The recent diplomatic meet of the Indian Prime Minister and Myanmar’s President at the East Asia Summit in Nay Pyi Taw in November’14 which they also called as meet of brother countries has reinstated Myanmar’s strategic importance for India’s new ‘Act East policy’.

Another important objective of this meet was to discuss future perspective of direct air links and the Indo Myanmar Thailand trilateral highway and the Kaladan multi modal transport project which is considered to be an industrial boom for both the countries.

Myanmar often has been sandwiched between the power struggle of India and China, which have both seemingly well established closer ties with Myanmar based on ‘strategic interests’. New Delhi’s prime interest has always been to avoid future Chinese naval influence in the Bay of Bengal which straddles Myanmar. However Beijing has assisted Myanmar in upgrading its naval defense capabilities and setting electronic listening ports along the Bay of Bengal, one of them reportedly said to be in a close proximity with an Indian defense facility. New Delhi also keeps a close watch over the Coco Islands in Myanmar, where Beijing has reportedly said to upgrade its radar and naval auxiliary facilities.

Amid of the present blooming ties between both the countries, one aspect which is still argued by international policy makers is the ‘pragmatic shift’ of Indian foreign policy towards Myanmar and its de facto military rulers. Being a country which itself gained independence after an era long British suppression and prioritized democratic values far ahead of strategic interests, India was vehemently criticized for all of sudden supporting the military regime in Myanmar to save its ‘national interests’.The Indian Embassy in Rangoon and the All India Radio have a vast history of supporting the pro democratic opposition groups and activists like the Nobel Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi during the uprising in the late 80’s. It indeed has been a very reluctant ride for the policy makers in New Delhi from an era of idealism to the realm of realpolitik. This ‘pragmatic shift’ has been decreed by Myanmar’s pro democratic activists who accuse India of surrendering her ideals.

Having a huge influence of Buddhism in majority of the country, Myanmar is also culturally a very important region of the Indian Diaspora. The future of Indo-Myanmar ties depends on the approach of Indian foreign policy in handling an ally which is different in principles, non-believer of democratic values but strategically very important.