• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Josh Kurlantzick"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "South Asia",
    "India",
    "China",
    "Southeast Asia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Democracy",
    "Military"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Burma’s Buddy — India’s Craven Appeasement in Burma

While the world has focused on how China abets the Burmese generals, in recent years the policies of India, the world's largest democracy, could be described in exactly the same way, and are just as craven.

Link Copied
By Josh Kurlantzick
Published on Oct 2, 2007
Program mobile hero image

Program

South Asia

The South Asia Program informs policy debates relating to the region’s security, economy, and political development. From strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific to India’s internal dynamics and U.S. engagement with the region, the program offers in-depth, rigorous research and analysis on South Asia’s most critical challenges.

Learn More

Source: The New Republic

As protests spiral into chaos and bloodshed inside Burma, the country's giant neighbor, China, looks on with concern, worrying about a total meltdown on their borders, which could spread instability across its frontiers. After saying nothing for weeks, its senior leadership calls on the Burmese junta to act wisely, yet does not condemn their brutal crackdown or support the Burmese pro-democracy movement.

But while the world has focused on how China abets the Burmese generals, in recent years the policies of India, the world's largest democracy, could be described in exactly the same way, and are just as craven. These days, senior Indian officials buy up Burma's resources, invite the junta leaders on state visits, and even sell the Burmese military arms. As Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee recently said, according to the BBC according to the BBC, "We have strategic and economic interests to protect in Burma. It is up to the Burmese people to struggle for democracy, it is their issue." (By contrast, one of Burma's smaller neighbors, Singapore, said it was "deeply troubled" by the crisis.)

The last time Burma erupted in protest, India's position was far different. In 1988, many Indian officials expressed open support for the Burmese pro-democracy movement; Aung San Suu Kyi once lived in India, where her mother had been Burma's ambassador to Delhi. The Indian embassy in Rangoon helped protect demonstrators. In the '80s and early 1990s, India sponsored UN resolutions on Burma and provided refuge to exiled Burmese activists, where they set up NGOs like Mizzima News, which has proven essential to covering the recent protests inside Burma. Former Indian defense minister George Fernandes offered high profile backing for Burmese democracy advocates, plastering a picture of Aung San Suu Kyi to the wall of his official residence and frequently inviting exiled Burmese leaders into his home.

But over the past decade, India has done a 180-degree turn. As India's northeast has disintegrated into a hotbed of insurgency, the Indian army has become more concerned about weapons and militants entering the region along the porous, 900-mile-long Burma frontier. The Indian armed forces also worries that China may be building bases in southern Burma, part of a possible Chinese plan to extend its naval reach farther outside its near neighborhood, threatening India's navy, considered the best in the region. So, the Indians have run joint patrols with Burmese soldiers. Far more shocking, according to the Christian Science Monitor India has sold Burma tanks, helicopters, and artillery guns, among other weapons. This although the Burmese military primarily trains guns on its own people, whether protestors in Rangoon or ethnic minority groups in eastern Burma, where each year brings a new scorched-earth offensive and there are now over 600,000 internally displaced people.

At the same time, as India's economy booms and it watches China gobble up oil and gas deals around the globe, Indian leaders covet Burma's petroleum riches, which will become even more internationally important as mature fields in the Middle East decline. (Burma may have as much as 300 billion cubic meters of gas, and India itself has few domestic sources of petroleum.) India is building a network of road links to Burma, and trying to get Burma to agree to a pipeline to northeastern India. Showing its interest, in 2004 India hosted thuggish junta chief Than Shwe for a lavish state visit to India, the first by any Burmese leader in 12 years. "India and not China should be getting this gas. It is vital for the economy of eastern India," Nazib Arif, the former secretary of the Indian Chamber of Commerce, said.

Even during last week's protests India's Petroleum Minister traveled to Burma to sign production-sharing contracts, publicly showing that the demonstrations would not stop the India-Burma relationship. While the petroleum minister visited, a senior Indian official told the BBC: "We have no desire to interfere in the internal affairs of Burma," a line that echoed China's position.

Yet some Indian opinion leaders are beginning to question this unthinking support. Unlike an authoritarian state like China, India will never be able to provide the same level of blanket assistance for Burma, without criticism back in Delhi, at the United Nations, and from India's new partner, the United States, which worries about Delhi's relationship with rogues like Burma and Iran. Perhaps recognizing this, the Burmese generals still have favored Chinese oil and gas companies over their Indian competitors, inking larger deals with China.

Some Indians also realize that, if Delhi is going to compete with Beijing, it will have to emphasize its brand as the world's biggest democracy. India "should have sympathy on the Burmese people and take the initiative to pressure the military government to release political prisoners including Aung San Suu Kyi," Nirmala Deshpande, an Indian MP, told The Irrawaddy magazine last week. And The Hindu, one of India's most prominent newspapers, last week editorialized that in "this difficult struggle [the Burmese people] need every ounce of the world's support, moral as well as material." From the world's biggest democracy, it appears, they are likely to get neither

Joshua Kurlantzick is a visiting scholar of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and a special correspondent for The New Republic.

About the Author

Josh Kurlantzick

Former Visiting Scholar, China Program

A special correspondent for The New Republic, a columnist for Time, and a senior correspondent for The American Prospect, Kurlantzick assesses China’s relationship with the developing world, including Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

    Recent Work

  • In The Media
    Fighting Terrorism With Terrorists

      Josh Kurlantzick

  • Other
    Beijing’s Safari: China’s Move into Africa and Its Implications for Aid, Development, and Governance

      Josh Kurlantzick

Josh Kurlantzick
Former Visiting Scholar, China Program
Josh Kurlantzick
Political ReformDemocracyMilitarySouth AsiaIndiaChinaSoutheast Asia

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Was it Right to Boycott Eurovision?

    Five countries staged the biggest political boycott in Eurovision history over Israel’s participation. With the FIFA World Cup and other sporting or cultural touchstones on the horizon, are boycotts effective?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Abstract image of China and AI
    Article
    China’s Pivot on Global AI

    Beijing’s AI diplomacy is pivoting from infrastructure and associated technical standards toward a more comprehensive effort aimed at recrafting global norms and institutions of AI governance.

      Arindrajit Basu

  • Visualization of technology and democracy intersection
    Article
    Realizing the Potential Gains of AI-Enabled Deliberative Democracy

    Democratic institutions currently lack the capacity needed to govern AI-augmented deliberation in ways that serve democratic imperatives.

      • Micah Weinberg headshot

      Micah Weinberg

  • Article
    India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible Pathways

    A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.

      Rajiv Bhatia

  • wide shot of the city of Dakar by the water
    Commentary
    Senegal: An Island of Resilience

    During our visit, we observed a democracy that has learned from its difficult past and is working toward an even more dynamic future.

      • Sarah Yerkes

      Sarah Yerkes, Natalie Triche

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.