'Ne Win kept good relations with the Nehru family even though he did nothing to do business with India.'
'When Indira Gandhi was assassinated, Ne Win took off to an 
undisclosed destination, leading to rumours that he had gone to India.'
'But we had no knowledge of his visit and days later, we were
 told that he was so struck with grief that he went into meditation on 
an island.'
Ambassador T P Sreenivasan on mysterious Myanmar.
 T
The designs in a kaleidoscope 
change at every turn in most unpredictable ways. No design is permanent 
and no two designs are the same. Such has been the fate of Burma, now 
known by its ancient name, Myanmar.
Even in the seventy years of independence, the design has changed 
many times beyond recognition. It is again in a cusp of change, as the 
world watches with bated breath.
Aung San Su Kyi has already won a convincing victory and she believes
 that she will lead the country, even if she cannot be president till a 
constitutional amendment is made. One never knows whether another design
 will unravel and throw the country into uncertainty again.
If anyone wishes to gaze into the crystal ball and predict the 
future, there is a pathfinder in the scholarly tome by Rajiv Bhatia, 
India-Myanmar Relations. Changing Contours
 (Routledge). After years of living in Myanmar, studying it and 
researching on it, he has attempted to decipher the several designs in 
the kaleidoscope.
His travels in Myanmar were not just on planes, but 'in the company 
of a variety of thinkers, travellers, scholars, authors and leaders, who
 studied, reflected and wrote about this country.'
No wonder it has twelve pages of bibliography and forty pages of 
notes, a testimony to the Herculean task he undertook to write the book.
 The result is an authentic study of a mysterious country, which has 
baffled the world.
I remember the shock treatment 
that Burma gave to the Nonaligned Movement in Havana in 1979. Some time 
in the middle of the night of the general debate, the Burmese foreign 
minister was invited to speak after a lengthy speech by an African 
leader.
Normally, the rule in the Movement is that the smaller the country, 
the longer the speech. Delegates went out for a walk or settled down to a
 nap, thinking that Burma would have nothing to say.
As the junior most delegate from India, I was glued to the earphone 
not to miss the Burmese wisdom. What shook up everybody was that the 
minister finished his speech in precisely three minutes.
When he returned to his seat, everyone in the Indian delegation 
turned to me to find out what he said. I told them that Burma had just 
left the Movement as it had ceased to be of any value to Burma. He said 
that Burma was too nonaligned to be in the Nonaligned Movement!
The Movement took it in its stride and moved on till it came back to a
 session in Bali asking for re-entry. Under direct instructions from the
 prime minister, we blocked their return on the ground that the elected 
leader was denied power.
Burma was, in 1979, in the 
second of the four phases Bhatia has identified, first, the U Nu era, 
second, the Ne Win Years, the third, the transition period and the 
fourth, Than Shwe rule.
Ne Win was in the same class as Pol Pot and Kim Il Sung in that he 
reduced a fairly prosperous Burma into a bankrupt and isolated country 
through his Burmese Way to Socialism.
Golf was the only effective diplomatic instrument at that time as the
 golf course was the only place where we could speak to the Burmese 
officials. It was a good alibi for me to take lessons in golf, which 
turned out to be a passion in later years.
Every year, diplomats were invited to the special army golf course, 
where Ne Win played. The Burmese repeated their golf jokes and laughed 
loudly on the 19th hole, giving an impression of camaraderie, but 
without any business being transacted.
'My wife is my handicap!' was the most popular golf joke in Burma!
Ne Win's actions, which led to an exodus of nearly 100,000 people of 
Indian origin during 1963-1964, are covered in the book. Since then, it 
was an uneasy calm without substance in India-Burma relations during my 
time (1983-1986) and all our efforts to give some content was rebuffed.
We imported rice from Burma to please them, the commerce secretary 
visited Burma, we flooded Rangoon with cultural programmes to which the 
local Indians and Burmese came in large numbers, but the relations 
remained static.
The diplomatic community kept itself amused by golf and staging of plays like 
Charlie's Aunt and 
The Thwarting of Baron Bolligrew
 in the British embassy. About forty Burmese families, who were assigned
 to enjoy diplomatic hospitality, filled our parties to add the local 
touch.
As Bhatia has noted, Ne Win 
kept good relations with the Nehru family even though he did nothing to 
do business with India. When Indira Gandhi was assassinated, Ne Win took
 off to an undisclosed destination, leading to rumours that he had gone 
to India. But we had no knowledge of his visit and days later, we were 
told that he was so struck with grief that he went into meditation on an
 island.
Then came the indication that he wanted to visit Delhi to express his
 condolences to Rajiv Gandhi and family. He was very warm and 
affectionate to Rajiv Gandhi and told him that as his 'uncle,' he would 
do everything possible to help him and raise the level of India-Burma 
relations.
On my return after the Ne Win visit to Delhi, I spoke with optimism 
about a new phase in bilateral relations to the diplomatic corps and the
 press.
My joy was short lived as the initiatives I took after Ne Win's visit
 were rebuffed as before. His policy of dealing only with 'third 
countries' (other than big powers and neighbours) continued with the 
exception of China, which built up its contacts with generous gifts and 
the support of the Burmese Communists.
The military dominated kaleidoscope had remained unchanged when I left Burma in 1986 for a more exciting time in Fiji.
I remember discussing Burma 
with the then prime minister of Fiji, Ratu Mara. He was astonished that 
the people of Burma had lived under authoritarianism except for a little
 trouble when the body of U Thant, the secretary-general of the United 
Nations, was brought to Rangoon.
I thought aloud that it could be because Buddhism might have given 
the people a sense of resignation to their fate. Ratu Mara suddenly 
perked up and said to me conspiratorially, 'Why don't you take back all 
these Hindus from Fiji and send me some Buddhists?' My reaction was a 
grim smile.
Bhatia is at his best when he describes the state of affairs in 
Burma, Myanmar now, when he was in Rangoon, now Yangon. The years 
between 1987 and 1992 have been characterised as transition years, but 
they were the years of uncertainty, violence and efforts of the army to 
present acceptable faces after Ne Win resigned.
India was totally opposed to the military government, which forced 
the military leader to observe, according to Bhatia, that 'India took a 
very hard line position against the military government, perhaps the 
hardest line anywhere in the world.'
After the advent of Than Shwe rule, the same P V Narasimha Rao, who 
blocked Myanmar from re-entering the Nonaligned Movement, decided to 
start a constructive engagement policy with Yangon.
The author himself steered the new policy as ambassador and the book 
has the details that no one else could have. The book contains a 
blow-by-blow account of the events in India-Myanmar relations, leading 
to a new understanding with the junta, with the reluctant acceptance of 
Aung San Suu Kyi.
Incidentally, her sojourn in Bhutan had coincided with mine and I did
 not see any indication of her steely determination at that time.
The complex India-Myanmar-China
 triangle is adequately covered in the book. Though the general 
perception is that it is a zero sum game, the author argues that this 
need not be so.
He is over optimistic about Myanmar seeking diversity in relations by
 cultivating India and believes that the new Chinese initiatives in the 
region will reduce the impact of the China factor and provide new 
opportunities for the three countries. Given the adversarial Chinese 
position towards India, I would not endorse the author's view.
The state of the remaining people of Indian origin, particularly the 
farmers, who were requested to stay back when the others left, is a 
matter of shame.
The author speaks of their warmth towards the Indian ambassador, but 
not about their grievances. They are virtually State-less and treated as
 foreigners. They cannot eat even the rice they themselves produce as it
 is taken away. India generally closes its eyes to the problem to avoid 
an irritant in bilateral relations.
As was said about Milton's 
Paradise Lost, Bhatia's scholarly
 work has to be read as a duty rather than as a pleasure, because the 
ordinary reader has to steer clear of the mountains of information that 
come in the way of a smooth passage through the text.
But his admiration for the country is based on his deep understanding
 of it, which he shares with the readers. When the Myanmar kaleidoscope 
turns again and a new image appears, we will certainly go back to the 
book for the insights contained in it to decipher it.
IMAGE: People walk around the Shwedagon Pagoda in Yangon, Myanmar. Photograph: Jorge Silva/Reuters
T P Sreenivasan is a former Ambassador of India and Governor 
for India at the IAEA; Executive Vice-Chairman, Kerala State Higher 
Education Council and Director General, Kerala International Centre.