Transcript: Episode #263: Passage to India
Below is the complete transcript for this podcast episode. This transcript was generated using an AI transcription service and has not been reviewed by a human editor. As a result, certain words in the text may not accurately reflect the speaker's actual words. This is especially noticeable when speakers have strong accents, as AI transcription may introduce more errors in interpreting and transcribing their speech. Therefore, it is advisable not to reference this transcript in any article or document without cross-referencing the timestamp to ensure the accuracy of the guest's precise words.
Host 0:29
Min, LA, ba, for any Burmese language speakers tuning in today, we wanted to let you know that our better Burma mission has launched three Burmese language podcasts, Myanmar, revolutionary tales, dark era of Burma and Myanmar, peace, women and security. These programs can be found on our website as well as on any of your preferred podcast platforms. We invite you to take a listen, but For now, let's get on with This episode.
Brad 1:02
You and welcome back. It has not escaped our attention at inside Myanmar that we have not paid significant enough attention to the Indian dimension of the international component of Myanmar crisis. And as we're going to find out today, it seems that this is very much true on the other side of the border, where India has not been paying as close attention to the Myanmar crisis as perhaps she could or she should. And my guest today is going to go into some detail about why this might be so. San Jo, I'd like to thank you very much for coming on and speaking to us today, and I'd like to give you the opportunity to introduce yourself for our audience.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 2:37
Hi, Brad, thank you for having me over here on your platform, insights, Myanmar, it's really an honor to be here on your platform just to share a little bit about my initiative, borders and broader conversations is a curated third space for India, Myanmar and Thai people, and to have a lot of people to people conversations, be it online or Be it in a physical manner. The purpose is primarily to lessen the gap of quality and credible information which we are missing back in India and in Myanmar about both the countries, and also to improve the understanding of post group Myanmar from its two most important border areas, one is India and the other is Thailand. And to you know, provide plug this information and knowledge gap that we have so primarily to bridge this information, knowledge and analysis gap. This is why I have started this initiative. Thank you for having me over.
Brad 3:33
And so let's you know that you've raised decolonization. Let's, let's talk on this one, because I have always found this very fascinating as as the students of history might recall for quite a long time, during the colonial period, the Indian subcontinent as a as basically a single block, along with Myanmar, were amalgamated into a single British holding. And it seems that as soon as independence occurred. There was a schism, and if I've understood our previous conversations correctly, the average Indian has a reasonable concept of Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, but does not seem to have much of a sense of connection to Myanmar, despite centuries and centuries of cultural export and impact, and then Myanmar, likewise, seems to have a little bit of a closer tie to the other Southeast Asian Nations, and not so much to India. Do you have any concept of why this sort of schism formed?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 4:38
I believe that that falls majorly into this area that once the military took control. You know, way back after independence of Myanmar, we in India or the Indian policy makers felt that, okay, this is a country that is now left to its own destiny, and therefore it is not much we can do about it, and we should just. Just focus more on our own, you know, self, the and therefore India actually was also more concentrated on its own, nation building processes. The fact that also in the northeast of India, there were huge kind of uprisings taking place, because there were a lot of other communities that kind of felt that they were not part of India. So you have these historical reasons, which also kind of led to a disengagement from Myanmar and or disengagement from both sides, because both went inward in many ways, and therefore the understanding or engagement of the other was not actually a priority in the mind.
Brad 5:45
Interesting, interesting. So let's sort of fast forward a little bit then. So the modern situation independence was approximately 75 ish years ago. So in that period of time, and I believe you, you said previously, it was sort of the coup of Ne Win that really severed the interest in Myanmar in that time. How has the Indian political establishment sort of viewed Myanmar? Is there any way that we can, we can explain it? Have they viewed it with suspicion? Have they viewed it more with disinterest, or have they just not really been thinking about it?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 6:26
I think it's a mix of a lot of different factors. It was viewed with a bit of suspicion. It was viewed with a bit of disinterest. It was also seen as something that, okay. You know, there's a lot of internal fighting taking place, and we should not get involved. The fact is that a lot of Indians were, at that time, kind of, you know, pushed out of Myanmar and had to kind of come back to India in or let's say, Indian origin people that kind of also put off India that. Why should we kind of engage with such a country that is not, you know, looking at the interest of India as well. So, I mean, it's a huge kind of historical treasure trove that we'll have to dig out. But I think, in a nutshell, we could put it this way, that the the mistrust from both sides kind of came in that, you know, the military was thinking, hey, you know, maybe these Indians were a colonial instrument which were used by the British to subjugate us. And from the Indian side, it was more of, you know, like that. The Indians who are there inside in Myanmar are not safe and okay. And therefore let's, let's, kind of, you know, cut off our relationship with the military that is not looking at the interest of both the people as well as of India.
Brad 7:42
So, so you mentioned the Indian population. I mean, I lived in Yangon. I think most people who've lived in Yangon have noticed that there are very, very large Indian populations there. Of course, this doesn't spread across the entirety of Myanmar, but within Yangon, there seems to be a very, very large Indian population from the interactions that I had with with those people, a lot of them seem to have come specifically from Gujarat. And I wonder, I'm not particularly familiar with the history of the Indian migration to Myanmar. Someone explained it to me once, and unfortunately, I've forgotten. But I wonder whether the presence of such a large, stable, long term Indian community would not have engendered a desire among the Indian people to sort of connect somewhat with Myanmar, considering there's such a large diaspora community there, and I would have thought that many of the Indian community in Myanmar would also have, maybe friends, relatives, community ties back in India proper, like I would have imagined that this would have created some sort of inter country liaison. But it, I mean, do you the way you describe it? To me, it almost seems like the the Indian establishments attitude was to say, well, this, community is not being treated well. Let's completely disengage and leave that community to its own devices, rather than trying to double engagement to protect the interests of that community.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 9:14
Yeah, I think your observations are quite right. And what I would like to also add is that, yes, I also stayed in Myanmar for six years, and my observations were also similar on those lines. And the fact that, you know, even though we had a lot of Indian origin population or South Asian origin population in Myanmar, staying over there for maybe centuries as well, you know, and have mingled and kind of have got roots across the borders. But the fact is that even though we knew that India, knew that there was diaspora over there, there is Indian origin people over there, yet India, you know, after the military coup, way back on the Navy and did not. Of give that attention much to developing the relationship, because it was like, Okay, it's all under a military right now. Let's, let's kind of, you know, put it aside. I think it's just stayed at a very low level with, you know, people traveling, them to India, meeting their own relatives, and then going back and whatever little they could do in terms of their own small level of commerce engagement or building the relationship, that's what they were doing. So it never kind of upscaled with the support from the government side.
Brad 10:38
That's what is definitely clear from they're interesting. It is just sort of it feel, I wanted to say isolationist, but it does sort of feel very much like the attitude is, well, let's not try to achieve things. Let's just move away, disengage. You know, if something is not already in our interest, let's not try to turn it to our interest. Let's just move away and try something completely different. Maybe that's a very amateurish sort of description of how the government behaves, but that's sort of the impression that I'm getting here, that they don't they're not really willing to put in risk and put in a lot of investment in bringing people over to their side of the table is, would that be fair?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 11:23
Yes, that would be fair enough to say that. However, I would also like to add that it's only in the last 10 or 15 years that when India has really started engaging and building a more people to people collaboration. And that's why we see over the last decade or more. You know, the, let's say the embassy in India, of India in Myanmar is also trying to reach out and build different relationship, although I wouldn't say, you know, that it's doing a very good job of right now, especially when you know, our relationship with the military is, you know, going on in a very strong manner, which shouldn't be, rather, we should be actually engaging with the pro democracy forces, or this, or the spring revolution people.
Brad 12:08
And so let's, let's focus on that. Then this is a very big issue. A lot of the people that we've spoken to lately, the analysts, our focus, you know, as as I've said previously, has mostly been towards China or towards the rest of Southeast Asia. But within that context, we've heard people saying that the Chinese government, the Thai government, the Singaporean government, have been disengaging from the military, and a large part of the reason is not ideological. It's not so much that these governments feel that what the military is doing is morally wrong, but rather they have recognized that the military is not willing and is not capable of bringing about the stability necessary for economic activity to occur, and therefore these governments and their associated corporate interests are losing potential revenues, because the military is not interested in providing the environment for for beneficial economies. So in a purely selfish, purely business minded way, they have come to the conclusion that the military is the wrong horse to back in the race. Has the Indian government not come to this conclusion yet? And if not, why?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 13:27
You are quite right in pointing out that it's not, you know, the relationship around Myanmar, especially with certain countries, is changing. I think in many quarters right now, there is a realization that the military is not exactly what it was promising to bring stability to Myanmar. And we have to also keep in mind that the people of Burma have actually spoken out through their actions, especially when the military took the coup in 2021 and that is that they, you know, they don't want this kind of a, let's say, a go back into a military rule where, you know, the military is again subjugating the people, and it's they are violating their rights. They had a taste of freedom. They had a taste of what it they could become or aspire to be. And therefore they, they kind of have come out in the open, and that's what is a bit of a realization that is coming out right now, that this is a bottom up people's revolution, and there is actually the people are speaking throughout the country in their own form. So both as an armed struggle as well as nonviolent struggle. That is that they are expressing almost every day. We can see that. So this is a kind of an indication, which is now gradually coming into a lot of other countries, compared to that India and Indian engagement with Myanmar has been more on the military primarily. And therefore the military has developed a strong military to military relationship. And. Is what has become dominant, because it has got linked with India's security parameters. And these security parameters are linked with our Northeast of India region, wherein there are still certain ethnic armed organizations which are on Myanmar side, which are being given, you know, patronage by or patronage or support by the military, Myanmar military, and therefore they are still able to operate against India. And so India is still looking at that, you know, the whole situation from that particular aspect that we still need Myanmar military junta to carry out, you know, actions against our own ethnic armed organizations. And that is where the dilemma is that it has not been able to properly read the changed landscape of Myanmar right now. And that landscape is completely kind of, you know, it's, it's, it's a new one. It is not just from Burma people, but also from a lot of different ethnic groups.
Brad 16:03
And that's where I think we are missing out that realization in India, but, but so just on this point with the security So my understanding is that there are, you know, insurgent groups in India who cross over the border, whether into Sanai, and the border is quite porous. It's it's reasonably easy for them to move across the border. And so collaboration between the Indian security services and the tama DAW was necessary for Indian national security purposes. Now that makes sense on paper. The question is, though, in reality, was this partnership actually efficient and effective at improving Indian domestic security?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 16:42
I think to some extent it may have, I mean, this is only somebody, from military point of view, would be able to give more explanation. I don't think I can kind of really say a lot more on this one, except that at some point of time, Indian establishment has felt that, yes, it was, has been helpful for them, and therefore they would like to continue this relationship. I think that's the strong indication we can see that there was some benefit that they got, and therefore they are still willing to take all the risk of having strong engagement with the military junta, despite the last three years, people strongly coming out against the military. And, you know, saying that this is not the military rule that we want. We want to return back to the democratic norms, you know, and the country was moving towards a democratic future. We in India still have to read the room properly that there is a huge need for, you know, for Myanmar, which is moving towards a more federal, you know, democratic structure. Why is there a demand for this? We still haven't understood it properly.
Brad 17:55
We still look at Myanmar from a security lens, and that is what is the start part right now, every time elections are held in India, we we hear the phrase the world's biggest democracy, and which, which, quite literally, it is. And this stands in contrast to a lot of the actors within the Asian space. China is not a democracy. Thailand is not a democracy. Vietnam, who continues to be invested in Mitel, unless I'm mistaken, not a democracy. And there has been significant concern that the more dictatorial nations and regimes in the area do not want the Myanmar revolution to succeed, because if democratization could be forced in Myanmar, then the message might spread to other countries that the people can force democratization in their own countries. But India, being a democracy, does India not have an interest in exporting democracy and and standing as a sort of a beacon of democratization within the region? Or does India not really care what the the actual domestic political structures are among her neighbors.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 19:04
I think there's quite a good question that you're asking, and that brings us back to the point that let's start and look at what India has been for the last 10 years. Over the last decade, India has changed significantly, and its structures have also changed internally. The way we vision India is very different from when 88 revolution took place, you know, and right now there's the internal landscape of India has changed so much that democracy and the democratic principles are also, you know, being questioned as to To what extent that they are actually catering to the aspirations of Indian people, and if they are in what manner they are being utilized to actually, you know, reflect the the so called, you know, secular country of the India, where in the rights of the minorities are. So being respected. I think what we are looking at is an India that has changed a lot over the last decade, and that India has put a lot of policies in place which it's trying to look at it from its own pragmatic purposes, and that pragmatism is more about putting its security interests first, its national interest first, and from that lens, it is looking at the region as well.
Brad 20:26
Interesting, interesting. So it's not, it's not quite like the United States in this idea of of exporting its values. It's more trying to, it seems almost like shore up its position, but not necessarily try to try to rebuild other countries in its own image.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 20:47
Yeah, I would, I would agree with your statement on that, yes.
Brad 20:51
Okay, interesting. And so does this then play into the other question of during, you know, you use we, we can talk about the new win coup 62 we can talk about the uprising in 88 but and the the elections of of 1990 which were annulled by the military. But after the 2010 election, we enter this period, this 10 year period of what I refer to as the faux democracy. During this period of democratization, was there not a push to say, hey, the things that made us mistrust Myanmar, to start with this military regime that was abusing a lot of its minority groups, including the Indian groups. This military dictatorship is trying to change, is trying to democratize, is trying to open up a little bit I could understand, prior to the FAU democracy, India not having much to do with Myanmar, not because of India's concern, but because Myanmar was quite isolating, voluntarily isolating. But during this faux democracy, was there not a sort of, I don't know, maybe like an optimism to say, hey, maybe now is the time that we should be re engaging with a country that seems to be moving in the right direction, or was it sort of too little too late, where we're no longer interested?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 22:09
Oh no, India did try to build a relationship, especially when you know you had the elected government coming in place, the NLD government coming in place, and there was a lot of exchange taking place. And India actually went out of its way to, kind of, you know, do the engagements. It kept up. It did keep up its engagement with the military. It didn't, kind of, you know, back down from it, but it also stepped up its engagement with the elected government. And therefore it was moving ahead. Actually, if my, I believe my, my information is correct that there were a lot of visits being conducted for elected representatives from Myanmar to actually do visits to India to learn about India's, you know, governance structures, it's, it's different parliaments. And there were parliamentarians from Myanmar who also visited India, in some places in northeast of India as well to understand how, you know, minorities over there were also staying, or how the peace process over there was also kind of moving ahead, and also in other parts of the country as well, to see how the parliaments, you know, the different state parliaments, were also working. So there were efforts being made. There were a lot of trainings being done. There was a lot of exchange from the election commission to Election Commission as well. So India did take part in, kind of putting certain efforts, and it did do a lot of contributions as well. It just didn't do it so openly, and it was trying to do it more quietly. Yet, when we look at it from the post coup kind of a scenario, what was, or what is disappointing, is that it didn't kind of, you know, keep up on those efforts, it rather completely dropped it out, and focus completely on, you know, maintaining and actually strengthening its relationship with the military.
Brad 24:00
Okay, interesting. So then let's fast forward. Fast forward again. Here we are. Coup has happened. The relationship between the Indian military establishment and the dama DAW continues after the coup, and the question now becomes that the crux of our of our discussion here, what is the the cross section of information flow within the Indian establishment, whether it's among the people, whether it's among the media establishment, whether it's among the political establishment, the coup is raging next Door. The relationship with the military is going on, I assume that the Indian establishment, and even the the sort of Indian people who have an eye on it would know that the military is committing horrific atrocities. What is the what is the image that is being painted domestically in India? About this? I.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 25:00
It's a good question. I mean, we have to, in my opinion, when we want to look at all these factors that you are asking that has there been good quality, flow of information? Is there people to people? Connection? Is the media to media and establishment or military? A few things that comes to my mind is, let's look at the language that you know, almost everybody in India uses. There are hardly few people who actually use revolution or resistance forces, you know, as when they are trying to portray all the, you know, the spring revolution activities that is going on, or the ethnic groups that are actually aligned with the pro democracy forces, it's more of militia. So you can see from the language as to where the thought process is going. Because this language of saying everybody is a militia, you know, is, is a language that was used for many of the groups in the northeast of India when they were also struggling for their own rights and dignity, and you know, or were also against the Indian establishment at some point of time, many of them joined the mainstream right now, but they were also called as a militia. So you see from that language, the portrayal that is going on is still kind of misunderstood, and that shows, or that is an indication, that in India, we still need to learn a lot about the spring revolution. We still need to learn a lot more about the different dynamics that are opening up in the post coup environment. And if we keep on using militia, that means we are looking it from a very one sided lens, we are not able to capture the dynamics of what is actually unfolding in the country. That is one when you talk about People to People connection, I think it's more stronger that is taking place in the northeast of India, especially on the border side, and that's where and the reason is because we have got a lot of cross border communities that are staying over there, who have got centuries of connections with with the other side. They are mixed by blood. They are mixed by marriage. They are mixed by relationships. You know, both that is cutting across family ties or commerce and otherwise, of friendship. So that is where a lot of people have better information than those of us who are in the mainland of India. When we talk about media again, you know, unfortunately, it's very few in the media. I notice and observe that have been started to actually understand what is going on in Myanmar, but there's still a lot more that needs to be done and needs to be understood about Myanmar spring revolution. And again, it's any if anything happens in Myanmar, that's when the reports are being done. So we are not exactly, you know, on on the curve of how things are happening or unfolding. In Myanmar, we are basically doing a lot of catch up. It's like, oh, you know, there's something happened. Maybe we need to report it because it's related to our border side, or we should report it that's, that's how it is. It's not consistent. It's not kind of, you know, the quality that should it should really go more in depth. Should is still missing, and there's an area where we can really grow, I think, in terms of military then it's most unfortunate that the military to military engagement is still kind of, you know, on this verge, or it still kind of hovers on this whole thing, that the Myanmar's military is essential in order to keep the country together. I think that's the thought process inside India that is still dominant, and that is also sad that, you know, the that we in India still don't realize that the military, or the current military of Myanmar, is no longer actually desirable in Myanmar, and the people of Myanmar have completely come out and spoken that they don't wish to see a military that is completely destroying not only the country, but also the democratic aspirations. Rather, they want to see a military that is under the Constitution and is under the civilian rule, and therefore is a servant of the people and is supporting the people rather than going against them. So so this is this realization within Indian establishment and military is missing still, and most of the kind of like when I'm listening to all other media discussions and all primarily the subtle message that comes out is that military is still relevant, and we still need the military over there. And that's what is a little bit sad, because when we look at our own Indian history, when we got independence, we. Have been going through a whole period of more than, you know, 6070, years we have been structuring and restructuring our federal system. So how can we just outrightly, you know, decry the need of Myanmar that that there is a community that needs federal structure. And they are also coming to terms that they no longer need a military which is suppressing its people. And they would like to come up with a new structure. I think this is which in India we really need to really, really understand. And if we don't, we are going to misread the situation of Myanmar by a mile or more than that, and we will be, you know, having no kind of links to Myanmar, when, when this whole revolution emerges out of its own, you know, fighting against the military junta.
Brad 30:55
I find some of what you're saying A little bit ironic, because this, this notion that I'm gathering here, is that the primary interest when it comes to Myanmar, the primary narrative, is security, domestic security. And the irony is that it is precisely because of this military that India has yet another armed crisis on her doorstep, and not only an armed crisis, but as a result of that, also an influx of refugees, which, if I gather correctly from the discussion that we had previously refugees who are being painted as as themselves, something of a threat to India. Does do the dots not get connected that the military has, if anything, the junta has, if anything, done a disservice to Indian security since the coup.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 31:59
Yes, I would agree with you that my what I'm saying sounds like irony, but that's the fact that, you know, as boggles my own mind as to why we in India, we are not able to see it as plainly as you know, many of us who are, let's say, who have engaged within Myanmar, you know, have Been working on the issue, and some of us are analyzing it, and then we see that there is all of this taking place. And so what actually leads the Indian establishment and Indian military to continue to engage with the you know, military junta?
Brad 32:40
It boggles my mind, and I have no words to explain that right now, but so then, so the glimmer of hope, then, from my perspective, and I wonder whether you would or would not agree with this, is to say, Well, if the Indian establishment is interested in Indian security and Indian economic interests, as we would expect a political establishment to be, then. Surely, it's not a matter of trying to convince a massive political establishment to take a principled position that goes against its own bottom line, financial and strategic interests. But it should be the much simpler course of simply pointing out to the establishment that you have misunderstood the situation and you can better serve your own interests by backing the democratic movement. It sounds, if anything like it should be a reasonably simple correction to make. And I wonder why has that correction not been made?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 33:43
You're right, that correction has not yet been made. And I hope that, as the Indian establishment and the military is looking at the current situation, you know now, in 2024 with a new lens, and there should be, there is a realization that, yes, we need to kind of RE, reassess our situation, re, re, read the room, reassess the political landscape that is there, but we will only see it in the actions that actually are implemented on the ground. And so far, the indications that are there are anything but, you know, moving in that direction that we have to do a course correction. So I would say, yes, it's still too early. It's we just finished a month in the new, you know, in 2024 but there are the remaining 11 months to be seen as to where the Indian policy and its actions move towards, and is there going to be a course correction in actually engaging with the pro democracy forces, with the spring revolution, with the different actors and stakeholders. I think this is a fantastic opportunity for India to really utilize this opportunity, and, you know, build up its, let's say stakeholders, engagement with Myanmar and upscale it. Yeah, rather than kind of, you know, playing it down and doing it very quietly, think pulling a page from what China is doing, China is going and engaging with almost every group that it can, and it does it in its own strategic manner. And India also should be stri uh, doing the same. I think there's an opportunity to look at refugees, not as illegal migrants, but also as people with whom it can develop a People to People relationship. There is a lot more need to be done in providing humanitarian aid to them. That corridor could be opened up. Thailand is considering opening that corridor. So why can't we do it? Although it's taking place at the state level in Mizoram and, you know, in some other places, but it can be upscaled. We can allow international actors to come in and provide more services which is needed. The resources at state level is not enough to provide the huge, you know, humanitarian aid or support that is needed. So that is one. You're also looking at a relationship building wherein there are many elected members of parliaments who have crossed over into India. They are on Indian Territory, you know, seeking refuge. Why not start engaging with them, you know, and treat them with the dignity they deserve because they have there. They are looking to engage with India, but the Indian central government of India has so far ignored them. They are right there. I mean, you know, if one wants to meet them, they can go and meet them. But has India taken that initiative? Has there been any initiative from the central government to do so? It has yet to be seen, and that's not yet taking place. You know, India can also open engagement with the nug representatives and build upon a relationship right now and try and seek how it can move ahead in strategically building up a relationship with the spring revolution overall, you know, all with, with, even if, even if we say that nug is an interim government, you know, and it can start building up a relationship. So these are all these soft tools that India can use in order to build its relationship. It's a question of, is there a political will to see that happen? And if so, how soon?
Brad 37:17
And just on the issue of engagement with the national unity government. There is a national unity government office in India. And the question is, would that office have been established in any way with the knowledge or with the consent of the Indian government? Would the would the establishment of the office itself indicate some sort of tacit acceptance by the Indian government of the nug presence, or would it just have been done completely independently?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 37:46
I believe that the Indian government is aware about the, you know, the presence and the, there is a kind of a low level of engagement. It's but when you are looking at it, that's that low level engagement is the maximum that India is doing at the present moment. You know it really needs to be upscale. So, yes, there may be a tacit understanding that this is what we would maybe allow you to do it and operate, but at the same time, there is a need to upscale it as well.
Brad 38:17
That's very fair. I want to take it back a little bit to the refugees, which we both mentioned, and I think it's an important question to ask, the presence of refugees from Myanmar in India, is that negatively coloring the public perception of the ongoing conflict? Or rather, is it what impact is it having in the general perception of the ongoing conflict?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 38:45
I think there are a couple of layers that we need to understand. That is when we look at the, you know, the refugees that are in India. One is people who are asking for asylum. Second is those who are temporarily coming into the country because there's active, you know, bombardment going on or violence taking place, conducted by the military junta in their particular areas, and they are crossing over to India in seeking safety and would like to go back. And third is there are still communities on both sides who feel that the border is actually, you know, not the border that they agree with, and the borders withdrawn without their consent, and therefore they are moving in their own land, right? So, so you have this notions that are there on the borders. So look, we need to understand these different dynamics and then see how we would like to address them.
Brad 39:41
Interesting, interesting, and I do understand there is a bit of a like a tension between the state government in in Mizoram and the federal government in India over this issue of of refugees. Is that? Is that causing the federal. Government to be even more, let's say, hard line on this issue.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 40:07
I think there is a mixed reaction that we could see. I mean, in the case of Mizoram, we noticed that the state government has been so very positive because they feel that this is their Kyaw Khin who are there, and therefore they would not like, you know, any policy to be implemented which is going to be negatively impacting their relationship with their Khin, and therefore, they are very much supportive of the refugee community that is coming in. They have been providing them with humanitarian aid and support, and it's not a very well developed state, mind you. I mean, you know, when you look at the resources that are available in the state, it's, it's not huge. So the people themselves are coming forward and trying to take care of, you know, the communities, or the refugee communities, or the Burmese community that is crossing over into its side. And you know, there's a, there's a huge network of people who are working through different mechanisms, which is both the people's network, or, you know, the their own church groups and other different voluntary organizations that are working. So we look at it from that perspective, and therefore the reaction, even if these central government is trying to, you know, put any policy that the local people are feeling, it doesn't get implemented. You know, when the people are at the local level are feeling that it's negative, it's not getting implemented, right? Compared to that when you look at money, poor, money, poor, there is somehow a huge, huge disparity in the way the state government is reacting to it, and the state government is seeing it from more as illegal migrants, and that has also led to a lot of tensions, and within the different communities that are there a lot of negative, you know, reactions to each other, and there's a lot of hate speech and a lot of Active violence that is going on in the state. And, you know, I don't want to dwell into it, because I'm not qualified, actually, to speak of the different, really different layers that are there. But that's, that's something that should be looked into in, you know, from a very different perspective.
Brad 42:16
Absolutely, we'll definitely try to find someone who can speak on this, because it is a the crisis in Manipur is just something that keeps coming back and coming back and coming back whenever we have discussions with people. But as you say, we need to have someone who has a an inside understanding of that particular issue, but moving to a slightly different issue, you mentioned the Chinese engagement and in amongst the many other factors that are motivating Chinese shifts in in policy. One of the very large ones was, and we did an interview with this a few months ago, with the US Institute for Peace, the scam centers that have some 150,000 now, about 120,000 people held in slave like conditions, trying to scam people electronically out of money, most famously, Coco. Now I understand that some of the victims of these scam centers are Indian, and that there is, in fact, interest in both in the establishment and the Indian public as a whole to act on this, to rectify this issue. And China, it seems, in large part, was motivated to shift its support from the military to some of the eaos because those groups were more willing and more able to crack down on the scam centers. Do you think a similar outcome is is foreseeable in in the Indian establishment?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 43:40
I think what my understanding is that, you know, India so far, is trying to do what it can in order to address this issue of illegal activities that is there, but specifically the the Indians that are caught in these illegal activities. It's trying to rescue them and repatriate them. But when it comes to creating an awareness, I think that's where we have to see and understand, is India doing enough inside the country to create an awareness about these scam centers, that the this is also going to cause a lot of harm to its own nationals and also going to be detrimental to its own national security, you know, so we still have to see that, although I believe I was noticing some news outputs reporting that in the embassy in Yangon is doing its best in order to get these rescued and repatriated. But can it upscale this, you know these activities, and specifically, can it create a huge awareness within India and Indian, you know people? That still remains to be seen. I haven't seen much news about Chinese camps centers, as well as what activities India is doing in order to counter this in in the media or much being. Discussed in Indian, you know, think tank or public space as well.
Brad 45:05
Okay, so let's, okay, so let's, let's talk about the think tanks, you know, think tanks and panel discussions and analysts. I mean, we we rely on these we rely on these groups to inform the public, to create the content that later gets disseminated through the media establishment. We rely on these groups to inform the military and to inform government and generally inform sentiment and decision making. But it seems from from our discussions, that the think tanks in India with regards to Myanmar, the analysts in India with regards to Myanmar, are not giving a full and complete picture to the people who depend on them for their information. Is that actually the case? And if so, why is this occurring?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 45:57
I mean, in my opinion, there is a lot more that needs to be done when it comes to Myanmar in India. You know, especially when you talk about discussions, we we are unable to have open discussions about Myanmar in India. We are not able to look at it from a proper lens of where these different layers are taking place. What are the contours, what are the different stakeholders at present moment that have come on the scene, especially in a post coup environment. Let me be very clear, there may be a good understanding about what Myanmar is from a pre coup kind of conception. There are people who have been writing about it, but at the same time, when you look at it from a post school situation. That is a missing factor, and that is what we really need to see. Can it be improved in India? And so far, the the fact that a lot of issues on Myanmar gets linked up with the northeast of northeast of India, and the security issues, and in particular, with money poor, you know, there is a kind of hands off approach, in some ways, to address or get deeper into these issues. On the other hand, there is still a need to discuss about, you know, Myanmar, because unless we understand these different, different aspects that are emerging out of the country and where there is intersectionality of these aspects, with India's security policy, with India's own national interest, with India's economic interests, and specifically with India's Act East Policy and neighborhood first policy. We in India will be still groping in the dark. We'll still continue to use narrative that is dominated by the Myanmar military, which will put itself at the centrality of everything and say that we are still relevant in Myanmar's future. And somehow, you know, we will land up doing the same.
Brad 47:58
What I don't understand is, you know, India is is enormous. It is quite capitalist. There is a lot of money moving around India. It seems intuitive to me to say that, well, okay, Tama, do propaganda is going to exist. But at the end of the day, those analysts who are going to provide accurate information, information that their stakeholders can actually use to make sound investments, sound security decisions should be the ones who become elevated, who become promoted, who are better paid, who are more widely listened to, just by virtue of the fact that their information is is better. And yet, you seem to be saying that the the pool of voices in the Indian sphere is is not very competitive when it comes to information on Myanmar.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 48:51
Yes, that's my impression that I'm getting in, you know, I'm not from a think tank Center. I'm not from an analyst. I'm more of a person who is from advocacy communications background, you know, I landed up in this because I strongly felt a need for us in India to really understand about Myanmar, and especially from pos covid, where the whole landscape has changed drastically. There are so many voices that are coming out, and specifically the voices of ethnic minorities have become very strong, and that is what we in India nearly need to understand, because for many years, we have only listened to a BA Mar majority voice, and that has been, you know, let's say, projected on us through the military and via military to military engagement. But understanding these different different layers is very important for us. I'm a minority myself, and therefore for me, you know, I am looking at it from a lens of a minority perspective, that we are missing these different layers that are coming up. You know, we are missing the voices of women, we are missing the voices of ethnic minorities. We are missing the voices of. LGBTQ community in the discussion. So when we are looking at all these foreign policy engagements and where our policy should be, we are missing out these voices which should reflect in our discussions. So what happens we are taking, what is the low hanging fruit? Just take the military version and just say, Yes, we resonate that. So a lot of times we are, we are continuously resonating that kind of a you know, or amplifying that message that the military wants us to amplify in our public sphere.
Brad 50:35
But it feels very negative. It's almost like the low hanging channels. We have a lot of this in the West, particularly now during the Russia Ukraine conflict, where you have what is essentially Russian propaganda. And the talking points of Russian propaganda filter through, and they become very popular on platforms like Tiktok or Facebook, or even to an extent, on YouTube, and they find a home among a certain community, a community who enjoys a contrarian view, but the majority of the people, or at least it seems to me, the majority of the people, would look at that and say, I do not Want to get my talking points from a foreign power, particularly not a foreign power that we are deeply suspicious of. I would like to have my talking points coming from people that we can trust and people whose values we know align with our own values, whose analysts, whose analyzes are going to align with what we consider to be. You know the right thing to do. It seems like India is in a in a very strange position here, where they basically saying, well, we don't trust Myanmar. We don't really trust the Myanmar military. We work alongside them, but we are happy to get our information through foreign Myanmar military propaganda and and it sounds almost like you're saying that there isn't much of an appetite for alternative perspectives, for people coming from a more genuinely Indian perspective, and looking at things through the lens of India's genuine interest, to say, Well, hang on, maybe the line that the military is feeding us is motivated by their own interests and is not motivated by India's best interests. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your perspective, but that's sort of how it looks to me.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 52:29
Okay, I, I would stand corrected if, if I'm giving you that impression. But what, what it is, is that the there is a certain narrative by the military that is getting dominated right? It's only in the last, as I come back to the point that I shared earlier, that it's only in the last one or two years that we see that there is a bit more information being published in Indian public sphere about Myanmar and some of its you know, contours that are under, you know, opening up, but that readership, again, is small, that is not huge. I mean, if you want to look at it from a number as compared with our own population, that number is still minuscule, right? So when you want to look at it as to within our public sphere, as to what is the understanding of Myanmar, that information has to still go down to that particular level. It's still, you know, still at the top. More likely that is where we are facing a challenge. Again, it's our readership or the information that is coming out is kind of locked into the English reading readers, and most of the information that is locked into the, let's say, the Hindi speaking, or any other vernacular languages that India speaks, you know, you know, in different states, we don't see that discussion taking place about Myanmar in In as robustly as compared to, you know, what you would say is happening in English media, or English, you know, English based media. So there is this difference that we really need to understand that if we really want Indians, you know, and that when I'm saying Indians, that is cutting across all these different states, right, and which we have, then you have to look at it a way of penetrating that understanding about Myanmar in these diverse states. Have we got that capacity and capability? Not yet. I don't believe we have reached there yet. So that's why I would say that we are still lacking a lot of in depth understanding about Myanmar at a country level, there are efforts being taken by some in the media to understand it. I believe some of them have managed to get connected with the nug, nucc and CRP H people, and they are bringing out these information. But I think that is still not yet enough. We need to do a lot more. We need to really go into the in depth of what is unfolding, rather than just seeing it, you know, at the spur of a moment. Oh, this, this is a news that is developing in Myanmar. So we need some sound bites or some information and a nice article. You see, we have to move beyond that.
Brad 55:16
Okay, so it's more just this, the problem of the 24 hour media cycle and not having the space for deeper analysis.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 55:26
Yeah, I believe we strongly need more deeper analysis that is there. We need a lot more people to people links. We need a lot more discussions and conversations which moves beyond just this fear of getting, you know, just updates so that you know, I can inform my readers say this is what is happening, and I was the first one to break it. I think we have to go beyond that.
Brad 55:48
So then the obvious question is, do you do you think that there is an appetite? It's one thing to say that there is a need for deeper analysis, and I think everyone's going to agree that deeper analysis is going to be better than shallow sound bites. But is there an appetite for deeper analysis? Do people have the patience for it?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 56:06
I believe there would be once, if there is quality information that is coming out, and if that helps in improving our own analysis, improving our policy, you know, responses to Myanmar and how those implications are linked with our own, let's say national security, or, you know, other broader policy frameworks that pans out in the BIMS tech region, in ASEAN region and Indo Pacific. I think that can be built, and that is where it should be built, also towards.
Brad 56:38
Okay, fair enough, and so moving to sort of the objective here, the long term planning. We can see from the discussion then where the problem is, the lack of the information, the fact that there hasn't been enough focus and there isn't enough deep analysis. But also, we both seem to agree that there is a need. There is an absolute need on the part of India, not just for the benefit of Myanmar, not just for the benefit of the principle of standing up for democracy, but also for India's own strategic interests, economic interests, to to engage. So I wonder, do you think it's quantifiable before we try to look at solutions? Do you think it's quantifiable what India is potentially losing out on by not engaging more with Myanmar, by not engaging with the revolution, and by not better understanding the situation?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 57:38
It's a tough question, I would say, because there are so many factors, personally I feel, and in my small observation, I think if you want to quantify, the quantification can come, yes, there are, is our strategic interests that are there in the country. Our access to ASEAN by road goes via Myanmar. You know, our access for a lot of deeper markets is through Myanmar, an unstable Myanmar, you know, is going to impact India's own northeast, which is further going to be kind of de our own initiatives to have, you know, northeast of India, which is developed and is thriving and is, you know, and is connected with rest of the region, because we are, we've, we have been saying that northeast of India is much closer to our, you know, to ASEAN region or Southeast Asia. So we'll be failing in all of those things, you know, if we are not able to understand Myanmar properly, and we are not able to develop our policies properly in terms of monetary one. I'm sorry, I'm again, I'm not qualified because I don't have numbers or whatever with me. Maybe that is something, you know. I hope in the future you find somebody who is able to speak about those numbers that can be crunched in, you know, as to what is the quantifiable loss in terms of monetary loss that India will have.
Brad 59:10
But to me, these are the, you know, the things that I see from my side, interesting. So then the million dollar question that we've sort of been working towards is, what do you think can be done? What can be done by whether the people within India, within the establishments, or even by people outside of India, to help facilitate this transformation of the understanding, a transformation of the of the media and the analyst and the political landscape towards Myanmar, to convince the the Indian establishment that that they have a need for their own benefit to engage with the revolution.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 59:46
Well, it's also an interesting point that you're raising, because I believe strongly it would be benefited that if India steps up its engagement with the different stakeholders and brings them into these countries. Conversations and discussions. That's what Indian you know, establishment media and other think tanks will benefit from it, because without that engagement, if it's only us as Indians who are trying to analyze Myanmar, and you know, it's we are just speaking to the converted, then we are just speaking within ourselves that this is how Myanmar is, rather than actually trying to understand Myanmar from the stakeholders who are directly engaged in the spring revolution, you know, from stakeholders who are completely involved in the different ethnic armed organizations who are anti junta, from the different diverse groups of civil disobedience movement who are also working towards their own goal of removing the military junta. I think these are the points of intersections that we really need to look in the future as to where we are engaging with the stakeholders bring them into our conversations and discussions, and without that taking place, I think we will be just, you know, trying to self, glorify ourselves, otherwise that I you know, we know about Myanmar, and we know what has to be done for Myanmar. I'm sorry to say that, but we have to get over this, you know, this feeling that we, as Indians, we know everything. I think we have to now say that we really don't know anything about Myanmar, and let's start from scratch. We have to honestly admit it, and unless that admission is there, you know, it's, it's very difficult for us to learn to catch up, we will still be behind China, and China will always have an upper hand on us with this kind of an attitude.
Brad 1:01:37
And that's, that's a very interesting point, just going back to the sort of geo strategic element of this, India and China are openly rivals, have been for a very long time, and Myanmar is a country that they both share a border with, and a reasonably geo strategically valuable country that they both share a border with. Is this, I don't know. It seems to me like that, if nothing else, just trying to foil Chinese interest in Myanmar would would be a motivating factor. And I is there? Is there a component to which China shifting towards supporting the revolution somewhat might convince the the Indian military establishment that they need to double down and support the junta even more. Or does India not really view Myanmar as a as a well, for lack of a better term, a staging ground for a proxy conflict?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:02:37
I would simply say, see for India to gain any hand over its rivals, it starts with engagement with different actors and all and if we don't have an institutional memory developed within our own different establishments, within the media, within, you know, within the military, within the think tanks and within our own government sectors, and have a collaboration with all of these sectors and analyze Myanmar, I think we are going to be losing out a lot more. That's where it is. So India has to, rather than trying to develop a strategy that we want to go into a proxy war with China, I don't think that's the right approach, and I firmly don't believe in that. You know? What I believe strongly is, how can India improve its game of engagement with different stakeholders in Myanmar across the board? And that engagement is a quality engagement. It's you know more in depth engagement, rather than seeking these stakeholders as just, you know, various units of information as to what China is doing in Myanmar, you know, but rather as, how can we improve our relationship? How can we, you know, work together in building a better Myanmar, where, you know, there is a federal structure that is in place. We have got so many examples of federal structures which our Constitution has made provisions for federal units to be recognized and at a very smaller level and units. So these are examples that India can provide to Burmese friends to see what they would like to adopt that is also a place to start engagement with different, you know, stakeholders in Burma, when Burma is looking to move into a Federal Democratic structure. So the again, I say that there are so many points of engagement India has with Myanmar. You know, we don't need to look at anybody else to say we need to enter into a competition and a proxy war.
Brad 1:04:44
No, and so getting back to this, the engagement. Then you you're talking about engagement. You're talking about the need to bring in the Myanmar stakeholders to fully understand the context. And I completely agree with that. I think most people would understand and agree. That if you are trying to design policy that affects a specific group of people, not consulting with that group of people is not a very successful way to move forward. It would be supremely ironic at the risk of being in politic, it would be supremely ironic if that were the position of India, when India herself has been the victim of the exact same type of mentality when the British came in and started making decisions for the Indians, without engaging and understanding, or even, to be honest, caring about the needs of the of the local communities. But the question is, is it possible, other than the the Indian side, actively reaching out and trying to engage with with with the stakeholders in Myanmar? Is it possible for the people in Myanmar to start actively reaching out and engaging with Indian stakeholders, to try and build those bridges and get the ball rolling on that.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:06:04
I think, yes, when we are talking about engagements, it has to be both ways, and it's not. That's why I also tell, you, know, share my thoughts with my Burmese friends that you know, instead of just saying that you know, India is a democracy, you need to engage or India should support the spring revolution. I think it's equally important for Burmese friends to understand how India has evolved and changed, you know, over the last 10 years. And it's equally important to understand what is currently India's strategic interests in Myanmar, and to find those common grounds. And it's on those common grounds that Burmese friends can find intersectionality ending points of engagement. Without that understanding on both sides, the dominant narrative will be again, you know that it's one sided, and it's only a certain perspective that gets reflected in policy, you know, policy initiatives or actions. So it's both ways. I think it's not just Indians who need to also engage with Burmese, but also Burmese people. But the question is that when both are reaching out to the other, where is the willingness for each side to actually openly engage with the other also?
Brad 1:07:19
So what do you mean by that, that last point, are you, are you saying that it's also on the Myanmar side, that there doesn't seem to be much interest in actively reaching out and engaging to India. There
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:07:30
is an interest, but I think it's the interest should also be as to, you know, understanding Whom are you trying to engage and, you know, kind of hold that discussion. Otherwise, you know, you land up going and engaging with anybody. It's not going to be of use, because you may land up being just an information, you know, source to them, rather than actually looking at it from a policy, you know, discussion and discourse, right?
Brad 1:08:02
But is, is not, is being an information source not in and of itself valuable if, if we can get good information into the mix, into the landscape of of media and policy making in India, is that not in and of itself going to be beneficial?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:08:18
Well, if the Burmese friends feel that, you know, just providing information will be good, then that is their call.
Brad 1:08:27
I would say you sound a little bit negative on this, on this thing. So it seems that you are, you are much stronger on the idea that it's not sufficient to supply information. You actually have to be much more engaged in the policy making process.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:08:40
I believe strongly in the engagement for policy, you know, development, and that is where our efforts should be, because information, there is a lot of information floating around. And it's not that in Indian agencies or establishment has not got that information they have. But Mike, again, the reflection of India's action is more towards pro military. So I don't see providing information to and, you know, to is just going to be enough. It's actually a discussion and changes in the policy that should be really aimed at. Without that, you know, we could be providing information for the next five years, 20 years, will that actually lead to policy change? Is another question.
Brad 1:09:27
Okay, so would your recommendation be to lobby directly to the Indian government? Then
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:09:35
I think the lobbying can be done at different levels. It can be done directly with the Indian government. It can be done with different agencies that are there. It can also be done with different Indian think tanks who are also influential. And if their understanding, if their knowledge, is improved, I think that's what would lead to a better understanding and analysis and thereby a better policy, you know, implementation.
Brad 1:10:00
So, yeah. Okay, interesting. And would you say that, considering that India is a federal system, is there, likewise, would there be advantage lobbying at the state government level?
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:10:10
Oh, yes, I think we should, when we are looking at lobbying, it should be at all levels, irrespective of state or center.
Brad 1:10:23
I think you know, that's that's where we have to strategically look at and so, because my my broader question here, like, obviously, I don't understand how the Indian political establishment works, but if it is possible to successfully lobby a state government, is there a sort of filtering up effect where state government policies and state government decisions, once they can be shown to be successful, are then sort of sent up to the federal level for for consideration internally.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:10:52
That's That's a tough question to answer, because, but if, if, by any experience, when we look at what was done in Mizoram and the central government's own, you know, direction it is taking. I u1 would say that it's not working, right? So, so it's, it's, I believe it's, it's a question of where the interventions are and how much of a collaboration is taking place at all levels, and where is a common base of understanding taking place?
Brad 1:11:25
Interesting, interesting. I think, okay, so I, I think that you've given us a lot to to ponder and a lot to think about when it comes to not just, not just the landscape in India, but the ways that we need to go about the concept of engaging with Indian stakeholders and and reaching the ear of of Indian policy establishment.
Sanjay Valentine Gathia 1:11:49
I think, and I strongly believe, you know, that between India and Myanmar, there can be a lot of conversations taking place. A lot of discussions taking place. The real challenge is to find the quality people. And that's where my own initiative is focused on curated discussions. And that's that's where I focus on quality, finding quality people who can make an impact. You know, not just for holding the sake of holding discussion. So please look at quality. Please look at the way the discussions can actually make an impact in terms of your own understanding and learning, and make an impact on the kind of policy you are looking to change. Otherwise, you know, we can keep on holding these discussions, and we would be going round and round in circles, which is not the whole idea. The idea of engagement is to bring about certain changes, and that's where we need to focus. So let's focus more on doing this, quality engagement, people to people, engagement in conversations. And I believe, strongly believe, that it's high time for Indian Government also to, you know, not just look at military junta as the, you know, only source of information or engagement point, but actually should kind of bring two, three notches down their engagements and rather raise their level of engagement up with the, you know, the spring revolution, people, the actors, the stakeholders in it, and broaden its stakeholder engagement. That is what is needed. And that's where I strongly believe that with India and Myanmar engagement, a lot more support can be found for Myanmar spring revolution. And last of all, Brad, I would like to say thank you to insights. Myanmar for having me on your platform and allowing me to share my thoughts. And once again, I wish this platform, your platform, to kind of continue bringing more and more people who can talk about India. And also, you know, would be lovely to see more insights from many more Indian friends who are knowledgeable about Burma. Thank you so much. Thank you for having me over.
Host 1:14:20
For whatever reason, even as the conflict in Myanmar continues to worsen, it somehow continues to be shut out of the Western media news cycle, and even when the foreign media does report on the conflict, it's often presented as a reductionist, simplistic caricature that inhibits a more thorough understanding of the situation. In contrast, our podcast platform endeavors to portray a much more authentic, detailed and dynamic reality of the country and its people, one that nurtures deeper understanding and nuanced appreciation. Not only do we ensure that a broad cross section of ideas and perspectives from Burmese guests regularly appear on our platform, but we also try to bring in foreign expert scholars and allies. Can share from their experience as well, but we can't continue to produce at this consistency and at the level of quality we aim for without your help. If you would like to join in our mission to support those in Myanmar who are being impacted by the military coup, we welcome your contribution in any form, currency or transfer method. Your donation will go on to support a wide range of humanitarian and media missions, aiding those local communities who need it most donations are directed to such causes as the Civil Disobedience movement, CDM families of deceased victims, internally displaced person. IDP camps, food for impoverished communities, military defection campaigns, undercover journalists, refugee camps, monasteries and memories, education initiatives, the purchasing of protective equipment and medical supplies, covid relief and more. We also make sure that our donation Fund supports a diverse range of religious and ethnic groups across the country. We invite you to visit our website to learn more about past projects as well as upcoming needs. You can give a general donation or earmark your contribution to a specific activity or project you would like to support, perhaps even something you heard about in this very episode. All of this humanitarian work is carried out by our nonprofit mission, Better Burma. Any donation you give on our insight Myanmar website is directed towards this fund. Alternatively, you can also visit the Better Burma website, betterburma.org, and donate directly there. In either case, your donation goes to the same cause and both websites except credit card, you can also give via PayPal, by going to paypal.me/betterburma. Additionally, we can take donations through Patreon, Venmo, GoFundMe and cash app, simply search better Burma on each platform, and you'll find our account. You can also visit either website for specific links to these respective accounts or email us at info@betterburma.org, that's better Burma one word, spelled B, E T, T, E R, B, U, R, M, A.org. If you would like to give it another way, please contact us. We also invite you to check out our range of handicrafts that are sourced from vulnerable artisan communities across Myanmar, available at alokacrafts.com any purchase will not only support these artisan communities, but also our nonprofits. Wider mission that's Aloka crafts spelled A, L, O, K, A, C, R, A, F, T, S, one word, alokacrafts.com. Thank You so much for your kind consideration and support.