Guest contributor
Shalini Perumal
On February 9, a shocking social media post by the Indian Army highlighted the successful installation and operationalization of a 12-Lane Infantry Weapon Training Simulator at the Myanmar Army Combat Forces School in Bahtoo, located in southern Shan State.
The project, executed by the Indian Army Mobile Training Team from the Simulator Development Division, involved imparting comprehensive training to Myanmar Army personnel on system handling, simulated scenario execution, and technical maintenance.
Promoted under the hashtags #DefenceCooperation and #IndiaMyanmarFriendship, the update showcased the ongoing military-to-military engagement between New Delhi and Naypyidaw.
However, against the backdrop of the 2021 military coup in Myanmar and the subsequent horrifying nationwide crackdown on civilians by the military junta, this continued defense cooperation has become a subject of intense international scrutiny.
Leading human rights monitors, including Justice for Myanmar and Fortify Rights, alongside various United Nations mandate holders, have published highly critical assessments of these ties.
They argue that by supplying military hardware, dual-use technology, and professional training to a regime accused of widespread atrocities, India is effectively undermining international humanitarian law and is complicit in war crimes.
Since seizing power from the democratically-elected government in 2021, the Myanmar military has engaged in a brutal campaign against ethnic resistance organisations and civilian populations.
The U.N. and numerous independent watchdogs have extensively documented these actions, classifying them as crimes against humanity and war crimes.
International humanitarian law, primarily codified in the Geneva Conventions, establishes the rules of armed conflict.
A cornerstone of this law is the Principle of Distinction, which mandates that armed forces must strictly distinguish between combatants and civilians, and between military objectives and civilian infrastructure.
Furthermore, the Principle of Proportionality prohibits attacks where the incidental loss of civilian life would be excessive in relation to the concrete military advantage anticipated.
The Myanmar military has systematically violated these core tenets. Fortify Rights, for example, has documented repeated and deliberate airstrikes on civilian targets in Kachin, Chin and Karenni states, hitting schools, displacement camps, and hospitals.
They argue these attacks often follow battlefield defeats, indicating collective punishment—a grave breach of international law.
Because the military relies heavily on its air superiority and artillery to terrorise civilian populations, the international supply of arms, ammunition, and technical support is viewed by rights groups as directly enabling these atrocities.
Despite international calls for a comprehensive arms embargo, investigations by human rights groups reveal a steady flow of military equipment and support from India to the Myanmar military.
Critics highlight that many of these transfers involve Indian Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs)—state-owned enterprises under the Ministry of Defence.
There are numerous instances of support documented by rights groups.
An investigation by Justice for Myanmar has documented that BEL (an Indian state-owned aerospace and defense company) transferred over $5.1 million USD in military end-use equipment to the Myanmar military between November 2022 and April 2023.
These shipments included metallic sonar domes, radar equipment, directing gear systems, and battlefield radio communications, often routed through known Myanmar arms brokers like Mega Hill General Trading.
Additionally, Justice for Myanmar reported that in January 2024, the Indian Air Force’s 31 Movement Control Unit shipped over 50 items—including sensors and thermometers categorized as “defense goods”—to the Myanmar Air Force in Yangon.
This followed a December 2023 deployment of 15 Indian Air Force personnel to Myanmar to install meteorological instruments.
Rights groups argue that automated weather stations provide critical data that improves the accuracy and operational effectiveness of the military’s indiscriminate airstrikes.
In October 2022, export records seen by Justice for Myanmar showed that the Indian state-owned arms company Yantra India Ltd shipped multiple 122-mm howitzer barrels to the Myanmar military.
Similarly, Indian private firms like Sandeep Metalcraft have been identified as supplying fuses for munitions to the military.
The core critique leveled by human rights defenders is that India cannot claim ignorance regarding how its exported military goods and training are being utilised.
“The Indian government and its state-owned arms companies are continuing business as usual in Myanmar, equipping and profiting from the junta as it commits acts of terror against the people,” stated Yadanar Maung, a spokesperson for Justice for Myanmar, in a June 2023 press release.
Under international legal frameworks, providing material support—whether it be howitzer barrels, radar technology, or infantry training simulators—with the knowledge that the recipient is engaged in systemic human rights violations can constitute “aiding and abetting” atrocity crimes.
Fortify Rights has also been highly critical of India’s active enablement of the military.
In January 2023, following an airstrike on the headquarters of the Chin National Front that reportedly saw bombs drop near or within Indian territory, Fortify Rights publicly urged the Indian government to close its airspace to Myanmar fighter jets.
They argued that tolerating these incursions and continuing to supply the military directly conflicts with India’s responsibility to protect civilians under international law.
From a diplomatic and strategic standpoint, foreign policy analysts often contextualize India’s continued engagement with the Myanmar military as a product of Realpolitik.
New Delhi shares a porous 1,600-km-long border with Myanmar and relies on Naypyidaw’s cooperation to manage insurgent groups operating in India’s restive Northeast.
Furthermore, India views maintaining a foothold in Myanmar as a vital strategic counterbalance to China’s deep economic and military influence in the region.
However, organizations like Justice for Myanmar and Fortify Rights wholly reject this geopolitical justification. They maintain that regional security concerns cannot override the absolute prohibitions of international humanitarian law.
By hosting Myanmar military officials, conducting joint military exercises, and supplying them with both lethal and non-lethal military infrastructure, critics argue that India is bestowing unwarranted political legitimacy on an illegal regime.
The installation of an infantry training simulator at Bahtoo in the name of “Defence Cooperation” is a microcosm of a much larger, highly controversial relationship.
While New Delhi may view its military exports and training programs as necessary instruments of regional statecraft and border security, human rights monitors see a different reality. Through the persistent documentation of arms transfers—from howitzer barrels and radar components to air force logistics and infantry training—human rights organisations make a forceful case that India’s policies are directly underwriting the military’s campaign of terror.
As the conflict in Myanmar continues to devastate civilian lives, the calls for India to align its foreign policy with international human rights standards and enforce a comprehensive arms embargo remain as urgent as ever.
Shalini Perumal is a creative international development professional who has worked previously in Mae Sot, Thailand at Mae Tao Clinic, consulted for Finnish Refugee Council Myanmar, and served as a Writer/Researcher at Insight Myanmar Podcast. She is currently a freelance journalist working on a novel.
DVB publishes a diversity of opinions that does not reflect DVB editorial policy. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our stories: [email protected]
