As a corrective, India gave an unusual “explanation of vote” even though the resolution was adopted by consensus. In this, New Delhi sought to balance its views making it known that it had difficulties in accepting the draft in this entirety.

“We regret that the text of the resolution adopted is not fully in conformity with this (India’s) approach. Further, its unhelpful tone does not contribute to effectively pursuing the objective of engaging constructively with the authorities in Myanmar which is essential to make a difference to the situation on the ground,” stated India’s explanation.

New Delhi’s stand has been that it is willing to work towards an outcome with “like minded” countries which is “forward looking, non-condemnatory and seeks to engage authorities in Myanmar in a constructive manner”.

The resolution “urges” Myanmar to “release without delay” all protestors. It also calls for Aung San Su Kyi’s release, which is supported by India. However, it further states that the Council “strongly deplores” the current violence including “beatings, killings, arbitrary detentions and enforced disappearances”. Asking Yangon to respect human rights, the resolution ask the government there to “investigate and bring to justice perpetrators of human rights violations”.

Sources said the tone of expression was not one which India would support given that New Delhi hopes that the “process of national reconciliation and political reform” initiated by Myanmar government would be “broad based, inclusive and taken forward expeditiously”.

While maintaining this position, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee “suggested” to his Myanmarese counterpart at New York on October 1 that Yangon must “consider undertaking an inquiry into recent incidents and use of force.”