BANGKOK There is currently much international ado about Myanmar. At first glance, the regime is under increasing pressure to reform itself and allow a measure of democracy in the country, formerly known as Burma. But there are so many crosscurrents, political and economic, that the prospects for real change may be little higher than at any time since 1990, when the generals thwarted the electoral victory of Aung San Suu Kyi and her National League for Democracy. The good news is that several members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are admitting that their efforts to promote change through dialogue with the generals have failed. Members of Malaysia's ruling party were the first to move, and now Asean legislators in Manila for the Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting have demanded that their foreign ministers, due to meet next week, bring more pressure to bear on the regime in Yangon to free opposition leaders and permit a degree of democratic participation. Meanwhile the UN envoy to Myanmar, the Malaysian diplomat Razali Ismail, is expressing frustration at being prevented from visiting the country, and the International Labor Organization has repeated its condemnation of its use of forced labor. Some of this Asean reaction is out of genuine democratic sympathy, some out of frustration that Myanmar's economy is almost as unreformed as its politics. Most, however, is out of concern that Asean itself will be damaged if Myanmar in its current political condition is allowed to take the chairmanship of the group when its turn comes next year. This modification of the policy of noninterference in one another's internal affairs was articulated by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of Singapore. He noted that "developments in one Asean country could impact on Asean as a whole." Lee was in Yangon to promote trade as well as to deliver this political message to General Tan Shwe, the head of Myanmar's junta. Western pressure and threats to boycott meetings held in Yangon have clearly had an effect even on governments traditionally sympathetic to authoritarian rule and whose businessmen, as is the case with Singapore and Malaysia, have been deeply involved in trade with the regime. But Asean proceeds by consensus, and it will be a hard fight to persuade Vietnam or Cambodia to help delay Myanmar's chairmanship. Thailand also has an equivocal position; business interests appear to dominate current policy, and the government has chosen this moment to pressure Burmese exiles in Thailand by demanding they move from the major cities to remote border areas. Meanwhile the generals may be too preoccupied with their own infighting to bother too much about Asean or democratic gestures. No one knows quite what power plays are in progress, but there are still reverberations from the arrest of Khin Nyunt, then prime minister, in October. A closed-door national convention to draw up a new constitution has been adjourned and is not expected to resume till November. The generals can also take solace from the bizarre politics of the European Union, which is marking its "Burma Day" on Tuesday with a seminar attended largely by those advocating dialogue with the regime. To pave the way, an EU-commissioned "independent" report urges the end of sanctions and engagement with the generals. But its two academic authors have been characterized by The Irrawaddy, the best external English-language news source about Myanmar, as "well-known regime sympathizers." Expatriate Burmese groups have been similarly scathing. But the EU, long intransigent toward the junta, now seems under the influence of Singapore-funded academic research and of former diplomats from EU member countries making livings as businessmen in Southeast Asia. Myanmar's economy may be in a shambles, thanks more to mismanagement than sanctions. But its energy resources and strategic position give the generals more leverage than ever. India, putting national interests before democracy, is eager to offset China's dominant influence and will buy Burmese gas if Bangladesh can be persuaded to allow a pipeline across its territory. India's foreign minister, Natwar Singh, visiting in March, described Myanmar as a "valuable neighbor and strategic partner." Indian companies are interested in increasing exploration. So is South Korea. China, of course, remains the generals' staunchest friend, arms supplier and trading partner. The bottom line seems to be that neither dialogue nor sanctions have much effect. Tan Shwe and his comrades are almost as impervious to the outside world as Kim Jong Il of North Korea. See more of the world that matters - click here for home delivery of the International Herald Tribune. < < Back to Start of Article