If history is any guide to current policy, Asean should reconsider its pushfor Burmese participation at the upcoming Asia Europe Meeting (Asem) inOctober. (boxun.com)

In 1997, Asean admitted Burma irrespective of mounting internationalcriticism, arguing that the military regime would gradually transformitself.

During the last seven years, the Burmese military regime, calling itself theState Peace and Development Council (SPDC), found its Asean membership socomfortable that it finally dared to attack and arrest democratic oppositionleader Aung San Suu Kyi, in May 2003. There remains a brutal dictatorship inBurma leaning towards what EU Commissioner Chris Patten has called "theexplosive creation of another failed state".

When Asean admitted Burma, it listed a number of geopolitical and economicreasons.

First, Asean argued that membership could effectively keep Burma out of theorbit of Chinese influence. Not only did Asean fail to stop Rangoon fromcosying up to Beijing, but nowadays the SPDC has become totally dependentupon Chinese aid in shoring up its failing economy and bloated military.

Second, Asean thought that Burma could slowly reform its planned economyunder Asean Free Trade Area obligations. No reforms yet. Alas, the SPDC hassought a rent-seeking economic model in which it rewards cronies with tradelicences and industrial permits while opening up the country's rich naturalresources to a fire sale. Some Asean countries may have benefitedexceedingly from its preferential access to Burma's rich natural resources.

Finally, Asean made the logical argument that cooperation was needed toaddress transnational effects of domestic problems in Burma. To date, noamount of cooperation has been able to stem the problems of increased drugtrafficking, a worsening HIV/Aids epidemic and the unending saga of refugeeand migrant outflows across Burmese borders.

The SPDC's track record should be particularly instructive for the upcomingAsem summit. Asean must also weigh the greater crisis coming in 2006, whenBurma takes the chairmanship.

The US has already stated categorically that it will not go to Rangoon underthe present military rule, and the EU partners will stay away in solidarity,causing a major diplomatic catastrophe for Asean.

The SPDC's vision for the future state typically looks like a centralisedcommand system. It would be extremely imprudent for Asean to be constrainedby the principles of non-interference while allowing the SPDC to consolidatetheir constitutional garrison state in Asean's backyard.

Thus, a "ten minus one" formula should be considered for future affairs ofAsean. It is high time that Asean exercise the principle of "sufficientconsensus" to unhook the Burmese generals from playing hostage diplomacy.Instead of pushing for automatic membership for Burma, Asean could make acompromise with the European Union to delay Burmese participation.

In fact, the Asem summit provides a very timely opportunity for Asean toextract real commitment from the Burmese military regime. (boxun.com)