The bizarre and protracted trial of Aung San Suu Kyi has just heard the final arguments of the prosecution and defence. The verdict - due tomorrow - will not only decide the fate of Myanmar's iconic opposition leader, who has been held under house arrest for the best part of 19 years, but will cast a decisive shadow over elections scheduled for 2010.
During the recent visit of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, junta chief General Tan Shwe promised free and fair elections next year. Indonesian Foreign Minister Dr Hassan Wirajuda has made it clear that Myanmar must release Suu Kyi if those elections are to be credible. Attending the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) regional forum in Phuket, US secretary of state Hillary Clinton informed the Myanmar delegation that any US offer to improve relations is dependent on releasing Suu Kyi and other political prisoners.
And what happens if - as most observers expect - she is perversely found guilty of violating her conditions of house arrest, all because of a mysterious intrusion from an uninvited American guest?
Myanmar's opposition has already predicted a guilty verdict, expecting the judge to send her to prison or renew her detention order for another five years, thus denying her any role in next year's elections. So what will Asean do about their recalcitrant member? Not too much hope should be placed in the newly approved human rights provision of the Asean charter. The human rights commission has no power to monitor violations, and Myanmar participated in efforts to water down the provisions to exclude any monitoring or investigation.
Although the Indonesian foreign minister has expressed anger, the misgivings of Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines, expressed through softly-softly diplomacy known as "constructive engagement" with the regime, have so far made no difference. If anything, it has become routine at major Asean conferences for the Burmese delegation to deflect criticism and carry on as usual. The club of south-east Asian nations operates by consensus and shrinks from suggestions that Myanmar should either be expelled or suspended. The idea, suggested by parliamentarians from Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand, of suspending Myanmar's membership was rejected by Thailand's prime minister, the current Asean chairman. "There are not enough grounds to do that," he said.
Since 1997, when Myanmar joined Asean, the military regime has been accused of forced labour, systematic torture of political prisoners and shooting protesting monks. Thailand has been flooded with political refugees, especially ethnic minorities such as Karen and Shan, fleeing the burning and pillaging of the Burmese military offensives. A recent report from Harvard law school calls for the UN security council to establish an investigation into crimes against humanity and war crimes in Myanmar.
Whether or not Myanmar should be suspended from Asean is one issue, but to suggest there are not enough grounds to even consider it is an insult to the endless sufferings of Myanmar people which Asean has singularly failed to alleviate.
It is clear Asean's policy of "constructive engagement" has failed to move Myanmar's generals away from their bunker mentality and convince them of the need for a transition towards democracy. Asean has of course called for Suu Kyi's release. But if the junta takes no notice and the court finds her guilty, after the usual round of polite protest, nothing will happen - it will be business as usual.
The real issue, however, is not sanctions or engagement, but the type of sanctions, and the terms of engagement. But as long as Asean engages in unconditional diplomacy, sanctions are necessary to indicate the diplomatic rejection of a brutal regime. Up to now, the junta has survived thanks to support from China and Russia in the UN security council, and the cynical scramble for Myanmar's rich natural resources which has united India, Thailand and Singapore with China and Russia. Suu Kyi will continue to languish behind bars (or under house arrest) as long as pressure on the generals is constantly deflected by the competing greed of these nations.
