In Sweden, people all around me got emotionally involved in what was happening in that far-away country. They organised spontaneous rallies and demonstrations, partly to inform their fellow countrymen about the situation in Burma, partly to stiffen the resolve of their own government in dealing with the crisis.

At a book fair in the city of Gothenburg, a rally was quickly organised with retired South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu as lead speaker (why he was in Gothenburg in the first place, I never found out). Crimson armbands were handed out, representing solidarity with the Burmese monks whose robes were of that colour. 

At the rally, many speakers including Tutu demanded that China exert its influence on the Burmese junta, failing which they would boycott the 2008 Beijing Olympics. They were loudly applauded.

Retired Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu addressing a crowd in a Gothenburg hall. I squeezed my way to the front to grab this photo.

Frankly, I thought they were a bit naïve, firstly about the degree of influence the Chinese government has over the junta, and secondly, about whether Beijing would take the threat of a boycott seriously, but there was no doubting the sincerity and urgency of the crowd's feelings.

Honestly, it was probably the most embarrassing part about being Singaporean at a time like this.

European governments were urging boycotts of a different kind: economic sanctions. China immediately ruled out the idea. As far as I can see, Asean governments kept mum, offering no support whatsoever. In fact, Asean has pursued for 10 years its (now proven to be utterly ineffective) policy of "constructive engagement" with the junta.

No doubt, Singapore, as Asean chair, issued some nice-sounding statements. George Yeo, our Foreign Minister, said on behalf of Asean foreign ministers that they "were appalled to receive reports of automatic weapons being used and demanded that the Myanmar government immediately desist from the use of violence against demonstrators."

"They expressed their revulsion to Myanmar Foreign Minister Nyan Win over reports that the demonstrations in Myanmar are being suppressed by violent force and that there has been a number of fatalities."

"They strongly urged Myanmar to exercise utmost restraint and seek a political solution. They called on Myanmar to resume its efforts at national reconciliation with all parties concerned and work towards a peaceful transition to democracy."

I chuckled over the bit that "demanded that the Myanmar government immediately desist", because nowhere in the statement did the Asean governments indicate what they would do if the junta ignored their demand. In fact, mere days later, George Yeo himself told the world that Asean governments had no influence whatsoever with Burma.

Well, of course not. How else could it be, since Asean has ruled out the possibility of kicking Burma out of their cosy club, and cold-shouldered the idea of economic sanctions? In fact, many Asean countries, such as Singapore and Thailand, trade extensively with that pariah of a state.

Asean can have influence; our plea that we have none is meant only to evade responsibility. We're merely hoping that the rest of the world would not blame us if no improvement occurs in Burma.

Precisely because Burma is rich in natural resources, selective economic sanctions can work.

By their very nature, extracted natural resources, such as natural gas and teak wood tend to be channelled through just a few agencies for export. These agencies are invariably linked to the military junta. How else would they have been able to finance their army and buy their solders' loyalties? Even the extraction of gemstones -- Burma is rich in jade, ruby and sapphire -- is controlled by military outfits. Blocking exports of these and their contingent profits would seriously hurt the junta.

Excuses about economic sanctions hurting ordinary people miss the difference between a total trade embargo and selective sanctions. I wouldn't call for a total trade embargo that might affect the imports of medicines, machinery or motorcycles, but banning trade in commodities that primarily benefit the military government is the way to go. 

The truth of the matter however is not that policymakers don't know this. Rather, it's the simple fact that no country wants to pay the price of imposing sanctions. I've read that some 20% of Bangkok's electricity is generated from natural gas piped in from Burma. China and India have broad economic and strategic priorities, not least making sure the other does not gain an advantage.

The difference between Europe and Asia seems to be in the degree in which a sense of morality permeates government, probably a reflection of their deeper degree of democracy. The people press for the price to be paid, while in Asia, governments are more interested either their own survival -- as in Vietnam and China being anxious that the Burmese people should not set a "bad" example of bringing down a totalitarian government -- or their own strategic interests. Let the Burmese people be exploited and crushed, if needed, so long as Chinese, Thai, Indian or Singaporean interests are served.

All the while I was in Europe, I felt rather ashamed to come from this part of the world.

This is not to say that begetting change in Burma will be easy. So far, the only instrument available seems to be UN envoy Ibrahim Gambari. But goodwill and diplomatic suasion will not get him very far with a government that believes in isolating their country from the world at large, and that is so out of touch with its own people as to raise fuel prices suddenly and extensively, and feature in the domestic media a lavish, multi-million-dollar wedding for the dictator's daughter.

Gambari needs to carry a big stick if his words are to carry any weight. He has to be able to say the UN will consider economic sanctions if the junta pays him no heed.

And this is where Asean has a role. Noting that China and India have competing strategic interests in Burma, with neither willing to take the first step in pressuring the Burmese junta, Asean (perhaps with Japan, Burma's largest aid giver) should be the honest broker between Beijing and New Delhi, with the aim of getting these two regional powers to agree on co-ordinated steps, so that the junta cannot play one power off the other.

It is better for Asean to play this role in support of Gambari than to plead "we have no influence". That is a shameless cop-out.

© Yawning Bread