Since its emergence in 1990, ambiguity has been the dominant feature of the decisions and practices of the Burmese military junta, or the so called State Peace and Development Council (SPDC). It was not surprising, therefore, to see analysts of Burmese affairs holding conflicting interpretations and views over the recent leadership reshuffle in Rangoon.
In late August, the SPDC announced a new power structure with its chairman General Than Shwe, its second man General Maung Aye, and its third man General Khin Nyunt being installed in newly created posts of president, vice-president, and prime minister respectively.
To some observers the new arrangement signified that power was shifting from the ageing and hardened leader Shwe to younger and more moderate Generals led by Nyunt.
The latter has been known for being a relatively moderate and pragmatic figure in the repressive regime, and for advocating dialogue with rather than the repression of the opposition represented by Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD).
Different view
Other Burma-watchers hold a completely different view. To them the reshuffle strengthened Shwe and hardliners' power as it pushed General Nyunt out of the SPDC, the highest decision-making body, and replaced him with one of his fiercest opponents, namely Lieutenant General Soe Win.
By putting him in charge of the day-to-day running of the impoverished country, Nyunt became an implementer rather than a maker of policies and could be solely blamed for any failure.
Should he be removed from his last powerful position as head of military intelligence, Nyunt will turn into a lame-duck. Apart from arguments over the winners and losers in the recent reshuffle, the other development that has attracted observers was Nyunt's first speech as Burma's new prime minister. In a reformist, but ambiguous, message to the Burmese, he talked about "free and fair" elections to be held under a new constitution.
The fact that he gave no details about the authority that would write the new constitution, the date on which general elections would be held, and the fate of the ruling military junta in the future, made many Burmese pessimistic.
To them, Nyunt's promise and the government reshuffle were nothing more than attempts to improve the SPDC's ugly image in the face of regional and international pressure and criticism, and to escape a Thailand-sponsored roadmap for re-establishing democracy in Burma.
Bangkok, backed by its major partners in the Asean, has recently talked about a proposal aimed at achieving peace and national reconciliation in Burma in order to rescue the Burmese from declining living conditions, isolation, and the consequences of economic sanctions imposed by the West.
Not much is known about the Thai roadmap due to Bangkok's refusal to disclose its details before receiving Rangoon's approval. However, based on comments made by the Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his Foreign Minister SurakIart Sathirathai, the initiative calls for the release of Suu Kyi.
It also calls for the organisation of a forum in Bangkok before the end of this year to collectively try "to make Myanmar acceptable to the international community and to see that the Myanmarese people have better lives", while taking into account such sensitive issues as the country's national sovereignty and dignity. In addition to Burma and Thailand, five other players are expected to participate in the proposed forum: the United Nations (which has unsuccessfully been leading the process of reconciliation in Burma since 2000), the United States (which leads political pressure and economic embargo), Britain (Burma's former colonial master), China (Burma's biggest economic partner and the SPDC's strongest supporter), and Japan (the major source of aid and investments that could help Burma's crumbling economy).
It is not at all unlikely that Beijing has been behind the recent measures adopted by Yangon. In other words, they have possibly been inspired by the Chinese ahead of any foreign intervention that might lead to installing an anti-China regime in Rangoon.
It is believed that should Thailand's proposed roadmap be implemented, it would certainly result in holding general elections under international supervision. In this case, the Burmese opposition led by Suu Kyi will certainly win and form the new government with all the implication of such a development in terms of Burma's foreign policy. The country under Aung San Suu Kyi would definitely maintain close relationships with all the states that tightened the noose against the military junta and supported the pro-democracy movement, particularly the US and EU. Regionally, it would strengthen its ties with New Delhi, given the personal bond existing between the Aung Sans and India and the fact that the latter gave the family sanctuary after it was forced into exile in the early 1960s.
Traditional rivals
Such a scenario will not be, of course, in Beijing's favour but will serve the interests of its traditional rivals.
It should be noted that by exploiting the SPDC's isolation, Beijing has been able to maintain diverse links with Rangoon and to consolidate its military influence in the Indian Ocean. It has established invulnerable naval bases, equipped with sophisticated monitoring and espionage systems, on Burmese soil opposite India's east coast.
During the past few years, China has been the only gateway open for the SPDC to prolong its rule and to deal with the country's economic problems. Burma's senior generals have regularly been visiting Beijing to sign bilateral deals, particularly in the field of military co-operation. It was reported that since 1992, the SPDC has spent about $3 billion on Chinese-made arms and security equipment to tighten its grip on Burma and the Burmese.
It was also reported that Beijing provided Rangoon with loans and grants to help the latter escape its financial and economic crises.
The most recent Chinese aid was a $200 million loan in late August.
Given the above background, the Chinese role in obstructing attempts by Thailand to bring Burma out of its dark abyss must be worthy of consideration and must be dealt with in earnest.
The situation serves as a reminder of Pakistan's role in Afghanistan. If the international community had met Islamabad's interference with a firm position from the beginning, the Afghans would not have suffered six rough years of the worse kinds of human rights abuses at the hands of the Taliban.