SOMETHING is brewing in Yangon. This can be said with reasonable confidence after the latest round of consultations Mr Razali Ismail, the United Nations special envoy, had last week with Myanmar's ruling generals and Ms Aung San Suu Kyi.
'It had better be good' might well be the rejoinder of the Asean countries and the wider world. The patience of South-east Asian nations - in particular, Singapore, Thailand and Malaysia - is wearing thin after the military regime's cynical calibrations to stave off ostracism with insubstantial concessions to the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD).
The generals of the ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) should be mindful of the fact that the events of Sept 11 and the fall-out have cast a pall on the region. When Mr Razali began in October 2000 to execute the UN's brief of persuading the generals to 'regularise' their rule by diktat, much of South-east Asia was nicely on the mend after being almost wrecked in the 1997-98 financial hurricane.
Myanmar's treatment of the NLD and Ms Aung San Suu Kyi was an embarrassment, but international censure was tempered by Asean's intercession.
The terror attacks on America have changed the equation. Myanmar is no longer a peripheral matter. Rightly or wrongly in post-Sept 11 permutations, the region is being seen collectively as some sort of security risk - with all that this implies in terms of investment and tourism flows, market access and stable governance. Investment flows, for one, are down. It is hard enough for the one, two or three dependable countries to avoid being lumped together with insurgency-plagued nations such as Indonesia and the Philippines.
In these circumstances, Myanmar's continued resistance to full political liberalisation is not any longer an aberration to be played down, much less excused. In foreign eyes, it is being twinned with fragile security that would give South-east Asia as a whole an unflattering rating.
Twelve years after Myanmar's generals refused to honour the result of a democratic election, it is payback time. Myanmar's people have a right to expect redress.
Mr Razali, who was making his seventh visit, was said to be so frustrated with the slow progress of reform that he could resign if this trip produced no breakthrough. It is doubtful the generals would be impressed if he did, but there is hope neither party need be tested. The regime's spokesman, Labour Minister Tin Win, said after Mr Razali left that an important announcement was imminent.
Yangon-based diplomats said Mr Razali himself was unusually buoyant. 'A few important developments may well happen quite quickly,' he reportedly said. Nothing could be more welcome than a deal that would permit Ms Aung San Suu Kyi full release from the periodic detention she has been subjected to, in one form or another, after she led the NLD to victory in 1990. If this is too much to expect, the release of all remaining political prisoners has to be considered the minimal concession.
Only 258 have been freed after Mr Razali's mission began, but about 1,000 remain in detention, including those who won seats in the 1990 election. If prisoner release is the extent of the regime's cooperation, it has to be accompanied by a timetable for Ms Aung San Suu Kyi's speedy return to national life. After that, in Mr Razali's formulation, the NLD and the SPDC will need to seek compromises in administrative functions.
Only with power sharing can the generals rehabilitate themselves. It is a long haul and a tough bet, but the regime is running out of options.