It's less than a week since Burma's generals decided to defer taking the rotating chairmanship of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in 2006. But as other developments in the region quickly take hold, it seems ages ago that this significant step was announced in Vientiane.
While Asean ponders the consequences of Rangoon's decision, the United Nations seems to offer some promise. The visit to Burma beginning yesterday of Jim Morris, the executive director of the World Food Programme, could help ease the restrictions placed on UN agencies operating in the country over the past several months.
That the generals are allowing such a high-level officer to inspect projects in border areas indicates their appreciation of the need for humanitarian and development assistance.
But it may be harder to draw the generals into discussion about a possible visit by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Agreeing to receive such a figure would open the door to requests the generals would find difficult to turn down, and outright refusal to do so would show lack of courtesy to an organisation that was once headed by a Burmese.
Mr Morris is the first top level UN officer to be admitted into Burma for about a year. The UN special envoy, Razali Ismail, and special rapporteur on human rights have not been allowed in for that long.
But Li Zhaoxing, China's foreign minister, has had no such problems. After meeting the Asean foreign ministers, he left Vientiane for Rangoon on Wednesday, foregoing the organisation's pride and joy, the Asean Regional Forum.
There has been no word on whom Mr Li saw or what he discussed. But he was unlikely to have been snubbed as Mr Razali was in Vientiane by Burmese Foreign Minister Nyan Win. And given the timing, which coincided with fierce lobbying for enlargement of the UN Security Council, there was strong ground to believe that Mr Li's quick departure for Rangoon was linked. Many knowledgeable sources now say his main mission was to secure Burma's vote against Japan's bid for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
Two days earlier, on July 25, most countries seeking permanent seats on the UNSC reportedly hammered out a common position at a meeting in London. The position sees the African Union (AU) _ comprising Nigeria, South Africa, Libya and Egypt _ relaxing its proposal for veto powers being immediately granted to six new permanent members.
This would bring them into consonance with the Group of Four _ comprising Japan, India, Brazil and Germany _ who are agreeable to a freeze of 15 years for activation of veto powers after permanent membership is granted. The AU, however, has yet to secure agreement to the relaxed stand among all members. At the same time, the G4 agreed to back the AU's call for five non-permanent members, instead of holding out for only four, as was the group's previous stand.
China's recent anti-Japan protests and remarks are seen as largely motivated by its opposition to Japan's bid to secure the international recognition and powers that would come with permanent membership of the UNSC. Britain, France, Russia and the United States are the other permanent members of the council enjoying veto powers. Ten non-permanent members currently serve two-year terms on a rotational basis.
Why rising China is opposed to Japan's bid to better its position in the world body remains something of a mystery, although certain events make this understandable, notably Tokyo's closeness to Washington on the matter of Taiwan, which Beijing considers a renegade province.
Japanese Foreign Minister Nobutaka Machimura also left Vientiane early and headed immediately for New York.
If Mr Li, the Chinese foreign minister, did hurry away from Vientiane in order to secure Burma's vote against Japan's bid to rise in the UNSC, the junta still counts. One question then is whether Rangoon acquiesced in recognition of past and present assistance from Beijing, or bargained for more in exchange?
Another question is whether Rangoon will show commitment to its membership of the UN _ and of Asean _ by behaving accordingly. That, for both organisations, would mean reform, at an acceptable pace and level.