Thwarted. That must be how Senior-General Than Shwe is feeling this week in Rangoon. Despite his refusal to speak on the matter, the dear general must have been eagerly looking forward to presiding over his Asean colleagues at key meetings in Rangoon, but this was not to be.

In the past year the domestic media hyped up preparations for the Asean chair. Despite the shrinking economy, projects to upgrade hotels, meeting facilities and Rangoon's notorious roads were started.

In April, even as Asean foreign ministers were publicly admitting that the Burma chair was a bad idea, it was declared that preparations for the Burma chairmanship were "on course".

In late May, three weeks after bombs wrecked two shopping centres and the Yangon Convention Centre which was being renovated to host Asean meetings, the regime that calls itself the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) awarded Singapore information technology company CNA Group a $10.6 million deal to expand Rangoon's International Airport.

It certainly looked as if wannabe Emperor Than Shwe was determined not to let a couple of bombs and unprecedented statements by Asean leaders get in the way of the legitimacy and prestige he could derive from the chair (or possibly in his mind, the 'throne').

When matters became increasingly heated, the general and his boys even resorted to playing the China card. Two weeks ago, Thailand-based activists were told that China supported the regime's 'right' to chair Asean.

Diplomats, media and activists were being encouraged to think that with China acting as their 'godfather', the SPDC was invincible, that Asean would cower in fright and withdraw its objections.

Strategy backfired

It would appear that the strategy backfired. Under a Burma chair, the USA and other western partners were likely to downgrade or even boycott the key Asean meetings. Without their presence to counterweight China, many Asean governments would have shuddered at the possibility of being swallowed up when all they wanted is lots of profitable economic engagement.

So, a compromise was reached. The Asean foreign ministers tried to be gentle as possible, but beyond the diplomatic, face-saving text of the announcement confirming Burma's deferral, it is clear that Asean finally put its foot down.

From the Burmese regime's point of view, compromise is a sign of weakness. This decision would definitely demoralise them as they would interpret it as a defeat.

Pro-democracy and ethnic nationality movements in Burma should feel encouraged that they are not alone. Many Asean countries have openly made a stand for human rights and democracy in their country.

While like me, many human rights activists must be delighted that Asean has finally found its spine, it had better learn to sit up straight and be pro-active about human rights and democracy in the region.

The deferral should not be an excuse to forget about Burma for the next 12 months. Asean must finally learn that consistent pressure produces stronger results than unconditional engagement.

Asean must keep up the pressure to ensure that the Burmese regime actually delivers genuine national reconciliation and democratisation as promised. Otherwise, Burma will continue to threaten regional security and fester like a thorn in Asean's side.

DEBBIE STOTHARD, a longtime Burma analyst, is Coordinator of the Alternative Asean Network on Burma (Altsean-Burma). A former journalist and academic, she has been actively supporting Burma's pro-democracy movement since 1988.