Does that have something to do this this?  North Korea next from Clinton visit?

----------------------
United States faces critical juncture in Burma

Washington, DC, United States, — U.S. Senator Jim Webb’s visit to Burma last week to negotiate the release of a detained American was fraught with complexity. In one sense, the initiation of negotiations undermined the cause of Aung San Suu Kyi, the prisoner in Burma most deserving of freedom. At the same time, the all too rare direct U.S.-Burma contact has created a critical juncture for U.S. policy toward the reclusive junta.

Though it remains unclear why Burma’s military leaders were willing to release their American prisoner, the United States should capitalize on the goodwill generated from this rare opportunity by engaging the authoritarian regime. If positive momentum can continue to build behind this event, then the United States may, over time, be able to establish greater interconnectivity with the closed country.

In May, eccentric American activist John Yettaw entered Burma and paid an illegal and uninvited visit to Aung San Suu Kyi, Burma’s democratically elected leader who also happens to have been under house arrest for more than a decade. Yettaw’s thoughtless visit earned Suu Kyi an extra 18-month sentence.

Webb’s decision to reach out to the Burmese government to seek Yettaw’s release was as strategically prudent as it was morally unfortunate. While Yettaw’s seven-year sentence in a hard labor camp hardly seems warranted, he did in fact commit a crime. Suu Kyi, who remains locked up, committed no crime.

In an attempt to refrain from being excessively judgmental, it is important to recognize that Burma had no incentive to release Yettaw; winning his freedom is the best outcome the United States could have expected in this situation. These circumstances exist because the United States has no connectivity to Burma.

At best, 20 years of U.S. economic sanctions have achieved little more than assuaging American moral indignation toward the behavior of Burma’s leadership. At worst, U.S. sanctions have helped keep Burma and its citizens mired in poverty. Strategically, U.S. sanctions have resulted in long severed ties with Burma, making it nearly impossible to exercise leverage or influence Burma’s behavior.

With such an utter lack of influence over the behavior of the Burmese government, it would be unreasonable to expect Senator Webb’s visit to achieve more than it did. Certainly there could be no realistic expectation that Webb could have won Suu Kyi’s freedom, despite the grumblings of some pro-democracy advocates.

That the United States has virtually no influence on the behavior of Burma’s junta is as morally repugnant as Suu Kyi’s continued captivity. When the Burmese government suspends the results of democratic elections, refuses urgently needed humanitarian aid out of paranoia and detains thousands of political prisoners for participating in peaceful demonstrations, the injustice of Suu Kyi’s detention simply becomes a microcosm of broader injustices that exist countrywide. Suu Kyi’s condition is deplorable, but so too is the status of thousands of other political prisoners in the country.

The only solution to this sad situation is some form of engagement. The United States has maintained sanctions for decades to no avail. Economic sanctions against Burma have adversely impacted Burma’s poor citizens far more than they have Burma’s ruling elite.

If the United States does not seek to initiate both formal and Track II – that is, nongovernmental – discussions with Burma now, there is little chance that another opportunity for engagement will come along any time soon.

--

(Van Jackson is the founder and executive editor of Asia Chronicle. A nationally recognized expert in U.S.-Asia relations, he also writes a daily column on Asia policy for the Washington, D.C. edition of Examiner.com. The views expressed are his own. He can be contacted at editor@asiachroniclenews.com. ©Copyright Van Jackson.)