By moving to impose the toughest sanctions on Burma so far of any Western country, the US Congress may finally give the junta an overdue lesson on the economic pain such punitive measures can bring.

The prospect of this lesson in the offing has not been lost on Burmese exiles in Thailand and groups seeking an end to Rangoon's military dictatorship.

They are also banking on the fact that Burma's rulers are not taking the political invective flowing out of Washington this week - including measures in Congress to bar the entry of Burmese goods - to mean it can be business as usual.

''The effort by the United States on the military government is what is needed. The sanctions are tougher than the past efforts,'' says Zinn Linn of the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma, the government-in-exile set up after the 1990 parliamentary elections whose results were ignored by Rangoon.

Produce change

The measures sought by the US Congress ''will cause a stir because the language is so strong,'' adds Debbie Stothard of the Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (ALTSEAN), a regional group lobbying for human rights and democracy in Burma.

''It will revive our faith that sanctions can produce change, as it did in South Africa during apartheid,'' she says in an interview.

The leaders of the junta, too, are now conscious of what awaits them after their crackdown on opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and her supporters, says Aung Zaw, editor of The Irrawaddy , a magazine on Burmese affairs published in northern Thailand.

''That comes out in what has been said before and after the May 30 incident.''

On May 30, the military regime triggered global outrage after Suu Kyi and members of her party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), were attacked by individuals linked to the junta while they were visiting supporters in a town north of Rangoon.

Although the junta maintained that four people died in the clashes and 50 were injured, human rights groups believe that over 70 people were killed and more than100 NLD members were injured or are missing.

Noble laureate Suu Kyi and 18 NLD officials were subsequently whisked away by the junta and are being kept in ''protective custody''.

''Before May 30, the military leaders were saying that sanctions were an imaginary fear, but after the clashes the message coming out hints of a genuine fear of what can happen,'' says Aung Zaw.

''The generals are concerned, because sanctions are one way to cut the lifeline of the regime.''

Neo-colonialist efforts

According to Zinn Linn, the leaders of the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), as the military government is known, have even been making public statements about a ''neo-colonialist effort to crush us through sanctions''.

The sanctions being put in place by the US Congress, especially the ban on imports from Burma, will hit Rangoon where it counts most - because the United States is the principal market for Burmese-made goods, according to a report on the impact of sanctions being prepared by ALTSEAN.

In 2001, Burma shipped US$456 million worth of goods to US markets, up from US$443 million in 2000, reveals the report due to be published in July.

The European Union, which has been a consistent second after the US market from 1995 to 2001, imported US$404 million worth of goods from in 2001.

Between 1995 and 2001, Burmese exports to the United States, European Union, Australia and Canada increased by an average of 435 percent, the report states.

''While the SPDC is making concerned efforts to develop trade regionally, it would be difficult at best to replace these major markets,'' it says.

''This (US ban) is serious, because no one else has banned imports from Burma,'' says Stothard. ''It will drastically reduced the flow of US dollars, which the SPDC needs.''

Assets freeze

The US Congress is also pushing for a freeze of assets in the United States belonging to the regime and its leaders, and for Washington to oppose any loans to Burma from international financial institutions such as the World Bank.

These sweeping measures were never the case in the past, when Western governments talked about the threat of sanctions or imposed ''tough measures'' to bring about political change in Burma.

Even when Washington banned on new US investments in Burma in 1997, the prospect of Rangoon crippling under the economic strain was not amply evident.

''A lot of US companies managed to bypass the1997 law, although campaigns in the US by groups like the Free Burma Coalition have led to some companies pulling out of Burma,'' says Stothard.

But the tough US moves may well make it easier for other western governments to take more action against Burma, or at least put the spotlight on the economic ties that other Western nations have with Rangoon.

Common misconception

For instance, Britain has spoken out against the military regime, but has not put the brakes on its investments in Burma. By 2000 Britain had close to US$1.4 billion worth of investments in the country, according to ALTSEAN's findings.

''The common perception that Asian countries are the largest investors in Burma is a misconception,'' states the ALTSEAN report.

''During the 1990-2000 period 'western countries' disbursed more than 80 percent of investments that they committed, accounting for about 65 percent of actual FDI (foreign direct investments).''

Countries like Britain argued that greater economic clout provided opportunities to work from within to elicit change. Burma's South-east Asian neighbours, too, opted for ''constructive engagement'' to nudge the junta toward openness.

But in the wake of the US Congress' moves, it may soon prove embarrassing to be seen cuddling with Burma's strongmen for the sake of profits and talking the language of democracy at the same time. - IPS