Writer Yap Mun Ching says the jailing by the Burmese military regime of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi reveals a number of serious problems and frustrations for the Burmese opposition groups as well as those states seeking to pave the way for political reconciliation in Burma on the one hand and the release of Suu Kyi on the other.

Yap is right to focus on UN special envoy Razali Ismail, a Malaysian who is also a confidante of and advisor to outgoing Malaysian premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Razali's recent visit to Rangoon, the 10th in three years, has resulted yet again in abject failure.

Yap gives a number of reasons for this, but there is one that Yap skims. She fails to draw out the broader implications for political change in Burma, and anti-democratic Asean more generally.

Razali owns 30 per cent of Malaysian company Iris Technologies, which has business ties with Rangoon, and through this link the murderous Burmese generals have Razali just where they want him: in their pockets.

Where Razali has dismally failed to get the ears of the junta, he has succeeded in winning a major contract to supply smart chips for electronic passports. And no prizes for guessing who owns the company that is to develop the passports for Burma: the generals.

Amazingly, though, Burma remains one of the poorest countries in the world; most Burmese can't afford to travel abroad, let alone fees for the new passports.

So where do Razali's priorities and loyalties lie? The UN and Asean may as well send the druglords from Southeast Asia's Golden Triangle to cut political deals with the junta over Suu Kyi's release.

This is akin to despatching Mahathir to Zimbabwe to talk number one thief Robert Mugabe into halting the blind robbing of his country, and the repression and threats to kill black oppositionists and white farmers whose lands he has forcibly taken.

Like lead goose Malaysia, Asean has again proved to be a pathetic joke, not only for its ineptitude but also for its farcical policies, especially when dealing with its own membership.

It's all very well to join hands onstage for photo opportunities and to exhibit a united stance among Asean states. But as in the Razali case , the question is begged: who, and what, do these turkeys really represent?

When Asean admitted Burma into its fold in 1997, it was on the basis that through 'constructive engagement' the political transition to democracy in Burma would be accelerated.

It has failed miserably. In fact, Burma has taken advantage of Asean to jettison political reform. After all, that is just what each of Asean's authoritarian regimes, which are averse to criticism, have also failed to start real political reform.

And the best bit: Burma takes over the Asean presidency in 2006.

It is so much easier, and convenient, for Razali and Asean to do business with fellow corrupt regimes than it is to 'engage' them 'constructively' to seek political compromise or introduce the winds of political change for the sake of their citizens and the long-term stability of their nations.

Talk is cheap, or with two tongues. Asean has again proved this.

Editor's note

: Malaysiakini reported Razali's involvement in Iris Technology last November and his denial of any business dealings with the military junta ( Razali: Position in Iris has no bearing on UN job ).