Curiously, it appears the meeting will be stocked almost entirely with—to put it politely—Rangoon military regime apologists, under a cloak of academic distinction and alleged Burma-expert status. The phalanx of worldwide pro-democracy non-government organizations which keep a watchful, critical eye on the regime are all uninvited, and some apparently are organizing protest in Brussels on the day.

As well they might, because why did the EC choose two well-known regime sympathizers to draw up a report on Burma, scheduled to be the centerpiece of the meeting? Why is the report short on humanitarian aid to Burma, the EC’s responsibility, and long on a plea to the EU to drop its sanctions and be nice to the poor, misunderstood generals who rule Burma? Why are the two EC-sponsored stars being joined by other pro-regime – or at least, anti-sanctions – stooges to try to press the EU to take a softer line, while facing almost no (invited) anti-regime spokesmen?

Ye gods!

Let’s take a closer look at the main figures in the session’s panels. For a start, authors of the report are Professor Robert Taylor and Morten Pedersen. Taylor, currently in a semi-retired position at Singapore’s Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, has for many years been bleating his message about the kindly generals running Burma, and the positive aspects of their policies, driving the country’s economy into the ground and stamping on dissent, to anyone who cares to listen. The academic was born in the United States, but has switched to first Australian then British citizenship, serving for a while at London’s prestigious School for Oriental and African Studies.

Before Burma’s ill-fated general election in May 1990, Taylor confidently predicted the junta’s party would do “extremely well.” As it turned out, the party scraped a meager 10 of the 485 parliamentary seats, while the opposition National League for Democracy swept through with 392 seats. The regime at the time naturally chose to ignore the result, saying it was only to elect people to draw up a new constitution—a task now vested in the sham National Convention—and not to form a new government. It was the first time it had mentioned a new charter. And Taylor has since been reported as saying, in so many words, that the election is no longer valid and can be ignored.

Pederson, a Danish political scientist, now works for the International Crisis Group. He is credited with saying that human rights in Burma were a “luxury.” They are joined by well-known opponent of sanctions Kyaw Yin Hlaing, from the University of Singapore, and another kindred soul Derek Tonkin, former British ambassador to Thailand, Vietnam and Laos.

What happens if the EU endorses the sentiments of these distinguished gentlemen? Maybe the EC has wanted an excuse for more involvement in Burma. But as John Jackson, director of The Burma Campaign UK, told The Irrawaddy: “The EU’s Burma Day seems like a meeting of the flat earth society.”