What’s Asean’s real policy towards its troublesome member, Burma? Officially it’s still the much-criticized “constructive engagement.” But when the international heat is on the entrenched Burmese military regime, as it is now, the regional grouping somewhat changes its tune.

Take the current run-up to the Asean summit-cum-East Asian summit in Kuala Lumpur next week. Asean foreign ministers have started to press the regime to make a start on its promised “road map to democracy.” They also called for a deadline for opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s total of more than 10 years house detention.

Usually, the grouping tries to keep the Burma issue away from the international spotlight. But the US in particular is highlighting the Rangoon junta’s stranglehold on its own people, and its recalcitrance in the face of the barrage of international pressure to make a realistic first step on its proclaimed road to democracy. Hence the Asean foreign ministers rather bold statement, by Asean standards.

Let’s hope this stronger tack is not just a temporary expedient.

The ministers expectedly only went so far in stretching Asean’s traditional “non-interference” code. As host Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar told reporters: “This [summit] is not a meeting on Myanmar [Burma.] Read, Asean will try to keep the issue in the background.

Syed Hamid did say ministers wanted Rangoon to be “more responsive to the wishes of the international community.” But this probably reflects the fact that strong criticism and sanctions of Burma by the US and EU, and implied unhappiness with Asean’s softer approach, potentially threatens the region’s important trade with the West.

On the surface, at least, it seems Asean buys the Rangoon line that it actually intends to march towards democracy. The only ostensible sign of that has been on-off sessions of the constitution-drafting National Convention, which reconvened on Monday. That’s supposed to be part of the first step of the regime’s seven-step “road map to democracy.”

But the junta consistently declines to give any time frame for the NC, which means it could carry on through the whole of 2006. It also blames Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy’s boycott of the NC, as well as that of some ethnic groups, for lack of progress.

That leaves mainly hand-picked NC candidates, and the prospect of a truly democratic charter just a pipe dream. For instance, prominent Mon politician Nai Ngwe Thein recently stated that any resulting new constitution will not constitute any democratic practices.

“Having studied their [government's] drafts for a new constitution, it has to be realized that amendments can only be made with at least a 75 percent vote,” he said “But since the military is entitled to 25 percent of the seats in parliament, amending the constitution requires military approval.”

So effectively, Rangoon has made no serious start on the democratic path. We praise Asean foreign ministers for drawing attention to this. But the lame “constructive engagement” policy remains.

Asean needs genuine political will to press for real reconciliation in Burma. If it continues to stick to its line that lack of democracy and human rights in Burma are its own domestic affair, the grouping can expect more international cold-shouldering. If, however, the Thursday foreign ministers’ statement represents a serious Asean move to join the world in putting pressure on Rangoon to reform, it can only improve Asean’s international standing.