Ibrahim Gambari’s mission, in early March, comes on the heels of the junta jettisoning its commitments to the world body to hold a dialogue with Burma’s pro-democracy leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, as part of a political reform process that is open and accommodating.

The junta, which has renamed the country Myanmar, has a new political reality for the U.N. envoy to grapple with. In addition to making a sudden announcement in mid-February that it will conduct a referendum in May for a controversial new constitution, the military leaders have said that Suu Kyi will be barred from participating in the 2010 parliamentary elections to follow.

The success or failure of Gambari’s visit will be gauged on what he achieves in the wake of the junta’s tough line to pursue its political agenda, which is to entrench the military’s power in the South-east Asian country at the expense of a genuine, inclusive political solution. How he handles the ban on Suu Kyi, who has been under house arrest for over 12 of the past 18 years, will test the resolve of the world body’s commitment towards the country’s beleaguered people.

Gambari’s initial response to the junta’s disclosure about the May referendum has won little support among Burmese opposition groups. ”This is a significant step as it marks the first time that we have an established time frame for the implementation of (the junta’s) political roadmap,” Gambari is reported to have said during a recent visit to China, a key supporter of the Burmese regime.

”We don’t believe he can produce any positive results from his upcoming trip. He has already failed and this visit is just to confirm again that he fails,” says Aung Din, executive director of the U.S. Campaign for Burma, a Washington D.C.-based lobby group. ”The regime has rejected all of his recommendations and decided to continue its one-sided act. Ironically, he endorsed the regime’s plan to continue its one-sided act as the significant step forward.”

If the U.N. wants to be taken seriously on Burma, Gambari and Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon ”have to admit that they failed,” Aung Din added in an e-mail interview. ”They have to make a sincere judgement on their mandate and mission, and not to make the world believe that there are some developments in Burma. Their hollow optimism and inability to admit to their failures has misled the world.”

A welcome starting point would be an admission of the junta’s reluctance to accept Gambari’s views during his recent visits, noted Aung Din. ”They need to tell the world sincerely that the generals in Burma are not listening to their suggestions, and that they need to call for the Security Council to step in with an effective resolution that will force the regime to listen to (Gambari’s) voice.”

The Nigerian diplomat’s role as a special U.N. envoy took on added significance late last year following a harsh crackdown of peaceful protests in Burma. The street demonstrations in Rangoon and other Burmese cities, which were led by Buddhist monks, and drew tens of thousands of supporters, were the largest witnessed in the country in nearly two decades. The September protests grew out of public discontent after the junta raised the price of oil by 500 percent in mid-August with no warning.

According to the U.N., a little over 30 people were killed in the crackdown, when soldiers and the riot police opened fire on unarmed demonstrators.

Opposition groups say the death toll, including monks, was far higher, in the hundreds. In addition, nearly 700 people were arrested and thrown into the country’s notorious jails.

The international outrage that followed the crackdown forced the junta to open its doors and let Gambari in. During his two visits, he secured a commitment from the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC), as the junta is formally known, to start a dialogue with Suu Kyi. That breakthrough was hailed, since the U.N. envoy appeared to have won support from the generals for an inclusive political reform process, including a role for the leader of the main opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), in drafting the constitution.

But reality proved otherwise. In January, during a rare meeting she had with leaders of the NLD, Suu Kyi revealed that she was ”not satisfied” with the five rounds of talks she had had with the junta’s liaison officer, Labour Minister Aung Kyi. The talks had little substance, she had said, since they lacked ”any time frame” for this mediation effort.

The junta confirmed such a reality in February, announcing plans for a referendum for a controversial new constitution in May and a general election in two years with no role for Suu Kyi. They were decisions that made any future talks between Aung Kyi and Suu Kyi meaningless.

”The junta have no right to bar Suu Kyi from participating in the elections,” Zin Linn, a spokesman for the National Coalition Government for the Union of Burma (NCGUB), the Burmese government in exile, told IPS. ”They have to listen to the people’s voices, if Suu Kyi should participate at the elections or not.”

The political ban on the NLD leader stems from a clause that has been written into the new constitution, which was drafted over a 14-year period.

Under this clause, Burmese citizens married to foreigners are prevented from running for the post of president. Suu Kyi was married to Michael Aris, a British academic, who died in 1999.

The new constitution set for approval during the May plebiscite also has other features that questions the SPDC’s notion of democracy. Significant are the clauses that seek to perpetuate the role of the military, which has held Burma under an oppressive grip since capturing power in a 1962 coup.

”The army chief and not the elected president has been given powers to mount a response when there is a state of emergency. If he feels there is a threat and wants to stage a coup, he can do constitutionally,” says Aung Naing Oo, a Burmese political analyst, living in exile in Thailand. ”The army chief will also have control of three important ministries, interior, defence and the border areas.”

If Gambari comes out in support of the new constitution, then it means that the U.N. is also endorsing such undemocratic features of the charter, he explained in an interview. ”The Burmese regime will not change its mind now. I don’t think the U.N. will be left with any credibility after this.”