During his visit to Asia, US President Barack Obama told Burmese military leaders to free pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and urged the regime to ensure that the 2010 elections are held in a “free, fair and transparent manner.”

Officials traveling with Obama also reiterated calls for a national dialogue involving all political stakeholders in Burma, especially the opposition led by Suu Kyi and ethnic groups.

A statement released after a summit meeting between the US delegation and leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Singapore called on the junta to begin “a dialogue with all stakeholders to ensure that the process is fully inclusive.”

The joint statement and Obama’s appeal to the recalcitrant regime to open up Burma and free political prisoners were just symbolic gestures. They all know that the regime won’t budge.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton admitted that there is a lot of work to do on Burma, saying: “We have no illusions that any of this will be easy or quick.”

Let’s be clear: the new US policy on Burma is comprehensive and it has received some positive feedback.

More importantly, the US remains a supporter of the democracy movement. The Burmese opposition inside and outside the country continues to count on the US and many believe Washington has a negotiating role to play in Burma’s political deadlock.

In spite of the initial favorable response to the new US policy of engagement outlined by US Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, deep-seated skepticism remains.

Recent history has indeed shown that engagement with the regime in Burma has totally failed. An endless succession of visits have been made to Burma by UN special envoys and regional leaders  hoping to find a political solution. All left empty-handed, expressing deep frustration.

Burma’s paramount leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe rarely makes any concessions because he feels he doesn’t have to. There is no reason for him to act differently this time.

After learning of the new US policy, Than Shwe is said to have told his subordinates that the US and the international community now want to engage Naypyidaw because they have finally realized the positive achievements of his regime.

It should come as no surprise that Than Shwe thinks this way. The world has changed its approach to the regime, but it hasn’t changed its ways at all. No wonder Than Shwe feels vindicated.

Nevertheless, after sending its first high-level mission to Burma in November, the US expects to see some meaningful gesture in return.

If Than Shwe doesn’t heed Obama’s call to free Suu Kyi and hold a free and fair election, the new US   administration’s engagement policy will look weak and supplicatory.

Than Shwe should not be deluded into thinking that the US has unlimited patience and that it will accept this one-sided relationship.

The plain fact is that Burma is no North Korea, where the US has a strategic interest in containing the threat posed by the rogue regime in Pyongyang. The US will continue its engagement with North Korea and even support the revival of the six-party talks.

In the case of Burma, the new US administration has adopted a carrot and stick approach and has offered a small window of opportunity that Than Shwe should not ignore. It is highly unlikely, however, that Than Shwe will respond—he simply lacks the political will to take Washington’s offer of engagement seriously.

Hostage takers rarely makes concessions, and Than Shwe is no exception.

At the end of the day, the US doesn’t want to be embarrassed before the international community should the regime reject  meaningful progress toward an improvement in relations. At some point, if talks grind to a halt—perhaps within the next six months—the US may just turn its back on engagement.

Engagement could thus be rather short-lived. Washington could lose its patience and even tighten sanctions against the regime.

In the meantime, nothing changes for the oppressed people of Burma, who must be asking themselves why the world has altered its tone and approach towards Burma while the regime hasn’t changed at all.