Saturday, July 26, 2003; Page A20

In his July 15 op-ed column, David Steinberg suggested that the "unresolved issue of power-sharing" between the ethnic Burman majority and Burma's ethnic minorities is at the heart of that country's political misfortunes. This is not so. While some ethnic minorities aspired to independence 40 years ago, today they recognize the impracticality of separate existences and aspire to self-determination within a democratic Union of Burma. They wish to have some authority over their social and economic affairs and want this to be reflected in
a new constitution.

Although it has largely subdued the majority of insurgencies, Burma's military regime keeps alive the notion of a serious internal security threat to justify its iron grip on power.

Mr. Steinberg also said that Burma's military leaders are ignorant of international events. On the contrary, they follow developments in the world carefully and try to interpret them to their own purposes at home, although they often do so ineptly. They resent the outside world and wish Burma to remain free of external influence. This means they will defy international political overtures or pressures, and they will not allow foreign companies to operate freely in Burma. They will insist on "protecting" their population from foreign influence that might enter
the country through free movement or free exchange of information.

Finally, no evidence supports Mr. Steinberg's conclusion that engagement with Burma's regime will encourage positive change. Japan and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations have been trying for years to engage Burma through investment and economic assistance and have not affected the regime's willingness to embark on political liberalization. Even the United States tried constructive engagement during the years of relative detente between the military leadership and the National League for Democracy (NLD) since 2000. Whatever progress we hoped for has been dashed by the regime's imprisonment of General Secretary Aung San Suu Kyi, the rest of the NLD leadership and other democracy activists.

Burma's military leaders prefer to face the consequences of sanctions and international opprobrium. Under these circumstances, the United States has no option but to move forward with sanctions, as it has done, and to join others in affirming the unacceptability of continued military rule in Burma. Engagement is no longer an appropriate option.

PRISCILLA CLAPP

Washington

The writer was U.S. charge d'affaires in Burma from 1999 to 2002.

C 2003 The Washington Post Company