What the world is reading

Could this be the start of a 8220;burgundy revolution8221;, asks Time. Over the past week the country8217;s Buddhist monks have kept up their protests against the Burmese junta, defying orders to return to their monasteries and broadening their defiance against the price hikes announced in August to a movement for democracy, thereby drawing Aung San Suu Kyi8217;s supporters. The cover story took stock of the monks8217; traditional place in civil society: 8220;Historically, Buddhist clerics have been a key element of resistance in Burma, from British colonial days through the democracy rallies in 1988. But this time, the monks are not simply adding their moral authority to the movement; they are leading the protests. The shift is significant, particularly for a junta that has tried to burnish its influence by linking itself to Buddhism. Burma8217;s government-run newspapers regularly display generals lavishing money on building new pagodas and monasteries. 8216;The junta has bent over backwards to show how good Buddhists they are,8217; says Josef Silverstein, a Burma expert at Rutgers University in New Jersey. 8216;For them to legitimise a crackdown, they will have to prove that the protests are being led by misguided monks who are actually misusing Buddhism.8221; But will the monks get soldiers to desist orders from the junta? It8217;s not clear. The regime is blockaded away in Naypyidaw, a new capital operationalised in 2005, and it has in any case kept strong discipline in the military, with most government positions made available to armed personnel.

Which is why, wonders The Economist The Saffron Revolution, it is important to note how the outside world handles this moment. While the UN has increased involvement, China could be key. Experience is not so heartening: 8220;China8217;s traditional posture, heard again this week, is to oppose any 8216;interference in the internal affairs of another country8217;. It trots out this formula so often when foreigners criticise its own behaviour that, even if it supports change, it is hard for it to utter more than platitudes, as it has this month, about the desirability of a 8216;democracy process that is appropriate for the country8217;. China has also been the chief beneficiary of the partial Western boycott. Myanmar offers two of the prizes China values most in its foreign friends: hydrocarbon resources and a friendly army, willing to give it access to facilities on its coast on the Bay of Bengal. China has become the junta8217;s biggest commercial partner and diplomatic supporter.8221; But China would also be desirous of gaining stability on its borders and being seen to be a responsible power ahead of the Beijing Olympics. The last thing China would want, notes the leader, are calls for a boycott.

Foreign Affairs has already put on its website an article from the November/December issue: Asia8217;s forgotten crisis: a new approach to Burma by Michael Green and Derek Mitchell. They say, in an article written before the monks began their stir, neither sanctions nor constructive engagement has worked: 8220;Given the differing perspective of interested countries, a new mulitaleral initiative cannot be based on a single, uniform approach. Sanctions policies will need to coexist with various forms of engagement, and it will be necessary to coordinate all of these measures toward the common end of encouraging reform, reconciliation, and ultimately the return of democracy. To succeed the region8217;s major players will need to work together. Bringing them together will require the United States8217; leadership. One way to proceed would be for Washington to lead the five key parties 8212;Asean, China, India, Japan and the US8212;in developing a coordinated international initiative.8221;

Meanwhile: Newsweek profiles Lt Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, till recently ISI chief and likely to succeed Gen Musharraf as chief of Pakistan8217;s army.