On October 13, ASEAN Secretary- General, Dr. Surin Pitsuwan, gave positive, if not fanciful, assessment of the likely impact of next month’s general election in Burma, the country’s first in two decades.

The long-time Thai politician said, “Myanmar [Burma] has been a major issue for ASEAN, in its co-operation and interaction with the global community. We would like to see this issue behind us. And the only way that that can be done is to make sure that this [the Burmese] election [on November 7] is going to be a relatively effective mechanism for national reconciliation.”

It is regrettable to hear someone, especially a former member of the Democrat Party of Thailand, voice a remark so damaging to democratic morality and human values.

The Secretary-General might not realize what he said and how democratic activists will view him. Like it or not, he is acting as an advocate for the Burmese regime, a military junta using ASEAN as a springboard to further its claim for international legitimacy following the election.

The comment is certainly a bitter pill for Surin, long described as an experienced politician and an “activist”, to be dishing out. The Economist magazine said in a 2008 opinion piece written about his ASEAN appointment that while most secretaries- general were, “usually a senior regional official rewarded with the post as the crowning boondoggle in a career of not rocking the boat”, Surin Pitsuwan was different because he sought an activist role in member states.

But, his apparent sell-out over change in Burma should not be misconstrued as anything unique. Surin was also used as a pawn in pursuit of narrow Thai interests in the wake of the Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s first visit to Burma last week.

The Thai leader failed to have the Thai-Burmese Myawaddy-Mae Sot border checkpoint reopened after the junta closed it in July. Thailand is the second largest cross-border commerce partner for Burma, with trade valued in 2008/09 at US$327 million, Union of Myanmar Federation of the Chamber of Commerce and Industry president Win Myint said.

Last week’s attempt by Abhisit to open the trade point, however, resulted in only mere hopes based on Naypyidaw’s promises that the gates would soon be opened.

Nonetheless the following day, Surin aired his qualified support for the Burmese electoral process. The sentiment came even as an observer on the Thai-Burmese border estimated the Thai PM’s visit to Burma would not benefit ASEAN, nor would it profit the people of Burma.

The message is clear: Thailand cares more about business than human rights abuses and the result of the election. Thailand will do what is best for Thailand, even if it means appeasing the Burmese regime.

However, despite the wishes of Burma’s generals that Thailand and regional groupings support the legitimacy of next month’s election, ASEAN has a responsibility to remind its troubling neighbor of the requisite to heed the concerns of the international community.

The record of the Southeast Asian bloc is far from promising. Only members the Philippines and Indonesia are strongly voicing their displeasure at the forthcoming Burmese election. But Thailand, at one time a partner in the pursuit of democratic aspirations for the region, has demonstrably lost its way.