The current period of Suu Kyi's detention began in 2003 following the incident in which a pro-junta mob attacked her motorcade during a political tour of northern Burma.

Suu Kyi, the leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD), has spent more than 11 of the past 17 years in incarceration. The Burmese junta's extension of Suu Kyi's term of house arrest for one more year signifies that it could care less about the intense international pressure. The fiasco of the United Nations Security Council's vote on the Burma issue in January of this year, in which China and Russia exercised their vetoes, pointed to the fact that the Burmese regime no longer lives in isolation. Beijing and Moscow are now its new best friends.

Meanwhile, Western sanctions against the junta have proven hopeless. Burma is more content to trade with energy-hungry China and India, which in turn, helps bring in cash to feed the regime. Although Asean, of which Burma is a member, may have taken a harder line against the junta, the members' individual interests still prevail, and thus the Burma problem has from time to time been passed over. As a result, the military's grip on power has grown stronger day by day.

But just when the Burmese junta thought that it was easy to hand Suu Kyi a new detention order, as well as to quickly write her off as a dormant leader of the NLD, it has to think again.

She might have been in and out of house arrest for almost two decades: some might even believe that she has lost her political momentum and is getting old.

But the truth is Suu Kyi is still a political icon, highly regarded not only inside Burma, but also in the eyes of the international community.

Gordon Brown, the British prime minister-in-waiting, has written in his book, "A Woman of Courage", about Suu Kyi's campaign for democracy in the face of Burma's brutal regime. He portrays Suu Kyi as a true hero for our times and calls to the Burmese junta for her immediate release.

Suu Kyi, the Nobel laureate, has also been portrayed as a holder of moral superiority, standing in stark contrast to the devilish Burmese generals. Her words are sacrosanct. No proof is needed of her love of democracy.

Those who wish to commit political suicide could do so by "talking bad" about Suu Kyi.

Some Burmese activists argue that the longer Suu Kyi has been in detention, the more she has transformed herself into a part of the country's political problem.

Perhaps, they have failed to notice the bright side of Suu Kyi being held hostage in the midst of Burma's political crisis.

It is undeniable that her imprisonment under her own roof has kept the Burmese political impasse in the international limelight. Pro-democracy campaigns elsewhere reached their peak and died down, apparently because of the absence of determining figures.

 The pro-democracy rally in China's Tiananmen Square in 1989 exemplified an unsuccessful thrust for political openness. The Chinese pro-democracy movement died immaturely due to its lack of a strong leadership.

The fact that Burma's democracy has failed to thrive is not really unique in Southeast Asia. Thailand, too, is experiencing the ups and downs of democratisation, and is currently under the control of a military regime. Burma, however, represents a unique case since it is the only country in the region in which the fire of a pro-democracy crusade is still burning, thanks to Suu Kyi's long house arrest.

Acknowledging Suu Kyi's continued popularity, the Burmese military regime has lived with the fear that setting her free would automatically mean the end of its day. But as the regime has incessantly been malevolent toward Suu Kyi, trying to flush her away with the extension of her house arrest, it has indeed provoked a greater degree of resentment and abhorrence among Suu Kyi's supporters and the global community.

Her imprisonment conveys a message that the military regime is highly insecure regarding her silent protest, and will do everything to close the channel of communication between Suu Kyi and the Burmese public. In fact, the reason why the Burmese military government has been unable to repackage itself and live with the world without having to surrender political power is because of Suu Kyi's house arrest.

Vietnam, Laos and Brunei, as examples, are happy members of the world community. They do not even have to pretend to be democratic in order to be accepted by the outside world. Suu Kyi's role as a disruptive force in her country's power base serves as a reminder of the ongoing political struggle that does not seem to be coming to an end anytime soon. Another year of confinement for Suu Kyi is like a new drop of fuel that keeps Burma's democratisation engine running.

It is however easy for us to be complacent and optimistic with the present situation in Burma. There is a great danger in laying all expectations solely on Suu Kyi when it comes to finding a political solution.

Ultimately, she has shown no sign of compromise and continued to treat her struggle against the military regime as a zero-sum game.

What is even more precarious is the question of whether Suu Kyi's house arrest, year after year, and her unbending mindset will only raise a false hope for the Burmese people when there is still no light at the end of the tunnel. It will be a real tragedy if all the attention is paid to Suu Kyi's extension of house arrest, an issue often on the surface in the Burmese crisis, when the well-being of the Burmese people requires an equal awareness.

Dr Pavin Chachavalpongpun is the author of "A Plastic Nation: The Curse of Thainess in Thai-Burmese Relations", published in 2005.

Pavin Chachavalpongpun

Special to The Nation