China has long been the principal ally of the Burmese generals, shielding them from censure at the UN Permanent Security Council by judicious use of the veto and sending thousands of Chinese workers to build the infrastructure that might just help transform the Burmese economy from its disastrously ramshackle state of affairs. China has also contributed a hydroelectric power station which has made possible the extraordinary relocation of the capital to Naypidaw from Rangoon (Yangon). When it was first announced that the capital had suddenly been moved, there was widespread amazement across the region. Very few people have been permitted to visit the site of the new capital, which initially appeared to be just a few buildings in what had once been them idle of the jungle. Naypidaw now has accommodation blocks for civil servants and more impressive apartment buildings for senior officials. Ministry buildings have been completed on a standard basis, with Burmese motifs enhancing the architecture. There are precious few facilities for the civil servants who have been forced to uproot themselves and move halfway across the country. There are certainly very few opportunities for the notoriously poorly-paid junior civil servants to find ways to supplement their meagre incomes. No embassies have yet to move to the new capital and no businesses have been willing or, indeed permitted, to establish representative offices there. In terms of efficiency of governance, the move is as debilitating as it is mystifying. There is still speculation that paranoid Than Shwe feared invasion by sea from US forces, although that seems a remote possibility. Others have noted that Naypidaw is close to the location of one of the historical imperial capital sites and speculated that Rangoon is too much under the influence of the British colonialists. Others again talk about moving to a location closer to the centre of the country to be closer to all regions. In any case, the enormous expenditure of resources seems to be a wholly wasteful disaster.

The movement of the capital also means that the generals are far removed from the centres of protest in Rangoon, Mandalay and other important towns and cities in the country. Whether Than Shwe is still capable of being swayed by the sight of military goons attacking unarmed monks with batons and guns remains to be seen, although surely there are some among the junta who would be. However, they are not there. Even the UN Emissary, Ibrahim Gambari, is finding it difficult to gain access to the generals, although he has apparently been able to speak to democratically-elected prime minister Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been held under house arrest for years and who has never been permitted to take up her legal right to rule the country. Indeed, Than Shwe took over the country after a series of struggles among the military in 1993, when a more hard-line attitude towards the democratic process became evident. Now the military is trying to lock down the country, apparently having turned off internet and mobile phone connections and, according to its editor, launched a denial-of-service attack against the pro-democracy magazine The Irrawaddy (Irrawaddy). However, modern information technology has become so prevalent and the technical abilities of the Burmese military so ham-fisted compared to the nimble young people able to outwit them that it is almost impossible to prevent news leaking out these days. The atrocities that are being committed will become known and, at least so it is to be hoped, perpetrators will one day be punished.

Rumours are swirling around the expatriates in Thailand and the media that hundreds of monks were dragged out of their monasteries are placed in detention. People fear the real death toll is enormously higher than the nine or ten variously reported as having been acknowledged by the junta. International condemnation of the acts of violence has been patchy: US President George W Bush has been commendably vocal but his credibility is at a very low ebb after his various foreign and domestic policy escapades; European leaders are firm but compromised by the businessmen perfectly happy to come and do business where they can. India has been silent. It is China to which we look for a lead in these trying times.

In Bangkok, Thailand, Burma's military dictatorship is trying to pin down monk rallies and protests, and prevent them from further continuation. Several movements that are monstrous in size have been struck up by the Buddhist monks, demanding reform politically and economically from their military dictatorship.

Official casualties have been reported, as violent police retaliation to the demonstrations led to the death of two monks and one other civilian. Because of the monk's social status, they have become more than a nuisance for the Burmese government, because they are able to enlist more followers than many other reformists are capable of. Because of the general public's view of the monks' moral infallibility, the demonstrations have become a fight of good versus evil.

Burma has been run by military rule since 1962, under various masks and guises, supposed to give the impression of different governments, when in reality they have all primarily been the same. A man named Ne Win, a socialist, ruled the country until 1988, when a revolt due to his incapacity to rule caused him to step down. Another power took his place, and lost in an election in 1990.

Despite losing the election to Suu Kyi's party, a group of activists whom have aligned themselves with one another, the government refused to step down, prompting additional protests. The protest as of recent have been caused by Burma's withdrawal of fuel-price subsidies.

At first it was simply a group of students that protested, which was broken up quickly. The violent dispersal of a peaceful monk rally, leading in the deaths reported earlier lead to the escalation of monk activist activity that may be seen today.

Response: Monk Protests in Burma

I believe in the cause that the monks are representing, because I support the ideal that the government is created to serve the people, and not the other way around. Burma claims to be making steps toward democracy, but as far as I can tell there is no headway being made. Buddhist monks are a righteous, spiritual group of people, in my opinion, and I believe their voices should be heard, and have some kind of impact on the world today.

The U.S. has done little more than publicly denounce Burma's government and put in place a series of restrictions, but something more must be done to help these people who fight bravely against their oppressors day in and day out. They strongly lash out against those who are stronger than they are, and I believe we all can learn a lesson of these brave men in red.

The fact that an election was held in 1990, and the government that lost the election refused to give up power infuriates me as it violates the rules of the “democracy” they claim to represent. This is no government of the people, no matter how hard the government tries to convince the general public otherwise.

The monks see that the common people of Burma are being taken advantage of, and someone must step in to help them. It is shocking that a dispute over fuel-price subsidies can escalate into a conflict that involves loss of life.

The monks are clearly in the right, but it is clear that they may not be able to overcome the government on their own, as unlike their opponents, they cannot resort to violence. Freedom of speech is clearly non-existent as well, as outspoken opposition leaders have been killed, jailed, or placed under house arrest. This abuse of power in Burma cannot be allowed to survive.