Which way is Burma heading? Straight to a new confrontation it seems. And when the dust settles, the customary winners: the Burmese army.

Now that the National League for Democracy (NLD) has asked the people to publicly vote “No” in May’s referendum, it is more likely that the constitution will be rejected.

Maybe there will be fresh demonstrations. But one needs a very vivid imagination to envision that a new public outcry will persuade the military leaders to ditch their uniforms. Most likely there will be more violence, no new constitution and no democratic changes at all.

This cannot be what the opposition wants. In an earlier contribution, [“An Inconvenient Truth”; The Irrawaddy online; February 14, 2008] I wrote about a more pragmatic and visionary stance. By stepping over its own shadows the opposition would at least be able to get a small result out of all of this, as opposed to the total absence of results in the past and the collision course the opposition is on right now, which will only bring more pain and misery.

Of course there is little use in repeating my argument although I'd like to address one objection the opposition is making to a more pragmatic outlook. One of the main criticisms of the flawed constitution the regime proposes is that is almost impossible to alter it after its acceptance. To amend the constitution would require a majority of more than 75 percent through a parliamentary vote. With a guaranteed 25 percent of the seats for the military in both the upper and the lower houses it seems unlikely that parliament will ever be able to change the constitution and move on to a more democratic Burma.

Kyaw Zwa Moe is one of the critics making this argument in his article “Constitutional Conundrum” [The Irrawaddy, print edition April 2008]. Judged purely by numbers his assertion seems to be irrefutably true. But there is more to Burmese politics than mathematics. Remember the 1990 elections, when even a significant part of the Tatmadaw, or armed forces, voted for the NLD and left the National Unity Party embarrassed and virtually empty handed? And how about the discord at the highest levels of the regime on how to deal with the protests in September 2007? Some people with connections whisper that even today some regional commanders are still ready to switch sides if the opposition would manage to oust Snr-Gen Than Shwe and his most trusted allies. It's a caricature to portray the army as a homogenous institution, made up only of fans of repression and poverty. There are many different shades between black and white.

Yes, on the outside the army projects a united front. But it is not unthinkable that within a few years the opposition could persuade a couple of military-picked members of parliament to vote for changes to the constitution. Courage is not a monopoly of the opposition.

Maybe the army would react by staging a fresh coup, but at least this would create a new political situation that would be hard to swallow for regional neighbors and the international community. And it would rob the army of one of its main tactics: its claim that it is preparing a transition, if we would all just have a little more patience.

It's tragic that there's so little room for alternative views in the minds of opposition leaders. “If you’re not with us, you’re against us,” seems to be their collective thought. Of course, persons with a pragmatic stance are doomed to be labeled “apologists for the regime” sooner or later.

The opposition would be more productive if it shed its inflexibility and finally started producing results. They have a responsibility to deliver to the people they claim to represent. The people in Burma deserve more than stalemates and deadlocks. At least the referendum on the new constitution could offer results, albeit in a modest way.

It's time the democracy process in Burma began moving in the right direction. Whether the current generation of opposition leaders is flexible and visionary enough to stop tugging the boat in the wrong direction remains to be seen. Maybe they are too old (like some of the current NLD leaders) to put the past aside and move on. However, they have no alternative if they want to avoid another 20 years of military rule.

Politics is not about pride—Politics is about deliverance.

Adam Selene is a journalist based in Bangkok.