In 1988, Burmese armed forces killed at least 3000 pro-democracy demonstrators. The military then took power, promising free elections. Despite the intimidation and imprisonment of leading opposition figures, elections were held in May of this year, and the main pro-democracy party won more than two-thirds of the seats in the new national assembly. The military promised to turn over power in September.

Since then, things have gotten progressively worse. The military junta has tightened martial law, murdered dissidents and detained thousands without charge. Just as in Kuwait and Iran, the sanctity of foreign of embassies has been violated, thus putting "American lives at risk." The U.S response was to join other Western countries in filling a protest with the junta.

Why didn't the U.S duplicate its Panamanian invasion? Not because Bush has had second thoughts about military intervention in sovereign nation. Not because Bush values the lives of American soldiers too highly.

No, Bush has a very different reason--Myanmar has no canal. Myanmar does not make it convenient for the U.S Navy or the merchant marine to get from point A to point B. Dictatorship in Myanmar is therefore "unfortunate," not "threatening." Bush has little reason to promote "the rule of law" in such a strategically unimportant land.

This isn't to suggest that the U.S. should be running around the world invading every country that quashes democratic movements. If we did that, we would have invaded most of our Friends by now.

But military intervention is not the only U.S. option. Bush, in his belief that there is "no substitute for American leadership," remains mired in the Cold War mentality he thought he was getting beyond, a mentality in which the options are invade or ignore.

A world beyond the Cold War requires something far different from the Bush Doctrine. It requires a renewed commitment to the UN (not selective attention), real efforts at regional solutions and, above all, a doctrine that does not place America above all. These policies would make a difference, instead of merely asking "What difference does it make?"