Executive Summary: "Each of Burma?s citizens has a stake in the country?s development and should have a say in how it develops its economic potential, including its human and natural resources. In the future, it is likely that Burma?s people will act to exploit their economic potential in conjunction with international economic institutions. To do so most effectively, they will have to deal carefully with the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Asian Development Bank, and other international financial institutions (IFIs). They will also have to develop national institutions, strategies, and mechanisms to manage wisely Burma?s trade relations as well as the revenues generated by exploitation of the country?s natural resources... Burma and the IFIs: IFIs are profit-making organizations. IFIs do not wait for the establishment of democracy, the rule of law, and other good governance practices before they begin operating in a country. IFIs engage in a country when the IFIs decide that they will likely profit from such an engagement and when the country?s government and the international community are ready to accept such an engagement. Instead of helping countries implement national-development and poverty-reduction strategies devised with the participation of their citizens, IFIs often dominate the formation of such strategies to such a degree that the people of these countries lose control of the process. The IFIs see economic growth as the key tool for promoting development and reducing poverty, and they apply a narrow, blanket set of reforms to achieve it. This focus on economic growth and the blanket application of reforms, however, have failed to work in many countries and have had disastrous effects in some. In order to avoid losing control of development and poverty-reduction strategies and to make IFI assistance most effective for its people, Burma must have: a clear set of development objectives; a strategic, comprehensive social and economic policy framework; and good-governance principles and practices. Whether they live in Burma or abroad, Burmese people who favor a democratic government, a free-market economy, rule of law, and the development of sound political and economic institutions must begin as soon as possible to organize themselves; to gather information on Burma?s economy, its economic potential, and the needs of its people; and to devise their own comprehensive, strategic social and economic policy framework as well as good governance principles and practices. The Burmese people should be wary of efforts by the IFIs to re-engage in Burma before the establishment of democracy, rule of law, and other elements of an open society in their country. Burma will have to clear arrears of about $170 million before the IFIs re-engage. Burma?s people should be aware that the IFIs? lending practices put pressure on countries to borrow and that many countries, often by borrowing for large infrastructure projects that do little to promote growth, incur unsustainable levels of debt that pose serious problems.... Burma and Trade: As a consequence of Burma?s lack of a comprehensive, strategic social and economic policy framework, the country?s commodity-centered trade with China and other nearby countries is providing the Burmese only short-term gains that benefit mostly foreign interests and people associated with Burma?s military regime. Volatility in commodity markets makes dependence upon commodities an unstable basis for sound, long-term economic development. To capture long-term gains from trade, broaden the distribution of these gains, and stimulate development, Burma needs a comprehensive, strategic social and economic policy framework. This framework should take into account trade flows, exchange rates, Instead of helping countries implement national-development and poverty-reduction strategies devised with the participation of their citizens, IFIs often dominate the formation of such strategies to such a degree that the people of these countries lose control of the process. The IFIs see economic growth as the key tool for promoting development and reducing poverty, and they apply a narrow, blanket set of reforms to achieve it. This focus on economic growth and the blanket application of reforms, however, have failed to work in many countries and have had disastrous effects in some. In order to avoid losing control of development and poverty-reduction strategies and to make IFI assistance most effective for its people, Burma must have: a clear set of development objectives; a strategic, comprehensive social and economic policy framework; and good-governance principles and practices. Whether they live in Burma or abroad, Burmese people who favor a democratic government, a free-market economy, rule of law, and the development of sound political and economic institutions must begin as soon as possible to organize themselves; to gather information on Burma?s economy, its economic potential, and the needs of its people; and to devise their own comprehensive, strategic social and economic policy framework as well as good governance principles and practices. The Burmese people should be wary of efforts by the IFIs to re-engage in Burma before the establishment of democracy, rule of law, and other elements of an open society in their country. Burma will have to clear arrears of about $170 million before the IFIs re-engage. Burma?s people should be aware that the IFIs? lending practices put pressure on countries to borrow and that many countries, often by borrowing for large infrastructure projects that do little to promote growth, incur unsustainable levels of debt that pose serious problems... Burma and Trade: As a consequence of Burma?s lack of a comprehensive, strategic social and economic policy framework, the country?s commodity-centered trade with China and other nearby countries is providing the Burmese only short-term gains that benefit mostly foreign interests and people associated with Burma?s military regime. Volatility in commodity markets makes dependence upon commodities an unstable basis for sound, long-term economic development. To capture long-term gains from trade, broaden the distribution of these gains, and stimulate development, Burma needs a comprehensive, strategic social and economic policy framework. This framework should take into account trade flows, exchange rates,foreign investment, and domestic issues like infrastructure and education improvements, human resources development, and industrial development... Burma and the Resource Curse: Natural-resource-rich countries like Burma are more likely than resource-poor countries to experience flat economic growth, endure greater poverty, incur unwieldy debt, develop authoritarian and repressive governments, and suffer armed conflict. Receiving significant revenues in payment for natural resources can free a country?s government from the need to collect taxes from its citizens; this severs a vital bond between the citizentaxpayer and the government and dampens the government?s incentives to implement sound economic, social, and fiscal policies in a transparent and accountable manner. In many countries, revenues from extraction of natural resources actually trigger a decline in living standards and exacerbate social problems. Revenues generated by exploitation of Burma?s natural resources are helping to sustain the country?s military dictatorship, contributing to human rights abuses and conflict, and failing to alleviate the poverty and poor governance most Burmese suffer. Natural resource extraction in Burma has produced long-term damage to the environment; contributed to a decline in agricultural productivity; aggravated corruption of the government and civil society; exacerbated the illegal drug trade, the exploitat