In spite of the fact that everyone would like matters to be simpler in the case of Burma, the masses need to comprehend that the authoritarian government in the country is not going to change as a result of outside pressures or because of Suu Kyi's intervention. The fact that the opposition's leader was released stands as proof that the country's current leaders have developed a great deal of trust in their own powers and that they are no longer considering that Suu Kyi poses a threat to their well-being. Her release does not actually mean that she is free to exercise her rights and get actively involved in creating a better democrat movement that would oppose the government. Similar to how they behaved during the two previous periods when she was released from imprisonment, the authorities are likely to impose their power and prevent her from getting involved in political affairs in the country (Burmese Dissident Is Freed After Long Detention).

Although Suu Kyi's release can be taken for an example of pro-democrat principles in the government, reality can be very different. It might be that the...

By maintaining relatively peaceful relationships with other countries, they have ensured that matters in Burma will not change in the coming future.
Hilsum, Lindsey "Why Burma Was Crushed: As Burmese Pro-Democracy Activists Are Rounded Up, the West Looks to China to Intervene. We Are Failing to See the Seismic Changes That Authoritarian Capitalism Is Bringing the World," New Statesman 8 Oct. 2007

Zarni, Maung "Why We Must Talk to the Generals: Focusing on Aung San Suu Kyi May Not Be the Best Way to Bring Democracy to Burma, Argues Maung Zarni. Real Change, He Says, Will Require the Co-operation of Those Now in Power," New Statesman 14 Aug. 2006

"Burmese Dissident Is Freed After Long Detention," Retrieved March 24, 2011, from the nytimes Website: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/world/asia/14myanmar.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1