Executive Summary: "Even before 1988, when the armed forces crushed a pro-democracy uprising and took back direct political power, Burma?s government feared an invasion of the country. Then, the danger was seen to emanate mainly from China, but over the past 20 years the US and major EU countries have been viewed as Burma?s greatest military threat.... In the wake of the 1988 uprising, the new regime feared that the US, or a coalition of countries led by the US, planned to invade Burma and restore democratic rule. Fears of foreign intervention were renewed after the regime?s refusal to hand over power to the civilian government elected in 1990. Perceptions of a significant external threat were strengthened by the measures subsequently taken by the US, EU and a range of other countries. The economic sanctions levelled against Burma, for example, were seen as part of a wider effort to weaken the military government and precipitate its downfall.... Fears of an invasion have fluctuated since 1990, but the regime has remained convinced that the US and some other states are determined to replace it with an elected civilian administration. Strong criticism of the military government, and public references to Burma alongside notorious ‘rogue? regimes, has seemed to presage armed intervention. Attempts in the UN Security Council to declare Burma a threat to regional security, open support for opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, and aid to dissident groups, have all been interpreted as part of a campaign to subvert the military government. If it could not be brought down by the direct application of military force, it was believed, the US and its allies would try to cause the regime?s collapse by fomenting internal unrest.... When the US, UK and France positioned warships off the Burmese coast in May 2008, after Cyclone Nargis struck Lower Burma, the regime was immediately suspicious of those countries? motives. Its fears were greatly strengthened by statements made by senior officials and others about the international community?s overriding ‘responsibility to protect? the cyclone victims. There were calls for coercive humanitarian intervention and even an invasion of Burma to provide aid to those in need, regardless of the regime?s wishes and broader issues relating to national sovereignty. Such statements seem to have hardened the military leadership?s conviction that it still faced the possibility of an attack by the US and its allies, against which it must remain vigilant.... Since 1988, there has never been any likelihood that Burma would actually be invaded, by the US or any other country. In international relations, however, threat perceptions are critical. Fears of armed intervention, and of indirect foreign interference in Burma?s internal affairs, have been strong influences on Burma?s defence planning and foreign policy. In that sense they are a strategic reality, and must be taken into account in the consideration of future approaches towards the military government. Failure to do so will make the continued delivery of humanitarian assistance, and the search for viable long term solutions to Burma?s many complex problems, much more difficult."