THERE are global political figures so widely admired and respected their standing approaches something akin to secular sainthood.

Think of South Africa's Nelson Mandela and Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi, and you will have some idea of what I mean. Even such heroes and heroines, however, are not above criticism.

In Ms Suu Kyi's case her critics have become increasingly vocal, especially in a week that sees Burma commemorate the 25th anniversary of the uprisings which launched the country's pro-democracy movement.

It was, of course, out of these protests that Ms Suu Kyi emerged as the leader of that movement, despite her many years under house arrest imposed by Burma's brutal ruling military junta.

To the casual outside observer, Burma has long been an isolated land that today appears to be opening up to trade and tourists as it takes a few tentative steps towards the democracy it has long sought and courageously fought for.

That those steps remain hesitant was highlighted yesterday by the small group of activists who marched through Rangoon to lay wreaths in honour of those who died in the 1988 protests.

This despite police orders that they stop and with only tacit approval for such commemorative gestures from the current "reformist" government.

While there is little doubt that after 49 years of military rule, President Thein Sein, a former army general, is spearheading democratic change in the country, Burma is far from well.

To begin with there is the continuing ethnic and religious clashes that have already killed hundreds in this Buddhist-dominated country.

In Burma's northernmost state there is the ongoing conflict with ethnic rebels in Kachin which, on the religious level, are clashes between Buddhists and Muslim.

Anti-Muslim sentiment is closely tied to the country's prevailing nationalism and dominant Buddhist principles that have facilitated the government's rule.

Cynically, this has left previous leaders little incentive to protect the interests of the Muslim minority.

Indeed at times it has even enabled the ruling regime to manipulate anti-Muslim feeling and conflicts in an attempt to distract the public and emphasise the importance of military rule

Some observers have even drawn parallels between the current surge of Burmese nationalism and that which rose menacingly to the surface in Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union with the resultant attacks on minorities there.

It was a little over a year ago now that three men from the Rohingya Muslim community in Rakhine state raped and murdered a Buddhist woman.

The resulting backlash of rioting and killing quickly grew into what human rights groups have subsequently documented as a more orchestrated campaign.

Since then, religious violence has spread across Burma, targeting Muslims more integrated and less vulnerable than the Rohingya.

Stepping into the crossfire of this has been Ms Suu Kyi and other prominent pro-democracy activists, who, critics say, have been feeble in their response.

Such critics point to that fact that despite Ms Suu Kyi winning of every conceivable international human rights accolade from the Sakharov and Gandhi Prize to the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, she seems to have taken her eye off the ball when it comes to the latest sectarian human rights breaches in Burma.

According to Ellen Bork, director of human rights at the Foreign Policy Initiative in Washington, what Burma needs right now is a Tolerance Prize and should it exist "Aung San Suu Kyi would not even be on the shortlist".

Such criticism, while touching a nerve, is perhaps a little harsh given that other regional political analysts quickly point out the extent to which Ms Suu Kyi and her pro-democracy supporters remain hamstrung by the prevailing political structures that the military continue to adroitly exploit.

A significant point in case is the first chapter of the 2008 constitution that states that the Defence Services "shall be able to participate in the national political leadership role of the State".

Within these charters there are complicated rules for constitutional amendments, which effectively give the military veto power over any proposed changes to the present power structure.

This, say some in defence of Ms Suu Kyi, means that while Burma's government might have a quasi-civilian face, behind that lies a military-dominated power structure.

In other words, opposition is fine as is freedom of expression and other pillars of democracy, but only within the confines that allow the military to retain the upper hand.

Many leaders of Burma's ethnic minorities claim this has meant Ms Suu Kyi has in effect been "neutralised" by the government.

According to Bertil Lintner, former correspondent with the Far Eastern Economic Review and an acknowledged author and expert on Burma, this means that "to the satisfaction of Burma's rulers, Aung San Suu Kyi has morphed from a once fiery opposition leader into an avid supporter of their new order".

In the meantime, Burma's latest religious sectarian violence between Buddhists and Muslim Rohingyas continues to simmer and there is now real concern about its potential to create a wider regional security crisis.

The outflow of Rohingya refugees alone, some say, is leading to stronger contacts between Burmese Muslims and regional Islamist militants. Such militants could recruit disaffected Rohingyas to their own cause.

Just a month or so ago Malaysian police detained 54 illegal immigrants from Burma, a week after detaining another 1000 Burmese.

The detentions followed a series of reprisal attacks in Malaysia between Burmese Buddhists and Rohingyas, many of whom fled sectarian violence in Burma's Rakhine state last year.

Related attacks have also taken place in Indonesia and several regions near to Burma.

Places like eastern Bangladesh, southern Thailand and the remote northeast Indian state of Assam are struggling with their own intercommunal tensions and fear Rohingya refugees could add another insurgency to an already volatile mix, further jeopardising central control.

Historically, Burma has shifted between its isolationism, quelling domestic tensions and occasionally exposing itself to the outside world. As the country moves slowly towards democracy, its internal sectarian issues threaten to stall that process while its military continues to cast its political shadow.

More than ever, Burma needs Aung San Suu Kyi and those like her. The question is whether, once again, they will step up to the mark when it matters.