Celebration mixed with caution. That is the most natural response to the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, and it is the response being uttered by most of our politicians. Celebration, because one of the most high-profile examples of political tyranny in our age has seemingly been righted. Caution, because, despite their posturing, Burma's military rulers are still averse to anything like real democracy. As William Hague has said, what about Burma's 2,100 other political prisoners? And what hope that Suu Kyi's release will mark a real shift in how the country conducts its politics? If Burma is to one day enjoy the "new opportunities for pluralism" that Daniel wrote about on Thursday, then this is not a moment for the international community to soften its attitude towards the current regime.
I'm of a generation that grew up when the Berlin Wall came down, and it seemed as if history was indeed pointing towards the triumph of democracy and liberal government. It's hard to argue that now. As Francis Fukuyama argued in The Spectator back in February, we have not seen the end of history. It has a few more surprises to spring. Mainly the success of what Ian Bremmer calls state capitalism: a system where the state is the lead economic actor, and works for politicial gain.
No-one can fail to be delighted that one of the most iconic figures of the pro-democracy movement has been released: hers is one of the most inspirational stories of political courage. But this should not be misinterpreted as a sign that things are getting better in Burma. The military junta have released Burma's most famous woman, but still imprison a nation.