The three-day 22nd World Economic Forum for East Asia concluded on Friday in Nay Pyi Taw. It was the first time Myanmar has hosted an international gathering of such magnitude.

On the sidelines of the forum, a globally televised debate titled "Myanmar: What Future?" was moderated by Nik Gowing of the BBC, with about 400 people in attendance.

The panelists included Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the opposition party, U Soe Thein, minister of the President's Office, and Zin Mar Aung, ex-political prisoner and activist.

Evidently, the debate was divided on the very name of the country. Though they all refer to the same country, some used Burma and others used Myanmar. For example, the moderator, Aung San Suu Kyi, and Zin Mar Aung unequivocally preferred the former, while Minister Soe Thein and the majority of questioners from the audience used the latter.

Does name matter in Myanmar politics? Is there any significance in using one over the other? And why does this issue still linger 24 years after it was renamed in 1989?

First of all, the issue is historical as well as political. The controversy surrounding the name started with the political circumstances under which it was renamed.

It was the State Law and Order Restoration Council junta that renamed the country from Union of Burma to Union of Myanmar. Similarly, the name of the capital city was changed from Rangoon to Yangon.

During British rule, the name of the country was called Burma, and the capital Rangoon. At the 1947 Panglong Conference, and in the preceding months, the majority Burman group led by General Aung San made several attempts to convince the frontier people, who are today designated as the country's ethnic minorities, to join the union.

There are two basic arguments about the name change. First, the military leaders argue that as the name Burma was given or used by the colonial rulers, it is necessary and important to replace it with an indigenous name. It is also implied that using a different name symbolizes freedom from the legacy of colonial administration. The second argument is that the term Burma refers to only one group of people and the usage of Myanmar is inclusive of all ethnic nationalities of the country.

In Burmese or Myanmar language, Burma is known as either Myanma or Bama. Myanma is the written, literary name of the country, while Bama is the spoken name of the country. In terms of meaning, there is no difference. Both names still refer to the majority group of people in the country, who are also referred to as Burmans.

Though the name had been changed in 1989, the people of Myanmar and the international community continue to use two different names.

The overwhelming democracy activists and some Western countries, particularly the US and the UK, continue to use the old name. On the other hand, the Myanmar government and its supporters and sympathizers, as well as a vast majority of the international community including the UN, use the new name.

Those who prefer Burma argue that it was an undemocratic government under military regime that changed the country's name without the consent or mandate of the people.

They argue that the term Burma is easier to pronounce and remember, and that there is no fundamental difference between the two names, since both still refer to one group of people.

To them, the name change should only happen if a democratically elected government decides to do so with majority approval in the parliament.

But if the current pattern of democratic transition continues and the international community establishes a normal diplomatic relationship with the country, it is likely that the new name will eventually be used for all official diplomatic dealings.

Nevertheless, the old name may not easily be forgotten or abandoned by some in Myanmar society, especially among the older generation and within the expatriate community.

Until a democratically elected government officially mandates and recognizes the name change permanently, the country's old name will still linger.

The author is general secretary of the US-based Kuki International Forum. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn