In this respect, Myanmar is not an isolated case. Rising oil prices in recent years have created all kinds of headaches as they have rippled across the world. Many governments, especially in the developing world, have had to choose between raising domestic subsidies to offset the increases or letting the people bear the brunt.


Neither choice — higher government spending or the risk of popular discontent — has great appeal. In oil-rich Iran, civil unrest spread through Tehran this summer after the government rationed gasoline in an effort to curb the country’s addiction to cheap fuel; gasoline in Iran, imported because the country lacks refining capacity, is heavily subsidized and cost about 40 cents a gallon at the time. After two days of upheaval, the Islamic theocracy restored order and kept the policy.

In Nigeria, the outcome was different. Striking oil workers in June threatened to shut down the country’s oil production if fuel subsidies were dropped. Faced with the threat of losing its biggest source of revenue, the government quickly backed down.

Fuel prices go to the heart of people’s ability to move, stay warm or feed themselves. So it is no surprise that governments around the world have tried to blunt the effects of oil prices that have tripled in the past four years.

But interfering with energy markets can be a risky and costly game. Prices kept high by market forces and taxes dampen expectations of cheap fuel. Fuel subsidies do the opposite, and countries that rely on them play with fire.