Myanmar and Pakistan are both Asian countries whose military rulers are in trouble. But they are heading in opposite directions, because, whereas Pakistan understands why Asia is rising, Myanmar does not.
Asia is rising because Asian countries are increasingly opening their doors to modernity. Starting with Japan, this wave of modernization has swept through the four "Asian Tigers" (South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore), some ASEAN countries (Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam), and then to China and India. Now, it is moving into Pakistan and West Asia.
I was in Pakistan during one of its more exciting weeks. Exiled former Pakistani prime minister Nawaz Sharif sought to return, but was promptly sent back into exile. The world expected a political eruption. Instead, the country carried on calmly.
Pakistan did not erupt because Pakistan's elite is focused on modernization. Led by Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, who was formerly with Citibank, the country has carried out dramatic structural reforms, matching best practices in leading emerging-market economies. This explains its high economic growth rates.
Pakistan has welcomed foreign trade and investment. And, just as the success of overseas Indians in the US inspired Indians in India, Pakistan stands to similarly benefit from its own successful diaspora.
But this opening to modernity extends beyond economics and finance. Yes, Islamic fundamentalism is strong. But this has not completely changed the fundamental texture of Pakistan's society.
One sight at Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS), a leading private university, heartened me when I saw how women were dressed. When I visited Malaysian campuses as a young man in the 1960s, few Malay Muslim women covered their faces or hair.
Today, on the same campuses, almost all do. By contrast, at LUMS, which has the look and feel of Harvard Business School, only about 5 percent of female students cover their faces, a remarkable expression of social freedom.
There has also been an explosion of free media in Pakistan. An astonishing number of Pakistani television stations openly discuss the activities of Sharif and the other exiled former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto. Indeed, many elements of an open society are in place, including -- as the world learned in March -- an independent judiciary.
Myanmar, in contrast, broadcasts no information on Burmese dissident Aung San Suu Kyi and would never allow the reinstatement of a chief justice fired by its generals, as Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf did in March, let alone demonstrations in the streets in the chief justice's favor.
Of course, there is much silent resentment about the enormous political and economic space occupied by the Pakistani military and a danger of a backlash if the military does not learn to share more power in the country. I met many retired Pakistani army generals occupying key posts. Fortunately, they seemed to have a temperament closer to former US secretary of state Colin Powell's than to Than Shwe or Maung Aye, the two closed military minds who have cut off Myanmar from the world.
The decision of the US to engage, rather than isolate, Pakistan has also helped. I have no doubt that closer US engagement helped to nudge Pakistan in the right direction. Many members of Pakistan's elite have been educated in US universities -- another leading indicator of a country's orientation. Just imagine how different international relations would be if US leaders could visit Myanmar or even Iran with equal ease and have friendly discussions about agreements and disagreements.
Myanmar's generals deserve to be condemned for their brutal crackdown on civilian protesters and Buddhist monks. The Western world will rush to demand more sanctions and more isolation. But to what avail? Myanmar has effectively isolated itself for more than 50 years. What can even more isolation achieve?
A courageous Western leader might choose to confront Myanmar's leaders with a threat that would really frighten them -- deeper engagement.
Myanmar's generals genuinely believe that they are protecting Burmese "purity" by shutting out the world. Imagine the impact if as many Myanmar generals visited the US as Pakistani generals do.
As Thant Myint-U, a brave young Burmese intellectual and the grandson of former UN secretary-general U Thant, asked: "What outside pressure can bring about democratic change? And why, after nearly two decades of boycotts, aid cutoffs, trade bans and diplomatic condemnation, are Myanmar's generals apparently more in charge than ever before?"
I was in Pakistan as a state guest. But my real mission was to reconnect with my ethnic roots, as I had never visited the country where my parents were born. Only those who understand the pain of the partition of British India in 1947 will appreciate the powerful symbolism of a child of Hindu parents being welcomed back warmly to Muslim Pakistan. Those cultural ties helped me understand the language being spoken and feel the deep urge to modernize in the Pakistani soul -- an urge that exists alongside the urge to reconnect with Pakistan's rich cultural past.
I left Pakistan feeling hopeful because I saw the strong desire to join today's rising Asia. If a similar impulse could be nurtured in Myanmar, both its people and the world would benefit.
Kishore Mahbubani is dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy at the National University of Singapore.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
With escalating US-China competition and mutual distrust, the trend of supply chain “friend shoring” in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and the fragmentation of the world into rival geopolitical blocs, many analysts and policymakers worry the world is retreating into a new cold war — a world of trade bifurcation, protectionism and deglobalization. The world is in a new cold war, said Robin Niblett, former director of the London-based think tank Chatham House. Niblett said he sees the US and China slowly reaching a modus vivendi, but it might take time. The two great powers appear to be “reversing carefully
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Taiwan is facing multiple economic challenges due to internal and external pressures. Internal challenges include energy transition, upgrading industries, a declining birthrate and an aging population. External challenges are technology competition between the US and China, international supply chain restructuring and global economic uncertainty. All of these issues complicate Taiwan’s economic situation. Taiwan’s reliance on fossil fuel imports not only threatens the stability of energy supply, but also goes against the global trend of carbon reduction. The government should continue to promote renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power, as well as energy storage technology, to diversify energy supply. It
RSS