Southeast Asian Democratization in the Era of Globalization

Modernity has entered a stage in which space and time are being transformed, the cause and consequence of which is globalization.

Globalized modernity is risky, we have to deal with unforeseen and unwanted consequences. Present day modernity is full of man-made risks. One such example of a manufactured risk is the much discussed climate change of which we cannot fully grasp the causes let alone the consequences.

Are the risks of globalization evenly distributed around our globe? Does globalization have the same ring in London as it does in Jakarta?

London can be classified as a global city as it is the center of trading, banking and financing. Jakarta is no global city. Decisions taken by investment bankers in a global city can have severe consequences in other places.

Early July, 1997, the baht halved in value after the Thai government decided to float its currency when became apparent that the real-estate market was over-heated. In June of that year Indonesia seemed an unlikely candidate for an economic crisis, but many corporations had debts in U.S. dollars.

This became a problem when the rupiah started to slide. The IMF stepped in with a rescue package. To no avail, the rupiah further devalued. This let to inflation of basic goods, which in turn let to demonstrations and riots. Eventually Soeharto stepped down on May 20, 1998, after 32 years in power.

Indonesia started on a bumpy road towards democratization. A decade after former strongman Soeharto ended the New Order regime, Indonesia still struggles in times of soaring energy prices. Since the U.S.-led attack on Iraq in 2003, oil prices have sharply increased.

Indonesia has had to cut subsidies, which has hit the poor hard. Tens of millions live in poverty. According to the World Bank more than 100 million Indonesians have to live on Rp 20,000 or less per day. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, though, claims that Indonesia's poverty rate is not 49.5 percent but is now only 16.5 percent.

In post-crisis Thailand Thaksin Shinawatra became prime minister with the populist Thai Rak Thai party in 2001.

In January 2006 his family sold their stake in Shin Corporation to Temasek Holdings (which is fully owned by the Singaporean finance ministry). This was heavily criticized by Thai nationalists. Thaksin's family netted US$1.88 billion due to tax exemption.

In September 2006 the Thai army committed a coup while Thaksin was in New York. He was accused of corruption and choose to remain abroad. In 2007 Thaksin bought English soccer club Manchester City F.C. (which currently has the Swede Sven-Gvran Eriksson as its manager).

The economic crisis of the former Asian tigers also hit post-soviet Russia. The Washington-based IMF demanded the liberalization of the Russian market. Roman Abramovich became rich in these chaotic times of post-soviet privatization in the early nineties. According to Forbes this young Russian's net worth was in mid-2007 US$18.7 billion. He bought Chelsea F.C. in 2003 and bought for millions new players.

His Israeli friend Avram Grant, who is of eastern European descent and who lost a large part of his family in the holocaust, now leads Chelsea (Grant is assisted by the Dutchman Henk ten Cate, who is of Surinamese descent; the former Dutch colony Suriname is still home to many Javanese, Chinese and Indians). Chelsea's shirt sponsor is the South Korean-based multi-national corporation Samsung, as English soccer is very popular in this region of the world.

Is this the feel-good mixture some multiculturalists draw on when discussing globalization: Soccer players from Ivory Coast and Brazil, music from the Caribbean and the Balkan, food from the Middle East and South Asia?

Are England's only curses caused by globalization that some swans died of avian flu and that the national soccer team will not compete for the European Championship in Switzerland and Austria next summer? The influx of foreign players into the Premier League is blamed for the national team's failure to qualify.

But London was hit hard on the morning of July 7, 2005, by a series of four bombs that killed 52 and maimed many others.

The four suicide attackers were sons of immigrants. The UK, like other European countries, has become an immigration destination in recent decades, especially from former colonies. Immigration (and Islam with it) is high on the political agenda.

Sometimes it is suggested that low-wage countries like India and China pose a threat to the European economy. But a city like London has already turned away from industrial jobs.

Transferring jobs to low-wage countries only affects a small percentage of the population: The uneducated underclass that lost out in the service economy and is now structurally dependent on welfare.

Moreover, because multinational corporations have become experts in tax evasion the welfare system becomes difficult to afford.

Globalization affects every one, but not equally. The average Londoner can look ahead with more sensible optimism than most Jakartans can. Decisions made in London, New York, Washington or Tokyo can have consequences for the quality of life in Jakarta and beyond.

Decisions made in one city can have unforeseen and unwanted consequences for economics and politics on the other side of the planet.

That should be something under very serious consideration in those global cities. A decade after the crisis most Asians still struggle for a sense of stability in this fast changing world.