Zhongnanhai

After much reflection on this question, I’ve come to the conclusion that….. I don’t know.  My good friend Tim Stoney, a former reporter with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, believes that Asian culture and democracy just don’t mix.  He claims that Asians, by their very nature, are adverse to change, and don’t like the see-saw back-and-forth scheming that makes democracies so vibrant.  I’m paraphrasing, but he says Asians (and this is a vast, vast generalization, something I normally try and refrain from doing) prefer to know who the government will be, and what the policies will be, 10 or 15 years from now.  That allows proper planning.

Perhaps my friend is on to something, or perhaps it’s hogwash, as the democracies in Taiwan (Province!) and South Korea can attest.  Whatever, below is a column I wrote on this subject after a recent trip to Bangkok.  (Yes, honest, I was there to write hard journalism stories!!!).

Desire for order trumps democracy; Thais’ contentment with military coup points to Asia’s different values
Published: Sunday May 13
Times Colonist 

The Chinese propaganda machine is very effective. Ask anyone in China about democracy and they will reel off reasons why now is not the right time.

"China isn’t developed enough yet." "Chinese people aren’t educated enough." "China needs stability first." The list goes on.

Decent reasons really, but not for most of us in the West. We’re accustomed to believing that democracy is the only way. Challenging that belief is tough, but it’s necessary.

And Thailand offers a good example of a country where democracy has gone horribly wrong.

Western governments and media outlets were quick to denounce the overthrow of a democratically elected prime minister in a bloodless military coup last year. Thaksin Shinawatra was fresh off an election victory, his second landslide majority.

But while images of tanks in the streets of Bangkok were enough to make CNN headlines, the reasons behind the coup — and the feelings of the Thais — were often left unreported.

"I hope he never returns," a Thai taxi driver told me en route to Bangkok’s sparkling new Suvarnabhumi Airport last week. "If he does, somebody will kill him."

Thaksin, who has been ordered to stay away from Thailand by the military, is not well-liked in the country’s urban areas. His election victories and popularity were owed to the rural areas which didn’t see firsthand the level of corruption in his government.

"Look at that," the taxi driver said, waving a finger towards a giant, concrete rapid-transit line along the highway. "What a waste." The multi-billion-dollar line was intended to connect downtown Bangkok with its new airport. But now it sits there, unfinished.

You don’t have to go far to see other evidence of waste and mismanagement. Thaksin rushed the new $4.5-billion Suvarnabhumi Airport to completion. After only months in operation, complaints about construction quality, crumbling runways, overcrowding and an embarrassing lack of bathrooms have forced the military junta to re-open the old Don Muang Airport.

Thais say his real sins go much deeper. Thaksin is accused of perverting democracy to centralize power and limit dissent, creating an authoritarian regime with him at its centre.

And questions are mounting about his sale of communications giant Shin Corp., controlled by his family, to a Singapore government agency. The deal earned his family $2.1 billion — tax-free.

All that helps explain why, when the military decided something had to be done, the country’s revered King Bhumibol Adulyadej gave his blessing.

Most Thais told me that life carries on as it did before. They are happy to know the circus atmosphere surrounding Thaksin is gone and the government is now "much less prominent," according to the driver.

While the military regime has promised the return of democracy and a new constitution, they have cracked down on the media in the meantime. The government blocked the YouTube website for showing a video of King Bhumibol next to images of feet. The king is regarded as semi-divine and generally loved, while feet are considered offensive. It has also blocked websites and broadcast reports about the deposed prime minister.

But despite the erosion of a free press, the Thais seem to be taking everything in stride — just as the Chinese do.

One of my friends from Australia once told me that democracy doesn’t fit easily with Asian culture. I argued about the importance of freedom of speech, human rights and all the other ideals we are raised with in the West.

But the longer I’ve remained in Asia, the more I’m gaining perspective on his point of view. Here, the value of stability trumps democracy.

Asian people generally respect authority and their elders. The Western ideas of activism, questioning authority and individuality are as foreign to Asian cultures as authoritarian regimes have become to Europeans and their descendants. Asia has very few truly democratic countries and even those that can hardly be called democracies by Western standards.

Japan’s Liberal Democratic Party has been solidly in power for half a century, except for a short-lived opposition coalition government in 1993. Singapore is an apparent democracy, but it has been run by Lee Kuan Yew, his son, and their People’s Action Party since it gained independence in 1959. Malaysia has been run by a single multi-party coalition since the 1950s and Indonesia is unstable at best.

Taiwan and South Korea could turn out to be success stories, but both are too young to be judged. And Taiwan’s chaotic, fight-filled legislature is often cited as proof that China doesn’t need that "immature" form of government.

India might be a bright light, but its cumbersome democratic system is often blamed for its failure to match China’s rapid economic growth.

"We have to sacrifice for the good of the whole," a close Chinese friend once told me. She was referring to the bloody crackdown on Tiananmen Square protesters back in 1989 and explaining how many Chinese believe the students who died that June were paying the price for their country’s success today.

Many Thais see their military coup in the same light, except this time the sacrifice was democracy.

There are splinter groups calling for the right to vote in Thailand and China.

But there is no massive underground network advocating democracy, no widespread support and no large-scale threats to the two governments.

Even without democracy, everything seems to be working just fine.