[asia-apec 968] Re: Anwar Ibrahim and APEC (fwd)

[Jomo]

It's not clear to me what this posting is meant to prove.  That Anwar
is basically neo-liberal, he is, though endorsing the EAEC and some
other subtle points in the text are  hardly proof of  'unabashed free
market views'.  But you can find the same in Mahathir's speeches,
albeit with less subtlety and often more forcefully.  So what does the
speech prove?  Pray tell me.
I would add that knee-jerk anti-market views are not going to get us
very far.  When protectionist policies are kept in place to enhance
crony profits, etc, where do we stand?  While the recent crisis is not
primarily due to crony capitalism, crony capitalism is alive and well
in the region despite IMF measures, and still very powerful,
especially in Malaysia partly because we avoided IMF
conditionalities.  We need far more sophisticated and nuanced analyses
of complex situations than the following trivial commentaries offer.

Jaggi Singh wrote:

> The following was posted to the Student Activist Network listserv
> based
> mainly in North America. For the record, while the post is critical
> of
> Anwar`s unabashed free market views, that`s not meant to imply that
> somehow he deserves what is now happening to him. It is clear that
> the
> case against Anwar is a farce and unjust. However, much of the
> West`s
> whining about Anwar recently has been incredibly self-serving and
> hypocritical. -- JBS
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 14:24:42 -0400 (AST)
> From: Penny Mc Call Howard <pmchowar at is2.dal.ca>
> Subject: san: Anwar Ibrahim and APEC
>
> Completely randomly, I came across this pro-APEC speech by Anwar
> Ibrahim,
> the Malaysian guy recently made the focus of "pro-human rights
> comments"
> by al gore and jean chretien at APEC 1998 in Malaysia.
>
> Interesting to note that despite all the rhetoric, they were simply
> wanting to protect their buddies. Penny.
>
> ****************************************
> ****************************
> Remarks by Anwar Ibrahim at the World Economic Forum, Davos,
> Switzerland,
> 28 January 1995.
>
> Will APEC be East Asia's Future Growth Engine?
>
> It is very important to stress, although it may be stating the
> obvious to
> some, that APEC was conceived as a means to make the most from the
> booming
> economies of East Asia. There is no doubt that East Asian countries
> will
> gain tremendous benefits from APEC, but we must not be under the
> illusion
> that they wish to confine their dealings to members of APEC. The
> European
> Union will remain a major trading partner and constructive
> engagement
> between the two will continue. We in ASEAN have agreed to pursue the
>
> proposal to hold an East Asia-Europe Summit in Singapore sometime
> next
> year. We are also vigorously looking into the emerging markets --
> South
> Asia, Latin America and South Africa.
>
> APEC will never be transformed into an exclusivist bloc, as feared
> by
> some, as such a move will be vehemently opposed by its East Asian
> members.
> East Asian countries have prospered through open multilateral trade
> and it
> would be detrimental to their own interests to undermine the very
> foundation of their economic achievement. Neither would any one of
> them, I
> believe, take kindly to the slightest indication to use APEC as an
> instrument for any of its members to pursue her geopolitical
> objectives.
>
> The precise Malaysian position is to help make it clear at the
> outset what
> APEC should not be, that no member should entertain the idea of APEC
> as an
> instrument of trade leverage to meet the narrow agenda of member
> countries, neither should it be a substitute to the multilateral
> trading
> system under the WTO.
>
> One must not lose sight of the fact that growth in the level of
> economic
> interaction in the Asia-Pacific, led by private sector, has preceded
> any
> kind of institutionalization. Malaysia is all for further growth in
> economic and other relationships in the Asia-Pacific in which the
> private
> sector has shown its capability to lead. Economic history has proven
> the
> benefits of free markets and open competition in bringing about
> prosperity, and the cost of clumsy over-intervention by government
> which
> has, more often than not, stymied growth.
>
> The Bogor declaration has proven that APEC has the capacity to
> become a
> force to serve the cause of free trade and our support for it must
> be
> unqualified. Yet one must not forget that while the benefits of free
> trade
> are obvious, the passage to it is seldom plain sailing. Today the
> strongest resistance against liberalization has more often than not
> come
> from institutionalized industrial and agricultural interests and
> union
> lobbies in North America and Europe.
>
> Malaysia for one is all for liberalization and in recent years we
> have
> progressively liberated the economy as well as our trade, in the
> belief
> that this would ensure our sustained growth in the long term and,
> more
> importantly, ensure the sharing of wealth. In the APEC context,
> there is
> appreciation of different stages and levels of development and
> certain
> counries must be given the opportunity and the time to undertake
> adjustments. Thus any schedule that involves the imposition on the
> sovereign rights of any country would mar the spirit of consensus
> which
> should be the mode in APEC's deliberations. Constructive
> consultation and
> continued engagement must be the modus operandi to arrive at true
> commitment. We all have, after all, made commitments under the GATT,
>
> however arduous the process and we must now all, under the aegis of
> the
> WTO, fulfill our obligations.
>
> The challenge before the Osaka Summit this year is not only to come
> up
> with measures to accelerate the integration of economies of the
> Asia-Pacific region, but also to vigorously draw into the
> development
> mainstream many economies within East Asia which until now had been
> on the
> periphery. This is very important to avoid the perception that APEC
> is
> only a club for the super rich and the nouveaux riches. Thus we must
> be
> committed to reduce economic disparities within the region. The
> peace in
> Indo China must be made to work through economic growth;
> inward-looking
> regimes must be constructively engaged. We must also look beyond
> East Asia
> to forge partnerships with the reforming economies in South Asia.
>
> We believe that the diffusion of growth can be effectively
> accelerated
> through open regionalism. Within Asean, we have seen the enormous
> potential of growth in the less developed areas of member countries
> through the establishment of regional growth triangles. Similarly,
> the
> establishment of AFTA is a regional initiative to facilitate the
> passage
> of economic liberalization in Asean. We believe it is only through
> this
> stage by stage approach rather than an impulsive headlong rush that
> we can
> make substantial progress in economic liberalization. Malaysia's
> proposal,
> now adopted by Asean, to establish the East Asia Economic Caucus
> (EAEC) as
> a strong voice for open regionalism and free trade would certainly
> complement APEC objectives.
>
> Finally, while the focus in APEC and in similar efforts is primarily
>
> economic, we must not lose sight of the fact that development is a
> multifaceted endeavour. As the economic integration of the region
> progresses, we must have the confidence to deal with complex issues
> of
> society and culture. The economic cooperation in the Pacific can
> provide a
> workable basis for increased understanding and enriching
> intercultural
> engagement.
>
> Thank you.