Fasting month in Jakarta

It's that time of the year again. My drivers are fasting,the maids are fasting, so are the rest in my office.

In Indonesia, which prioritizes religion over everything else, fasting is a God given right. Efficiency and productivity is down; people call in sick; people arrive late for work - all these are "acceptable" and "understandable".

I've been told by a Moslem friend in Indonesia that fasting is God's test of one's resolve. He says that things are different in the Middle East, where everyone works only half a day at most during the Ramadhan fasting month. But in Indonesia, the Moslems supposedly believe differently - during Ramadhan, one is supposed to carry on life as usual.

There are numerous interpretations - understandably. I'm not a Moslem so it would not be fair for me to comment on their practises.

However, if we go by the norms promulgated by renowned economists and theorists, I would expect that Moslem nations observing the holy month of Ramadhan should have devised policies which will ensure that their working population contribute more during the other months just so they can make up for the losses in productivity and efficiency of the fasting months.

I don't have statistics to delve further into this; but from observation, I don't think any policies have been put in place. At least not in Malaysia and Indonesia. I'm not even sure that Malaysia and Indonesia have any yardsticks or benchmarks to effectively measure productivity, fasting or not fasting.

Perhaps that's something the authorities can consider and come up with an effective solution in this era of globalisation and supposedly fair competition?

Tumultous months ahead for ASIA

So, what's all this news about Thailand and Malaysia? Why are they hogging the headlines?

With Thailand's re-inventing of democracy, and Malaysia's reconciling of the balance between Malays and the other races living in that country, we in Asia are left where we started.

The Philippines has its problems, but they are contained in a way. Who in Asia gives a shxx about what happens in Makati or Mindanao these days? We all have our hands full in our own countries with our own issues.

Internal Security Act?

So be it. It's not democratic; but who cares these days?

Can Anwar maneuver himself out of his sodomy allegations? Can Samak find a replacement whom the DAP will be happy with? We don't know. Just like this unknown Palin out of Alaska who is facing the American public now!

We all know (or should know) who Hillary Clinton is. McCain was from the last campaign, so again, no excuses. Obama? Well OK also, since he's had the benefit of that political machinery behind him. But, to be honest, their running mates are a cast out of heaven.

But that's politics out of the USA! Period. Anyone care to dispute that?

So why can't we in Asia be the same?

Why can't we in Asia have politicians with the same flair as those in Uncle Sam? Why can't we be... simply what they can be?

We are new to this thing called democracy - I gather. We are new economies. We are immature countries without a stable political system, like what Uncle Sam has. We are we.....

So why are we pretending that "we are not we" ....?

Why are the Badawis and Mahathirs pretending that we are different? Why is the PAD behaving like they are the God of the Thais?

Even the likes of Hu Jingtao and Wen Jiabo have come to terms with this new world (in their own ways), so why are people still re-inventing the wheel?

Thai democracy - where they're at now

I wrote about the Thai style of democracy last June. And guess what - they've just declared a state of emergency.

The PAD (People's Alliance for Democracy) in Thailand isn't that democratic after all. They want the constitution changed so that the Parliament comprises elected representatives as well as appointed reps, such as those from trade unions etc. How can that be democratic? Who is authorised to appoint reps to Parliament other than the citizens of Thailand?

One of their justifications is that Thais in the rural parts of the country are illiterate or less literate than those in urban centres; and these are the people most culpable to voting for people who give them money - what they call vote buying. But aren't these rural folks a part of their populace with the same rights under the constitution?

Their proposals smell of the Indonesian parliament under the rule of President Suharto where there are fixed number of appointees from various organisations, such as the military etc.

If Thailand can get away with this, then Malaysia can also say that the rural Malays do not deserve the same vote as the urban Chinese. Malaysia can also say that the rubber tappers who are so essential to their economy also do not deserve the same vote as the more educated people. Should we redefine democracy such that one university degree gets one vote? Or one higher school certificate gets one vote? Maybe Singapore should dictate that those who do not have two kids cannot vote. Or that democracy is only for the elite; and anything which the elite doesn't like is not democracy?

Although absurd - I believe - these are the notions the 10,000 or so people illegally occupying the government's office, and the same group who closed off the airports to their main tourist destinations are proposing for their country. Is Thailand heading back to the stone age? Only the Thais know.

Indonesia putting corruption suspects in uniforms

Came across an article about Indonesia's Corruption Eradication Committee, the local equivalent of ICAC in Hongkong and CPIB in Singapore. They're advocating putting corruption suspects in special uniforms. From pictures published, they look similar to the orange jumpsuits of suspected terrorists in Guantanamo Bay.

The virtues of Guantanamo and its treatment of suspected terrorists aside. Corruption suspects are not dissimilar to criminal suspects, and that is, they're innocent until proven guilty - a basic tenet around the world. Why would the Indonesians who have supposedly been through 10 years of reformation want to treat their "suspects" differently and to the point of humiliating them?

Has the Indonesian authorities lost faith in their judicial system to the point of desperately trying to "get even" by shaming their suspects before they're let off the hook too easily by the time the courts finish with them? Administration of some form of summary justice perhaps?

The Indonesian parliament is hesitant about verifying the ASEAN Charter primarily on grounds of inadequacies in the protection of human rights, directed - for the moment - at the "injustices" they see in Myanmar. Is this hypocrites at work or is this reformation?

OUR PLANET: A MID YEAR REVIEW

Time flies. It's interesting - at the same time scary - to think about what's happened in our world over the last six months of this year.

The biggest news is probably the sub-prime overhang causing havoc in stock exchanges around the world and fueling expectations of a slow down in the US economy.

Then there's spiralling oil prices. Besides downwards revisions of economic growths, political implications of fuel subsidy reductions are taking its toll around the world.

Grain and commodity price rises aren't away from the limelight as well. Shortages of staple food like rice and wheat are creating havoc in world economies and all sorts of problems for World Bank planners in poverty alleviation programs. (What poverty alleviation? Feeding all those who can afford on this planet is already a problem).

Inflation is at an "almost" all time high with no signs of abating. The poor's getting poorer and more impoverished. The rich will be spending less in anticipation of that "rainy day".

Is this the end of the world?

Most prophecies on the world's end originate from conflicts of some kind, with differing religious views at the forefront. None (I've heard of) attributed the struggle for survival as a possible cause for nations to destroy one another.

Will China infiltrate and control Saudi Arabia in order to assure themselves of oil? Will Uncle Sam install puppet governments in South American to ensure that Americans are fed? Will Japan attempt to take control of South East Asia (again) just so they can survive? Will corrupt governments in African nations sell out their countries' resources to enrich themselves? Will Russians feel that their oil resources are much more powerful weapons than their nuclear warheads in a new "cold war"? Will Indonesia and Australia awaken to their new found powers of having basic minerals which the world needs?

Uncle Sam is going through a transition. Whether Barack Obama or John Mccain gets into office, they will be so pre-occupied with their own political survivals that the rest of the world will be on the back burner for a while. But the world really needs someone, anyone, to lead it out of this quagmire. And if the US can't or won't do it, I don't see who else can.

What we need is a concerted global effort to bring all vested interests together for the common good - the survival of this planet. Although none of us will like this, but the USA seems to be the only one who can lead this initiative.

The Amercians can influence the Saudis and that would appease China and India who need their oil. The Russians may feel isolated and try to influence oil states like Libya and Iran as a counter weight; but the sheer dominance of Saudi's oil resources is unlikely to give the Russians enough weight to deal with the rest of the world.
The Europeans, South Americans and Japanese can also be easily influenced by the US to at least sit down on a round table and discuss the resolution of issues facing the planet. So what do we need?

A new American president who can see the light, really.

Not someone who can only deal with domestic issues and think that such issues dictate his popularity ratings. Not someone who thinks that America makes the world evolve because high pump prices and wheat shortages won't make many happy Americans. We need someone who can see the bigger picture of a world in economic equilibrium making life easier and happier for the average American voter.

If Osama Bin Laden had that vision, he would have spent his resources choking off America's supplies of oil and commodities rather than weaving that intricate plan to bomb the World Trade Center. But then again, he could have known that American presidents aren't that smart and forward thinking; and that the only way to make his point with immediate effect was to do what he allegedly did.

FUEL & OTHER SUBSIDIES

Most Asian countries have one form of subsidy or another, whether it's for petrol we all need to move around or cooking oil we use to cook the 3 or more meals in our daily lives.

But I'm sure when the late ex-President Suharto introduced fuel subsidies to the Indonesians, he had no hint that oil wil become such an expensive commodity and the subsidies an unbearable burden on the state's budget. Neither could he have anticipated that Indonesia has become a net importer of oil.

Will buffering our poor from market forces help them in the long run? Anyone with the slightest interest in economic theory would have know that the answer is a "BIG NO".

Distorting market forces has a heavy price - whether we pay it now or 30 years down the road. I can agree with temporary solutions and eradicating short term "obstacles" just so we get the nation building in progress. But governments have been slow to eradicate subsidies which were put in place for specific purposes. This must be a painful lesson for governments throughout Asia now.

Each time Indonesia raised fuel prices, there would be demonstrations and protests, the most severe being the one in May 1998 which rewrote history (although that was a long overdue change). The test of a government's political will when contemplating reducing fuel subsidies is immensely tougher after that fateful fuel hike in 1998.

Through the years of nation building, Indonesians have been pampered with low fuel costs to the extent that low fuel costs become a right they are born with. Budget deficits or insufficiencies, along with other things of concern in Indonesia, are aliens to the ordinary folks. They don't understand how these can and will impact on their lives and their kids' lives in future. Yet, I've not seen any effort being put in by the government to effectively communicate and educate the populace of what the country is going through and what the country needs to ensure stability and economic well being in the years to come. Every politician is busy politicking or trying to make the next million dollars from the next deal on the table. No one seems to be interested -- truly interested I mean -- in what will happen to the next generation, their own children included.

Malaysia's government is not much different, although the Malaysians are in a more enviable position as a net exporter of this expensive commodity called oil.

This is just the tip of the iceberg.

Soon there'll be problems with cooking oil which Indonesia and Malaysia have plenty of, from the millions of hectares of land cultivating palm oil; and rice, the staple food of most Asians. Maybe those who protested vehemently against the conversion of padi fields into golf courses saw something which our well-educated politicians didn't.

THAILAND'S STYLE OF DEMOCRACY

Throughout its history, the Thais have experienced several coups d'etat, the most recent being September last year. But the question that's baffling me is that why a smart people like the Thais cannot understand the true meaning of democracy

They recently elected a new government into office. By "elect" it's not silly to assume that the populace made their own choices. And one of the fundamental pillars of democracy is that the majority rules and the minority respects that majority. The same rules of democracy also enabled manipulators to fester, and stir up their people to demonstrate against decisions made by the majority.

Demonstrations are healthy. Most of all, demonstrations are a true sign of democracy and the freedom of expression. But what has the army got to do with this?

There is no doubt that in a mature state like Thailand, there would have been an independant judicial system and a police force with clear rules on how to enforce existing laws passed by lawmakers elected by the people.

Under the pretext of keeping peace and unity, they, the army -- whose powers were supposed to have been derived from the civilian government -- blatantly flex their muscles and use weapons purchased from taxes collected from the people who elected their governments, to throw out the democratically elected government.

Must an army be so arrogant in this day and age? Should they feel that their management of Thailand is superior to that of democratically elected representatives of the people? Should they feel that their laws are better than those of elected lawmakers? Do they think that their way of maintaining the peace is better than that of the police force under civilians. Have they not learnt anything from history of the world?

The threat of another coup is affecting not just the proper functioning of the government but also the economy's ability to continue attracting vital foreign investments. The same army which purportedly is acting in the interests of the people and the country is blinded by their "noble illusory conception" as to forget that millions of poor people need to be fed and millions of young children need to be educated for the sake of the future of their nation.

What is a democracy when decisions of the majority facing opposition from the minority become fodder for removal of the government by undemocratic means? Are there no effective laws in Thailand to deal with lawbreakers in such protests and demonstrations? Are the police so severely outnumbered as to be unable arrest anarchists? Is there no faith left in the judiciary in dealing with such anarchists? Or are these (and others) simply excuses conjured up by the men in green? Or are they so close to Myanmar such that their neighbors' ways have had a contagion effect on them?