217. DEMOCRACY IN ASIA PANEL II
217.
Panel Title : DEMOCRACY IN ASIA PANEL II
Chair : Mohanan Bhaskaran Pillai
Panel Abstract :
In the aftermath of the collapse of soviet system the theory and practice of liberal democracy has reached its new heights. On the one hand new insights have been thrown open by serious scholars working in the field of democratic thought. On the other hand newer and newer geographical areas have been coming under the fold of democratic form of governance. Simultaneously multilateral lending agencies and institutions have linked democracy and development in developing countries. Thus democracy has become the most important determinant of good governance in developing countries. Transparency, right to information, accountability, E-governance and Decentralization, protection of human rights etc, has emerged as the bosom concepts in the theory and practice of contemporary Democracy. Citizen participation at the local level has become another important dimension of the new democratic initiative. Prof. Mohanan B Pillai talks about the democratic decentralization process in India with special reference to Kerala. The focus of his paper is the left-right divide in perspectives and approaches on decentralization in Kerala.Dr. Thomas Kalinowski discusses the consequences of economic crises for democratization especially in the case of young democracies. He examines the issues in a comparative perspective. In the process he questions the established theories of democratization.Dr. Takazhi Kanatsu paper is on "Collective Memory in Practice". He argues that effective democratic governance requires shared "beliefs" among members of society. The author argues that the importance of collective memory of certain group of people is essential for democratic process of respective country. Dr. Ghan Shyam Shyam talks about Political Transition in Thailand. The author argues that Thailand has gone through significant periods of democratic consolidation.
Participants :
Ghan Shyam
Paper Title : Political Transition in Thailand: Possibilities for Democratization
Abstract :
The military coup which took place in Thailand this September has renewed the debate over the roots of authoritarianism in general, and the development of Thailand's political system in particular. The purpose of this paper is to explore the historical patterns of political transition in Thailand, and the political culture which has prevailed among the Thai people. This provides a lens through which to analyze the recent return to military rule, as well as future possibilities for true democratization in Thailand. Thailand has gone through significant periods of democratic consolidation, namely after 1973, when student revolt opened a period of democratic experimentation, and after 1992, when military rule was strongly resisted by a growing civil society. Nonetheless, these periods proved to be relatively short-lived because pressure politics, mobilization, and confrontation replaced the usual political acquiescence and achievement of consensus through bargaining between patron-client factions. In other words, democracy brings a certain amount of political unpredictability, and the Thai power structure has rested primarily on reverence towards the King, and on forms of government which - irrespective of their military or civilian character - maintain national unity above all. Thus, stable governance is considered more important than a particular form of government which comes to power through popular participation. In the backdrop of East Asian Economic crisis, which started from Thailand in 1997, a series of new measures were taken to make Thai politics more transparent and participatory through the implementation of a new constitution. No doubt, Thaksin as a democratically elected Prime Minister revived Thai economy but his management of the economy was perceived as an attempt to benefit his own business interests. He also began to fall into more authoritarian patterns of rule, repressing dissent in certain areas and relying on paternalistic development programs to win support in rural areas. In addition to this, king's displeasure towards his rule also became a cause for his downfall. The current military takeover on the name of stability and national unity received overwhelming support from the general public. What is most important in this case is that this act has got sanction from both the king and the middle class who were considered custodians of Thai democracy until now. Given this situation, where leadership styles and popular attitudes support a "top-down" view of political decision-making, the question arises, what are the possibilities for a long lasting transparent and participative democracy? This paper presents the argument that democratization in Thailand will only be possible once there is a widespread political culture which recognizes the common man's responsibility in decision making through the "bottom-up" political arrangement. The democratic movements of 1973 and 1992 are the proof of existence of this "bottom-up" political consciousness. Nonetheless, the current situation indicates that these roots of a "bottom-up" political consciousness are still weak. Only when they gain strength will there be a true change in the entire system of government, which does not merely replace one paternalistic power group with another.
Mohanan Bhaskaran Pillai
Paper Title : Democracy and Development: lessons from Kerala,India
Abstract :
Democratic Decentralization got a fresh impetus with the 73rd and 74th amendments to the Indian Constitution in 1992. These constitutional amendments and conformity Acts in the Indian States refurbished the federal set up of India by adding a third structure at the local level. However, the efforts to decentralize power and finance to local bodies are not on a uniform scale through out India. States like Kerala, Karnataka, West Bengal and Madhya Pradesh have gone ahead of other States in devolving powers and functions to the local governments. Of these Kerala is far ahead of others in strengthening local body institutions by way of democratic decentralisation. The CP I (M) controlled Left Democratic front (LDF) Government in Kerala in 1996 decided to devolve powers, functions and finance in an unprecedented way. Local bodies have been strengthened through democratic decentralisation based on CPI (M)'s assessment of the utility of local bodies as engine of economic growth. The CPI (M) perceived that local governments could effectively be used to overcome economic stagnation in the traditional sector of the economy; it could also help developing a local market. This left approach to decentralisation attracted international attention particularly in the context of globalization vis-à-vis decentralisation. In 2001 general elections to the state legislative assembly the LDF was voted out of power and Congress (I) led United Democratic Front (UDF) came to power. The UDF effected drastic changes in the theory and practice of decentralisation as implemented by the previous left government. The UDF approach to decentralisation is perfectly in accordance with the neo-liberal perspective. Therefore the UDF government has created any number of new structures at the grass roots, parallel to local governments for service delivery. Most of these structures have been created on Public-private/civil society partnership and run on substantial financial and logistical support from multilateral agencies like the Asian Development Bank.While coming back to power in 2006 LDF has initiated innovative programmes to address developmental issues at the grassroots level in Kerala. The Left-right divide in perspectives and approaches on decentralisation in Kerala has enlarged the sphere of political society and virtually eliminated the civil society in this part of India.
Takashi Kanatsu
Paper Title : Asia's Missing Success Story: Aircraft Industy
Abstract :
The aircraft industry has been considered as one of the capstones of successful industrial development in the world. There was a significant power shift from Europe to the United States when the US became a dominant power in aircraft industry. The impact was so huge that four European countries overcame a collective action problem to challenge the US hegemony by setting up Airbus, which regained the pride of Europe. Unlike other high-tech industries such as IT industry, the aircraft industry symbolizes more than the country's high-tech prowess. The industry represents the pride of nation as the industry is tightly connected to the national security due to the closeness to the defense industry. Many Asian countries have been known for its high-tech industrial development. Yet, none of the Asian countries even including Japan has successfully developed this industry. Why not in Asia? Post World War II Asia has had a lot of security concerns, which should benefit the development of aircraft industry due to its closeness to national defense. Geographically, Asia is characterized so many islands and mountainous vast lands, all of which should encourage aircraft development. After carefully studying various Asian cases (Japan, Indonesia, South Korea, and Taiwan) as well as recent none-Asian successful cases (Canada and Brazil), the author argues an assortment of reasons including international relations, slow start of the industry, strategic business mistakes, and macro-economic factors, has contributed to the failure of Asia in this industry. The most recent attempt of China's ARJ-21 project is also facing a significant up-hill battle to succeed due to the significant change of international environment and the structure of the industry in China.
