Asiaweek.com | Growing Pains

NOVEMBER 17, 2000 VOL. 26 NO. 45 | SEARCH ASIAWEEK

Growing Pains
Why Asia's troubled democracies should not despair

ALSO
Monky Business
To save its reputation, Thailand's clergy needs urgent reform

These are testing times for democracy in Asia. In key countries, popularly elected leaders are locked in take-no-prisoners battles with opponents, which are threatening the stability and the prosperity of their societies. President Joseph Estrada of the Philippines faces a growing clamor to resign or face almost certain impeachment over allegations that he received millions of dollars in illegal-gambling kickbacks. In Taiwan, opposition leaders are trying to force a referendum to oust President Chen Shui-bian because of his decision to scrap a nuclear-power plant. And in Indonesia, President Abdurrahman Wahid continues to confront attacks and threats of impeachment by parliamentarians for alleged corruption and general ineptitude. In all cases, stock markets have plunged and investor confidence has been jolted. One can almost hear the critics of democracy chuckling, "We told you so."

No one ever said getting democracy right would be easy. It takes both time — the United States has had a couple of centuries and Europe about half that — and a lot of effort. Many of Asia's democracies are young and face predictable growing pains. This is especially true of Indonesia and Taiwan, whose leaders are confronting a similarly enormous challenge. Both Wahid and Chen displaced power structures that had dominated local life for decades — the Suharto regime and the Kuomintang, respectively. The new leaders' relative inexperience, combined with the old orders' predictable efforts to undermine their rule, almost guarantee conflict and instability. These antagonisms should be allowed to work themselves out, within the democratic system. In the process, it will strengthen and mature.

It could be argued that the real failure of democracy in the Philippines was the elevation to the presidency of a man who was manifestly unfit to hold the office. Yet Estrada had a real chance to prove his doubters wrong. It wasn't until more than two years into his tenure that the corruption charges exploded, finally giving his critics the ammunition to try to remove him. Today, the atmosphere in Manila is eerily reminiscent of the People Power revolt in 1986. Tens of thousands demonstrated against Estrada last weekend, including such warhorses from those heady times as Fidel Ramos, Corazon Aquino and Cardinal Jaime Sin.

People Power rightly occupies a hallowed place in the history of Asian democracy. But today is different from then, when strongman Ferdinand Marcos was in power. Estrada may be inept and he could be corrupt, but he is no dictator. Constitutional means exist for his removal if the charges against him are supported in a Senate trial. Some extra-constitutional "solutions" to the crisis have been mooted, such as calling a snap election or allowing Estrada to stay as a figurehead presiding over a government run by his vice president or a coalition cabinet. Such options should not be entertained — for the sake of nurturing a healthier, stronger democracy.

A similar scenario is being played out in Taiwan. The legislature, dominated by the KMT and other oppositionists, has initiated proceedings to remove Chen from the office he has held for only five months. Under the island's Constitution, a two-thirds vote is needed to send the impeachment motion to the people. A new presidential election must be held if more than half of them approve the recall referendum.

In this case, the opposition's use of constitutional means to remove the president is obviously overkill. Impeachment of a democratically elected leader should be employed only as a last resort, against someone who is corrupt, tyrannical or tarnished by a criminal offense. Chen is none of these. He has made mistakes, as he himself acknowledged during a televised apology last weekend. But the chief reason for the impeachment bid is a difference over policy — namely the president's closure of the KMT-backed power plant. Chen's removal, under such circumstances, would amount to a kind of legalized coup by the Kuomintang, which is still smarting from its historic loss of the presidency in the March election.

In Indonesia, popular patience with the amiable but erratic Wahid is wearing thin. True, the country's problems would daunt any leader, but he has not addressed any of them effectively after a year in office. Wahid has failed to reform the economy, defuse separatist violence, decisively bring to justice members of the Suharto clan and their cronies, or even keep a firm grip on his own cabinet. And Wahid never had a real popular mandate — no party emerged from the 1999 election with a majority or even a solid plurality. But democracy could be harmed if his political foes succeeded in maneuvering him out of office. Having become president through due process, Wahid should be allowed to serve out his term — unless he is found guilty of a criminal offense.

Asia's fledgling democracies should not despair just because things are messy at the moment. That's in the nature of an institution that allows for give and take. Over time, the system tends to correct its own mistakes. The biggest, and most dangerous, temptation would be to short-circuit it with extra-constitutional gambits. That is one mistake from which recovery would be extremely arduous, if not impossible.

Back to the top

Write to Asiaweek at mail@web.asiaweek.com


Back to the top		© 2000 Asiaweek. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines.