AsiaGlobal Voices

In 2001, after then president Abdurrahman Wahid lifted the ban on celebrating the Chinese New Year, the message was that racism was no longer an issue in Indonesia. Personally, I am friendly with fellow citizens of different ethnicities and religions without ever having encountered any racism or intolerance. When reporters from The New York Times and CNN interviewed me about allegations that in Indonesia today there is still discrimination against ethnic and religious minorities, I firmly emphasized that Indonesian people are neither racist nor intolerant as some in the foreign press have said.

When the coronavirus epidemic was rampant, however, the question of racism and intolerance resurfaced. I started to have doubts about my own personal belief that the Indonesian people are tolerant and not racist. It was beyond my knowledge that minority races and religious minorities were still being treated unfairly and in an uncivilized manner. My personal perspective being limited and shallow, I did not know anything about the reality of life in my beloved homeland.

My vision is myopic so I could not see the reality beyond the reach of my sight. So I humbly ask for guidance about the facts on the ground and the parties who dare to violate the law that strictly prohibits racist and intolerant attitudes and behavior. What evidence is there of racist and intolerant behavior in Indonesia?

To mitigate the health and economic risks associated with unequal access to Covid-19 vaccines, the public and private sectors must coordinate their efforts and resources to address access as a fundamental human right for everyone.

Actors in the private sector, such as multinational corporations (MNCs), SMEs, and local and international startups, should be proactive on working closely with national governments and international bodies on how to support and promote access to safe and effective Covid-19 vaccines for the public.

This issue is complicated by the current high demand for Covid-19 vaccines worldwide as well as the politics of vaccines. Governments lead the way in policy development and the governance of vaccines. Governments also have an obligation to ensure that companies respect human rights and promote them.

Unequal access to Covid-19 vaccines is an obvious human rights issue. It is grounded in broader structural inequalities, putting some populations at greater risk than others. These include legal and illegal migrant workers, low-skilled workers, people with disabilities, and workers on short-term contracts in various sectors. Companies need to design and execute effective and inclusive human rights due diligence strategies that promote access to vaccines for all.

Companies that promote the right to good health via the promotion of access to vaccines could need to re-design their human rights due diligence strategies, bolster their internal capacity to adopt innovation, and engage employees, suppliers, and clients in all steps. Doing so will enhance companies’ resilience, reduce financial risk, and promote management capacity.

In short, the actions that a business takes during this crisis will aid in the recovery of economic prosperity while building a more inclusive and equitable future for their workers, suppliers, and for society in the long run.

The government’s Covid-19 response, which led to the public’s worries and dissatisfaction, has been described as a “digital defeat” for two reasons. First, while the internet and mobile technology were widely available in Japan, administrative services using such technology did not function well in tackling the virus. Second, it became apparent that the public could not use, had difficulty using or chose not to use the digital apps and services that were actually provided by the government.

But why did such problems emerge? When the pandemic arrived, countries across the world took various actions to cope with the spread of the virus. It became clear to everyone that there are gaps between governments that actively utilized the digital environment — citizen identification systems and services, infection data, testing services, data on hospital beds, vaccination processes and predictions for the effect of lockdowns — to tackle the virus and those that did not.

Members of the public do understand the power of digital services. And they also became aware of the fact that Japan, unlike other countries, failed to use these services to deal with this significant contingency. That is what made many view the situation as a digital defeat.

The new digital agency has a goal to not leave anyone out. That means realizing a 100 percent digital service coverage for all regions and people.

To lead the global governance regarding the internet, it is necessary to have sufficient discussions on a daily basis to establish trusting relationships with allies and other countries which share the same goals. It is essential for the agency to secure people who can engage in such activities, as well as implementing other policies such as making its officials communicate in English, inviting advisors experienced in international negotiations and holding exchange programs with international organizations.

It is clear for all to see that the government of Gen Prayuth Chan-o-Cha has failed its people with its incompetent handling of the Covid-19 pandemic. The death rate keeps soaring to new highs. As hospital beds, particularly in Bangkok reached capacity, news and images of coronavirus patients waiting to be cared for or put in ad-hoc wards is heart wrenching. Tens of thousands are set to become unemployed. Thailand would be lucky if the economy does not contract this year.

The inoculation process, originally targeted at 500,000 jabs per day, has fallen far short of that. The government failed to secure mRNA vaccines and have had to do with less effective shots that will hardly ensure herd immunity and offer little protection against the Delta variant.

The call for Prayuth to resign is getting louder by day. In a clear signal that he will not resign, Prayuth said that he will forgo his salary for three months to help fund the government’s battle against the coronavirus, a gesture that elicited more anger than sympathy. It will not bring back the dead because they were not vaccinated in time or help those who lost their jobs. It is just theatrics prolonging Prayuth’s stay in power for at least three months.

Even if Prayuth resigns, and not many are betting on that, there seems to be no visible competent alternative. No general elections can take place without a major risk of significantly exacerbating the pandemic. This means Thailand will likely have to suffer more infections, loss of lives and face absolute economic ruin before any significant political change can occur. The hope is that we do not become utterly destitute and the country fall into ruin before positive change can be achieved because that would be a total tragedy.

Under the Chinese Central Military Commission Chairman Xi Jinping, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) has undertaken military reforms intended to make it a world-class force by 2049. Xi has not defined what a world-class force means. But an informed guess is that it would mean being on a par with the US, UK, French, Russian and Indian armed forces.

Although China’s primary strategic direction is reunification with Taiwan and to prepare for the US contingency during reunification, India and other Indo-Pacific countries are also affected by the PLA’s force modernization. India needs to be cautious of at least four changes:

First, China has built dual-use infrastructure in Tibet to prepare for possible offensive and defensive operations on the border. The PLA is much more capable of forcefully changing the status quo on the border with India. With force modernization and improved connectivity, its ability to convert these standoffs into a protracted conflict has increased.

Second, the PLA is shifting from “near seas defense” to “near seas defense and far seas protection” – meaning protect its interests in the Indian Ocean and Western Pacific Ocean.

Third, China created the PLA Strategic Support Force to increase synergies between its space, cyber and electromagnetic spectrums. This force is responsible for China’s information warfare and electronic countermeasures, cyberattack and defense, and psychological warfare missions.

Finally, China elevated its Second Artillery Corps to the PLA Rocket Force in 2015. This force’s missile systems and rapidly developing space and counter-space capabilities have become critical components of China’s emerging power projection capabilities.

China’s investment in military tech, big data, drone swarms, and other disruptive offensive technologies, its military linkages with Pakistan and the ongoing building of border villages should concern India. These developments have strategic and tactical implications for India’s border dispute with China.

One of the first tasks undertaken by the new chairman of the Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry (KCCI) was to research and gain insight on the growing anti-chaebol sentiment. This phenomenon is neither uniquely Korean nor new, but it is imperative to understand public opinion as this trend could lead to more regulation of corporations.

According to two Korea University professors, there are two main reasons contributing to “anti-chaebolism”. First is the close relationship between the chaebols and the government dating back to the late 1940s under president Syngman Rhee, which was deepened under the military dictatorship of president Park Chung-hee. The chaebols were given incomparable preferential treatment to support their fast growth. For many, this was unfair and diminished the legitimacy of the success these business groups.

The second reason is the fabrication and manipulation of the anti-chaebol sentiment by the politicians. Both presidents Park and Chun Doo-hwan built up and tapped into the anti-chaebol sentiments. Under President Kim Dae-jung, certain chaebols were blamed for causing the financial crisis and were punished. Even today, the tradition of the incoming government penalizing the chaebols which were closely associated with the outgoing party continues. Politicians intentionally use the anti-chaebol sentiment to bolster their legitimacy.

From the corporations’ point of view, it is clearly in their interest to regain public trust. People expect the chaebols to play their part by giving back to society, providing good employment opportunities, and fulfilling their corporate social responsibility. There is much speculation about what the new KCCI chairman might do to turn the anti-chaebol tide.

Afghanistan’s tumultuous peace process came to a halt after American President Joe Biden’s announcement of a withdrawal plan for US troops. This served as a good excuse for the Taliban to boycott any peace talks, assuming that they will have power after the US withdraws.

The escalation of attacks by the Taliban significantly heightened fears of a total collapse of the governance of the state, possibly leading to the loss of control of Kabul. The region fears something bigger: the Taliban’s ambition to be “regional heroes” for Islamic extremists.

In China, as soon as the authorities caught a whiff of Islamic extremism, they went into full force against them. Iran does not want the Taliban to return to power. But Tehran seeks to deepen its relations with the group as a precautionary measure. The reformation of an umbrella organization for many extremist groups has frightened Pakistan, which has called on the Afghan Taliban for support. If Pakistan wants to play a positive role in the Afghan peace process, it must stop supporting the Taliban.

The Afghan government and political leaders must work towards an Afghan-owned peace process. The Taliban must realize that Afghanistan has paid a tremendous price for its past isolation during their regime, and it cannot afford to do so in the 21st century. If the Taliban want to be accepted, they must articulate peace policies. Delaying the peace negotiations to test the waters is not a smart idea. All the regional states maintain ties to various militias and other armed groups in Afghanistan, including the Taliban, as a Plan B. The longer the talks remain stalled, the greater the danger of regional countries defaulting to this Plan B, potentially turning Afghanistan into a battlefield of proxy wars that history has never seen before.

As poor as President Rodrigo Duterte's Covid-19 response has been, so was his last state-of-the-nation address (SONA). A sensible president would have started the speech with the pandemic, the most important issue facing the country. But two hours in, Duterte had still not discussed it. He covered benefits and pensions for soldiers and police, the fight against drugs, and his battle with oligarchs and communists. Same, same.

He did not pay much attention to our economic crisis. He did not mention that the economy is collapsing and that we are again the “sick man of Asia”. He did not mention that nearly 4 million are unemployed. He did not mention that inflation is still above 4 percent. He did not mention that millions are hungry. Instead, he boasted about statistics from before the pandemic such as the drop in the unemployment rate, the increase in government revenue, and improved credit ratings. In the minds of Duterte and his economic managers, our timeline is divided into pre- and post-pandemic. They know their record is dismal. They have nothing to be proud of.

Is it obvious that Duterte does not care about the suffering of Filipinos? The address was empty, with no focus – as if the pandemic and economic crisis have passed.

But there will probably still be a pandemic in 2022, or even longer. So if we want the country to get better, let us all vote right in May next year . 

As depressing as Duterte's last SONA was, the mood rebounded with news of the country’s first-ever Olympic gold medal won by Hidilyn Diaz at Tokyo. I cried, to be honest. Faith in humanity was restored. Hidilyn carried not only the barbell, but also the people in a way that Duterte failed to do.

In China, tourism of famous sites of the Communist revolution is booming, a way of tracing a proud century of the Communist Party on the occasion of its centennial. This phenomenon might appear to involve poor people poisoned by the one-party dictatorship that sometimes treats human rights and democracy as if they were nothing. But in an emerging country that has overcome its "history of humiliation" and is on the verge of becoming the strongest country in the world, many people seem to become naturally patriotic.

Many people reflexively want to defend their country. Love and pride in one's country is not limited to China, but can be found anywhere and anytime. In this age of globalization, whether it is Tokyo or Shanghai, one tends to see oneself as a replaceable part of a larger system that transcends national borders. Nationalism is the perfect mental stabilizer, anchoring one's ever-changing life in a unique history that continues unbroken.

It must work only when there is a sense of unity as a nation. When a catastrophe occurs in a distant part of a country, the feeling of being a fellow countryman surely intervenes. Nationalism has its benefits. However, when patriotism is imposed "from above" from a position of power, and when people are forced to "ethnically" identify with a certain group, the negative effects can be serious.

Japan is not immune to this kind of nationalism. We should not stop watching China's problems and criticizing them. But if we get so caught up in it and succumb to anti-Chinese peer pressure, then Japan will become a mirror image of China. Nationalism is like a well that never runs dry. The off-putting celebrations of the 100th anniversary of the Communist Party in China are calling Japan to check itself.

The government has survived the odds to last two years in power. The first challenge that the regime of Prime Minister James Marape met was Covid-19. Just like a child is not terrified by the broomstick in mum’s hand but by the look on her face, it was the enormous fear that made everything seem bleak. But the government moved swiftly before the outbreak was declared a pandemic. The measures it took were criticized but the end story is what we see today – matters could have been far worse.

The PM faced other extraordinary challenges – court battles to remove the government and the economic crisis due to Covid-19. The major risk was the economy – that the entire system could break down. Law and order was another concern. There is no “thank you” in politics. What counts is the whole-of-government approach the ruling coalition adopted as its key strategy. What Marape did was try and put Papua New Guinea (PNG) back on track. Marape became the first PM to give money directly to the people – for promoting small and medium-sized enterprises.

The contest is now between those who want to change PNG and those who want to continue with the old normal. Covid-19 is here to stay. People who say all the right things to impress the country, observers, and friendly nations and organizations belong to the old normal. The people are more aware of what goes on today. They want better times and to do away with the old normal.

Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance, you must keep moving.

The World Bank (WB) report on the dismal state of Philippine education triggered Education Secretary Leonor Magtolis-Briones to demand a public apology from the WB for shaming the country. In the absence of national performance metrics data that say otherwise, it is more prudent to take the World Bank report on Philippine education as an opportunity to examine what we need to improve and use lessons and insights from it to frame our expectations of the next president come 2022. We badly need an education president!

The world is talking about the emergence of Society 5.0, or the Imagination Society, where digital transformation and innovation in science and technology combine with the creativity and values of people to solve societal problems, promote wellbeing, and achieve economic development. This emerging society and economy require a pool of human capital with different skill sets that are future-proof, disruption-ready, and innovation-oriented.

The election season is about to start. Candidates must be able to offer concrete education programs that will transition the country’s education system to something that will focus on developing the country’s human capital for Philippine Society 5.0.

The emergency remote learning that the country implemented due to the Covid-19 pandemic gave us a glimpse into the education revolution that is already underway in many parts of the world. We need school leaders who are imaginative and creative, with enough understanding of the new mindset required to transition our system to be future-ready, data-driven, and innovation-oriented. We cannot afford to have school leaders who will do more of the same things.

But first things first, in 2022, we should choose an education president. Everything else will flow from there. We cannot afford to miss the ongoing education revolution.

Two high priests of the Chinese foreign policy community, Yan Xuetong and Wang Jisi, have written recent pieces in Foreign Affairs. Their task is to interpret for the outside world what China’s leader Xi Jinping means when he says that “the Chinese people have stood up and the era of suffering bullying has gone, never to return.”

Wang and Yan start by acknowledging that recent changes in US policy mean that relations are unlikely to grow any less tense or competitive. Wang holds America responsible for this adversarial environment. China, according to both, is not to blame in any way, and is simply responding to American provocation.

Both scholars wish to persuade readers (and nations) that unbridled competition can only end one way – badly for America. America is plagued by political dysfunction, socio-economic inequality, ethnic and racial divisions, and economic stagnation. Wang says that Washington must accept that “CPC enjoys immense popularity among the Chinese people; its grip on power is unshakeable.”

Their main message to the Americans is to give up on pressuring China to change its political system as this will be futile, and to return to accommodating the Chinese Communist Party as a legitimate global player. The Chinese message to the rest is to bend to China’s inevitable hegemony.

From India’s perspective, three points might deserve attention. First, the statement that there is a paradigm shift in post-Covid Chinese foreign policy. Second, Yan’s forthright statement that Beijing views America’s so-called “issue-based coalitions” (he presumably includes the Quad, the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue that includes Australia, India, Japan and the US) as the most serious external threat to its political security and the biggest obstacle to national rejuvenation. Finally, that China is still offering accommodation if Washington just respects Beijing’s internal order and acknowledges China’s regional dominance.

The government is discussing a yet another real-estate tax reform. Given the mounting opposition to a tax hike, the suggestion is to increase the threshold for taxation on households holding a single residential property from 900 million won to 1,200 million won and to assess the tax only on the top 2 percent of properties.

Despite this, the tax on a single residential property is still fundamentally flawed. Families often cannot move between homes because as soon as the value of the property exceeds the 900-million-won threshold, they will need to pay the transfer income tax. The same applies for the comprehensive real-estate holding tax. This is a tax introduced to discourage speculation in the high-end real-estate market, but when this tax starts to apply to ordinary households holding a single residential home because of increasing market value, the tax starts to become unfair and punitive.

If the government makes the right decision to eliminate the unfair housing tax, it can more than make up for the tax gap by aligning our system with other developed countries. It can consider the European Union model and remove many exemptions in the value-added tax (VAT) system. By simply reforming the VAT tax system and by eliminating the housing tax in line with the global trend, the government could fix the tax issue once and for all.

Whether or not the government will make this decision will have a decisive impact on the next election. Many people voted for the centrist government not out of approval but out of dislike for the other extreme alternatives. Whether it will continue to be the choice of the people will depend on its tax policy.

The torture and murder of a Myanmar domestic helper, Piang Ngaih Don, was so appalling that Singapore’s attorney general himself directed prosecutors to press for the highest possible charge against the employer. Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam expressed “complete abhorrence” over the inhumane crime.

The 40-year-old defendant Gaiyathiri Murugayan admitted to torturing the victim for nine months. Why was the abuse not discovered in time?

Under existing regulations, doctors must check the health of domestic workers regularly. This is a chance to report signs of domestic abuse. Yet, past cases have a common feature: The abuse was not found out or swiftly reported by neighbors. This indifference raises questions about Singaporean society.

Domestic workers have left their families and hometowns to work for low wages. On top of this, they may end up ultimately sacrificing their mind, body or even their life. Whether they can be protected and whether they can get justice after being victimized depends not only on effective law enforcement and justice but on our social conscience. No matter how strict the legal framework is, it cannot prevent "ordinary people" from committing extraordinary inhumane crimes.

The Ministry of Manpower is now reviewing the supervision of domestic workers. It is looking at how to improve the notification system for when doctors conduct routine health examinations of domestic workers. Setting up a more effective reporting mechanism is a priority, which requires greater public awareness and better education of society.

Singapore’s wealth and economy are the envy of neighboring countries. The development of Myanmar, Bangladesh, Indonesia and the Philippines remain far behind. Singaporeans must express greater sympathy for all domestic workers so as not to be labelled as "rich but not benevolent".

Stakeholder capitalism was a concept advocated by Klaus Schwab when he founded the World Economic Forum in 1971. Shareholder capitalism emphasizes that companies should serve the interests of shareholders, while stakeholder capitalism believes that companies have an obligation to all stakeholders. Shareholder capitalism has been proven extremely harmful, particularly in the US, which has seen widening inequality, intensification of social conflicts, and the control of political parties by powerful interests.

There are still a few countries in the world such as the Nordic countries, New Zealand and Singapore, which are worthy of recognition. Among these countries, Schwab has highlighted Singapore as model of stakeholder government. Schwab’s praise for Singapore spans its public housing construction, education, health and digitalization initiatives.

He has, however, also emphasized that Singapore’s model may be difficult to replicate in other countries with larger or poorer populations. Yet, pragmatic and stakeholder-driven policy making, common in New Zealand and Denmark, are still worthy of recognition. Ultimately, the government should take care of the interests and welfare of all stakeholders.

Schwab may also feel that in this globalized world, Singapore’s commitment to multilateralism is beneficial. This commitment is illustrated through Singapore’s active promotion of the economic integration of the ASEAN region and the country’s participation in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP) trade agreements. Furthermore. the Covid-19 pandemic has illustrated the crucial role this region will play in the global economic recovery.