The 19th century was the European
century, the 20th century was the American century and the 21st century is
believed to be an Asian century. While this century has 86 more years to
go, Asia is unlikely to be
the sole dominant political and cultural power.
Out of the big Asian players, none has risen, nor is likely to rise, as the
dominant power and the sum of all Asian countries isn’t likely to have the
capacity to dominate the world.
First things first, the big Asian players, like China, India, Japan and
Korea are busy with their own domestic issues.
The populations of China and India come with their own social issues
requiring tight control to prevent social chaos. Japan and Korea are busy
with their economic agendas, ensuring that they get through the global
crisis with flying colors. Korea with its unification plan needs all the
political strength to focus on its success.
Second, the second-tier Asian players, like Indonesia and other Southeast
Asian countries do not have enough momentum to propel them to political and
cultural megastardom. Either individually or as a group, Southeast Asian
countries are climbing uphill due to limited experience and poverty,
excluding Singapore.
Third, G7 countries (US, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Canada and Japan) are
still leading the world with their soft power, despite their economies
being in a big mess and their net wealth having dwindled. With their
combined experience of more than a millennium, G7 countries are maintaining
the status quo of world political and cultural power.
Fourth, the US, despite being a “frugal superpower”, continues playing the
role of “the world police” even though they need to borrow funding from
China, the world’s “lending bank”.
The US has showed no sign of stepping down from the highest place of the
“policing the world” totem pole. Its latest military base in Niger is an
attempt of a superpower in a midlife crisis to show its remaining power to
the world.
It is extremely interesting to notice that the grandfather of capitalism is
now borrowing money from the grandmother of communism. And in the matter of
finances, apparently, both countries are a matching pair of gloves, which
creates an unprecedented synergistic power.
Despite China’s position as a “bank”, its reluctance to control world
domination is another interesting phenomenon.
Fifth, western countries are likely to continuously leading scientifically
through various technological innovations, which makes a cliché “marry an
engineer, not an artist because an engineer can always find jobs while an
artist is likely to be starving” a reality.
For instance, Germany, the “geeky techie” nation, is relatively stable in
the midst of global crisis.
Sixth, economically, Asian countries are likely maintain their supportive
role as ideal regions for offshore outsourcing.
However, due to rising costs of doing business in Asia, western countries
are likely to limit offshore outsourcing. Many businesses have rebuilt
manufacturing plants in their own countries.
Seventh, Indonesia with its ongoing issues as a young democracy is unlikely
to rise to the occasion. It is yet to earn respect from the world, due to
its inability to manage a mid-sized country whose population explosion has
gone through the roof with 3.5 million to 4 million babies born every year
and a land area is merely 2.67 times the size of Texas.
Poor internal management and mediocre international image make it an uphill
battle.
Despite its national GDP, GDP per capita and positive economic growth of
6.3 percent per year, Indonesia is a Third World country in terms of
infrastructure, legal and taxation provisions, political performance and
educational system.
Eighth, the overall world disequilibrium has shown how fragile power is as
the world today is much more susceptible to shocks and the global risk
landscape has been dominated by sharp discontinuities, as posited by World
Economic Forum economist Thierry Malleret.
The world has simply changed so rapidly due to these four dominant forces:
interdependence, complexity, velocity and transparency.
At last, the unlikeliness of Asia to dominate this century doesn’t mean it
will be led by a unipolar superpower USA anymore. The century is likely to
be led collectively by all strong state and non-state agents, including
individuals.
The world has finally come to its most equal form: Anyone with hard and
soft power has the potential to dominate the world politically, socially,
culturally, economically and philanthropically.
The “wisdom of the crowd” has reached its tipping point. And the world isn’t
going back to the old ways of doing business anymore.
The United Nations and NGOs may attempt to steer the world into becoming a
more peaceful place, yet they are likely unable to fill the global
governance vacuum.
The unlikely Asian of this century is both a pro and a con, as long as you
know what to do and which decisions
to make. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar