The debate about international financial architecture is ending in a whimper. This is too bad for Asian voters and for Asian democracies. Financial faults both at home and abroad were the seeds of the Asian crisis. But it was nurtured by unfortunate politics in Thailand, Indonesia and Korea. The end of the crisis should not mean the end of efforts to make political life a part of the solution.
Across Asia leaders differ in their assessments and prescriptions for macroeconomic and structural policy management. There are debates about the optimal mix of macroeconomic policies during shock-induced downturns, the mix of public works spending versus spending on the social safety net and the effectiveness of these programs, given corruption. The CERN meeting will address these topics.
Breakfast Briefing held to discuss W. Courtland Robinson's new book.
The Carnegie Economic Reform Network met for the first time on February 27-28. During that meeting, CERN conducted a discussion on "Latin America in the Wake of the Asia Crisis: Lessons from and for Asia." In that context, participants in the meeting put forward ideas about how domestic and international policies might be improved to cope with the volatility of international capital flows.
Breakfast Briefing with US Committee for Refugees
For many years South Korea served as a showcase for the not-ready-for-prime-time model of economic development. Reading Cumings's and Oberdorfer's accounts, one is hard-pressed to find evidence that things unfolded in the smooth, organic evolution suggested by the popular models of development. Therein lie clues to explain the collapse of the Asian model.
These days there are no more double standards about dictatorships. If they're "emerging markets" for U.S. exports, we love them all. In this era, foreign policy is made by the Commerce Department and the U.S. trade representative - their job is to pry open markets, not societies. In places like Indonesia, you can't do both. President Suharto is the Indonesian market.