|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Friday, 21 November 2003 |
 |
|
 |
Features | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
The virtues of hybridity The Storm's Eye by Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha I hope the two major parties get together, because then I can criticize both Chandrika and Ranil, which would be vastly entertaining. I can think of several literary comparisons, from Anthony and Cleopatra to the Bobbsey Twins, that would irritate both of them so thoroughly that they would coo at each other at Cabinet meetings about how awful I was. That would be a small price to pay for peace in our time, but given Sri Lankan history I suspect I will be denied that pleasure. So, for the moment, I shall confine myself to the world at large. This is convenient, because some weeks back I attended the ASEAN People's Forum in Manila, and it provided much food for thought. In the opening session, on the world after Iraq, the brilliant and persuasive Malaysian academic Jawhar Hussein discussed the problems caused by unilateral American action. But while most delegates clearly disapproved of such action, they understood the pressures on their governments to support it, and the possibility of increased terrorist action as a consequence. Then the closing session dealt with religion in the region, which meant discussion of the connotations of Islamic identity in the current context. Yet, despite two scholarly and informative presentations, it was only in response to a question that one speaker explained the contemporary influence of the Saudi Arabian form of Islam. Then indeed he made clear the transformation wrought in Pakistani Islam, previously more eclectic, by what he described as Wahabi influences, reinforced by the Americans too in the Cold War. But it was the failure earlier to deal with the phenomenon that struck me, as did the failure to mention China in the sessions on Burma. There the West, though not moving for regime change of something much more oppressive than Iraq, has made its disapproval clear. ASEAN too has enunciated its anxiety for change. But the Burmese generals can ignore all this because of backing from China, which will not change while the world continues complaisant about their involvement. But one realizes that, as far as economic clout goes, ASEAN simply cannot challenge China. Though the ASEAN Tigers are more developed, the size of the Chinese market alone limits criticism. And similarly, given the authority wielded by Saudi religious thinkers in Islam today, the previously less intense Islam of ASEAN is not in a position to assert itself. South East Asia then, throughout its history and now, finds itself at a cross-roads, subject to several influences it cannot withstand. But its distinctive identity through history arose from its assimilation of several such influences on its own terms, and its creation of a hybrid but extremely dynamic culture. Now however it seems to allow each of the current major players, the United States in politics, Saudi and the Middle East in religion, China as a trading partner, full sway in their chosen spheres, without the mediation of other factors. Of course all this may workout all right. South East Asian countries have generally done better than us and the ASEAN approach may ensure a stronger regional voice, as well as an identity that preserves individual characteristics too. But, in the context of globalization, the body needs to expand to ensure its status as an equal partner to the stronger entities that currently make the running in these different sphere. So I welcomed the move, at governmental levels, to expand trade links with both India and China. The current agreement involving some countries from South Asia - including Sri Lanka - had earlier seemed a step in the right direction, but its impact was obviously limited. The involvement of India together with China throughout the region should encourage the pluralism that has historically been its greatest strength. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
