Change ... Or No Change. Part III.

I think I have come to the conclusion that my last Blog on this subject wandered too far off the original theme. Muddled thinking helps no one, and even if I knew what I was writing about, a re-read persuades me that others reading Part II might be getting lost.

I started down this road of Change or No Change on the premise that we may think the world around us generally is changing because of the amount of activity taking place. But the reality is we are not changing very much at all. You can be in an induced coma-like state for ten years and when you wake up although things like fashion will have changed, the world around us generally has not done so. To recap, I think this is generally true of Europe ... lots of activity and not much action. North and South America, in a similar position although North America does seem to be translating some of their actions into progress. Africa meanwhile remains in the grip of corruption, and nothing positive will change on that continent until tribal issues get resolved (difficult), and the countries are run by people who will attempt to eradicate corruption (unlikely, in my view).

But what of Asia; is there change here? On the face of it, of course yes. New leaders in China, Japan and South Korea for a start, but will they create real changes?

In the case of South Korea the evident change is their first ever woman President in a country known to be a male dominated society, but Ms Park's newly sworn in administration is already beginning to hit some speed bumps. Her Defence Minister nominee has quit, and she herself has been singled out for some pretty unpleasant rhetoric from the North Korean "boy" who is starting to walk down a dangerous path of brinksmanship that might go badly wrong. Of course it seems that Ms Park's relatively narrow victory in the December election was largely due to the vote from the older members of the Korean population who remembered her Father. A military dictator, who was assasinated in 1979, was credited with growing the Korean economy but disliked for his policy of crushing dissent and preventing democratic development. One wonders how much of the father has rubbed off on the daughter.

Japan has returned to a former leader who seems to be promising to do all the things he promised to do previously as Prime Minister - but he only lasted a year on that occasion. The rather hawkish and nationalistic Mr. Abe might wish to leave more of a mark this time - and I am not sure that the consequences will be good for North Asia, or the Japanese economy that remains in recession.

China has now formally had its change of leadership. Some people I speak to are clearly unconvinced about China and what the new leaders will bring, but initial signs seem relatively positive. As with many developing economies, corruption has plagued China for years but the appointment of the no nonsense Wang Qishan to the role of Secretary of the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection might bring about some major changes in that area. The new President Xi Jinping, and new Premier Li Keqiang, at 59 and 57 years of age respectively could make some significant changes to China as it continues the process of emerging into the world, but it's not going to be easy. Much remains to be done, although I get a real sense that the new leaders are serious about doing what is necessary to create a "fair and just society" as Premier Li said the other day.

But change takes time. That is why it often appears that there has been no change. Who actually remembers the Kyoto Protocol on Climate change? Did anything substantive really come out of that? I am sure that we all remember the Basel rules for financial institutions. After many iterations of the rules, countries seemed to make up their own minds as to whether they would adopt them or not. Therefore, I would argue, why do we spend so much time, effort and indeed money on debating issues of "change". At the end of the day the changes that take place as a result of the activity are - little or no change.

Comments

[Adam Tsui]

David, this is 'Alex Choi' can you email me your email, my email is [email protected]. I would like to send you a private message.

[David Eldon]

Clearly the outlook for "no change" is bleak, and I would not disagree with your summary of some possible outcomes. And, I would add that this widening gulf between the rich and the poor is not limited to countries like China. Countries like Singapore are suffering a similar "disease", as is perhaps the UK too.
I would also not disagree with your statement about the fact we DO need change but as I look around,I am concerned at the lack of real leadership that can drive such change.
It's not a doomsday scenario, but we will need to expect the unexpected.

[June]

Thanks, David, for Part III - I was getting a bit lost indeed after Part II! While I do agree that often not much is changed despite the "amount of activity taking place", I would be quite concerned if your conclusion - that the changes that take place as a result of the activities are "little or no change" - would remain true going forward. I fear the world is faced with a number of critical extreme imbalances cooking away - the extremely uneven distribution of wealth between rich and poor (China, and a number of other countries) - which might lead to higher risks of social unrest, the global financial and economic system that seems to be kept alive through a number of fragile band-aid policies in order to buy time, the failure of certain political systems to address the fundamental problems at play (Europe), to name a few. Can the world continue the way it is now, without substantial change? You were right that there has been a lot of activity (or noise) without too much real change, but I believe we DO need change - I just hope that some of the "activities" going forward will lead to some REAL change. Otherwise, I fear what prospects we are faced with - a revolution, a war? (I do hope my outlook is unnecessarily bleak, by the way...)