All other major world regions now include an explicit commitment to democracy as part of their regional membership requirements.
The European Union is the standout example, requiring all countries to meet stringent conditions of political openness, human rights and a free press before they can be considered for membership. This has done more than anything since the fall of Communism to encourage freedom in Eastern Europe.
Similarly, the club rules of both the African Union and Latin America’s Mercosur grouping today include specific commitments to democratic rule. Countries which fail to meet this criterion are suspended from the club until they return to democratic rule.
No such commitments exist in Asia. Democracy is not mentioned in the founding statutes of any of Asia’s key regional bodies such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), or ASEAN + 3 (which adds China, Japan and Korea).
If it was, most member countries would be ineligible. Only Japan, Korea, Indonesia, and (perhaps) the Philippines would currently pass the mark.
The Bali Democracy Forum is thus an historic attempt to put the issue of democracy squarely on Asia’s regional agenda. While it is unlikely to produce any major breakthroughs, the mere fact that the gathering is taking place is significant in several respects.
First, it represents a coming out party for Indonesian democracy itself. The political progress made in that country over the past decade is little short of remarkable. Ten years ago Indonesia was one of Asia’s most enduring autocracies, beginning its third decade of rule under Suharto.
Today, it is easily Southeast Asia’s most democratic country, and one the world’s few successful examples of democracy in a Muslim country. Its success gives the lie to oft-heard claims about the incompatibility of Islam and democracy.
The invitation list for the Bali Democracy Forum also deserves attention. It defines Asia broadly along geographic rather than cultural lines. In so doing, it includes participation not just of ASEAN but also the core Asian civilizations of China, Japan, and India, as well as Australia and New Zealand.
This essentially mirrors the composition of the nascent East Asia Democracy Forum, begun three years ago, which bridges civilizational schisms as potential building-blocks for future Asian regionalism. It marks an increasingly influential vision of the region as a geographic rather than a cultural entity.
This broadness is also a weakness, however. In the name of inclusiveness, the Forum includes some of Asia’s most repressive regimes, including Burma, China and Vietnam. At the same time, it excludes the United States, which has been sponsoring its own alternative grouping, the Asia Pacific Democracy Partnership, which is restricted to genuine democracies.
Naturally enough, the APDP includes the US and excludes non-democracies like China. But the limited enthusiasm shown in the region for this idea suggests it is unlikely to survive the end of the Bush administration.
The Bali Democracy Forum, by contrast, has the potential to be an important step not just for democracy in Indonesia, but also for Asia more broadly. And it underlines the fact that, contrary to proponents of ‘Asian values’, Asia’s past record of authoritarianism is unlikely to guide its future.
Benjamin Reilly is Director, Centre for Democratic Institutions, Australian National University
This post was also published in the Canberra Times here
Update: an alternative viewpoint here