Debate on Asian Democratic Prospects Stimulates Vicious National Rivalry

With representatives from Israel, Iraq, India, Pakistan, Ceylon, the Philippines, South Korea, and Japan present, one could tell before the fourth forum of the International Seminar got under way Wednesday night, that conflict was inevitable.

Speaking on "The prospects of Democracy in Asia," the three main speakers of the evening from Ceylon, Iraq, and the Philippines immediately established themselves as optimistic, pessimistic and undecided as to the prospects of Democracy.

But the real fireworks began in the question period when the speakers dropped their polite facades and launched chauvanistic barbs at their arch foes. One could not help but feel that if these men truly represented the power of their countries, and if the forum were an international conference of great importance, that war would certainly have prevailed.

The touchy interchanges began with a question from the floor asking whether the problem of unassimilated minorities were an obstacle to Democratic development in Asia. Taking the microphone, the representative from Israel said that, speaking as an individual and not for his country, he felt that the problem of Arab refugees in his country had to be solved in the larger context of finding a solution to the hostile relations between the Arab nations and Israel. There are also many Israeli refugees who had to flee from Arab territories without compensation, he continued, but "we feel that this problem is only part of the larger question of Arab-Israeli relations."

The response was short but to the point. Moniem El-Khatib, director of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iraq said, "the question of Arab refugees in Israel is one of blackmail."

Minorities continued to be an issue of some embarrassment as the Iranian representative at the seminar, after alluding to the magnificent manner in "which Persia had treated her minorities for centuries was asked about the treatment the Bahai's had recently received. The explanation was that this was a political question which did not indicate that Iran had difficulty integrating its minorities.

Raul Locsin of the Philippines, Executive Editor of the Economic Monitor, said that the problem of a Chinese minority in the Philippines is not very deep, and "I think one of our presidents was of pure Chinese origins."

Responding to a remark by El Khatib that many of the Democratcies in Europe were only superficial and that many of the "Democrats" are dangerous, Murugesu Sivasithamparam, Member of Parliament from Ceylon said, "If I am a demagogue I don't mind, Democracy must and shall prevail in Asia."

With a severe economic problem, with over-population, 14 different languages, and diverse religions, India has managed to establish a firm Democracy against all the Western prerequisites for freedom, Sivasithamparam said. "In the beginning there were skeptics who insisted that our Democratic government was held together by a charismatic leader, Ghandi, but India has proved time and again with Nehru, Shastri, and Mrs. Ghandi that it will continue to find great leaders a-plenty," he noted.

"We in Asia hope that a new form of Democracy will emerge from the blending of ideologies," Sivasihtamparam said. Democracy in Asia must include a new concept of property rights, must provide dynamic economic systems, and must maintain the rights of the individual, he said.

"If economic progress was India's sole concern, we would not bother with Democracy but would rather model our government after General Motors," he said. "But for us Democracy is where the government officials must face the people periodically," and prove to them that they deserve their trust.

The final jab of the evening came predictably, from El Khatib who had been on the offensive all evening. When asked why he felt Japan's Democray was superficial, he replied that "the Japanese have a unique dexterity with imitation, and I can't help but feel that their government is a copy which includes a fundamental Right-Left split."