Can Asians think?

Can Asians think? is the title of a book whose author is Pakistani-Singaporean, Kishore Mahbubani, Ambassador of Singapore to the United Nations. The first time I came to know of the book was from Khan's talk show on CNN; the author had appeared in a discussion of the motives behind the book's publication, which has become a bestseller. Not being available in Jakarta book stores, I had it sent from a friend in Malaysia.

"Think" as perceived by the author is not in the ordinary sense of denoting the mental faculty to express a belief, opinion or judgment. The broad perspective attached to the word in the author's mind is obvious as he states that Asians have an obligation to think very deeply about their prospects in the coming century and the new millennium.

The author explains that he is not asking the question in terms of limited thinking ability, as linked with the object of mastering the alphabet, playing chess or calculating two plus two makes four. And the author is concerned not so much with brilliant individual minds as with the mental performance of the aggregate groups which form societies. Here, he has in mind the Asian societies.

The book represents a compilation of the author's essays published in well-known magazines like Foreign Policy, Foreign Affairs, The National Interest, and lectures to learned societies.

The essays, overall, are not exceptionally spectacular, except for the last essay, under the catchy heading which is also used as the book's title.

The lead essay originated from a lecture given in Singapore by the author at the 7th International Conference on Thinking on June 3, 1997.

For the author to suggest that the question Can Asians think? is one single, key question that could determine the future of the globe sounds exaggerative or perhaps pretentious. Nevertheless, the question involves an extremely challenging issue to attend to. The question is posed against the background of the coming 21st century and the new millennium.

As we stand on the eve of the 21st century, only the Asian society has reached, in a comprehensive sense, the level of development that generally prevails in Europe and North America today. Pointing to Japan, the author asks: "If Asian minds can think, why is there today only one Asian society able to catch up with the West?"

The comprehensive configuration encompassing the fields of human endeavor, brought to bear on the question, is five-fold: first, the economic performance in the framework of liberalization and integration with the global economy; second, accomplishment in the cultural realm; third, the need for political stability and harmony on the political front and in the security realm; fourth, the serious challenges in the social realm; and fifth, developing the right blend of values, meaning the traditional Asian values and those adopted from the West.

Mahbubani suggests three answers are possible to the question: yes, no or maybe. For each answer, he sums up succinctly the pertinent reasons.

The readers would be ready to give their own answer, as the author suggests that the question remains a valid one for them to pose themselves, on the brink of the 21st century and the new millennium.

It is very difficult to answer the question posed by the author, to wit: "Can any Asian society, with the exception of Japan, be confident to succeed or do as well, in a comprehensive sense, as the contemporary advanced societies?"

We are posed with a very challenging question.

S. SUHAEDI

Jakarta