What matters is stability and predictability - commodities that can be provided equally as well by authoritarian or paternalistic leaders as they can by democrats. The principal attraction of countries such as Indonesia to footloose foreign investors in labor-intensive manufactures is as a source of disciplined and cheap labor, something an outbreak of political liberalisation might seriously jeopardise. Neither is it inevitable that East Asia's growing middle class will be a force for political transformation. In countries as diverse as China and Singapore, the freedom to make money appears equally as important as the freedom to vote in genuine elections. Indeed, in an era when capitalism has no rivals and elections in the West are often fought out between increasingly indistinguishable technocrats in the face of growing voter cynicism, authoritarian East Asian leaders have tried to portray democracy as something of a dysfunctional indulgence.
Perceptions are a two-way street.
Perhaps the most enduring legacy of the recent upheaval will be to make East Asian leaders as wary of Western-style capitalism as they are of its politics. Increased exposure to unregulated market forces carries big risks and makes economic planning of the sort that has underpinned the region's rise extremely difficult. As the contagion effect that swept global markets has demonstrated, no country is immune to the potentially pernicious fallout of greater international economic integration. Somewhat ironically, East Asia may provide an important lesson for the future management of an increasingly global economy. East Asian nations have been able to develop and mobilise national resources precisely because they could regulate and control economic activity.