BANGKOK: In the Philippines, a popular uprising by citizens tired of corruption led to the ouster of then President Joseph Estrada last year. In Indonesia, former president Suharto was driven out of office in 1998, following a similar display of public outrage.

These two episodes in Asia’s recent history show that despite all the ill effects of market-driven development models and policies, the region does have a healthy record of public protest that reminds the world — especially the developing world — that people’s power does work.

“There are strong social movements in Asia. We have a vibrancy that is important,” Nicola Bullard, deputy director of Focus on the Global South, a Bangkok-based independent think tank, says of these success stories of political and social movements that have influenced the course of history in the region.

“There are some good lessons we can offer those from other regions,” she adds, saying that public also has strong voices in places like India and South Korea.

She and other activists say these Asian examples could be useful in discussions at the Second World Social Forum (WSF) in Porto Alegre, Brazil next week on strengthening international movements against the ill effects of the neo-liberal economic order found in many parts of the world.

“We need to build such a social movement,” adds Bullard, whose organization will have activists from Thailand, Indonesia, Laos, East Timor, India, Pakistan and the Philippines at the Porto Alegre conference, set for Jan 31 to Feb 5.

But there are other Asian lessons, too, that the activists intend to draw attention to at the World Social Forum, like the policy that the Malaysian government opted to take after the Asian economic crash of 1997.

Unlike most of the East Asian economies hurt by the financial meltdown, Malaysia’s prime minister Mahathir Mohammad stuck to an alternative policy of regulating the flow of capital into the country to prevent its volatile movement - and defied the IMF’s prescriptions to avoid imposing restrictions on the free flow of capital.

But the 1997 economic crisis, which hit the once-booming economies of South-east Asia, will also be singled out by Asian activists as exposing the devastating impact that the neo-liberal economic agenda has had on developing countries.

In many cases, Asian economies’ vulnerability to a financial crisis emerged from decades of spending too much on unproductive sectors and growing public debt, while opening capital markets without adequate safeguards.

Also up for discussion in Porto Alegre are other negative affects of neo-liberal economics that have impacted Asia, which has more than half of the world’s six billion people. It is also home to 900 million, or two-thirds, of the world’s poorest people — those living on less than $1 a day.

Besides economic instability, Asian activists also plan to focus on instability arising from regional security concerns. This has become a pressing issue following the Sept 11 acts of terror in the United States and the US-led military strikes in Afghanistan as part of its “war against terrorism”.

For the likes of Bullard and Oh, the Porto Alegre conference will also help Asian and other activists send a powerful message to the mandarins at the World Bank, IMF and the WTO — that the critics of neo-liberalism and corporate-driven globalization have by no means disappeared in the region. “It is important that we come together to express a clear and absolute rejection of their economic agenda,” stresses Bullard. Oh argues likewise, asserting that the Porto Alegre gathering will serve to reaffirm that “there are alternative views and policies around”. “Any forum that encourages criticism of the effects of neo-liberal economics is welcome,” says Praveen Jha, an associate economics professor at the Centre for Economic Studies and Planning at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.

“As a result of such economic policies, we have seen a growth in economic disparities across nations and within nations in Asia,” he argues. “The current economic model will not be able to help the bottom 40 per cent of a country’s population,” Jha argues. “The market-driven models are unable to deliver results in critical areas, particularly to improve the lives of those in poverty, the poor.” —Dawn/InterPress Service.