I just returned from several weeks traveling around several Southeast Asian countries examining economic development since last there before Covid and from multiple visits earlier years while a graduate student. Going back to the 1980s, my professors suggested Southeast Asian nations as models for economic development for “Third World” or less developing countries and advised visits for practicum (experience). That led to my multiple visits over the years.
Southeast Asian nations as well as neighboring China grew astoundingly from the 1980s (some even from the 1970s) and came to be known as “miracle economies”. It is not a unified region although the several countries share some common characteristics like ‘benevolent authoritarianism’ and embracing elements of capitalism. Each nation had its own peculiar attributes that facilitated growth and development. My most favorite country as a model for Guyana is Singapore because its shares many commonalities – British colonial rule, English as the main language, parliamentary system, ethnic and cultural pluralism, hard working population, progressive leaders, among others. I love Singapore for its high state of development, zero poverty, full employment, near zero crime, zero tolerance for (government) corruption and graft, zero illicit drugs, orderliness, cleanliness, efficiently managed state corporations including electricity and mass transit, among other reasons.
Unlike Guyana, Singapore has no natural resources and that has not handicapped development. And unlike Guyana, it has managed multi ethnic relations without outward physical conflict; unlike Guyana, ethnicity does not negatively impact development. The ethnic groups get along and each is allowed “cultural autonomy”. The three main ethnic groups – Chinese majority, Malay the second largest, and Indians (Tamils or we call ‘Madrassi’ in the Caribbean) — learn their native language and culture in public institutions and celebrate their identity; Chinese, Malays, Indians have national public holidays (including Diwali and Eid) during which identities are promoted and celebrated. They do not shy away from their identity; cultural diffusion is encouraged and that has helped the groups to live in relative harmony and peace unlike during colonial rule when there were ethnic riots. A Chinese has been Prime Minister since its founding but the Presidency (that replaced the monarchy) rotates among the three ethnic groups; the current President is an Indian who assumed office a few months ago. The MPs and the cabinet represent the three groups in a partnership.
The state of the economy (GDP per capita) of Singapore was not much different from Guyana at independence. Singapore was part of a federation with Malaysia when independence was granted in 1963. Unhappy with and speaking out against Malay dominance and control of resources, Singapore was asked to leave the federation. It became independent in 1965 under an enlightened leader with a vision — Lee Kwan Yew (came to be known as LKY), Cambridge University educated lawyer – and perhaps the most enlightened leader of his era who served as Prime Minister till his voluntary retirement in 1990. He remained a MP till his death in 2015 training and advising his successors; his son Lee Hosien Loong (since 2004) has been PM and plans to retire. LKY co-founded a political party (Peoples Action Party) with other prominent politicians or activists and cultural leaders including Malays and Indians. He brought together several Chinese, Malay, and Indian organizations. He became the dominant figure and did not tolerate much dissension although he respected and accepted the views of others.
Although he was a left winger (and even labeled a socialist) in his youth when combating colonial rule, in the same mold as Guyanese nationalists who fought imperialism, he was a pragmatist. He was extremely brilliant and understood the consequences of aligning with the East during the cold war unlike left winger Cheddi Jagan. LKY recognized that Singapore would not develop under socialism, and he did not want his nation to fall in the same trap as Indo-China nations that fought the French and Americans. He distinguished himself from his radical socialist comrades in the party having them expelled. And he embraced capitalism as the mode of development. More specifically, at the height of the cold war, unlike our Jagan in British Guiana, he sided with the US and the West. This won him kudos and support from the Americans and the West resulting in loans, investment and open markets. He became very close with American Conservative rulers like Ronald Reagan and George Bush. His embrace of capitalism and the West going back to the 1960s gave him access to resources and markets to grow his country’s economy. And it took off like a jet. While the GDP per capita of Guyana and Singapore were almost the same in 1966, three or four decades later, Singapore’s was twenty times that of Guyana. Guyana pursued ‘etatism’ or insular state development tied to socialist economies and Its economy stymied. Today, Singapore’s GDP per capita is almost the same as the USA. Singapore has become a ‘super’ developed city state, the envy of the world. Singapore, like other Southeast nations, focused on education and industrialization. Scholarships were provided to outstanding students to study abroad (USA and UK) and return to make contributions to the economy. (Several Singaporeans of all ethnicities studied with me in NY) during the 1980s.
From a poor nation with no natural resources, Singapore has become one of the most efficient and rich states. Other Southeast nations and China have also done extremely well since the 1960s. Vietnam for example, has made a complete turnaround of its economy after the devastating consequences of the Vietnam war with America; that country has been booming with construction undergoing so much change every time I visited a few years apart. LKY was economic advisor to China and Vietnam, both growing phenomenally.
The Southeast Asian nations have not wasted their resources or new found wealth like Latin American or African countries. They have largely avoided the “resource curse” and their people are enjoying a very high standard of living and declining poverty. The Guyana government should give thought to (supporting young scholars) studying the development models of Singapore and other Southeast Asian nations. These economies can serve as guide if not models of development and how to avoid the resource curse.
