 Great, thank you all very much for coming today. I think we'll start, we have a lot to discuss and many big issues that we'll try to touch on over the coming hour. We have four esteemed participants today coming I think from very different backgrounds and perspectives on this issue that we're going to discuss. To my left we have Mr. Ishito Hori who is the president of Globus University and the managing partner of Globus Capital Partners and then Debbie Aundin who is like me also from Myanmar who is the founder and head of proximity designs in Myanmar. Mr. Wolfgang Jaman who is the Secretary General and Chief Executive Officer of Care International and then to my right Mr. Victor Chu who is Chairman Chief Executive Officer of First Eastern Investment Group and also Co-Chair of the International Business Council and my name is Thamu. I'm the founder and partner of Alva Advisory Group in the Young Own Heritage Trust. So now we have a very big topic to try to talk about East-West and fusion of ideas and I think the starting point for this discussion is really not in ASEAN but in the West and the sense that in the West today we're seeing possibly some tectonic shifts in the political landscape. We've seen new styles of leadership not least in the United States. We've seen very close to each other the Brexit referendum and the election of Donald Trump. In this sense I think that there is in some way a rising discontent against the established order, established politics, established political parties and the political establishment in general. It's very hard to quantify. It's very difficult in the West to say whether this is because of inequality, because of a certain type of economic growth, whether it's because of new technology and social media or the impact of social media. But I think it's hard to argue against the sense that there is this shifting political landscape in the West and this rising discontent with the political establishment. So part of our task today is to think about what that means in ASEAN in the sense of does it apply in ASEAN and more generally in this region. Is it the case that this kind of shift in political thinking and political style, whatever its causes, are also applicable in this region? Are we seeing something similar in terms of a rising discontent against the political establishment or not? And so perhaps we could just begin with that and then talk a little bit about, depending on our answers to that question, what does that mean going forward for this region and for ASEAN in particular, if I could turn first to Mr. Chu. Thank you very much, Chairman. The answer probably is yes and no, because the impact of technology, social media raise expectations of the young people worldwide and of necessity people are not satisfied with the status quo because competition globally is a lot more fierce and you know that the automation, impact, robotic and what we call the fourth industrial revolution will affect jobs. So people are concerned, are more anxious, expectations have grown and they see what's happening in the West, that's also a benchmark. But having said that, Eastern value, generally speaking, tend to be more family oriented. We look at things slightly longer term. There's a high emphasis on saving and education. Those are mitigation factors against a fast changing world. The speed of change and technology really makes people anxious. So I think it's not an easy question to answer generally. We need to look at specific economy, specific country, depending on their own political and economic cycle. I mean generalizing though, do you think it's fair to say that in Europe, in many ways, the past 40, 50 years has been a period of unprecedented peace and prosperity. In Asia though, the last 40, 50 years have included periods of violent conflict, political upheaval, extreme poverty in many countries. And in a way, many Asian countries are just coming out of a relatively dark period into a period of high growth, a growing middle class. And so almost in every Asian country, I think people can feel that their lives are better than their parents' lives or their grandparents' lives. And perhaps that also mitigates to some extent against any kind of discontent with the status quo or any anxiety. And that's the huge opportunity, because there's a refrogging potential in this part of the world. I mean, look at Cambodia. I mean, the last 25 years of reform and development is spectacular. I mean, so I think that's also opportunity. But the challenge is the politics is challenging. But and also the global market is also changing. So I think this is compounded challenge for us too. Right. And Mr. Horig, how do you see it? Well, coming from Japan, which has been enjoying stagnant economy, and therefore it's quite similar to what we see in Europe and the US. And we don't see that kind of Trump or Brexit phenomenon. And President Donald Trump mentioned forgotten people at the inauguration party who are no longer be forgotten. We have to find out who are the forgotten people in each region or each country. And if you look at the analysis of the referendum and the election, and then the commonality of those two was that they are mostly rural, less educated, older men. And those are the people who are forgotten and they are the workers. And we have to see who are the forgottens and we have to include them into the society and we have to include them as a community and let them engage into what we are working on. And that's what we have to be doing it. And that's the I think the issue that I think there's long-term issue is also important. But I think it's more of the community and how do we include the community? In talking about Japan, we don't see that kind of forgotten people. We don't see social divides even though we have been having lost decades or two decades. And I think we have to see what is differences in terms of East and West and find out what's going on in the East and West and see what the conclusion, what kind of best practices we can draw out of it. So if you say that in the West or in the United States that part of the reason for the election victory of Donald Trump was that there is this group of people, older people, maybe more rural people, less educated people who voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump, that is it the case that in Southeast Asia there isn't a similar demographic group? Yeah, in case of Southeast Asia, they are younger in generation. Younger people tend to become more globalized in thinking and they are open-minded. And then we don't see any kind of like a discontent happening in Asia, at least in Japan in terms of younger people. And therefore, and then there are, I mentioned in the room that there are no ultra-right parties in Japan or in Asia. And therefore I don't think there are that kind of things happening in the East. And we have to see why it is not happening. And I believe that community is a key. And I mentioned that in case of Japanese companies or Asian companies, we treat workers as assets. In terms of Western companies, they tend to treat workers as expenses. And whenever they want to cut costs, they cut and fire people. And therefore there are some people who are forgotten. But in case of Japanese or Asian companies, they tend to treat workers as assets mean. Whenever we see factories relocated, we relocate people as well, whenever we see jobs losing because of modernization or computerization, we retrain, we educate, we assign for other jobs. Whenever we need to fire people, we cut the salary of top management or we cut the top management jobs. And that's what we mean by community. And therefore we don't see any kind of forgotten people in the societies. And they tend to be included and they are treated as families. I think that kind of community-based thinking is a key. To think about what is going on in the East and West. What about in the rest, I mean, in Myanmar, for example, Debbie, we've had elections, we've had the rise of the National League for Democracy. The National League for Democracy victory is not framed as an anti-globalization movement in any way, but in a way it draws on the discontent of a lot of people who felt forgotten and who've been left out of economic change over the past 20 years. So could you say something either on Myanmar or more generally in this region? Yeah, I think with Myanmar, it's pretty extreme in that I don't think there's been a country that has opened up so quickly in history as Myanmar has. And it's dizzying. It seems like the world is flocking in. And then people in Myanmar are trying to make up for a lost time. So it's a real clash or, I mean, it is very dizzying to have a society that's been isolated for 60 years and all of a sudden just the lid is off. So I think what we're seeing in Myanmar, I mean, Facebook says this is one country in the world where the highest percentage of users and people in Myanmar equate Facebook with internet. That's where they get their news, everything. And so what that does to a society that was isolated and quite traditional or, I think, for all of us, we're grappling with the dizzying changes. And I think for young people, I mean, they want to embrace globalization and make up for lost time. But at the same time, there's a lot of uncertainty and complexity that comes with it and how to make sense of all the changes going on. And so for us, it's a really fragile time. I think some people want to throw out all the communal values and some people feel like, because it's so uncertain and so complex, they're scared and want to hold on to what they know is traditional and which means basically afraid of the other. And so then we have the rise of religious conflict and ethnic conflict. I think that's more, it was always there for 60 years, but now the lid is off. So, yeah, I think we need a new sort of mindset and consciousness of how to deal with these, really, all these tensions that have come up to the surface now. Yeah. I mean, I guess in a way, Myanmar is an interesting example, because on the one hand, it's a country, it's a very poor country. It's a country that can benefit enormously from coming out of isolation, and being more connected to the rest of the world could benefit from a more globalized environment as well. On the other hand, because Myanmar has such weak institutions, has so many challenges in terms of governance, has a relatively uneducated workforce, it's also a country where, I mean, living there, I can see that it's a country where there could easily be a backlash against an opening up, a backlash against free trade, foreign companies coming in. It could be channeled in an ultra-nationalist direction. It could be channeled in a nativist direction against also ethnic minorities in the country. And so I guess the question is, you know, is this also something that we could see in other parts of Asia as well? We've seen a lot of political changes in Asia. We've seen elections in the Philippines, elections in Korea, elections in India recently, as well as in Myanmar, that have really changed politics in those countries. So it's not as if politics in Asia are stable by any means. In Myanmar at least, I think there is this DNA that goes back a hundred years against globalization because of the experiences of colonialism and this sense of exploitation from the outside. So even though we don't see it in Asia today in the same way it's articulated in the West, the question is there a latent kind of anti-globalization sentiment? And what would it take for this to be more manifest in this region as well? Maybe, Mr. Jamal. Well, thanks. And it's really fascinating to listen to the contextual analysis. And at the same time, I think we realize we're dealing with phenomena which are in a way, you know, very similar when you look at global developments and they might have similar reasons and causes and different, if you wish, ways they roll out. But we clearly have a loss of trust and confidence in some kind of established institutions. You dubbed this session the fusion of ideas. And ideas could be anything from values, norms, beliefs, but also political and economic systems. And I think there's an overriding concern about those ideas, if you wish, by many pieces of societies. And they're being challenged. They're being questioned. They're being attacked. And they're being attacked from all sides. I mean, we look at free trade agreements, for instance. You had a very strong kind of leftist movement against free trade agreement. And then Donald Trump comes in and says, yes, I'm of exactly the same opinion. And he also challenges those agreements. So the traditional kind of left and right, maybe progressive, restrictive norms, don't play out anymore. We're having something which is happening in a very different manner. It's threatening because it threatens almost everything our societies are being built upon. And again, it plays out in different phenomena in the various contexts. But I think we really need to think hard about how do we deal with this? Because whatever our society is, the business environment, whatever is built upon, is being questioned, is being challenged. And now, actually, I like the fact that you mentioned how we talk about things. The public narrative becomes a very different one. It becomes very antagonistic. It becomes almost impossible to find common ground and consensus. And maybe it has to do with the way we talk about things. You mentioned assets, right? Sorry to challenge. I mean, I'm obviously not from a business background. I represent a large NGO. And I get increasingly irritated when people talk about markets rather than societies, people, nation-states, whatever. And the public narrative matters a lot to people. And we are living in a highly interconnected world. And communication is happening around the globe in an incredibly fast way. And that's what particularly young people, I think, getting very concerned about. How do we speak about? And in that way, I think what's different, as you mentioned just now with the United States, is this sort of marriage of anti-free trade sentiment with a more nationalist, almost right-wing nationalist sentiment as well. We don't see that in Asia so far. But I wonder if, with social media, with changes in the way in which ideas are being diffused, what are the kinds of new ideas on the horizon? Or let me put it in a different way. I think in Asia, one could say whether different countries had more democratic and open systems or not, most Asian countries, even more democratic Asian countries, had an elite establishment that drove a lot of policy and perhaps looked a little bit more to the long term in terms of economic growth and economic change. But with new social media and new technologies, do you think that things are changing in a way that's going to lead to, if not exactly the same kinds of new ideas emerging, very new ideas in terms of coping with the future? This year at Davos, there was a private session called Edelman Trust. Edelman Trust Barometer has mentioned three collapse entrusts, which is very scary. One is leaders are not trusted any longer. CEOs are not trusted. Employees are much more trusted than CEOs. Whatever you say, they are not trusted. Whatever people in the organization say, it's more trusted because people, leaders tend to take positions and they will not speak candidly. But people in the organization were speaking to their friends and then they would believe much better than what CEO said. Second collapse entrust is media. Media is no longer be trusted. And you see what happened in Trump's election. All the media supported Trump and all the media thought that Trump is going to be elected. However, they were wrong. And that's why media has not been trusted. So what happened was that media was not trusted and therefore social media was more trusted. CEOs are not trusted. Therefore people are more trusted. And that social media movement is creating a next, I think a collapse entrust. Third collapse entrust is more scary. It says system is not trusted any longer. The system is not trusted. And therefore they said, this is wrong. This is wrong. All the system is collapsed. I don't believe in it. And that happens. And then what they say is that globalization, they hate it because globalization, they say that they would grab jobs, they would deprive jobs. And in terms of innovation, they don't believe in innovation because innovation is going to be the one to be taking jobs from them. And so what I said at the work on forum is that the people who participate here is not being trusted any longer. So we have to bridge to them. We have to communicate to them. And we have to create dialogue with them. Otherwise there's a social device, which we may want to be creating it. And therefore I think the social media is going to be the key because media is not trusted any longer. But social media is going to be trusted. And then what I said at the table is that how many of us are in social media and how many of us present the ideas or political ideas to the people and how many of us actually do the dialogue with them. And that kind of social media open platform is the best way to be reaching out and to be including those who feel that they are forgotten. And that kind of attitude is going to be needed by the leaders. What do you think, Mr. Chu? I mean, I'd like to pick up two points here. I think what Horisang said is very important. And when Debbie said that Facebook is almost the, has the monopoly of news for the young, that's also very problematic because the accountability of social media is now also, you know, thrown into question. How can they make sure there's no fake news or misleading news feeding into the young, which inevitably accept the only medium as really what's happening? I mean, that's a very important issue. The other important point I want to pick up from what Wolfgang said is Trump is not against Trey. Trump is against the multilateral system. He wants to do it bilaterally because if you do it bilaterally, the US has a much stronger bargaining position, right? The young people are against globalization for many reasons, right? But whatever it is, the WTO that we have is the only non-discriminatory, is the fairest way, is the fairest system that we have. And actually these bilateral views or regional views undermines the multilateral system, right? So the small players, some of us representing here, have no chance against China or the US on bilaterally. So I think this is an issue that we also need to grapple. We have a fair system, yet it's not working as smooth as it should be. We should be focusing and improving and strengthening the system, rather than try to undermine that system which has taken years to build. That's the point which I like to raise as well. Can I build up on that? Because, yes, I think you're making a great point and if we expand the horizon a little bit beyond the trade agreements, we have two large global agreements out there which have been found two years ago, amongst the leaders of all nations, which is the Climate Treaty and the Sustainable Development Goals. Now, they had an incredible buy-in. Of course, two years into those agreements, they're already under existential threats. And for me, I'm asking all of us a question, what can we do to maintain those agreements and put them more into reality? It's something that international nations have achieved together and now, of course, is under threat, not just by leaders who are working on more bilateral or individualistic, if you wish, agendas. But of course, it's being questioned in the public narrative as well. And I think there is, of course, more than offering a different narrative. We're dealing with some trends that are making a multipolar world now, again, more likely. And one of the big trends is inequality. And it plays out almost everywhere you look at a lot of interaction with Cambodian youth earlier in the week. When you speak to them, of course, they're highly globalized. They love their country, of course. But they also realize there's a big danger for them to be left behind. And there you have, if we don't take care of these inequalities, you have a huge danger of losing a whole generation for the collective, for the greater common good. What do you think then? I mean, if we accept that in ASEAN at least, there isn't yet a backlash against globalization that we've seen or the kinds of major political disruptions that we've seen in the West. But if we see these challenges coming in the future, whether as a result of inequality, whether as a result of the impact of social media, challenges in governance, just the simple nature of the multilateral system and the different challenges that it throws up. I mean, what are the kinds of things that need to happen in this region to strengthen the region in terms of being able to cope in the future? I know it's a huge question, but are there specific things that could take place in this region that would increase its resilience at a time of tremendous change, both in terms of technology, climate change, and other challenges as well? Well, ASEAN, the potential of this huge market is still a work in progress because harmonization is not there yet. For example, I heard from my friend Tony Fernandez last week that he's operating in 10, I mean, Air Asia, operating in 10 countries in ASEAN, and he's dealing with 10 different regulators and 10 different sets of regulations. Now, so I think the European model, some of the positive things could be looked at. I mean, in Europe, you're dealing with one regulator and one set of rules. So for cross-border business inside the ASEAN region, it's much easier to obtain the operational efficiency. So I think a lot of efficiency need to be built. But if part of the answer in this region is greater integration and reduction of barriers between countries, I mean, if we look at the European example, that has also thrown up a lot of resistance and backlash. And if we compare Europe with ASEAN, I would suggest that countries in Europe are actually much more familiar with each other than countries within ASEAN. I mean, people in France and Germany follow each other's politics much more intimately than people in different ASEAN countries. People in Myanmar know almost next to nothing about politics in Indonesia or in the Philippines. And I think in a more integrated ASEAN, there is at least the potential for people to resist whether it's the free movement of people or the free movement of capital. So I mean, this is also something on the one hand, you know, the greater integration of ASEAN could be a big part of the answer, but it could also throw up new problems and challenges for which the region is not really prepared psychologically or culturally as well. That's a good point you made, but the European experiment has a much higher aspiration. It's for eventual, you know, political union. My understanding in ASEAN is not, I mean, it is trade standards and more cooperation. So I think that's where the tension should be less, you know. Do you think, Debbie, could I ask you, I mean, if there are any forgotten people in Southeast Asia, it's definitely rural people in Myanmar who are amongst the poorest in the region who have really been left out of any kind of positive change for a long time. I mean, how would you say about their perspectives in terms of their political thinking, in terms of their trust of the current establishment, in terms of how they might view some of the challenges in the future as well? Yeah, I think it's still very traditional and, you know, the view of government. Government is far away. They've never helped us. We've always been on our own. But at the same time, they're getting more interconnected. And so there's smartphones and Facebook. And so I think there is greater aspiration. And they know they've missed out on a whole era. So farmers say, you know, we know we've missed out and, you know, bring it on. We want new technologies. So they're very eager to join the rest of the world. So there is that very energetic and openness. And whether that can be delivered is a different thing. But I think there's still very much a view of, you know, government is something very far away that really has not impacted or delivered much in our lives. Mr. Hoya, you want to say something? What ASEAN should do is to keep on learning from the best practices and success and failure of the West and also from the advanced nations. And if you look at the social device which are happening in the US and Europe, I think they will remain as they are. And therefore there are some, something is wrong with the system and societies in those regions. But if you look at Japan, there is no social device happening. But at the same time, we have been criticized for the past 20 years as being so slow in economy. And the management system was wrong as well. And therefore we all have to, I think ASEAN has to keep on learning about the best practices or worst practices. And then try to adapt as much as possible. So one thing is keep on learning. Second thing, to make the society to be resilient, I think the key is the adaptability. You have to be flexible. Meaning like you always have to be able to fuse the ideas from the West or East and at the same time you will have to change yourself to be adaptable. The theory of evolution mentioned that the animals who have survived was not because of smartness, was not because of strength, but because of adaptability. Whoever can adapt to the changing world become better. So I think ASEAN can learn from the success and failures from EU and from the US and also from Japan, maybe from China as well. And then try to adapt the best ideas as possible. And then keep changing. And then I think the stage of the modernization is different from each country in ASEAN. And also each region as well. And therefore we can learn. There are so many things to learn from and then you can leap forward as well. Mr. Jamon, if I could ask you, if you want to respond to any of that, but also to ask you, I mean then what do you think in terms of what are the best practices in this part of the world? What are the positive elements here that perhaps are lessons for others as well? Excellent, and actually I wanted to come back to that because it was the underlying question to this session. I mean what can we learn from what works in this region? And obviously I'm the only non-Asian on this panel so I'm not the best place to answer that question. I'd rather pose the question. Twenty-twenty-five years ago I wrote my thesis on overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia and how their cultural identities, their norms, the way they did kind of interact with each other made their businesses tick. And it was actually quite fascinating to speak to some of these business leaders and saying, you know, we're family oriented, we're very relational, we know to trust each other, we have these concepts of Yu Yi and Guangxi and things that, but they said the young generation, our own generation will spoil all of that. That was twenty-five years ago, but when I listen to what I'm being told now, these are very stable concepts and they have played into today's way maybe business is being exercised despite globalization. We talked about long-term thinking prior to this panel. We talked about again how much relational issues do play a role and how much stability they provide. We also learn about some concepts that are really almost alien to western concepts that was reminded of sufficiency economy as a philosophical concept of Thailand, of the king of Thailand and whether there's criticism or not of course, but these are very, very different, very strong philosophical almost underlying principles to the economy. So I would be interested to hear how important, how stabilizing they are and maybe how much the rest of the world can also learn from this. I guess this is a, Debbie, if you wanted to say something. No, I was going to say, I mean, I wonder to what extent this kind of idea around equality and the need to promote equality and not to have people left behind. I mean, one is the Japanese case, but Japan is a very homogeneous society as well. In some other ASEAN countries in Myanmar Indonesia, a much less homogeneous society, their ethnic divides, that kind of inequality could also take on an ethnic complexion as well. I mean, you know, sort of building on what Mr Jaman said, do you think that ASEAN will be good at lessening inequality or do you think that in many ASEAN countries the structures and the ideas are not in place to really meet that challenge? I have hope. I think the ASEAN as Horisan said had the luxury of looking at what has worked, what has not worked in other parts of the world. And we have a very enlightened and smart leaders here. And I think they have what it takes to make ASEAN a better place. I think what you said is also very interesting. I mean, the Gwanshi is a plus and a minus. It brings, it's efficient and you don't need to second guess your partner because there's a trust factor here which is built on DNA language and history. On the other hand is, you know, we have the challenge of colonialism versus professionalism. And you have also the challenge of transparency versus opaque behind-the-scenes deals, right? So I think we need to hopefully the young generation can pick up the good part of it and grow into the positive, the globalized, accepted international norms and standards in terms of cross-border global business. So perhaps in some ways, I mean, this is a very testing time for us here because the challenges are there. We have this young, growing middle class. We have still a certain trust in the establishment and in the elites that haven't worn away in the same way as they have in some western countries. But really what happens in the next five or 10 years is going to be key. If these same elites at the same political establishment are not able to adapt and meet some of these new challenges, perhaps in five or 10 years in many ASEAN countries, we will see this sort of backlash against existing elites that we've seen in other parts of the world. Do you think that's fair? I think it's important for ASEAN and not to create forgotten people, like people who feel that left behind. And those people who feel that they have been left behind or forgotten is not because of inequality. I think it's because of the sense of belonging from the community. So it's like a caring for people. And then the society itself is caring for people and trying to include them. And inclusiveness is going to be important. And that because inequality will happen, inequality of income will happen because of the capitalistic system. And however, whatever happens in terms of the disparity of income, I think we should always be there to include them into the community and treat them as ASEAN, treat them as a family. And that kind of the value is going to be the key to sustain the development of ASEAN in Asia. I wanted to throw out a couple of other ideas before we open it up. One is that it seems to be that we are living in a period of such fast technological change and where the nature of growth and jobs is going to change around the world. And we hear in other panels and sessions here about the coming digital economy and what that's going to mean and the need for people to think completely differently about jobs in the rest of the 21st century. And I think part of the reaction that has led to political change in America and other parts of the West is that some people don't want this change. It's not just that they're anxious about not getting the job in the future. They may just not want that new type of job in the future. They may be they may look back maybe in a nostalgic way on their own life 10 years ago or their parents' lives 20-30 years ago. And my question is in this part of the world in ASEAN is it different? Are people more ready for change? Is it a demographic thing because it's younger people? Or is there something else that makes people want to adapt? Or is it not the case? I mean is it the case the opposite that people here also will start to look very nostalgically to the past and resist the pace of change that we're seeing in this region or inevitably we'll see in this region as well? Maybe. I think in this region in Asia what you mentioned education is the key. Education is the key for being able to change. Education especially lifelong education is going to be the key to be able to sustain because you know there are lots of jobs are changing and the system is changing technology is changing AI is coming robotics are changing and therefore in the lifetime nobody will be able to retain the same job for let's say 30 or 40 years and they have to keep on changing and some people who resist changes will be left behind and we just have to include them to get re-educated and then to keep up to the technology and keep up to the social media and then let them include and then we have to be very consistent and at same time you know always we have to be long-term take a long-term view to make them include and that attitude I think is a key to maintain the society. Can I add a dimension? I mean you're of course very right and if I would single out one other aspect besides inequality it is the rapid technological change that contributes to the to the mess around us. Now can we be optimistic because half of the population in the region is is below 30? Of course not because today a 35 year old is already overwhelmed by what's happening in terms of technological change so as excited as we can be with all the opportunities that come with it just just recognize that it's going so fast we talked to a 25 year old you know he or she will already be overtaken by a 15 year old you know who's cooking up something in the garage on so I mean the rapid change is not just overwhelming let's say an older generation it's overwhelming whole societies and if we are not intentional and cautious and only see opportunities you know the inclusivity of data the protection of you know the dangers that come with IT technology I think these are areas that require a lot of thinking and intentionality about it this is not just about opportunities we have about 20 minutes left and I wanted to open it up to the floor to see if there are any questions before we continue please yes there's a mic right thank you I'd love to follow up on your as the only a non-Asian on the panel I'd love to follow up on your point about the global the existential threats towards the sdg has this moved towards populism some people are saying this is the beginning of a possibly 20 year shift towards those politics in the west I'm wondering what your prediction is about the sdgs if in fact this 20 year shift is just beginning and can asian political leaders step up and fill that void and so who do you think will play that role thank you thanks I mean very quickly you know in our business we're supposed to be optimist by nature so we do believe that global frameworks like we have at the moment carry a lot of strength and possibility opportunities what we what we need to have to make them to make them real is accountability mechanisms for those whom those sdgs are supposed to be beneficial for you know so whatever data we're collecting on stg progress it can't come just through central statistical bureaus it needs to come bottom up from communities who are holding everyone accountable for what those sustainable development goals are supposed to deliver so my organization invests in community scorecards you know asks people what does reach you in terms of all these benefits that are being promised to you I think that's when you get much more cohesion around those goals rather than having this one a top-down approach I don't know whether the answer is your question but this is at the moment a critical element I think that we need to invest in to make sdgs successful are there other questions no all right let me just throw out one other idea and then we can we can sort of go back around to our core question of of what does this region have to to offer the rest of the world which is that you know sitting here in in Penang Pen or if we sit in Bangkok or Singapore or even in Yangon now I mean in a way these are places that are not only opening up and are relatively open or very open in the case of Singapore for a long time but these are you know in their core DNA these are very cosmopolitan places Bangkok Yangon Jakarta Singapore I mean they grew up as as trade cities and as Emporia and so is it the case that you know Southeast Asian politics Southeast Asian elites are almost by nature or by history relatively quite cosmopolitan and and are less inward looking to some extent than elites perhaps have been in other parts of the world I guess what I'm asking is is there is there something in the emerging kind of not just the ASEAN way but the DNA of this region that is that is much more outward looking and wanting and used to working with very different people if you take my our country in Myanmar for instance in Yangon since it's founding 200 years ago and and certainly since a hundred and hundred and fifty years ago under colonial times I mean we had people from all over the world living in Yangon so the elites in in Myanmar are very used to working with people from China from India from the west and elsewhere and perhaps that's a little bit different than some other parts of the world and and perhaps there is that there is that resilience in the face of some of the the the challenges of globalization that there might be elsewhere I think you're so right but but the whole I mean the whole issue is Bangkok versus the rest of Thailand right and Tokyo versus the rest of Japan I think that's really the challenge the people who feel they're forgotten are not the urban elites they are the people in the suburban and and the rural areas who feel that they have been disenfranchised whether it's politically economically on a national regional and global basis and that's where we need to be sensitive and that's why I think what you say about community strengthening is so important but but then the question is you know if if you have rural populations that feel left out in Thailand or in elsewhere it may not come out as an anti-globalization movement because free trade still works relatively well for many Asian countries it may come out in very different ways in the red shirt it's anti-elites I mean the I mean the unhappiness is really is the perception then the elites have shortchanged the rest of the electorate or population and we have to show that that's not the case the people who are in favor of globalization is not taking a selfish or elitist view globalization doesn't mean globalization of culture it means globalization of trade and maybe try to benchmark to the best standards for the benefit of everybody so the legitimacy of the globalization leaders is to show that we bring the whole community up I think that's really the challenge we should be focused on yeah so in that way I mean what are the the positive things that countries in ASEAN have done so far over the past few years that have meant that they have been able to cope with these challenges perhaps a little bit better than the rest of the world do you have any thoughts go ahead well I think there's a you know an emphasis on community and taking care of each other that's been good but then the flip side has been that it's been very family oriented and I think tends to be quite can be insular that anybody who's different from me or outside of my family you know isn't part of the system my system and the nepotism that happens in the cronyism is it's very much a mindset that you know it's okay to be greedy and financially to be financially successful and you know that's just not a that's just a mindset that won't work anymore it's just pragmatically you know you can't do that and so I think the mindsets really need to change and it's about having a consciousness that it's about the whole ecosystem not only are my family but outside my family the nation and the community but even the you know the animals and they and the whole environment that supports us so it's a much larger sense of consciousness in the biosphere and that's just in the asian context and I think you know globally we need that too that we are for the first time in human history you know becoming one family sharing one biosphere and it's not it's not you know because of the interconnected the internet age and connecting all of us that there's that sense of we are all in this together and so how does that translate as you know for leaders and elites to change their mindsets of and have a different way of operating so I think I think we have to grow in a different sense of empathy and have a civilization of empathy that is maybe different and much deeper I think when you're starting from a very low point then the legitimacy is the amount of people you can bring over the poverty line but I think in the future that's not enough because of the you know as you say the the expectation has risen and the social media and technology has cleared a point just above the poverty line is not enough to satisfy the the young and and the masses so that's that's hugely uh challenging but then if we think that you know part of the reason for relative stability in this part of the world is that in the last 20 30 years lots millions of people have been lifted out of poverty growth and and free trade have worked for many people that there are people who've been relatively left behind but maybe not to a point where this has resulted in major social tensions except with perhaps a few exceptions but going forward with social media there are rising expectations the nature of politics is also going to change and if we accept that in the west one big problem is that there's a feeling that elites are very distant from ordinary people right that they've lost touch that the politics in washington are different from what ordinary people are thinking and talking about that even politics in london or in brussels is different from what people are thinking and talking about elsewhere can we be hopeful that elites in southeast asia will be that much more in touch with ordinary people and constituencies or or not i mean is there anything to be hopeful about in in the practicality in the in the flexibility of adaptability of elites and their willingness also to to stay in touch with ordinary citizens i think you know asian has to be always open-minded so there will be no way for asian countries to become anti-globalized and then i had a discussion with kisho mohobani before two days ago about this topic and then he said clearly that asian countries have to keep on opening up therefore you mentioned that all the leaders in these regions have to be able to speak english and have to be able to communicate and have to be able to think about globalized and then have to think about what is going on in the world and have to keep on learning from what's going on at same times all those like you mentioned there is a divide in terms of cities and rural area and therefore the elites have to be able to bridge gaps with them and we have to reach out to them and they have to keep on discussing and what happened was that they are being you know drifted away from the populist you know sentiments and therefore they tend to make mistakes in terms of voting and why happens is that because there has not been enough interaction there has not been enough dialogue and therefore i think we all if you believe that we are the leaders we always have to think about what's going on globally at the same time we have to think of what is going on locally and we always have to be communicating to the world at the same time we have to be communicating to the local people and they keep on doing public education and public diplomacy and public talking to them communication with them by using social media is a key to it therefore i think the leaders have to be able to communicate both in english at the same local languages and then to be able to communicate to them and try to make them aware that globalization is the way to go we have to open up at the same time there should be you know there should be some kind of technological advancement so we have to be re-educating ourselves and that kind of like constant communication is going to be needed constant dialogue is going to be key so maybe before we close up just to kind of wrap up a little bit in terms of what we talked about i mean one is the starting point of the disruptions in the west and the changes there i think we've all agreed to some extent that it's not the same here but that there are challenges going forward that part of the reason that there aren't the same kind the same similar sort of anti-establishment political landscape in at least in parts of southeast asia is that globalization has worked differently and that more people have benefited or at least there's a perception of that that there are a lot of people who may feel disenfranchised in other ways and feel forgotten left out but that politics hasn't come out necessarily in the same kind of anti-establishment feeling or anti-globalization feeling as we've seen in the anglo-saxon countries or in or in parts of europe but that there's still an enormous hill to climb or many hills to climb that there are big challenges around the corner that we have these forgotten populations that their major governance challenges issues of cronyism and corruption things that local people may not be willing to accept five years or ten years from now in the way that they might have been even five or ten years ago but with that if i could ask you for some from final thoughts on on really the the central question that we're facing i mean what what are the pros and cons of this region and especially what are the the areas of strength that perhaps could even be exported elsewhere i mean are there i'll see in ways of coping with these things of change of technological change of inequalities that are lessons for the rest of the world i just have one because we had so few questions and there's one question there i just wanted to take one question yeah this is a microphone oh i'm sorry get closer to the people that they want to reach but when you combine this with the mentioned aforementioned collapse and trust in systems leaders and media as well the people who feel forgotten and the sentiment that social media brings out rebellious sentiments against the status quo in people coupled with the fact that the election of trump in the u.s. has largely been credited to social media campaigns do you think that actually the pros of social media is that great in outweighing its cons in possible social upheavals because especially in a lot of asian countries now for example in china you see social media being very tightly controlled precisely for that reason so i'm just wondering you know are we really i mean we've been singing social media a lot of praises but does it deserve the praises that we are saying and uh is there a way to you know correctly control it to make it more um sort of conducive rather than disruptive to society all right thank you and just maybe one very final question yes thank you yes thank you very much eva seabird swiss ambassador who allows cambodia in thailand there was an interesting discussion about values and ideas i was wondering if you could give some ideas some some of you use on on governance ideas we see a trend in the region to more authoritarian rule quite a few countries in asia on half the trend how do you respond and reconcile that with the idea that you have more participation through social media how do you how do you rationalize those trends thank you so lots of very big questions about the impact in the future of social media and is it is it is it a good thing to think about how that could be shaped or governed in a way that doesn't have excessive negative impact on on politics and this the question from the ambassador about the sense of increasing authoritarian authoritarianism in different parts of the world but including in this part of the world and and and how do people see that the future of that i guess how to link this all back to to what we were talking about before is that you know in this region like in the rest of the world it's not the case that all good things are going to come together that new technology new social media increased globalization moves towards democratic governance we know that that narrative is broken to some extent or at least it's not going to be a linear and easy process and in southeast asia it's too soon to really know what shape some of these big trends will will take so i guess maybe to wrap up if i mean any comments you have on or answers to these questions but any sort of final thoughts on you know what are the biggest fears you would have for this region given the changing political landscape around the world but also what are the what are the sources of of resilience or possible strength going forward in the future as well maybe if i could start with all in terms of the two questions i'd like to link them i mean social media cannot replace good governance so whoever thinks about you the using social media in turn in a manipulative term and i'll he or she will be waking up sooner than later i think there's there's there's something to social media that is uncontrollable and if you think you know you can restrict you can you can manipulate this might be helping in the short term but in the long term no it's it's something that is unleashed if you wish so good governance is is required you know whatever you do in terms of communication um and i think this particular region here and you know allow me not to speak in stereotypes but when we work with the communities and the countries in asia and and i compare them a bit with communities where we work with elsewhere in the world you have something which is very particular here which is a high susceptibility to to values actually to to positive values if you wish uh met a lot a lot of young young people again in in kabocha recently and and how they how they react to the opportunities to speak about things that they think they are right you know it's quite amazing i think there's an incredible potential for young people but also maybe rural communities you know to build upon those susceptibility to values and at the same time you can really spoil this because the people do not speak about their political leaders in a very positive term i mean there's a lot of skepticism if bad governance continues you know in many instances you know corruption whatever um you have you have a high risk when you look at the dangers and that's your question um don't look at europe or america look at places like the middle east that have been stable like five six seven years ago and are completely disintegrate and why because young people went to the streets you know they called an arab revolution with all the backlash and and now you have a whole whole region disintegrating and you don't want to you don't want to experience something like that debbie yeah i think um it's really going to be up to the elites and leaders to have a higher level of consciousness and and so my you know that's my fear is that they won't get it fast enough to be much more inclusive and pluralistic in building institutions and governing so i think whatever we can do to in our own sphere of influence to help leaders really understand the their urgency of this mr hoore yeah i believe in social media because social media has given us the voices to be speaking up and reaching out to other people without social media we have to beg mass media to give us the voices and therefore they had the power now we have the power and it's up to us how we use social media in terms of asian i believe in the future of asian strongly because they have a strong eagerness to learn but so therefore you know it has to be asian people have been learning from the west and there has to be two way streamed and therefore i think it's about time the west learn from the east in terms of the attitude and also community approaches and that i'm more worried about what's going on in terms of us and the the europe and therefore i think we should discuss this in europe and also in the u.s to talk about what's going on in social device and that's more important and that's more scary for me yes in terms of social media i think it's like globalization the train has left the station actually the plane have left the airport right you can't reverse it we need to strengthen protect and provide better governance of that and i think as many of us agree social media does have his tremendous contribution to society if it's used you know wisely and properly in terms of participating participating politics here i think depending on you know where your point of social and economic development if you're emerging from a one-ton country or after revolution the masses will be satisfied if they have a have a roof to protect them and then enough basic necessities but once you get into a situation of a middle class that's not enough the expectations are high and the the leaders have to be a lot more alert anything can happen we are in a period of rapid change so my my my my take actually in this discussion is not only do we have to do what our fathers do you know i always look up to my father's values and hard work family oriented we need to listen to our children and grandchildren because uh i think we need to have both and that's where asian and this part of the world generally have that advantage no thank you very much i think maybe in closing just to say that i think that um i mean we've all highlighted the different challenges i think we all accept that you know southeast asian won't be immune from the big challenges that will come from from technological change but from other changes as well uh that a key is adaptability um not uh leaving big parts of the electorate or or population uh behind and in that way maybe a key strength of asian is these are all countries that have changed so much in the last 50 60 years that adaptability is not something very new that in a way there isn't an arrogance of thinking that there is only a particular way of doing things i don't think in any asian country there was ever a sense that free markets democracy globalization was the answer to everything and i think there's a as a practicality or in in many asian elites whether or not they will then be able to meet the challenges ahead bring their populations along educate them properly um i think it's a big question mark and i think probably the future is going to be one where different asian countries are able or different asian elites and establishments are able to rise to the challenge in very different ways and some countries may not meet the challenge and and others will but a lot more to to discuss in the future but with that i'll close thank you very much for coming