A crisis sometimes brings with it “good things”, a blessing in disguise that is needed to help us reveal
who we actually are and what has gone wrong with what we have done so far. But most often, a crisis can also give birth to all kinds of unwanted events.

Pope Benedict XVI recently observed, “The worldwide financial crisis has, as we know, demonstrated the fragility of the present economic system and the institutions linked to it. It has also shown the error of the assumption that the market is capable of regulating itself, apart from public intervention and the support of internalized moral standards.”

Each economic crisis over the past decade has shown the downside of economic globalization. However, the dynamics of economic globalization often remain difficult to understand in part, because we are caught up in a process that is still developing, and whose outcome is still unclear.

Economic globalization in itself is neither good nor bad, but its impact will depend on decisions made by us. It must be seen as a process, not as an end.

Therefore, governing economic globalization calls for wisdom, not just empirical data on economic growth and fundamentals.

From the perspective of many developing economies, such as Indonesia, globalization must not only focus narrowly on the economic aspects of current global interconnections, which have been broadening and deepening, particularly in the areas of trade and finance.

Experience has shown that market forces, for all their efficiency, can be blind, particularly to the broader dimensions of human welfare and personal security. They also lack sensitivity to the demands of social justice and equality.

Thus, a more comprehensive concern for social issues, such as “human security and development” must also be given necessary attention through cooperation and the promotion of social justice in the process of globalization.

The ugly consequences of focusing (rather narrowly) human development on real GDP growth, personal welfare on efficiency gains and on free and open trade as well as financial flows, has given globalization a bad name.

Rather than bank upon the “genius of the and” (complementation and cooperation), it has allowed the world to be hemmed in by the “tyranny of the or”.

It is either the rich developed economies or the poor developing ones that benefit.

We should not forget that the same world that could find, within a few weeks, trillions of dollars to rescue banks and financial investment institutions, has not yet managed to find 1 percent of that amount for the needs of the hungry — starting with the US$3 billion needed to provide meals for school children who are hungry, or the $5 billion needed to support the emergency food fund of the World Food Programme.

We have also had clear reminders from financial markets in recent years, such as a crisis in the US financial system in 2008, that there is more to a market competitive system than these narrow, strictly economic values and principles.

Indeed, at the bottom of any market competitive system are money and credit, both of which are based essentially on faith and trust. But, these flourish in the final analysis only within an ethical culture, which calls for virtue, and among others, the golden mean and a system of checks and balances.

Thus, self-interest must be balanced by common interest and the invisible hand of markets by the more visible hand of a public regulatory authority.

A new globalization requires a new culture that can orient the changes.

These principles ultimately derive from universal natural law, he said. And thus, “the principles of this ethical order, inscribed in creation itself, are accessible to human reason and, as such, must be adopted as the basis for practical choices.”

On this premise, first, we need to propose a culture based on fundamental principles, such as the universal destiny of earthly goods and the common good, grounded in respect for the dignity of the people and acknowledged as the primary goal of production and trade systems, political institutions and social welfare.

It has become increasingly evident that the common good embraces responsibility to future generations. An essential aspect of globalization is, therefore, the promotion of the principle of solidarity. A global solidarity that must be recognized as a basic ethical criterion for judging any social system and will ensure all peoples can benefit from economic globalization.

Globalization, therefore, needs to be a process guided by a respect for human liberty. A globalization thus oriented by these two principles will result in a harmonious unity of the human family.

Indonesia, as the third-largest democracy in the world after India and the US, can offer a model on how to promote human liberty in a responsible manner in a modern, open and free society.

Being also a country with the largest Muslim population, it is an opportunity for Indonesia to demonstrate to the world that Islam and democracy that respects human liberty is compatible and complementary.

When we talk about Islam we cannot avoid talking about religion that carries a universal moral law needed to guide the process of globalization.

Thus, Indonesia can offer a unique solution to the many problems of globalization by actively proposing the common universal values of world religions as a foundation and source for a more human-friendly process.

It is in this context, the role of — and the compatibility of — religion and politics, faith and democracy, virtues and wealth in Indonesian society are very relevant as a model of a new global economic architecture.

The spiritual dimension is fundamental to converting the model of secular economic globalization into one that has a human face.

The writer is the vice president of PT Asia Select Indonesia and a senior adviser of the Family Business Networks in Indonesia.

Popular

Great Barrier Reef hit by record bleaching

Govt to undo latest curbs on personal imports

Middle East on edge as Israel and Iran trade threats