Indonesia has, for the second time in its history, concluded an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit
ndonesia has, for the second time in its history, concluded an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit. The pomp and ceremony of the most recent summit in Nusa Dua, Bali, are behind us; the leaders of the APEC member countries have departed, and the frenzy of zealous officials is little more than a memory.
It was a bewildering week. Those caught in the thick of the Bali meetings must have felt the world had descended upon them. Those who were not may have viewed all the fuss as mere folly.
It was a series of meetings too 'elevated' for most to appreciate, with many of the results being overly abstruse for anyone to comprehend. As with most conventions held on behalf of the common man, it ultimately convoluted itself to alienate the very people it was intended to help.
The final leaders' statement contained a sober and welcome conviction to devise 'prudent and responsible macroeconomic policies' to mitigate weak growth but with the recognition that 'risks remain tilted to the downside'.
It is hoped that the joint conviction among the 21 member countries will 'ensure mutually reinforcing growth and maintain economic and financial stability in the region, and prevent a negative spillover effect'.
In line with this year's summit theme, 'Resilient Asia Pacific: Engine of Global Growth', the leaders also agreed to accelerate physical, institutional and person-to-person connectivity in Asia Pacific.
Despite reinforcing its reputation as a stellar host, Indonesia had mixed outcomes in its negotiations. As initially predicted, efforts to lift trade barriers on crude palm oil (CPO) and rubber among the 21 economies failed.
The leaders reaffirmed their commitment to remain vigilant against protectionism at a time of slowing growth.
It was a notable statement, much-needed amid the fears of rising economic nationalism, including an emphasis that the Doha round of talks should not wither in limbo.
But at times, it seemed that much of what was said was scripted rather than reflecting a more impulsive commitment. It was as if the leaders were providing sound bites to an anxious media, rather than talking among themselves to resolve any sort of deadlock.
Let us not forget these are the very same countries that are jeopardizing the World Trade Organization (WTO) talks.
Then there is the United States, which seemed intent during the APEC meetings to forward its own free-trade agenda ' namely the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) ' which is incompatible with the standards within most APEC economies.
Bali 2013 was no Bogor 1994.
There were no seismic decisions, nor game-changing resolutions. Overall, the Bali summit seemed a meeting of meetings, lacking the same kind of purpose and urgency as its predecessor.
The hard work of everyone ' the delegation and organizers ' should be congratulated, but it seems certain in the coming years that the fate of APEC should further be debated if it cannot forge anything more than a fancy shindig.
Share your experiences, suggestions, and any issues you've encountered on The Jakarta Post. We're here to listen.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We appreciate your feedback.