Asia's governments come in two broad varieties: young, fragile democracies - and older, fragile authoritarian regimes.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
In Asia, democracy has been less advanced than elsewhere. And many of these countries haven't done too badly.
Countries that managed to rebuild commanding state structures after popular nationalist revolutions - such as China, Vietnam, and Iran - look stable and cohesive when compared with a traditional monarchy such as Thailand or wholly artificial nation-states like Iraq and Syria.
Many still believe that conducting political and economic reforms at the same time is not an Asian way. But this is a fairy-tale. We broke that old stereotype by reforming our political, economic and social systems concurrently since 1990.
So in Asia I want to make - I want to succeed to make a model of what success, practicing democracy, and market economy. Then that will give a good influence over Asian countries.
Unification is one thing, and stability in Northeast Asia is another thing.
While democracy in the long run is the most stable form of government, in the short run, it is among the most fragile.
In view of China's growing military strength and intentions, the best way to safeguard Asia's permanent peace and prosperity is to have all Asian countries join forces with other democratic countries in the world to form a global community of democracies.
With Taiwan, it took about 40 years to go from an authoritarian to a democratic society.
My own perception is that there are two tiers of countries, one, the original ASEAN, and then the new members. The new members are in various stages of development.
I have my own experience in Indonesia, of course. Sometimes in these transition situations, the new governments are still clumsy and awkward in responding to this new environment in which they operate. The only thing in their DNA is the old regime.