As the opposition celebrated the downfall of President Suharto in Indonesia, soldiers in Burma, its northern neighbour, were rounding up pro-democracy activists and putting them behind bars. At least 16 National League for Democracy party members were arrested in an attempt to halt a pro-democracy gathering planned for today to commemorate the party's 1990 election victory, which the army overruled.
The Burmese leaders have good reason to worry about pro-democracy demonstrations. President Suharto is the latest casualty of a regional trend in south-east Asia towards more open and democratic government, which leaves only Burma and North Korea in the grip of military dictatorships. The dramatic events last week which brought down the longest-serving Asian strong man have sent psychological shock waves through the region.
Historians may conclude that the movement towards more participatory government in Asia had its beginnings 18 years ago in the South Korean city of Kwangju, when on May 18th, 1980, students led peaceful demonstrations against a military coup d'etat. It was brutally suppressed by the army, using tanks and automatic weapons, and hundreds were killed or injured. The seeds of democratic ferment were to flower in the 1990s when South Korea's authoritarian regime crumbled, leading to the democratic election last year of former dissident Mr Kim Dae-jung as president. At a memorial service last week, the chairman of Kwangju's human rights commission, Mr Kim Byunkyun, said the uprising was "a model for democratic movements in the world, for Indonesia and Myanmar [Burma]".
It may also have been the example for "people power" in the Philippines in 1986, when the decision of the army to side with protesting students and workers brought about the end of President Marcos's dictatorship. There were subsequently five unsuccessful coup attempts against President Corazon Aquino, but in 1992 the country experienced its first smooth transition of power in 27 years. "People power" last year thwarted attempts by President Fidel Ramos to change the constitution to allow him to run for a second term. The next Philippines president will be actor-producer Joseph Estrada, the popular winner of a May 11th ballot notable for its peaceful nature.
The fact that the transition did not make world headlines is very good news for the Philippines, where democracy has become routine, however colourful the candidates and campaigns.
It is noteworthy that the Philippines has weathered better than most the economic hurricanes in the region, and that the politically responsive governments of South Korea and Thailand are showing the first signs of recovery from the crisis. Taiwan, where the Kuomintang Party metamorphosed from a dictatorship to a democracy 10 years ago, managed to avoid storm damage altogether.
The "people-power" movement in the Philippines spawned similar protests in Burma in 1988, in China in 1989 and in Thailand in 1992. In Burma and China the movements failed because the army did not break under the pressure and side with the people.
While Burma has remained a repressive society under the heel of the army, China speeded up its economic openness after the crackdown on students in Tiananmen Square. Under President Jiang Zemin and more recently Premier Zhu Rongji, Beijing has tackled badly-needed reform of banks and failing state enterprises. But it dared not bite the bullet of political reform, and the Indonesian student protests, which must have sent a chill through the corridors of power in Beijing, were not shown on Chinese television for fear of stirring dangerous memories of 1989.
The pro-democracy movement in Thailand ended differently. Students and workers led mass demonstrations for two weeks. On May 18th a curfew was called but 30,000 people rallied in Bangkok. The army opened fire, killing at least 52 people. The situation deteriorated rapidly with rioting and attacks in public buildings. Six days later the military ruler, Gen Suchinda, was forced to resign. Similarly, it was just a matter of days from the shooting of students in Jakarta on May 12th and mass rioting until President Suharto stepped down on May 21st.
The collapse of the Asian tigers and the downfall of Suharto have silenced the promoters of Asian values, at least those who used the term to suggest that too much democracy was not only unnecessary but would damage prosperity.
The strongest critics of this version of Asian values are not western analysts but the region's leading democrats. President Kim of South Korea said in response to Gen Suharto's resignation: "The Indonesian situation shows the miserable state of politics promoting so-called Asian values, which advocate that democracy can be sacrificed to achieve economic development."
Malaysia's prime minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, a long-time advocate of Asian values and critic of western speculators, said during a visit to London this month: "Asians have their values and these are just as good and as universal as European values."
Asian values are at the very least being redefined. Mr Urban Lehner, executive editor of Dow Jones Asia, said recently that the leadership challenge in Asia did not require a change in Asian values but a change in political institutions and economic policies.
"Asian values are not code for crony capitalism," he said. "The Asian values that matter are hard work, respect for education, strong family ties, a respectful style of public discourse, an openness to new ideas . . . these values are perfectly consistent with the more pluralistic, representative, market-driven order Asia needs for its second great leap forward."
Reflecting on the downfall of his neighbour, Singapore's elder statesman Mr Lee Kuan Yew, another champion of the model, raised a dissenting voice, claiming that a lack of democracy did not bring about economic collapse and that Asian values were critical to the region's success. But he conceded they had a downside. This was "a debasement of what I would call Confucianist values; I mean duty to friends and family," he said. "You're supposed to look after your family and your extended family, and to be loyal and supportive of your friends. And you should do it from your private purse and not from the public treasury."
The most damning comment on the perversion of Asian values came from the mass circulation Indonesian newspaper Kompas on Saturday. It agreed enthusiastically with President Kim of South Korea that the crisis in Indonesia came about because democracy had been sacrificed for the sake of developing the economy, and attacked those rulers who made Asian values an "absolute truth" to justify undemocratic political systems.
"In the end, this hypocritical political system will sooner or later be shattered, if its implementation is not coupled with democracy in its truest meaning," it said. "This is what happened in Indonesia and it is called the Indonesian lesson. To the governments in Asia, which have adopted a style of government similar to Suharto's style, this Indonesian lesson has been a blessing in disguise."
In other words, Burma and North Korea and other undemocratic countries in the region - look out: it could be your turn next.