ABSTRACT
The objective of this chapter is fi rst and foremost to problematize the debate on the Asian crisis. The debate proceeded as if the appropriate policy response to the Asian crisis could be identifi ed by ‘getting the causation right’, by identifying the ‘main’ cause. But the causation of the Asian crisis was inescapably dual, in the sense that there could be no ‘excessive borrowing’ on the part of Asian economies, without ‘excessive lending’ on the part of international (Western, Japanese) fi nancial institutions. Hence, whether an author identifi es ‘crony capitalism’ in Asia or the misguided policies of the IMF as the ‘ultimate’ cause, this is analytically invalid. Attribution of blame and policy responsibility can only be normative, based on moral judgment. Unfortunately, the belief that an ‘ultimate’ cause exists which may be identifi ed precludes serious and sober analyses of the pros and cons of different policy strategies. Instead, key issues are confl ated and the political, moral and normative issues obfuscated. Eventually, all this played a key role in making the IFA initiative appear a ‘necessary’ response to the fi nancial crises of the 1990s in general, and to the Asian crisis in particular.
