The Iron Lady may be dead but that does not mean her legacy does not live on. While during her time in power Margaret Thatcher sought to repair finances at home by lessening the state’s role and enhancing the free market, this had an impact on the eastern side of the world as well. Thus on reflection, today, around three decades following this woman’s rule of power, Lee Kuan Yew, a former Minister Mentor in Singapore who during his time at the helm worked with Thatcher, believes her to have been “a great leader and a person with strong convictions.” He added that it was only when she was leader of the Conservative Party that it “set the course to transform Britain.” It was her who enabled the country to become free market and entrepreneurial state it did, while boosting exports and promoting the region’s trade and investment market opportunities
In addition, during her time as Prime Minister of England, Margaret Thatcher signed the Sino-British Joint Declaration, ratifying Hong Kong’s return (which had until then been a British colony) to China, even though it was not something she was happy about.
Perhaps this is why today, even though underground, Thatcher is enjoying some kind of renaissance in Asia. New Japan and S. Korea leaders are honoring her as a hero and role model. According to experts, one reason for her popularity in the east is connected to her nationalist, anticommunist foreign-policy position in a place where China’s speedy economic and military rise created much anxiety.
In addition, implementing neo-liberalism vis-à-vis the economy was an attractive concept since Japan’s economy (that was once very powerful) is now sliding and S. Korea is finding it a challenge to maintain its “economic miracle.”
Further, there have been similarities drawn between South Korea’s first female leader, Park Geun-hye and Margaret Thatcher. In 2007, Park herself described Thatcher’s leadership as being one that would be able to “revive South Korea from crisis.” Indeed, this was why Park’s campaign managers tried to link her to Thatcher during the election campaign. Neither Park nor Thatcher would be intimidated by powerful men or totalitarian regimes. As well. In more recent times, Park dealt with North Korean threats with a promise for strong retaliation, akin to the Iron Lady who since passed. Park too has been accused of ignoring the plight of the less fortunate.
Ultimately, it must be recognized that while Park does promote a more “laissez-faire” attitude on government involvement, her economic platform still promotes welfare spending along with state guidance in industrial policy, hardly to be described as Thatcherite. So while there are similarities in the two powerful leaders’ strategies and styles, there are also significant differences that will lead to a distinction in impact on both their economic nations.
