However, an important point that should not be forgotten is that the financial sector encompasses a wider scope than just banks. In fact, policymakers in ASEAN have been successful in enlarging the borders of our financial markets by developing more diverse sources of funding for the economy. This is best reflected in the building of deeper and more liquid bond markets arising from the experience of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. We are also seeing a shift in the financial landscape through the usage of technology, something that I will elaborate more on later. Thus, the term bankers without borders, should perhaps, be expanded to be finance without borders. Yet, despite the positive outcomes from these and the continued strong need for openness, the conviction for globalisation and international banking seems to be waning. For one, post the global financial crisis, we have seen the rationalisation of operations by many international banks. 1/3  BIS central bankers' speeches  We read regularly on the prospects of trade protectionism, how globalisation has created widening inequality and how globalisation is like a train running out of control. No doubt, a key driver of the 2007/2008 financial crisis was indeed financial liberalisation going too far. Interestingly, some, including economists at the Bank of England have also begin to consider the theory of “peak finance” – that global finance has peaked and financial de-globalisation has begun, while others at the BIS have argued otherwise.
International banking and finance – a new model for a new era While this debate will surely continue to unfold over the coming years, perhaps the more pertinent question is how we can evolve the model of international banking such that it becomes more desirable and beneficial for the needs of the future. It is worth considering a new model – one that is inherently more sustainable and inclusive. If I may postulate, the starting point is perhaps an honest appraisal that international banking ought to be much more than just a commercial decision. Beyond considerations of revenue, margins and returns, international banking should fundamentally be more attuned to and invested in the developmental journey of the host country. Existing and traditional considerations on profitability, while important, should not become a border that limits the potential of transforming international banking for the benefit of the future. Here, the mindset is not one of a “winner takes all”, but rather one where the benefits of development are equitably “shared by all”. This, again, resonates with the ‘ASEAN Way’ of greater shared prosperity and is perhaps a useful reference. There are at least three ways in which international banking can further this new model. Firstly, by actively identifying the economic needs of the host country and working to serve these needs. These include, for example, national infrastructure development needs, financing gaps for certain segments of society as well as adoption of productivity-enhancing technology by firms.