There is no Asian development model and talking about one obscures confuses things greatly. The Japanese economy is as different from the economy of Hong Kong as one can possibly get. The one thing that Japan has in common with Hong Kong is that both ran massive trade surpluses with the United States, but then again everyone runs massive trade surpluses with the United States, and so relations with the United States has more to do with the United States than with Hong Kong or Japan.
Also Germany and Saudi Arabia ran trade surpluses with the United States, but no one calls them Asian. It is true also that most countries in East Asia feel more comfortable with government intervention with the economy than the United States, but again that’s a peculiarity of the United States than with East Asia.
The problem with talking about an Asian development model is that people see something that Japan does and assumes that China does the same thing and vice versa which is not true. For example, because Japanese companies have captive banks in a corporate group structure people assume that Chinese companies do the same thing, when this is not the case. In fact that Chinese banking system has many more similarities with the United States than it does with Japan, largely because the critical era in which major decisions where being made happened between the Japanese property crash and Enron.
The problem with talking in terms of development models is that you end up with two or maybe three models, and that ignores the fact that there are many ways of getting it right and many ways of getting it wrong.