Yes, and that's what I believe Stiglitz's point was too: That unfettered currency speculation is NOT good for developing countries, and to make his point he asked the welfare question first: "Who, if anyone, gets hurt by currency volatility in some known cases of major, speculator-induced currency crashes?" He didn't assume, a priori, who the real victims were.

 The larger issue with Indonesia from what I remember is that, perhaps like China today, it was trying maintain a given, unsustainable rate that currency speculators sniffed out and moved on, forcing the government to free the exchange, at which point everyone dumped the currency because the arbitrage profit opportunities were over.