Asia

Malaysia

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia’s Sham Trial
    Malaysia's opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim smiles as he arrives at courthouse for his sodomy trial in Kuala Lumpur (Bazuki Muhammad/Courtesy Reuters). Much has changed in Southeast Asia over the past decade. But travel to downtown Kuala Lumpur today, and walk along the Moorish-influenced public greens, and suddenly the Malaysian capital seems trapped in the 1990s. At that time, the Asian financial crisis was battering the country’s economy, and urbanites hit by the downturn and frustrated by the country’s tightly controlled political system, had taken to the streets, where they were met by riot control troops, who battered them on a daily basis until the government’s long-ruling coalition put Anwar Ibrahim, the country’s popular opposition leader, on trial. The charge: Sodomy, a serious crime in a predominantly Muslim nation. Though the trial was a farce—accusers later recanted their statements, and Anwar appeared in court with what the government called a “self-inflicted” black eye—he was convicted, and ultimately served six years in prison. Today, the same story seems to be unfolding across the city. Anwar is again on trial for sodomy, in a sketchy case full of holes, which the government seems to have initiated to end his career and weaken the opposition. As a result, tens of thousands of middle-class Malaysians have been rallying, both to demand his freedom and for greater political openness, and once again, the government has responded with beatings, tear gas, and water cannon. Yet unlike a decade ago, the demonstrators aren’t likely to give up so easily. Though Anwar could once again be sent to jail, Malaysian politics have been changed irrevocably—both by him and by the current prime minister—and Malaysians seem unwilling today to accept anything less than real democracy. In today’s Newsweek Daily Beast, I have an analysis of Anwar’s trial, and the significant changes in Malaysian politics today. You can read the whole here.
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick September 30, 2011 Asia Unbound
  • China
    Decline of Democracy
    Pro-democracy protesters scuffle with police during a protest march to demand universal suffrage and against rising property prices in Hong Kong July 1, 2011. (Tyrone Siu/Courtesy Reuters) The recent uprisings in Malaysia and Thailand, following on the heels of the Arab Spring, which has turned into the Arab Summer, have emboldened democracy advocates around the world. Some see the wave even reaching China, where in recent days there have been fresh protests in Inner Mongolia, southern China, and other regions of the country. But in reality the forecast for democratization is not so sanguine. Already, the revolts in places like Tunisia and Egypt are turning sourer, with the military and other elite actors reasserting their powerful position in society. Meanwhile, in other parts of the developing world, democratization actually has gone backwards over the past decade. In a piece in The National, I chronicle the decline of democracy in recent years, and argue that, Arab Spring and Summer notwithstanding, the future for democracy in the developing world is not bright.
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick August 1, 2011 Asia Unbound
  • Malaysia
    Malaysia’s Bersih Movement
    Supporters of the "Bersih" (Clean) electoral reform coalition shout slogans during clashes with police in downtown Kuala Lumpur July 9, 2011. (Damir Sagolj/Courtesy Reuters) Last weekend, Malaysia’s Bersih (clean elections) movement drew tens of thousands of protestors to the streets of Kuala Lumpur, demanding reform of the electoral system, which is weighted in numerous ways to protect the ruling coalition. Though the protest was largely peaceful, the government met the demonstration with massive force, arresting thousands of protestors. The police used clubs, water cannons, and tear gas to crush the protests. (New Mandala has fine coverage of the Bersih protests.) As in Thailand, where the red shirt movement started largely as a pro-Thaksin protest and developed into a larger force, the Bersih movement, which began as just a call for electoral reform, also may be developing into something larger. The government’s brutal tactics have alienated many average Malaysians, who see their country, if not exactly a democracy, as a moderate and tolerant state. Such anger could help swell the ranks of the political opposition in advance of the next election, finally ousting the ruling coalition. Yet as the Straits Times notes [subscription required] in a fine analysis, the Bersih demonstrations also are deepening a divide in the country. As more protestors turn to the opposition, the government relies more and more on ethnic Malays, who have benefited from the ruling coalition’s decades of affirmative action policies. And the more the government relies on the Malay heartland, the more it turns off Chinese, Indian, and other voters, pushing them toward the opposition--and only reinforcing the ethnic divide in Malaysia.
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick July 14, 2011 Asia Unbound
  • China
    In Southeast Asia, Big Dams Raise Big Concerns
    A view from upstream of Malaysia's Bakun dam, in the inland of the eastern state of Sarawak on Borneo island, December 11, 2003. (Bazuki Muhammad/Courtesy Reuters) This is a guest post by Prashanth Parameswaran, a former researcher at the Project 2049 Institute, who is currently conducting research on dam projects in Southeast Asia. These past few weeks have not been good ones for large dam projects in Southeast Asia. Big hydropower projects have been caught in a web of unsafe corporate practices, fierce political violence and simmering regional tensions. On June 9, another round of fighting erupted in Burma’s northern Kachin state, where Chinese companies are building a series of dams to power southern China. Dozens were killed, hundreds of Chinese workers were evacuated, and thousands of civilians fled the affected area. The political wing of the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), an ethnic minority armed group in Burma which has clashed repeatedly with the government, has also fiercely opposed the construction of a large dam in Myistone, a culturally and ecologically sensitive area. In fact, the group sent an open letter to the Chinese government in March to stop the dam’s construction, warning of the risk of civil war. It is not clear what exactly prompted this latest outbreak of fighting. Some claim that the Burmese government wants to ensure that the project is built so it will receive hundreds of millions in annual power sales, while others contend that the military is using it as a pretext to exert control in the northern areas which have resisted its control. What is clear is that the dam projects are exacerbating internal conflict due to concerns regarding the distribution of benefits, damage to the environment and displacement of local populations. Then, on June 20, Sinohydro, China’s largest dam builder, shockingly acknowledged that its construction procedures used to build Malaysia’s Bakun Dam, soon to be the largest dam in Asia outside China, were flawed. The admission came after the online Sarawak Report had published an online report, complete with photos and videos, charging that Sinohydro had widely used a technique involving adding excessive water to cement such that it was rejected by quality controllers for safety reasons. As the multi-billion dollar project is set to come online in the next few months, the assurance by one of the dam’s managers that it is “built to last” appears not to hold much water. While Sinohydro is certainly guilty of unsafe corporate practices, the Malaysian government could also be culpable. The dam has been mired in a string of financial delays and cost overruns since its conception in the 1960s, and there are reports that the Chinese contractors were under pressure from Kuala Lumpur to finish the dam as quickly and cheaply as possible. The fact that the rush to complete the dam now could have jeopardized its safety raises serious questions. Trans-boundary concerns have also been raised recently along the Mekong, one of the world’s longest rivers. On June 23, reports surfaced that Laos was pressing ahead with constructing its 3.5 billion dollar Xayaburi dam, in violation of an earlier regional agreement to suspend the project due to various environmental concerns by downstream countries in April. This is despite the fact that a report by Mekong River Commission, the body charged with promoting trans-boundary sustainable development, suggests that there are “fundamental gaps in knowledge” about how the project will affect the migration and population of dozens of fish species (a critical source of protein), and doubts whether the dam will even function in the long term because its reservoir may be filled with silt. Laos’ actions not only represent a breach of trust, but threaten to undermine already fledgling efforts at regional cooperation in an ecosystem that supports the livelihoods of tens of millions of people. If the countries along the Mekong cannot coordinate the sustainable development of the river, gloomy projections indicate that the construction of large dams, combined with development, demographic and climate change-related pressures, could potentially trigger a serious crisis characterized by water shortages, forced migration, food insecurity, prolonged floods and droughts. All this is not to suggest that large dams are never the right option. Hydropower is a cleaner, renewable energy source, and it is one form of powering energy-hungry countries and supporting otherwise poor, landlocked countries like Laos or eager companies from China. Yet in the rush for huge gains in power and profits, companies and countries in Southeast Asia and beyond would do well to understand that in pursuing big dams, they could also incur large political risks, raise safety concerns and trigger devastating regional effects. If they do not, we are likely to see these headlines become even more frequent in the near future.
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick June 30, 2011 Asia Unbound
  • Thailand
    Freedom on the Net 2011
    People use computers at an internet cafe in Wuhan, Hubei province, January 23, 2010. (Stringer Shanghai/Courtesy Reuters) Freedom House this week released its annual report on Freedom on the Net . Overall, despite the buzz about the ways in which social media, VOIPs, and other Internet-related tools have helped facilitate the Arab protests of 2010-2011, the report makes for pretty grim reading, including growing controls on online discourse even in free and developed nations like South Korea, as well as increasingly effective tools of repression deployed by autocratic regimes. Southeast Asia does very poorly on the report. Some countries should not be a surprise: Burma, one of the most repressive nations in the world, comes out badly. But even some of the freer nations in Southeast Asia, like Thailand, rank very poorly: Thailand is rated as “not free” in terms of the Internet, which is the lowest ranking a country can receive. And Malaysia, which has had a vibrant blogosphere even as its print media remained controlled and stodgy, also has begun to turn. Some of Malaysia’s most prominent online writers have grown increasingly scared of government intimidation, and there is fear that the online media will become as constrained as the print and television media.
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick April 20, 2011 Asia Unbound
  • Malaysia
    The Curse of Nepotism
    Members of an Indonesian military honour guard participating in a state dinner are pictured in Jakarta. (Jason Reed/Courtesy Reuters) Over the past two weeks, several interesting articles have emerged on politics in Indonesia and Malaysia, which are supposedly two of the more democratic nations in Southeast Asia. In one Asia Sentinel piece that also has been discussed endlessly in Jakarta circles, the author speculates that the wife of current president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) may well run for the presidency in the next election. In a well-drawn New York Times profile, the paper chronicles the rise of Nurul Izzah Anwar, the daughter of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. She has recently been elected to the leadership of Anwar’s party, despite the fact that she is extremely young and politically inexperienced. Nepotism has been and remains one of the biggest curses of political development in South and Southeast Asia. Though the region has elected a large number of women leaders, in places as diverse as Bangladesh and the Philippines, almost all of these women were the daughters or wives of former leaders, many of whom were killed for their beliefs. Many powerful political men, too, are largely known for their names, even though some of them have skills of their own. Today, Corazon Aquino’s son runs the Philippines, Benazir Bhutto’s son is being prepped to run Pakistan, and the daughter of Bangladeh’s founding leader currently serves as prime minister. And while the United States is hardly immune to nepotism (who’s our Secretary of State again?), the fact is that a country like the United States, or India (which, of course, worships the Gandhi dynasty) is large and diverse enough that nepotism does not dominate the political scene. Ms. Clinton, after all, was defeated in the 2008 presidential primaries, and despite the Gandhi worship, powerful politicians have emerged in Indian states, in lower-caste Indian parties, and even within Congress itself. Malaysia or the Philippines or even Indonesia—which still has a very small political class—is not diverse enough to weather this kind of nepotism. With such a small political class, nepotism crowds out fresh blood, new ideas, and real change. Anwar and SBY have positioned themselves as reformers, as harbingers of real breaks from their country’s past. Allowing such potential nepotism suggests that they are not the reformers they sometimes appear to be.
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick January 7, 2011 Asia Unbound
  • Thailand
    While you Weren’t Paying Attention
    Southeast Asia is a much broader and more diverse region than Northeast Asia or (obviously) China, so it can be hard to keep up with events, particularly when there is so much going on in North Korea, Japan, China, and back here in Washington. So here are a couple recent events worth noting. 1. Indonesia resumes using the military for counterterrorism operations. There is a fine summary of this in the New York Times today.  This was anticipated after Jakarta created a new counterterrorism agency in August. However, it has serious risks, and I don’t really understand the upside. The military in Indonesia, even more than a decade after the fall of Suharto, remains poorly trained, corrupt, and persistently abusive. It also has limited counterterrorism skills, as compared to the elite police units that have been used for counterterrorism, quite successfully, throughout the 2000s. 2. Malaysia continues its crackdown on bloggers. Contrary to Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly touting Malaysia as a model of moderation, in recent months his government has launched crackdowns on bloggers and cartoonists known for poking fun at government agencies and the prime minister himself. In early September, for example, the executive editor of the Malay Mail was charged with lying by making fun of Malaysia’s biggest power company through an obvious parody. The crackdown comes at a time when Malaysia is upgrading its ties to the United States, in part because of Najib’s admittedly progressive economic and trade agenda, and his skill at public relations. But this economic progressivism conceals a decline in political freedoms, and also conceals the fact that Najib is hemmed in by his own political position: He may want to promote an all around more liberal environment, but he needs the votes of power brokers in the ruling coalition, and the Malay majority, in a free election. 3. The Philippines announces that, despite a recommendation by a fact-finding panel of charges against several top police officials after the bungled bus hijacking in Manila in August, no one will actually face charges. Powerful people in the Philippines escape punishment for their (alleged) mistakes and illegal actions? I’m shocked, shocked. 4. Four people were killed in drive-by shootings in the south of Thailand earlier this week. While bombings in Bangkok get some international attention (see my post earlier this week), the killings in southern Thailand, which has become one of the deadliest conflict zones in the world, are almost totally ignored, since they dribble out a few at a time, don’t seem to impact Bangkok or the tourist hubs of Thailand, and (despite some claims to the contrary) are mostly unconnected to any broader Islamist battles. But in one respect the Thai south should get more attention: The spiral of violence there echoes a situation that could be repeated in the heart of Thailand itself, in which an initial revolt, combated by overly repressive government policies (under Thaksin), actually made the situation far more explosive. (Photo: Surapan Boonthano/courtesy Reuters)
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick October 12, 2010 Asia Unbound
  • Malaysia
    The Economic Transformation Program in Malaysia
    Podcast
    MAURICE GREENBERG: Good morning. Before beginning, would you please turn off all of your electronic devices, not on vibrate, but just off. And this meeting is on the record. You have a copy -- it's a pleasure to welcome Prime Minister Najib to the council. There's a comprehensive resume of the prime minister, so I'm not going to read it, but I would make a couple of comments. The prime minister was elected to parliament at a very young age, in his 20s. He's the sixth prime minister of the country. His father was the second prime minister. The prime minister has a great deal of experience. He's been defense minister twice. In addition to being prime minister, he carries the portfolio of the Finance Ministry, and he -- (inaudible) -- Education Ministry. So he's had enormous experience. It's a great pleasure to welcome the prime minister of Malaysia. (Applause.) PRIME MINISTER DATO'SRI MOHD NAJIB TUN RAZAK: Thank you. First of all, I'd like to thank Mr. Greenberg for the very warm introduction. I have been in New York since last Thursday, so it's a delight to be back in New York and getting to like the city of New York -- maybe not for its traffic. But I would like to commend New Yorkers for putting up with so many world leaders over the last few days. Just want to relate to you my personal experience. One morning, when I was driving towards U.N., the head of my secret service detail turned around and she said, "Sir, we are now in a freeze." So I said to her, "What is a freeze?" Well, a freeze is: when the president moves, everybody else freezes. (Laughter.) So I had that experience. But more than that, it's a great honor to be here because, as the American expression, it doesn't get any better to be -- to get an invite to be able to speak at the Council for Foreign Relations (sic), a very, very prestigious forum; and indeed, a great personal honor for me, as well as the government of Malaysia. When I took over office about -- let me see -- (chuckles) -- a year-and-a-half, a bit more than that, one of the first things I decided was that we should reengage with the United States, because I believe the forces that connect us are far greater than the forces that drive us apart, and that Malaysia and the United States will remain partners -- good partners -- bound by our common values and shared strategic interests. And I've pursued that goal and, in the process, been looking at our shared experience as well, even going back into history to know a bit more about the genesis of the evolution of America, it's politics, its government, its policies. And a little anecdote about the time of Thomas Jefferson. The time was 1777 -- quite a while ago -- and the Founding Father was circulating among his friends a copy of his bill for religious freedom. He was having little luck pushing the bill through the Virginia legislature and felt that getting some feedback on its phrasing might improve his chances. One of Jefferson's friends, a Quaker lawyer by the name of George -- John Todd wrote to Jefferson and said something -- and in my mind it's always defined America -- and I quote, "People of different sentiments in religion will all be one in the love and fidelity to the state which secures them everything dear and valuable." It seems to me that this rather inspiring quote encapsulates the fundamental responsibility of government -- that is, to secure for its citizens what is dear and valuable. So we have very much in common between our two countries: our shared values, our strategic interest, particularly in the field of trade, economics, business. The United States is Malaysia's third- largest trading partner, after China and Singapore. Two-way trade between our two countries average(s) 3 billion U.S. dollars per month for this year, and it's on a rising trend. More than 600 U.S. companies now operate in Malaysia, and many of them are knowledge-based companies like Dell, Intel, Microsoft and Motorola. Malaysia is also a country that can play our part in terms of providing some leadership role in global affairs. For example, as part and parcel of the new engagement with the United States, we have decided that we should contribute in a positive way by being present in Afghanistan, because Malaysia has -- or Malaysia is one of the very few countries in the world that has something unique that other countries don't have: We can provide female Muslims doctors. That is much needed in Afghanistan, a society like Afghanistan. So I promised President Obama that I would do it. And on the invitation of the Afghanistan government, as this is part of our help to reconstruct Afghanistan, in two weeks' time, the doctors will be in Afghanistan. What else can we provide to the world? We can provide a very unique model about Islam and how it is being applied. It's very topical now, as you know, particularly in New York. And we have applied Islam in the way that Islam is a moderate religion. And being moderate is actually being Islamic. I've never liked the term "fundamentalist" because it has a very rather negative connotation the way it's bandied about. But being moderate, being fair and just, not only to the Muslims but also to non-Muslims, is fundamental to Islam. It's, in fact, one of the pillars of Islam. So we can contribute that to the world, in your engagement with the Muslim world, so that we can close the chasm between the Muslim world and the West, if you like, or the Muslim world and the non-Muslim world. I think that's very important. Yesterday morning I delivered my address at the U.N. General Assembly. And I made a call that we should have a movement, a global movement of the moderates, because the problem is not between Islam and Christianity and Judaism, the problem is really between the moderates and the extremists. The extremists who, on the periphery, have held us hostage, have made their voices heard louder than the moderates. And if moderates -- moderate Muslims, moderate Christians, moderate Jews -- move together as a global movement, then we will occupy the center and the moral high ground. We will in fact drown the voice of extremism. The voice of reason will take over, the voice that wants to engage the world constructively, to cooperate and not collaborate; not confront, but find solutions; reject as to violence. And that I think is key and fundamental in moving forward in solving the world's problems. I actually made a specific mention about the fact that the intention to burn the Quran was actually stopped by a group of Evangelical Christians -- very sensible ones -- who persuaded that particular priest -- who apparently has only about 50 in his congregation -- that it is un-Christian to burn the Quran. And that is a clear example of how moderates, when they move, will make their voice heard. They can make a huge difference. What else can Malaysia do? We can provide you, at same time, our contribution to the world economy, albeit in a small way. But it's an exciting journey, because Malaysia is in a process of transition to the next level. One of the things I decided when I took over was that, look, what has served us well in the past may not necessarily serve us well in the future. The world has changed. In the '90s, what was it, Malaysia -- Mr. Greenberg knows this better than I do; been a regular visitor to Malaysia for many years -- that we were the darling of that part of the world. We were growing at 9 percent, 10 percent. But the world has changed. Where was China? Where was India? Where was Vietnam? Where were other countries? But today, they have reformed. They provide alternatives and competition. So Malaysia has to readjust itself. We have to come up with a new set of national strategies. That's when I decided that the time has come for us to introduce a game-changer, a new paradigm for Malaysia. And what is the paradigm for Malaysia? The paradigm has to start with an overarching philosophy, first of all, because the process of nation-building is important. You cannot achieve your national goals without national unity, without solidarity, without the cohesiveness in your society. That's when I thought about 1Malaysia. The (piece ?) I'm wearing is a 1Malaysia (pin pitch ?). It's more than a slogan; it is actually a guiding philosophy so that all Malaysians, irrespective of ethnic background, religious background, will move together as one people, one nation, one dream, one aspiration. And if we can move together, the sum total will be far greater than the individuals added up together. We can utilize each and every Malaysian in the process of this confirmation of Malaysia. We need global talent, but what about the Malaysian diaspora? I believe there are thousands of Malaysians in New York. I'm not sure whether, (off the ?) record, they are legal or illegal. I mean -- (laughter) -- I don't want to go into that. But they are here; they're around. And imagine if we can, you know, galvanize every single Malaysian, (has a sense ?) that there is fair and just society and every single Malaysian has a rightful place under the Malaysian sun, if you like the expression. Then we'll be far greater nation. We can even leverage. And Malaysia is geographically at a crossroads of the major civilizations. We have that advantage. No other country has this unique advantage, because we can relate to China, we can relate to India, we can relate to the Middle East and we are part of the Malay Archipelago. We have this wonderful geopolitical cultural advantage that we can leverage on. And in the modern world, it's important for us to be connected with all the major markets. China: Everyone talks about China. You may not really love China, but you cannot ignore China. India is important; Middle East is important; our part of the world is important. So that is in essence the spirit of 1Malaysia. But there's something unique about Malaysia, as well. It's very -- the fact that every country has its own set of legacy. I mean, we're not starting on a green field. We have to make certain adjustments. For example, to achieve national unity in the true sense of the word, we must have a just and equitable society. We cannot have a society in which the majority has a very small portion of the wealth. In the '70s, the Bumiputeras, who constitute about 55 percent of the population -- 55-plus or so -- only had 3 percent of the wealth. And can you imagine a society in which 55 percent of one -- of the majority has only 3 percent of the wealth? Surely, that -- that's not sustainable. So we need to correct that. And that is the essence of the new economic policy. It was started by my late father. And certainly I'm not the son who's going to dare change that policy. But I will redefine the means to get there, the pathways to get there. Not the policy, because the policy is sound: the policy about a just and equitable society, a sense of closing the gap between the rich and the poor, and the wealth of the country is not identified according to racial groups. I -- you cannot argue against that. There's a sense of fairness. But what you can debate, and you might take a certain position against, is where are the means to get there? It's fair. Whether it's too -- it discriminates against people who deserve certain things, yes, we should argue about that, because that's what I am trying to do or we are trying to do now with my colleagues, is to redefine the means to get there so that we will be fair, we'll be transparent, we will be more market friendly. For example, if we want to help the Bumiputeras, that's fine, those who deserve to be helped, not because they are well-connected, not because they are our friends, but because they are promising individuals, they have proven who can succeed. But let's say (in time it has ?) to be market-friendly, because we are competing, we're competing on a global stage. I mean, if you want foreign investment, you have to make Malaysia attractive. If you tell a foreigner, look, okay, you come to Malaysia but I will have to set aside 30 percent, they might begin to wonder, okay, in a week I work five days a week. That means three days a week I work for myself, two days a week I work for that 30 percent. You might think, oh, that might not be a good deal. If I go to Vietnam, I work five days, I work five days for myself. In any case, I will reinvest in that -- in the country that I'm working in or I"m putting my money in. So those -- that's a very important consideration, whether how you apply those kind of policies deter foreign investment. Or is there a better way of doing it, of distributing the wealth? -- for example, private venture capital, perhaps, by making small/medium enterprises to become bigger ones, but without really imposing it to the foreigners, so that foreigners have a sense, if they invest in Malaysia, they can get as much returns to the investment like any other place where they invest -- but at the same time, not forgetting our need to make that structural changes in our society so that we have a long-term stability. So that -- that's how I'm approaching it and we're approaching it. It is the 21st century. It is a new strategic environment. So all the thinking has to change. And we want to be a developed nation by the year 2020, and that's just nine years' time. So we came up with this rather ambitious plan, the new economic model. In fact, you just have to remember three set of figures for Malaysia. You know, we cannot -- our mind cannot remember too many figures. But just remember there are 12 what they call national key economic areas for Malaysia. The 12 areas will provide us that quantum leap to become a developed nation by the year 2020, raising per-capita income from about $7,000 today to 15,000 (dollars); creating 3.3 million jobs -- Americans like to hear jobs -- 3.3 million jobs -- we also like to hear about jobs -- 3.3 million jobs; 444 billion (dollars) investment. We have identified 131 projects. It's not just something conceptual, and it's not just a pie in the sky; it's actual hard work. It lasts for hours and hours and days and days within the government and the private sector. It's also a major philosophical change, because we are going to reenergize the private sector. Because I believe -- and I'm not talking in the context of American politics about -- arguing about big government or less government, which is very topical in America now. But in a Malaysian context, I believe the true engine of growth must be the private sector. So 92 percent of the investment will come from the private sector. We have to reenergize the private sector. We have to unleash the creativity, the entrepreneurial skills, the innovative capacity of the private sector. They will be the engine of growth, both domestic and foreign investment. For example, one of the major projects is to have the -- what we call the underground system, MRT, for Kuala Lumpur. That might be a -- I don't know -- about 14 -- I'm thinking in terms of ringgit, but it's about maybe 15 -- 12 to 15 billion U.S. (dollar) project. It's something that we hope to start next year. So that's an example of how we can move the economy when we get projects like that on the ground, and as well satisfy the needs of the people. So 12 NKEA -- oil and gas, education, electronics, medical tourism, et cetera, business services -- all these 12 areas. Then there are eight strategic reform initiatives. For example, human capital is one of them. We must make sure we have the right human capital. We must make sure we have strong institutions. We have eight SRIs and six NKRA. Those are the areas that concerns the people -- for example, lifting the lower-income group; fighting corruption, crime. I would like to congratulate New York because the crime rate has fallen in New York. I've spoken to some New Yorkers. (This is what ?) they tell me. Fifteen years ago, you cannot walk after 10:00 a night in Chinatown, because somebody would walk up from behind and mug you, but today they have a sense of confidence. So you can tackle crime. So 12, eight, six. Those are the things that will get us to our goal of being a high-income nation by the year 2020. So I detect a signal given that I should not transcend the time limit, as tempting as it is for a politician -- (laughter) -- who has such a wonderful captive audience, quality audience. I'd just like to say that I keep telling myself, you know, do what is required of the people of Malaysia, and the people of America, as well. Give them what is pure and valuable to them. And that is the essence of good government. Thank you. GREENBERG: Well, that was a wonderful address, Prime Minister. I think you answered many questions that have been on the minds of many of us who have been in Malaysia many times and have done business there. Let me just pursue the Bumiputera program for a moment. Prior to your ascension to prime minister, it had been fairly normal, if you were operating a company in Malaysia, that you were being pressured to sell 30 percent of the company to Bumiputeras. And I have personal experience. We had a property casualty company, and we had begun it in Malaysia. And we were required to sell 30 percent. And it couldn't have been two weeks after we sold the 30 percent to Bumiputeras that they sold it. And so we were back to square one. We bought the shares back and then we were being addressed again for the same problem. And when we had a very major life company in Malaysia, which employed many, many people and created jobs and invested in reserves in the country, we had to fight off the attack for years and years. And I think we took the position ultimately, if we're forced to sell 30 percent, we'll sell 100 percent. And I'm listening carefully to your words, and that does not seem to be the policy today. NAJIB: Well, first of all, we have decided that if, as a company, you have given 30 percent and the 30 percent, Bumiputera decide to sell it, then your company would (have give ?) to have complied. So it doesn't -- we don't have to look for another group of Bumiputeras to take over 30 percent. Secondly, there is this ongoing process of gradual liberalization so that we started with 27 subsectors in the services sector, and there's no requirement for Bumiputera(s) at all in the 27 subsectors. There is gradual liberalization of financial sector. But there's some limitation to foreign holdings. But this is quite common in many countries with respect to the financial sector. So it is -- it is a process. I would hope to be -- to take into account the need to be globally competitive as well. So that's where we are today. GREENBERG: Let me switch for a moment to the -- some geopolitical issues. Malaysia's a member of the ASEAN group, and you recently -- ASEAN recently entered into a free-trade agreement with China, which -- the U.S., of course, has not begun to have discussions with ASEAN for a free-trade agreement. How would Malaysia feel about that? Would they welcome a free-trade agreement with the United States via ASEAN? NAJIB: I am a strong proponent of free trade -- free and fair trade, because, first of all, we have to resist protectionism. We have to create wealth. And the best way to create wealth is to embark on a global regime of free and fair trade. I've wanted to continue the free-trade negotiations with the United States, but there was not enough time with the change of government. And with the new policy now, the bilateral FTAs have been put on the back burner, at least for a while. But there is a possibility of multilateral trade negotiations. And we hope that ASEAN and the U.S. can actually commence free- trade negotiations -- as difficult as it is to get an agreement, because even a free-trade agreement with Korea has not been ratified by Congress yet. But I hope we will have the opportunity to do a free-trade agreement -- if not possible on a bilateral basis, at least between ASEAN and the United States. GREENBERG: Yeah, many of us believe that it's critical and vital that we have an ASEAN-U.S. free-trade agreement. And there are a number of us working on that. NAJIB: Yes. GREENBERG: And I believe that there will be some initiatives taken very soon. NAJIB: Good. GREENBERG: Sticking with the ASEAN region, China is casting a very large shadow over the region. Is there concern in the ASEAN area, including Malaysia, that China will exert more pressure in the region? NAJIB: We have to come to terms with China, because China is -- it's a new China. It's a China that is more assertive than ever before. Recent events certainly will bear this out. But we believe that China would want not to destabilize the region. And there are mechanisms for us to undertake conflict resolutions with China, because Chinese people tend to be quite pragmatic people. And we believe that we can work things out with the Chinese, but we have to take into (cognizance ?) that it is a growing global power. That's something which is inevitable, and you have to come to terms with that. But if you look -- I mean, being a former defense minister, China is not really large in our projection in terms of its military buildup, doesn't indicate it is moving in that direction, but it has more -- certainly more economic clout, and you have to come to terms with it. QUESTIONER: Were you surprised at the position they took on the Spratley Islands? NAJIB: No, I've kind of expected it, actually, because that is an area which contains quite a lot of hydrocarbon resources. And China -- in fact, all countries want to get their hands on hydrocarbon resources, whether it's China or whether it's Brunei or whether -- it doesn't matter the size of the nation, but people do not want to give up potentially rich hydrocarbon resources. GREENBERG: Sure, but there's got to be -- it seems to me the size shouldn't elbow everybody out of the way. NAJIB: No, they shouldn't, but there are means -- ways and means for us to decide on certain mechanisms. GREENBERG: Let me return to Malaysia for a minute. Can you say anything about the Anwar episodes and whether or not he is out of politics now, would you say? NAJIB: I think I have to clear the air. There's a lot of misperception about the ongoing trial. Fundamentally it is not about the government against Anwar. It is about an individual who happens to be his own personal staff, chosen and appointed by him, who feels that he has been -- I don't know what is the correct term -- sexually abused, or whatever it is, and made a police report. And it was the basis of that police report investigations were carried out. And there's enough evidence to indicate that something on that nature has taken place. But this is fundamentally -- he is seeking justice for something that has a wrongdoing against him, and he is taking it against his own employer. So it's not about the Malaysian government against Anwar. Because without that, there cannot be any case. There will not be a case against Anwar. So I think I'd like to clarify that this is fundamentally about his own personal staff taking a legal action against his former employer. GREENBERG: That's good to have that clarified. NAJIB: Yes. GREENBERG: We're going to open it now to questions from the audience. Please identify yourself and ask a question, not make a speech. Yes. QUESTIONER: My name is Monnik Mecca (ph). I'm a journalist. In a few weeks from now, you will be receiving the Indian prime minister with a very large delegation. What are your expectations from this visit? And could you give me an update on the CECA you are currently negotiating with India? NAJIB: I'm looking forward to his visit. We have struck a good working formal and personal relationship. India is important to us. One of the key issues to be finalized and even signed, hopefully, is that partnership -- economic partnership agreement. We were almost there when I left KL. But I have not got the latest update. I've instructed the minister of international trade, and Manmohan Singh has also instructed its minister, that they have to work it out in time for our visit. So, hopefully, this is achievable, because that would certainly open up huge potential between Malaysia and India. And there are many, many other possibilities, including our companies doing business in India -- construction, power generation, airport. And, of course, India has its strength in IT, business, which certainly (will/would ?) benefit Malaysia. So the potential is very large. QUESTIONER: (Name inaudible) -- Human Rights Watch. Prime Minister, in 2009, as well as today, you spoke very eloquently of the need for a free media. You said we need a media that's empowered to responsibly report what they see without consequence. Yet the last few months have seen actions that don't seem to square with this vision. Opposition newspapers have been shut; books that question policy have been shut -- confiscated; sedition charges pressed against a vendor of a cartoon magazine; 13 new Internet crimes recently publicized, all having to do with content crimes; radio and TV shows shut. How do you account for the difference in government action and your vision? NAJIB: Thank you. When I articulated that vision, I did say that press must be responsible. I did not say that we will waive all the laws in Malaysia. But having said that, if you look at the -- what has happened in Malaysia, this -- the latitude is much greater now than ever before. The alternative media is very free in Malaysia. There's a lot of contents which are against the government, and we have not taken action just because you are against the government. There are two or three very prominent websites in Malaysia that are operating very freely, even as of today. So the fact that you can go against the government -- it's not something that we will take action against you. But if you go against the law, whether it is defamation or whether it is inciting racial hatred, religious hatred, then you have to be responsible for your action, because as a responsible government, we must protect the interests, the safety and security of our people, of our society. We cannot allow racial hatred to go out of hand, religious hatred to go out of hand. As you know, if things are not attended to in a very timely fashion, then you could get situations that might erupt in terms of violence and so forth, which will not serve us any good at all. So you have freedom, but freedom with responsibility. GREENBERG: Yes. QUESTIONER: (Off mike) -- I want to ask a -- you know, U.S. has expressed its -- sort of reinforced its role in East Asia. So do you -- do you see Malaysia or ASEAN just happy to play sort of the cards of China and the U.S. in its sort of role in South China Sea? NAJIB: We have a position that, you know, we want to engage with the major powers. For example, China is part of the East Asia process. America will be a full member of the East Asia Summit come next year. I think these are positive developments. And we want to engage with China as much as we want to engage with America. We don't see that the region is exclusive to one power. But there must be a nice equilibrium so that the region will be a region of peace and stability. GREENBERG: Yes. QUESTIONER: Chris Wachter (ph), McDonough (ph). Thank you so much, Your Excellency, for coming. I have a question about your new economic model -- new economic model. In particular, private investment has lagged dramatically, as you noted, and you have an ambitious goal for 2020. And also, ambitious set of proposals. As an investor, if you were on the outside following Malaysia, which of these reforms -- or what should I look for as a sign that you believe that the new economic model is on track? Is there a particular element that you think is a catalyst or a particularly good indicator that you think this program is on track? NAJIB: Well, starting with our decision to embark on the reforms and the process of gradual liberalization. In other words, we're listening to the market. And we believe that for us to achieve such ambitious goals, we need a set of policies that will make it attractive for domestic and foreign investors to look at Malaysia in a very serious manner. So we will take on board, you know, their views, and we are prepared to make adjustments as we go along. But Malaysia has to be globally competitive. I don't think there's an option. GREENBERG: Any other questions? I have two questions, Prime Minister. Over the years, Malaysia and Singapore had, you know, almost a love-hate relationship. There was a problem and then it was worked out. How are the relationships today? NAJIB: I would say a very -- a constructive relationship, because, you know, we believe that we need to look forward. Hsien Loong and I, we are members of the new generation. We don't have the baggage of history. But what is important is the future. And as long as we can work together on a mutually beneficial basis -- of course we have to fight for our own national interests. So does Singapore. But that is the essence of what every government has to do. But in areas where you can work together and you can collaborate, why shouldn't we do so? Why do we need to heark back to the past? I don't believe in it. I believe that whatever you do, you cannot change things anymore. History is there. It has been written. But let us not be a captive of our history. Let us be leaders who can chart a new course for our region and for our two countries. GREENBERG: Yes. QUESTIONER: Jonathan Gage, Booz & Company in New York. Prime Minister, you talked about the movement of the moderates. You proposed a movement of moderates. I guess it's sort of like Jon Stewart and his "million moderates" movement at the Washington Monument. What do you hope to achieve by that? What will that look like? How should Washington understand that in global terms? Is it something that will help America? And in what way? NAJIB: Yeah, right. Right. Yes, yes, I think it will help America and help the world. I think a good point would be, I know there's a degree of strategic ambiguity in a sense, but I think that's quite deliberate, because right now what I'd like to do after espousing those ideas would be for all of us to now put our minds together and think of the next course of action. You know, how do we galvanize the world, the moderates together? There will -- there could be many, many ways of doing so. For example, after I spoke, somebody from Portugal came up to me and said, look, we have a center in Portugal. It's an interfaith kind of center, dialogue, and we're prepared to play our part. And I'm sure other think tanks in Washington and so forth would want to say: Look, let's -- let us brainstorm. I know one particular think tank's actually -- this morning it's undertaking a kind of a brainstorming session to think about how we move forward this idea of -- this movement of the moderates. So let's take it from there and see what is the best course of action, because I think if all moderates are more assertive in their views, I think the world will be a better place. GREENBERG: Yeah. QUESTIONER: (Name off mike) from PineBridge Investments. You spoke about Malaysia's leadership in globalization and now this discussion of the moderates and bringing things together. I wonder if you think there's a specific role that Malaysia could play in the Middle East peace process. NAJIB: Well, it's a very complex process. It seems to me that the whole process has been held hostage by the extremists on both sides. You know, you have the extremists on the Palestinian side. You have extremists on the Israeli side, you know, (unleashing ?) rockets and building -- continuing to build settlements. You just cannot solve that problem. So I think if moderates can have their way, if the leadership can take the middle path, I think the prospects of a Middle East settlement would be much, much brighter. But at the moment, it doesn't seem to be the case. I mean, I'm not too optimistic about the outcome of the current direct talks until and unless, you know, the more moderate views hold sway. That's the only way forward to resolve the Middle East problem. Otherwise, there will be years and years of misery and degradation. GREENBERG: I agree with -- I agree with that. Yeah, I have a question. Go -- ask you question and I'll come back. QUESTIONER: Thank you very much. Brooks Entwistle, Goldman Sachs, based in India, in Mumbai. We as a firm were doing for many years in Malaysia; in fact, just opened a KL office, which we're delighted about. My question today is about the role of women. You mentioned doctors from Malaysia to Afghanistan. There was a very interesting piece this week in the Herald Tribune on women leadership in Islamic finance and chairing some of the major banks. And I'd ask you just to comment further on that topic, but just more specifically the role of women in other leadership roles in Malaysia, and how that can play a leadership role in the Muslim world. NAJIB: I would consider Malaysia in the forefront. In fact, the male species feels rather threatened in Malaysia now. If you look in terms of the entrance to university, 62 percent of undergraduates are women in Malaysia. I don't think any other Muslim or even non-Muslim country has that kind of record. And major financial and economic ministries and agencies are held by women in Malaysia. Of course, the governor of central bank, our economic (union ?), the top echelon of the Ministry of Finance, Treasury, they are all women. So women play a big part in Malaysia. And in fact, we want more women as part of the labor force in Malaysia, I think, and also a greater role for women in Malaysia. And we have been wanting to have 30 percent of women to hold strategic and decision-making positions in the public and private sector. I hope we can -- we can achieve that in the near future. GREENBERG: (Inaudible.) QUESTIONER: Thank you. Hwang (sp) from the council -- (comes on mike) -- thank you. Hwang (sp) from the Council on Foreign Relations. Prime Minister, I have a question. Two years ago, I visited Melaka. My tour guide, he was Chinese, but he had a Muslim name, and -- but he denied he was a true Muslim. And I asked, why did he do that? He said, "So I could enjoy all the benefits a Muslim enjoyed here" -- economic benefits, he mean -- "in this country." So I want to ask you a question. Is that policy of treating Muslim, non-Muslim or Chinese, that policy still in place? Thank you. NAJIB: Well, I alluded to this when I mentioned about the affirmative action. What we're trying to do is to make the means of achieving objectives fairer. I can give you one specific example. The government scholarships given to pursue the Shari'a education abroad as well as locally, for the first time in our history, we combined the principles of meritocracy and social justice. First of all, those who achieve at the -- well, the American equivalent, but in our case, it's after six plus five -- 11 years of education -- there's an examination called SPM, which is equivalent to the British O level. Then, those who achieve nine A-plus, irrespective of their ethnic background, will get a government scholarship. So that has never been done; first time ever we have done that. But the second part, for those who come from rather socioeconomic disadvantaged groups, then there's a special consideration for them, so that they feel is more level. If you are a child from a longhouse in Sarawak or Sabah, certainly you cannot compete with somebody born and bred in Kuala Lumpur, in a high-class area, for example -- there must be some adjustment for that -- or even from the Rabai (ph) states, or even from the Malay (campus ?). There must be some adjustment for that. So this is quite unique. It combines meritocracy and social justice. So that's how we are going to approach this, our approach to readjusting the affirmative action in Malaysia. But having said that, of course, you know, the private sector is by and large still not controlled by the man who make the (craft ?). So they also feel they don't have a chance to get government -- to get contracts from the private sector, to get employment in the private sector. So don't forget there is that large constituency of the majority who feel that they don't have access to opportunities in the private sector. And with the burgeoning private sector, the opportunities there will be even bigger than the public sector. QUESTIONER: I have a question, Prime Minister. What's the position of Malaysia on Iran becoming a nuclear power? NAJIB: We are against it. Our position is clear that Iran, like any other country, can use nuclear for peaceful purposes -- QUESTIONER: Right. NAJIB: -- but not to develop nuclear weapons. So we have abided by the U.N. Security resolutions. We tell Iranians, "Look, we can work together. We can -- we can do business. We can do investment. But, you know, if you want to use Malaysia as a transit point for illegal material, then all bets are off." You know, we'll have to take action against that. So that's our position. GREENBERG: Any other questions? I think you've done such a great job in answering every question -- NAJIB: Thank you. GREENBERG: -- that was posed. Let me just say a couple of words from the podium. It's not often that we get a prime minister who's not only so articulate, but so knowledgeable about every part of the economy and geopolitical issues in this country. So please join me in thanking the prime minister. (Applause.) NAJIB: Thank you. GREENBERG: Great job. (C) COPYRIGHT 2010, FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC., 1000 VERMONT AVE. NW; 5TH FLOOR; WASHINGTON, DC - 20005, USA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ANY REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION CONSTITUTES A MISAPPROPRIATION UNDER APPLICABLE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW, AND FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PURSUE ALL REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO IT IN RESPECT TO SUCH MISAPPROPRIATION. FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE, INC. IS A PRIVATE FIRM AND IS NOT AFFILIATED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. NO COPYRIGHT IS CLAIMED AS TO ANY PART OF THE ORIGINAL WORK PREPARED BY A UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE AS PART OF THAT PERSON'S OFFICIAL DUTIES. FOR INFORMATION ON SUBSCRIBING TO FNS, PLEASE CALL CARINA NYBERG AT 202-347-1400. THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT.
    Event with Dato' Sri Mohd Najib Tun Razak and Maurice R. Greenberg September 28, 2010
  • Thailand
    Web 0.2
    In an increasingly competitive region, and a world where a prolonged economic slowdown looks more than likely, the countries of Southeast Asia, constantly worried about competing with China and India, would want to give themselves every advantage, right? Right? Especially if that means trying to lure the kind of high-tech investment that not only pumps in money but also can help a country upgrade the value and quality of its workforce, right? Right? Well, maybe not. Over the past year, as opposition movements or protests increasingly have threatened the governments of Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, and other countries in the region, many of these governments have taken a major step backwards on Internet freedom, even after previously vowing not to censor the Web the way they control traditional print and broadcast media. Thailand, somewhat surprisingly, has been the worst offender; though it is still nominally a democracy, it now reportedly bans more websites than any other country on earth, a truly remarkable achievement given the competition from places like China and Saudi Arabia. Prominent online editors and bloggers have been jailed. Bangkok blogger Bangkok Pundit recently reported that the Thai police have allotted some 120 people to search for online discourse that potentially defames the monarchy --  an enormous waste of the cops’ resources, and a sign of the paranoia and increasingly authoritarian style of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s government. Though Thailand’s stock market has stabilized, and a recent delegation of U.S. investors heard all the right promises from the government, increasingly strict Internet censorship, which poisons the political climate and, in the long run, will stifle Thai high-tech entrepreneurship, can’t be too reassuring to investors. Meanwhile, in neighboring Malaysia, the government, which has steadily retreated from the initial reforms of former prime minister Abdullah Badawi, seems to be taking a similar approach. Though former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad once promised that the Internet would remain totally free in Malaysia, in order to fulfill his vision of the country as a cyberhub in Southeast Asia, those promises are now being broken. As the Asia Sentinel recently reported, the Malaysian government is now considering launching Internet filters to block “undesirable websites,” which could effectively block the only sources of independent information on Malaysia available to Malaysians in the local language. As one senior member of the governing coalition recently said, the original censorship of traditional print and broadcast media have seriously harmed Malaysian youth, by curtailing their education and making them less inquisitive. For a country with severe outflows of domestic capital, major weaknesses in the quality of graduates produced by universities, and that desperately needs to attract new foreign investment, extending these blocks to the Internet seems extraordinarily unwise. Then again, just because it’s unwise has never stopped Kuala Lumpur before. (Photo: Bazuki Muhammad/courtesy Reuters)
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick August 19, 2010 Asia Unbound
  • Malaysia
    Anwar and Malaysia’s Unfortunate Downturn
    When has any potential success story fallen as far and as fast in recent years as Malaysia? Sure, Iceland’s economy has collapsed, after its banks made such risky loans they made American financial institutions look like paragons of virtue – but Iceland was a wealthy, developed nation before the crisis, and it will remain one afterwards. Greece faces a massive debt morass, but it was never viewed as some example of economic success – it has always struggled to match its more prosperous European neighbors. Thailand? Argentina? Mexico? What about Malaysia? Unlike, say, Greece, Malaysia in the 1990s and early 2000s seemed like a real, model success story. A moderate Muslim nation with a sizable non-Muslim minority, it had created, if not some idyll of harmony, at least a place without the inter-religious violence of Egypt or Pakistan or India. Though its autocratic leader, Mahathir Mohamada, was criticized for his tolerance of graft and authoritarian political leanings, the country had built an impressive economic story, luring high-tech investment from companies like Intel while maintaining a strong foundation of natural resources exports. Malaysia had lapped former regional competitors like Thailand and the Philippines and seemed on the verge of entering the club of developed nations. It was building a high-tech corridor south of Kuala Lumpur designed to be Malaysia’s version of Silicon Valley. This month, Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim goes on trial on a charge of sodomy, which is illegal in the country. It’s a case so full of holes it’s embarrassing, seemingly trumped up by the ruling party to sideline Anwar – and it highlights Malaysia’s downfall from the 1990s. Unlike South Korea or Taiwan or even Thailand, Malaysia’s ruling party never made the critical leap, in its mind, to allowing a loyal opposition and, eventually, create a real democracy. The political stasis is alienating young Malaysians, and the country suffers a massive outflow of its most talented future stars. In fact, I’ve never been to a relatively wealthy country where so many talented people were anxious to leave, even to go to neighboring Singapore, Malaysia’s longtime rival. And, absent real political change, the model of religious tolerance is starting to break down, too, since the ruling party now resorts to Malay Muslim chauvinism to keep voters; a recent spate of attacks on churches in Malaysia seems more out of the worst parts of India rather than the Malaysia of years past. More and more young Malays, too, go to university to get degrees in Islamic studies, which don’t help them in the modern workforce. Even giant neighbor Indonesia, which has for years sent cheap guest workers to wealthy Malaysia, now looks better by comparison. Not only has Indonesia built a truly vibrant and inclusive democracy – its economy has continued to thrive through the global financial crisis. Malaysia, meanwhile, has gotten stuck. Losing talented workers, and without the open environment or the large domestic market that attracts technology innovation, it increasingly has lost out not only to China but also to regional neighbors. Inward investment cannot match the outflow of capital from Malaysia, and if the inter-religious environment becomes even more toxic, Chinese and Indian Malaysians, who control many of the most innovative firms, will pour even more of their money out of the country. Anwar went on trial once before, in the late 1990s, for essentially the same trumped-up charge. He was found guilty, in a highly questionable case, and went to jail. At that time, some Malaysians hoped that, despite the farce of his trial, the country would move on and, eventually, achieve the type of political and economic stability that would make Anwar’s cases look like a bad memory. It hasn’t happened.
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick February 8, 2010 Asia Unbound
  • Malaysia
    Malaysia, Egypt: A Fight over Faith
    Recent violence against Christians in Malaysia and Egypt points to rising tensions over religious freedom and Islamic identity. Legal expert Angela Wu argues these issues must be considered more carefully in U.S. foreign policy.
    Interview with Angela Wu and Toni Johnson January 15, 2010
  • Malaysia
    Party Like It’s 1999
    Looking at Malaysia these days from 20,000 feet, you could be forgiven for thinking it’s 1999, and not 2009. The prime minister, a longtime power player in the ruling coalition, fights for his life amidst a tangled web of corruption allegations swirling around his party. The economy is going nowhere, and educated Malaysians are leaving the country in droves. And opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, the most charismatic – and divisive – politician in the country, is facing a trial for sodomy, which is illegal in Malaysia. Oh, and, like in 1999, when witnesses recanted testimony against Anwar and said they had been tortured in custody, the evidence against Anwar this time wouldn’t exactly pass the test in a U.S. court. (For his part, Anwar denied the previous charges and denies these as well.) All you need is a Y2K scare, maybe a new album by Brittany Spears and it seems like 1999 all over again. But – not so fast. During Anwar’s previous trial, the trumped-up charges against him did infuriate many Malaysians, and helped spark protests throughout Kuala Lumpur, but ultimately the ruling coalition held on, maintaining its ethnic Malay base and guiding the country through the Asian financial crisis with solid fiscal management. It also, at the time, had the advantage of Mahathir Mohamad in the driver seat, who, for all his flaws, commanded a kind of loyalty within the party and grudging respect throughout the country. This time, the government, led by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, son of a former prime minister, is in a much weaker position, and Anwar’s case could prove even more explosive. The government has proven incapable of controlling the news cycle the way it did in the late 1990s; Malaysia’s promises to allow online media relatively free rein, critical to the government’s desire to position the country as a high-tech center, has made it easier for critics to expose government failures – or obviously flawed trials. Rumors about the prime minister’s links to a murky murder of a model linked, by some sources, to Najib, have been all over the Web, even if the prime minister refuses to address them. Stories of opposition activists who mysteriously disappeared or plunged to their deaths receive plenty of coverage in online Malaysian sites, read by much of the educated classes. Meanwhile, the ethnic Malay voting base has splintered, with some segments going over to the Anwar-led opposition coalition, which includes the Islamist party PAS. Najib hardly possesses the steely charisma of Mahathir, and he is having trouble holding his own coalition together. And after a decade of greater openness, many average Malaysians are simply unwilling to return to the more repressive days of the 1990s and before, when the government could get away with simply framing an opposition leader. The government may still go through, again, with the Anwar trial, but they can’t count on keeping the peace afterwards.
    Blog Post by Joshua Kurlantzick December 17, 2009 Asia Unbound
  • Religion
    Religious Conversion and Sharia Law
    A Malaysian court’s ruling against a Muslim convert to Christianity highlights the difficulties of blending sharia law with modern legal frameworks.
    Backgrounder by Lionel Beehner June 6, 2007