Back to News Menu About the Rat Asia Pacific Management Forum

What's New? Site Map

Search the Asia Pacific Management Forum database of almost 1,000 pages. Updated weekly. Use today's topical search terms or clear the box and enter your own. Click options for complex or phrase search. Or click on the icon for our full search facilities.

Google! is one of the publicly accessible Web document databases recommended by the APMF for professional and business research. Developed at Stanford university for research purposes, it is acknowledged by many as being the clear leader in returning relevant results. Use our suggested search or clear the box and enter your own.

"...Look how we have improved your lot in the past...", goes the appeal, and "..trust us to do the same in the future..."

It has been the same appeal used by the BN going back several elections, and also reflects that contrary to the reporting from some foreign press, the issues this election, when it comes down to it, are little different than previously.

Malaysians on Monday will vote back a ruling Barisan Nasional coalition with a majority reduced to around the same enjoyed prior to the ruling coalition's barnstorming triumph in the last elections where PAS and the DAP suffered major losses. That election was fought in a time of plenty, where few signs existed of any impending slow down to a miracle growth cycle.

Since then, the Asian crisis has come and gone. Some structures of national economies have begun changing as a result, either because they were largely forced to as in the case of Indonesia, Thailand, and Indonesia, or as an act of free will in the case of Singapore. Change is painful, but if handled correctly, ensures a good strategic position for the future. Many times to go forward, you have to go backwards, as the branch further down the tree may actually extend further and is usually more substantive and strong. Those who manage the Malaysian industrial-politico-economic complex (Malaysia Inc.) at the moment have decided the best policy is to creep further along the same branch.

Or are they?

There are several strong signs in banking reform in particular that Malaysia's brains trust are doing something, but in the dirt and dust of the electoral battle for power, the prime message is that Malaysia is doing it their way, as a rugged defender of Asian values, the continued supremacy of the nation state, and as a bullied playground weakling who finally has asserted himself. Now, say the Malaysian brains trust, those who criticised us are now saying we were right, and what's more the rest of Asia are being converted around to our proposals such as Asian currency boards, and relying on our own power houses such as Japan for largesse, rather than the foreign West.

The ruling élite would have us believe that there is nothing wrong at Malaysia Inc. and any poor bottom line results have been due to malicious foreign influences and anti-Malaysian sentiment. They point to an economy which is looking very healthy, but compare that to even worse-affected Asian crisis economies and it has done no better. The difference is, goes the argument, that we have achieved this without resort to selling off Malaysian assets to foreigners and compromising national sovereignty by running with the IMF. We have been able to recover without any major changes goes the proud boast of the Malaysian élite, unlike Indonesia where their leader was toppled and their economy is under the thumb of the IMF, nor Thailand and South Korea where foreigners are gobbling up national business assets.

That Mahathir's Malaysia still survives after today could be seen by future historians as a miracle in itself when you look at the facts. It would have survived the sacking of a Deputy Prime Minister assumed to be the next national leader, and an Asian economic and monetary crisis that bought down the ruling élite of several other neighbouring countries.

Look behind that analysis however and the ruling êlites success today is rather less surprising, and is predicated on a rojak of circumstances, some related, some not.

Firstly, apart from a worrying trend of over-spending and dependence on foreign investment, Malaysia's economic base was sounder than countries such as Indonesia, Thailand, and South Korea prior to the crisis, though not as strong as Singapore which has not only weathered the crisis but initiated positive fundamental structural change at the same time. Malaysia's media is in almost whole part controlled by the ruling élite, and in a country where the majority of people believe what they read, and prefer to be led rather than be involved in the political process, that is a formidable weapon. Mahathir's party UMNO, the predominant party in the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition has ruled Malaysia for almost all it's history since independence and the change of name from Malaya. It survived the succession of Singapore in much the same way that Indonesia will survive Eat Timor, Aceh and other sucessionist provinces, and engineered the reconciliation of races immediately after the Emergency and for three decades following. The Chinese are grateful for that, and the Malays are grateful that "affirmative action" has been taken to provide advantages for the bumiputra's (the son's of the soil), to even up competition with the business-savvy Chinese. Indians, the other major racial group in Malaysia, are also in large part, happy with the role and advantages the state has afforded them. In fact such has been the domination of UMNO and Barisan Nasional in government historically that "Malaysia" and the BN are almost seen as synonymous in most quarters. Such a perception allowed the ruling élite in modern times to equate opposition to the government and support for Anwar as anti-Malaysian and almost seditious. Yes it was anti-government, but Malaysia is much more than the ruling élite.

Another factor, alluded to in the paragraph above, is shared by most Asian countries. The culture of communalism and the suppression of individualism for the common good permeates throughout every level of Malaysian culture, from business to politics to society in general. Together with respect for authority, these two factors create the glue for the "Asian values" which has brought most of Asia to the economic power is it is today. It has bonded racial groups and created order out of chaos. It was the right approach at the right time. This election will prove that the "Asian values" of the old Asia are very much alive in Malaysia today.

Still another factor is the pragmatism of Malaysia as a whole. Thirty five percent of Malaysians are Chinese, immigrants and mainly political refugees from Mao's China. Their fathers and grandfathers have seen hard times and know good times when they see it. They have experienced the consequences of unfettered idealism. They recoil from any sign of political instability, and are wary of change.

Respect for authority, another Chinese trait, and even if it is seen as cruel or misguided, is as etched in political representation as is respect for your elders in Chinese families. While only 45% of the population, the Chinese however control a much greater percentage of business. On the other hand the Malays, at the risk of being accused of stereo-typing, are far more emotional. Even Mahathir, a Malay himself, was almost moved to tears a few months back when he reflected on how the Chinese were showing support but the Malay's were less supportive, especially when it came to the Anwar issue. "The Malays are an emotional people" was a direct quote from the boss. The head of the Chinese and the heart of the Malay, can explain a lot about Malaysia today. Expect the Chinese to vote for the status quo and the Barisan Nasional, and problems for the opposition in Penang, their traditional stronghold, as many of the voters in this mainly Chinese electorate reject a DAP aligned with PAS (committed to a Muslim state) and Keadilan (too much of a radical change).

Politics and power can harden however, and many Malays in government almost fell over themselves to switch allegiances from Anwar to Mahathir when it was obvious what the winning side would be. While one foreign publication even went so far as to name Anwar "Asian of the Year" for "changing the perplexion of Asian politics forever", our own analysis at the time was that the Anwar incident would only prove to Malaysians what happens to those who buck the system. Communalism reigns... and pragmatism reigns supreme over beliefs.

Mahathir's ruling élite in this election faces an opposition alliance of old political adversaries such as the mainly Chinese DAP and the conservative religious party PAS. But the new force is Keadilan, a new party headed by Anwar's wife, made up predominantly of Malays who were side lined or disaffected with the Anwar sacking, and a newly invigorated group of older reformers who finally stumbled on a popular issue.

There was no option other than for opponents of BN to form an alliance against the BN juggernaut, so the Barisan Alternatif was formed. Faced with a ruling party monopoly of the English press, the Malay language press apart from the PAS newspaper, and a good influence over the Chinese press there was little outlet for the opposition to allow their voices to be heard. Younger and educated reform-minded Malaysians used the Internet, but internet access is restricted very much to the English-speaking middle class in Malaysia. The government tried to counter this too by launching their own sites and denigrating Reform sites, but lacked the savvy and sophistication of the reform sites and quickly gave up on this rather more level playing field.

Add the requirement that only 2 weeks notice need be given of an election date, allowing very little time for new political forces to organise, and the non-enrolment of almost 680,000 voters who would reasonably have been expected to vote against the government giving the renewed interest in politics and the tendency of youth to vote for change, and a victory for the opposition was ruled out from the start.

Two other factors counted against the opposition, more of their own making, though as we have said, they really had very little choice. The first was the dependence on the Anwar issue, which could easily be challenged by the government. Second was the use of the "Reformasi" term as a rallying cry. "Reformasi" encouraged comparisons with Indonesia, a country seen as inferior by status-conscious Malaysians, and continually portrayed as a country in chaos by the press. Both the Anwar-as-a-victim appeal and the Reformasi tag had little hope of winning over the great majority of undecided voters, though the former may have some sway over Malay voters especially from Anwar's northern Malay heartlands. To paint Anwar as an angel attracts almost as much scepticism as Mahathir's claims about Anwar, as it is impossible for a politician to rise as high in the ranks as Anwar did without playing the Malaysian political game, and that means closet-deals, and favour-giving and receiving.

On the opposition's ability to form progressive and effective policies, little is known, due in part to their lack of access to the mainstream press, and also due to the fact that many players are new, with little experience in politics, a legacy of the tight control BN has over political and policy training and education. Those who saw BA as a vehicle for political expediency are quickly leaving, as they realise the neglible power of the movement.

That said, the election period, dominated unavoidably by ruling élite communications has been a period best forgotten. BN advertising and communication has either been almost totally negative in the form of personal attacks mainly against Anwar, blaming the opposition for street violence, and targeting the divergent agendas of the opposition alliance, or boasting of BN's record of national development and stability. While the foreign press were condemned for highlighting Malaysian street violence during the Anwar saga, BN has, for their own purposes, done the same. While UMNO paints themselves as a religious-based Muslim party, a cartoon depicting 4 opposition leaders in bed together, reprinted in all English language newspapers last week, would if it occurred in real life, result in Khalwat offences a-plenty and members of the party at least being charged with the same "offences against nature" that Anwar faces now. More seriously though, BN has talked little of the future, preferring to concentrate on history, both recent and ancient.

The issues of course come down to those in every Malaysian election. Anwar really is a sideshow. RACE, RELIGION and STABILITY as always, lurks menacingly behind the political carnival. Mahathir personally has predicted violence, none of which has materialised, and behind the images of violence spread over BN advertisements are subliminal references to the racial riots that pulled Malaysia apart many years back. The message intended to be conveyed is that a vote for the opposition is a vote for religious extremism, riots, violence, and racial tension.

It has been a campaign that above all has focused on the past rather than the future. It does not augur well for a progressive Malaysia.

And to get back to our focus, there has been little clue as to the effect the new administration will have on business and management in Malaysia. Certainly the level of economic debate has been badly affected by the blaming of foreigners for Malaysia's problems, the emphasis on personalities, and the almost total unreliability of the local press for any objective analysis. International business does not know if Malaysia is taking financial sector reform and reform of business practices as seriously as neighbouring Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand and South Korea. It may be business as usual politically for Malaysia in the future, but business as usual in industry and commerce is a recipe for disaster. If one felt that the arrogance and misinformation displayed by politicians during this heated campaign carried over to the business area, they would take their business elsewhere; but in a country where what is said is often different to what is done, such decisions may be too hasty.

Certainly if business management decision making and practice followed the same strategies as politicians, Malaysia's competitiveness in the future must be questioned. But it is also not smart to assume that business culture mirrors political culture. Many Malaysian businessmen laugh off the political anarchy of the last few months as a completely different arena to business, and pass it off as "politicians being politicians". Past behaviour is always the best indicator of future behaviour, but if new managers and professionals have to play the game before they can implement new ideas and strategies, the Information Age will be a stone age for Malaysia. Our feeling is far more positive than that, but it is up the new government to prove pretty soon that they are as good at change in business practices for the Information Age as they are at fighting political change.

The next six months will demonstrate whether Malaysia can, as well as changing things they can, also accept those things they cannot, and build a strategy based on that rather than fighting it. If the reality matches the electoral rhetoric, the message is obvious: Get out of Malaysia now. But political rhetoric is just that, amplified in Malaysia due to a leadership which has turned arrogant under pressure and gives real Malaysians little credit for their intelligence given their advertising and electoral appeals. Business strategy is something different, but we have to wait and see...

Don't expect either that Malaysian politics will stabilise. There are many Malaysians who feel alienated from the political process in Malaysia due to dis-enfranchisement or the government-controlled media. One thing is for sure, for both those who rule Malaysia, and their alternatives, the battle may be over, but the war goes on....