Malaysia 'model' offers lessons for Muslim world

Malaysia 'model' offers lessons for Muslim world

Mushahid Hussain, Inter Press Service, Kuala Lumpur

Malaysia is about to do something unique in the Muslim world,
one that would be a rarity in the Third World as well.

After 22 years as prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad is all set
to leave his powerful position voluntarily, honorably and
peacefully.

For centuries, the Muslim world has not been able to settle
the fundamental issue of power politics, namely, that of
political transition. More often than not, Islamic history is
replete with power struggles sparked by wars of succession.

Conspiracies, coercion, coups are the norm, with bloodletting
among brothers, father and son, long-standing comrades, until the
sword, or, now, the barrel of the gun determines the winner --
who is normally the one who managed to escape the last bullet.

Malaysia is about to change that pattern, when Mahathir
retires at the end of October following the summit of the
Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) he is hosting here in
the Malaysian capital. His handpicked successor is Deputy Prime
Minister Abdullah Badawi.

In the developing world too, the voluntary relinquishment of
high office is a rarity.

Nelson Mandela did so after serving a single term as president
of a multi-racial, democratic South Africa. More recently, the
Chinese leadership did it under the guidance of former President
Jiang Zemin.

At 78, Mahathir still exudes charm, charisma, energy and
stamina, with a hands-on approach to development, domestic and
foreign policy, providing leadership that has left a legacy to
this country despite criticism of his human rights record and
clampdown on political dissent.

Mahathir was the first real politician to rise from the
grassroots to assume the top slot in Malaysia. All his
predecessors were civil servants who turned to politics.
Interestingly, when Malaysia got independence in 1957, it had
only 11 doctors, and two of those were Mahathir and his wife.

What is more important is that this political transition is
anchored in an institutional framework where personalities,
policies and performance have combined to erect a new Malaysia,
one that Mahathir envisions would join the ranks of the developed
nations under this "Vision 2020".

For the world at large, and for Muslims who are downright
demoralized these days, groping in the dark for magical formulas,
instant solutions to long-standing problems or messiahs thought
to serve as panacea for all ills, it would be instructive to
examine the basis of the Malaysian success story.

Why is it that Malaysia has succeeded where others, including
Pakistan, have failed? How come a state, a mixture of races and
religions, has been glued into a nation?

After all, Malaysia had to face a long-running communist
insurgency during its formative phase. A bigger neighbor,
Indonesia under Sukarno, threatened it with irredentist claims
plus a needless, mindless policy of konfrontasi or confrontation.

In 1969, the same year that the demise of the Ayub Khan regime
saw the beginnings of an enduring, chronic instability and ad-
hocism in Pakistan, Malaysia witnessed vicious racial riots
pitching the Malays against the ethnic Chinese.

Doomsday forecasts at the time predicted the unraveling of the
Malaysian federal experiment.

Those forecasts were proven wrong in the case of Malaysia, but
right in the case of Pakistan. The year 1971 saw Pakistan's
break-up in the wake of the failure to compromise both among
politicians and between the army and politicians.

What are some of the reasons behind the Malaysian success
story? After a recent visit to Malaysia, meetings with their
federal and provincial leaders plus intellectuals and
policymakers, five reasons are noteworthy.

First, it has had leaders with a vision to articulate and
implement policies.

For instance, they decided from Day One to make education
their number one priority, with mass literacy in three languages
in stages, mother tongue, Malay the main national language and
English, the official language.

And as one of their leaders put it, "we treated development as
providing security for our people, since it gave stakes and
rewards for all people in the system".

Second, the country tried to give a sense of participation to
people representing different segments of society, removing a
sense of alienation or deprivation.

For instance, one important base of support for the Communist
insurgency was the ethnic Chinese population, many of them
immigrants. The government weakened the insurgency's base by
giving citizenship to the Chinese Malaysians, providing them with
a stake in the system.

Third, they had the ability to learn from mistakes and not
repeat these, whether it was the insurgency or the race riots.

In Pakistan's case, even the capacity to new mistakes is not
there since old ones are repeated with the same results as
before.

Fourth, there is the role of Islam in a multi-racial and
multi-religious society.

With a 70 percent Muslim majority since Malays are dominant in
numbers and the power structure, Malaysia is relaxed about its
Islamic moorings, and mosques co-exist with Hindu mandirs, Sikh
gurdwaras and Buddhist temples.

There is no attempt to brand "the other" as kafir -- it is
strictly proscribed under the law -- and religions co-exist
peacefully.

Fifth, women, as an integral and important part of the
educated work force, play an active role in all areas of society.

Most Malay women sport the hijab as a voluntary act, not
imposed by the state. As in Iran, where women film directors have
flourished after the Islamic Revolution, in Malaysia productivity
is considerably enhanced by the richness and diversity of the
female labor force.

The Muslim world, as it gets ready to convene in Kuala Lumpur
for next month's Islamic summit, should learn lessons from the
Malaysian "model" -- one that has the potential to provide a way
out from the malaise afflicting Muslim societies.