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.