WORLD NEWS EVERY DAY
US Attempting “Regime Change” in Malaysia: Fact or Fiction?
US Attempting “Regime Change” in Malaysia: Fact or Fiction?
As the South-East Asian nation of Malaysia prepares for
general elections, distrust of the political opposition and accusations
of foreign interference have been major talking points in the political
frequencies emanating from Kuala Lumpur. The United Malays National
Organization (UMNO) leads the country’s ruling coalition, Barisan
Nasional, and has maintained power since Malaysian independence in 1957.
One of Malaysia’s most recognizable figures is former Prime Minister
Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, who has been credited with ushering in large-scale
economic growth and overseeing the nation’s transition from an exporter
of palm oil, tin, and other raw materials, into an industrialized
economy that manufactures automobiles and electronic goods.
The opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat, is headed by
Anwar Ibrahim, who once held the post of Deputy Prime Minister in
Mahathir’s administration, but was sacked over major disagreements on
how to steer Malaysia’s economy during the 1997 Asian financial crisis.
Today, the political climate in Malaysia is highly polarized and a
sense of unpredictability looms over the nation. Malaysia’s current
leader, Prime Minister Najib Razak, has pursued a reform-minded agenda
by repealing authoritarian legislation of the past and dramatically
loosening controls on expression and political pluralism introduced
under Mahathir’s tenure. Najib has rolled back Malaysia’s Internal
Security Act, which allowed for indefinite detention without trial, and
has liberalized rules regarding the publication of books and newspapers.
During Malaysia’s 2008 general elections, the ruling Barisan Nasional
coalition experienced its worst result in decades, with the opposition
Pakatan Rakyat coalition winning 82 parliamentary seats. For the first
time, the ruling party was deprived of its two-thirds parliamentary
majority, which is required to pass amendments to Malaysia’s Federal
Constitution. In the run-up to elections scheduled to take place before
an April 2013 deadline, figures from all sides of the political spectrum
are asking questions about the opposition’s links to foreign-funders in
Washington.
 |
|
Protestors form a human chain in the city center of Kuala Lumpur during April 2012 protests in support of the Bersih coalition.
|
The question of foreign-funding
Malaysia’s former PM Dr. Mahathir Mohamad has long captured the ire
of officials from Washington and Tel Aviv, and though he’s retired, he
has channeled his energies into the Perdana Global Peace Foundation,
which recently hosted an international conference in Kuala Lumpur
calling for a new investigation into the events of 9/11 and has sought
to investigate war crimes committed in Gaza, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Mahathir has been an ardent critic of Israel and organizations such as
AIPAC, and has recently accused US-based organizations the National
Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the Open Society Institute (OSI) of
holding a concealed intention to influence Malaysia’s domestic politics
through the funding of local NGOs and groups directly linked to Anwar
Ibrahim’s Pakatan Rakyat opposition coalition.
In an article the former prime minister published in the New Straits Times, a leading mainstream newspaper,
Mahathir accuses financier George Soros and
his organization, the Open Society Institute, of “promoting democracy”
in Eastern Europe to pave the way for colonization by global finance
capital. Mahathir acknowledges how OSI pumped millions into opposition
movements and independent media in Hungary, Ukraine and Georgia under
the guise of strengthening civil society, only to have like-minded
individuals nominated by Soros’s own foundation come to power in those
countries.
The former prime minister
has also pointed to how Egypt
(prior to Mohamad Morsi taking power) has cracked down on NGOs
affiliated with NED, namely groups such as the National Democratic
Institute, the International Republican Institute (IRI) and Freedom
House, which are all recipients of funding from the US State Department.
In Malaysia, high-profile NGOs and media outlets have admittedly
received funding from OSI and satellite organizations of NED. Premesh
Chandran, the CEO of the nation’s most prominent alternative media
outlet, Malaysiakini, is a grantee of George Soros’s Open Society
Foundations and launched the news organization with a $100,000 grant
from the Bangkok-based Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA), another
organization with dubious affiliations to the US State Department.
Malaysiakini has
come under pressure from
local journalists for the lack of transparency in its financial
management and hesitance in revealing the value of its shares.
Additionally, Suaram, an NGO promoting human rights, has borne heavy
criticism over its funding and organizational structure. The Companies
Commission of Malaysia
launched investigations into
Suara Inisiatif Sdn Bhd, a private company linked to Suaram, and found
it to be a conduit for money being used to channel funds from NED.
Suaram has been instrumental in legitimizing allegations of a possible
cover-up of the murder of a Mongolian fashion model, Altantuya
Shaaribuu, who was living in Malaysia in 2006 and associated with
government officials that have been linked to a kickback scandal
involving the government’s purchase of submarines from France. Senator
Ezam Mohd Nor, himself a recipient of Suaram’s Human Rights Award,
has accused the organization of employing poor research methods and attempting to disparage the government:
“Malaysians have the right to feel suspicious about them.
They have been making personal allegations against the Prime Minister
[Najib Razak] on the murder of Altantuya and many other cases without
proof… their motive is very questionable especially when they are more
inclined towards ridiculing and belittling the ruling government.”
The German Embassy in KL has
reportedly admitted that
it has provided funds to Suaram’s project in 2010. Malaysia’s Foreign
Minister Anifah Aman followed by making strong statements to the German
Ambassador and declared that Germany’s actions could be viewed as
interference in the domestic affairs of a sovereign state.
Since 2007, Bersih, an association of NGOs calling itself the
Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections, staged three street protests in
which thousands of yellow-clad demonstrators took to the streets in
Kuala Lumpur demanding electoral reform. After coming under heavy
scrutiny for obfuscating funding sources, Bersih coalition leader Ambiga
Sreenevasan
admitted that
her organization receives funding from the National Democratic
Institute and the Open Society Institute. Sreenevasan herself has been
the recipient of the US State Department’s Award for International Women
of Courage, and
was present in Washington
DC in 2009 to receive the award directly from the hands of Michelle
Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. While Sreenevasan’s
organization claimed to be non-partisan and apolitical, members of
Malaysia’s political opposition openly endorsed the movement, and some
were even present at the demonstrations.
Anatomy of Malaysia’s political opposition
Malaysia is a multi-cultural and multi-religious state, and both the
ruling and opposition parties attempt to represent the nation’s three
largest ethnic groups. Approximately 60 per cent of Malaysians are
either ethnic Malay or other indigenous groups and are mostly listed as
Muslim, while another 25 per cent are ethnic Chinese who are
predominantly Buddhist, with 7 per cent mostly Hindu Indian-Malaysians.
The United Malays National Organization, the Malaysian Chinese
Association, and the Malaysian Indian Congress head Barisan Nasional.
The opposition, Pakatan Rakyat, currently controls four state
governments and is led by Anwar Ibrahim’s Keadilan Rakyat, the
Chinese-led Democratic Action Party (DAP), and staunchly Islamist
Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS).
While a large percentage of urbanites with legitimate grievances are
quick to acknowledge the government’s shortcomings, many are hesitant to
back Anwar Ibrahim due to his connections with neo-conservative
thinkers in Washington and general disunity within the opposition.
Ibrahim maintains close ties with senior US officials and organizations
such as the National Endowment for Democracy. In 2005, Ibrahim chaired
the Washington-based Foundation for the Future, established and funded
by the US Department of State at the behest of Elizabeth Cheney, the
daughter of then-Vice President Dick Cheney, thanks in large part to his
cozy relationship with Paul Wolfowitz.
While Ibrahim was on trial for allegedly engaging in sodomy with a
male aide (something he was later acquitted of), Wolfowitz and former US
Vice-President Al Gore
authored a joint opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal in support of Ibrahim, while the Washington Post published
an editorial calling
for consequences that would affect Malaysia’s relations with Washington
if Ibrahim was to be found guilty. Ibrahim enraged many when
he stated that he would support
policy to protect the security of Israel in an interview with the Wall
Street Journal; this is particularly controversial in Malaysia, where
support for Palestine is largely unanimous. Malaysian political
scientist Dr. Chandra Muzaffar
writes:
“It is obvious that by acknowledging the primacy of
Israeli security, Anwar was sending a clear message to the deep state
and to Tel Aviv and Washington that he is someone that they could trust.
In contrast, the Najib government, in spite of its attempts to get
closer to Washington, remains critical of Israeli aggression and
intransigence. Najib has described the Israeli government as a ‘serial
killer’ and a ‘gangster’”.
Members of Barisan Nasional
have addressed Ibrahim’s
connections to the National Endowment for Democracy in the Malaysian
Parliament, including his participation in NED’s ‘Democracy Award’ event
held in Washington DC in 2007. Independent journalists have
uncovered letters written
by Anwar Ibrahim, two of which were sent to NED President Carl Gershman
in Washington DC that discussed sending an international election
observer team to Malaysia and general issues related to electoral
reform. A third letter was sent to George Soros, expressing interest in
collaborating with an accountability firm headed by Ibrahim. Pakatan
Rakyat’s Communications Director, Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad,
verified the
authenticity of the documents. This should come as little surprise, as
Ibrahim’s economic policies have historically aligned with institutions
such as the IMF and World Bank, in contrast to Mahathir, whose
protectionist economic policies opposed international financial
institutions and allowed Malaysia to navigate and largely resurface from
the 1997 Asian financial crisis unscathed.
An issue that concerns secular and non-Muslim Malaysian voters is the
role of the Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) as part of the opposition. In
sharp contrast to the moderate brand of Islam preached by UMNO, the
organization’s primary objective is the founding of an Islamic state.
The PAS has spoken of working within the framework of Malaysia’s
parliamentary democracy, but holds steadfast to implementing sharia law
on a national scale, which would lead to confusing implications for
Malaysia’s sizable non-Muslim population. The debate around the
implementation of Islamic hudud penal code is something that other
Pakatan Rakyat coalition members, such as figures in the Chinese-led
Democratic Action Party, have been unable to agree on. The PAS enjoys
support from rural Malay Muslims in conservative states such as Kedah,
Kelantan and Terengganu in northern Malaysia, though they have very
limited appeal to urbanites. While certain individuals in PAS have
raised questions about NGOs receiving foreign funding, Mahathir has
insinuated that PAS’s leadership has been largely complicit:
“They [foreign interests] want to topple the government
through the demonstration and Nik Aziz [Spiritual leader of PAS] said it
is permissible to bring down the government in this manner. They want
to make Malaysia like Egypt, Tunisia, which were brought down through
riots and now Syria…. when the government does not fall, they [Pakatan
Rakyat] can appeal to the foreign power to help and bring down, even if
it means using fire power.”
 |
|
Despite claims of being non-partisan and
unaffiliated with any political party, the country’s main opposition
leader, Anwar Ibrahim, fully endorsed the Bersih movement.
|
Feasibility of ‘regime change’ narrative
It must be acknowledged that the current administration led by Prime
Minister Najib Razak has made great strides toward improving relations
with Washington.
At a meeting with
President Barack Obama in 2010, Najib offered Malaysia’s assistance to
cooperate with the United States to engage the Muslim world; Najib also
expressed willingness to deploy Malaysian aid personnel to Afghanistan,
and allegedly agreed on the need to maintain a unified front on Iran’s
nuclear program. Najib has employed a Washington-based public relations
firm, APCO, to improve Malaysia’s image in the US and has seemingly
embraced American economic leadership of the region
through his support for
the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. Some would argue that
Najib is perhaps the most pro-American leader Malaysia has ever had – a
stark contrast to the boldness of Mahathir. Despite Najib having good
rapport with formal Western leaders, it is clear with whom the
thank-tank policy architects, Zionist lobbies, and foundation fellows
have placed their loyalties.
Sentiment among Malaysia’s youth and “pro-democracy” activists, who
constitute a small but vocal minority, tend be entirely dismissive of
the ‘regime change’ narrative, viewing it as pre-election diversionary
rhetoric of the ruling party. While bogeymen of the Zionist variety are
often invoked in Malaysian political discourse, it would be negligent to
ignore the effects of Washington-sponsored ‘democracy promotion’ in the
global context, which have in recent times cloaked mercenary elements
and insurgents in the colors of freedom fighting, and successfully
masked geopolitical restructuring and the ushering in of neo-liberal
capitalism with the hip and fashionable vigor of ‘people power’ coups.
As the United States continues to militarily increase its presence in
the Pacific region in line with its strategic policy-shift to East Asia,
policy makers in Washington would like to see compliant heads of state
who will act to further American interests in the ASEAN region.
Let’s not ignore the elephant in the room; the real purpose of
America’s resurgence of interest in the ASEAN bloc is to fortify the
region as a counterweight against Beijing. The defense ministries of
Malaysia and China held a landmark defense and security consultation in
September 2012, in addition to frequent bilateral state visits and
enhanced economic cooperation. It was the father of the current leader,
Malaysia’s second Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak, who made the landmark
visit to Beijing to normalize relations in 1974, and under his son
Najib, Sino-Malaysian relations and cooperation have never been better.
Following the global economic crisis of 2008, Najib looked to Beijing to
revive Malaysia’s export oriented economy, emphasizing increased
Chinese investment into Malaysia and expanding the base of
Sino-Malaysian trade in areas like education and student exchange,
finance, infrastructure development, science and technology, yielding
lucrative and mutually beneficial results. China has been Malaysia’s
largest trade partner, with trade figures reaching US$90 billion in
2011; Malaysia is China’s largest trading partner among ASEAN nations.
In asking the question of regime change in Malaysia, Dr. Chandra Muzaffar
reflects on Washington’s moves to bolster its military muscle and dominance over the Asia-Pacific region:
“Establishing a military base in Darwin [Australia],
resurrecting the US’ military alliance with the Philippines, coaxing
Japan to play a more overt military role in the region, instigating
Vietnam to confront China over the Spratly Islands, and encouraging
India to counterbalance Chinese power, are all part and parcel of the
larger US agenda of encircling and containing China. In pursuing this
agenda, the US wants reliable allies – not just friends – in Asia. In
this regard, Malaysia is important because of its position as a littoral
state with sovereign rights over the Straits of Malacca, which is one
of China’s most critical supply routes that transports much of the oil
and other materials vital for its economic development. Will the
containment of China lead to a situation where the hegemon, determined
to perpetuate its dominant power, seek to exercise control over the
Straits in order to curb China’s ascendancy? Would a trusted ally in
Kuala Lumpur facilitate such control? The current Malaysian leadership
does not fit the bill.”
‘Backwards’ and forwards
Pakatan Rakyat, the main opposition coalition pitted against the
ruling party, has yet to offer a fully coherent organizational program,
and if the coalition ever came to power, the disunity of its component
parties and their inability to agree on fundamental policies would be
enough to conjure angrier, disenchanted youth back on to the streets, in
larger numbers perhaps. What is ticklishly ironic about reading op-eds
penned by the likes of Wolfowitz and Al Gore, and how they laud Malaysia
as a progressive and moderate model Islamic state, is that they
concurrently demonize its leadership and dismiss them authoritarian
thugs. Surely, the ruling coalition has its shortcomings; the
politicization of race and religion, noted cases of corrupt officials
squandering funds, etc. – but far too few, especially those of the
middle-class who benefit most from energy subsides, acknowledge the
tremendous economic growth achieved under the current leadership and the
success of their populist policies. Najib’s administration would do
well to place greater emphasis on addressing the concerns of Malaysia’s
minorities who view affirmative action policies given to Malay
ethnicities as disproportionate; income status, not ethnicity, should be
a deciding factor in who receives assistance. The current
administration appears set to widen populist policies that make
necessities affordable through subsides and continue to assist
low-income earners with cash handouts.
Najib has acknowledged the need for broad reforms of Malaysia’s
state-owned enterprises over concerns that crony capitalism may deter
foreign investment; this should be rolled out concurrently with programs
to foster more local entrepreneurship. To put it bluntly, the
opposition lacks confidence from the business community and foreign
investors; even the likes of JP Morgan
have issued statements of
concern over an opposition win. It should be noted that if Islamists
ever wielded greater influence in Malaysia under an opposition
coalition, one could imagine a sizable exodus of non-Muslim minorities
and a subsequent flight of foreign capital, putting the nation’s economy
in a fragile and fractured state. And yet, the United States has poured
millions into ‘democracy promotion’ efforts to strengthen the influence
of NGOs that distort realities and cast doubt over the government’s
ability to be a coherent actor.
Malaysia does not have the kind of instability that warrants overt
external intervention; backing regime-change efforts may only go so far
as supporting dissidents and groups affiliated with Anwar Ibrahim. No
matter the result of the upcoming elections, Najib appears to have
played ball enough for Washington to remain more or less neutral.
According to Bersih coalition leader Ambiga Sreenevasan, Malaysia’s
electoral process is so restrictive that a mass movement like Bersih is
required to purge the system of its backwardness. These are curious
statements, considering that the opposition gained control of four out
of 13 states in 2008, including Selangor, a key economic state with the
highest GDP and most developed infrastructure.
In response,
Najib has adhered to Bersih’s demands and has called for electoral
reform, forming a parliamentary select committee comprising members from
both Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional. As elections loom, Bersih
coalition leader Ambiga Sreenavasan is
already dubbing them “the dirtiest elections ever seen” – unsurprising rhetoric from a woman being handed her talking points by the US embassy.
