Rethinking the Reform Agenda for a New Age

By OOI KEE BENG, for The Edge FORUM: Picking on the Present. 25 -31 May 2024.

WE ALL AGREE that the world has changed greatly in recent centuries, accelerating in the last decades to such a degree that it is now almost impossible to isolate and identify dynamics of change well enough for us to give them proper names.

Information and Communication Technologies is one area of change; they alter the nature of how we connect, communicate and ‘cancel’ so forcefully that nobody’s life today is immune to them. These involve high-speed changes, and we adapt to whatever comes along faster than we understand how we are being transformed.

We are going cashless, businesses rely more and more on online possibilities, and governance is being quickly digitalised in the hope that it will increase efficacy and transparency and minimise graft and incompetence.

The global economy—capital flows, goods and services logistics, and human mobility—is being altered as often as press conferences by leaders are being held. Wars in Europe, the Middle East and Africa offer no end in sight, and polarised geopolitical propaganda has undermined the credibility of most mass media outlets.

In the midst of such tremendous speeds of change at all levels, what does it mean for Malaysia to have a reformist government? We have a Unity Government fixated on the vague notion of “Malaysia Madani”, whose core coalition—Pakatan Harapan—continues with a self-image of being reformist. Not being strong enough to hold power, it relies on its old archenemy—UMNO—to remain in power, and it has to offer overrepresentation on all fronts to the East Malaysians, especially given the fact that the national opposition is largely an Islamist one, something anathema to the majority population in Sabah and Sarawak.

Ever since it was offered power in November 2022 by the Agung, this Unity Government has suffered from an apparent sense of insecurity. This could have as much to do with political timidity as with flagging conviction over the worth and viability of reforms, over priorities in governance, and over the significance of formal reforms.

The world as it was at the turn of the century is very unlike the one we have today. Environmental issues are now much more pressing, the unipolar world which made geopolitical analyses easy is practically gone, the glory years of Malaysian global prominence in the 1990s are but a vague memory unknown to the young. Back then, technological plans had yet to picture the iPhone, let alone the AI possibilities of today.

Technology has transformed social norms beyond imagination. Malaysia’s young now communicate on social media, seek knowledge not from older people but from the latest websites, and imagine activism in the form of clicks and likes, not sweaty street marches, and they get riled up over sensational news rather than ideological views.

The War on Terror has come and gone, and global military conflicts today are located dangerously at the borders of Russia and of Israel, and in the Sudan, among other places. Where East Asia is concerned, we are confronted with the possibility of a mistake being made over Taiwan that could lead to open warfare in our region.

China’s growth, though strong in the late 1990s, was nowhere as impressive as it has become since then. Its economic strength today has shaken successive US administrations. The Americans are no longer seen as champions of free trade, or as an unchallenged superpower. On the contrary, being forced to reveal its hidden tools of power by the Ukraine War, its secret networks of power by the Gaza conflict, and its deep insecurities by the rise of China, America’s soft power has never been as weak as it is today, not since the Second World War.

Trade tensions between the US and China rising at the same time as the Covid-19 pandemic hit has left most of humanity anxious and suspicious. The confidence we once had in how international trade would bring prosperity and peace to the world if done right is practically gone. All fronts are now potential conflict zones, including international trade, currency exchange and manufacturing.

Supply chains have been shaken, and new strategies have come into being to minimise risks. “Decoupling” and “de-risking” have appeared as early symptoms of multipolarity, not of an integrative network but of an international economy divided into at least two parts, and as strategies for the upkeep of Pax Americana.

Where lies Malaysia in all of this? It took long enough for the Reformasi movement to come to power, and even then in a deeply compromised fashion, and a price has to be paid for that.

Young activists are now middle-aged at best, and old activists are, well, older. Their calls for reforms lack conviction, and their passion for change tempered by experience and age.

There is definitely a great need for a rethink of what is desirable and what is possible. How should national reforms connect to the changed global scene, and to the greatly altered domestic situation? In fact, how capable is the Unity Government in carrying out reforms. Does it have the power or the thinking capability to follow through?

Does the changing global scene not require a restrategising of the directions for reforms? Old wine sits badly in new bottles, so perhaps more effort should be given towards imagining what new opportunities are on offer today.

Indeed, what new opportunities are on offer? As any undergraduate in business studies will tell you, it’s all about “location, location, location”. And Malaysia is so well located today in geo-economics that it is quite embarrassing. We are right at the heart of ASEAN, we are right in the path of some of the world’s most trafficked seas, we are culturally both Asian and Western, and we have been a key producer of key products for a long time. We are also a manufacturing giant.

As has finally been noted in the international press, Malaysia, especially Penang, is now a major international hub for the production of electronic chips, thanks to the trade war. This was unexpected by most people, but this nevertheless now offers the country a chance to leap—out of the middle income trap, out of its political straitjacket, and out of its nation-building doldrums.

It would serve the Unity Government well to put aside the old ideas of reforms for now—it has not cared about them much anyway. Time waits for no one, especially not a hesitant reform programme. Malaysia will simply have to pull out all the stops in responding to global demands for Malaysian manufactures and primary products. Beefing up labour skills through reforms in immigration rules, in taxation, and in education, will provide immediate solutions for the production lines, and bring high-skill jobs into the country.

Furthermore, industrial strategies that synergise the country’s manufacturing, logistical and political strengths and assets, will be needed to make the most of the new situation. Geo-economic conditions, and not domestic economics alone, offer opportunities for the country to free itself from introverted policymaking, racial bullying, and systemic traumas.

Building on the new economic impulses coming Malaysia’s way on the cusp of global multipolarity could mean the systemic genesis of a vibrant and confident Malaysia 2.0.

Dato’ Dr Ooi Kee Beng is the Executive Director of Penang Institute, and Senior Visiting Fellow at ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute. His latest book is Signals in the Noise. Notes on Penang, Malaysia and the World (Singapore: Faction Press. 2023). Homepage: wikibeng.com.