Malaysia’s West And East Dilemma

Malaysia’s participation in the recent APEC Summit has
seen the strong stance on the Palestinian issue being
projected. In navigating the expected implications on this
stance, Malaysia has also reiterated its conventional
position on neutrality and firmly and fiercely aligning with
its own non-aligned stance and refraining to take a side,
and condemning the bloc rivalry and bipolar
divide.

Malaysia has for decades adherently stuck to
its neutrality stance, with bouts of hedging and balancing
in trying to adjust and accommodate the different facets of
security architectures and challenges. The rapid changes in
regional threats and the prospects of looming high intensity
conflicts render this past fixation on this concept to be
risky.

The urgency of threats is not determined by
past or current trajectories alone, as threat settings
evolve in a spectrum of rapidly shifting triggers and
miscalculations. When push comes to shove, national survival
and sovereignty reign supreme, and this model is the
ultimate priority for all countries. The need to align with
a proven track record of norms abiding and rules adherence
is not only strategic, it remains critical in ensuring long
term peace and security assurances. Being non-aligned brings
the worst outcome, as neither side will provide the best
returns and when a full blown conflict is triggered, it is
too late to start posturing.

The risks of being
neutral supersede the risks of taking sides, especially when
prospects for conflicts increase and internal deterrent
capacity is insufficient. Regional scrambles to shore up
assurances and support have seen the likes of Tokyo, Seoul,
Manila, Hanoi and Jakarta all ramping up their efforts to
bolster their external partnerships and alliances and in
maximising returns on their security and defence
postures.

Taking a Long Term Principled
Stance

The great power shift is not necessarily
flowing from West to East, it is a misconception to argue
that the West is now on the decline and the future belongs
to the East in an Asian century. The long term resilience
and strategic fundamentals of the West, especially in a
value based approach and a sustainable progressive
leadership in hard and soft power dominance and economic and
technological spectrum, are enduring and
consistent.

Being neutral would only create greater
leverage to external powers in seizing upon this to up their
carrot and stick approaches and existing measures including
economic coercion and potential blackmail and grey zone
tactics which have been happening to the region and other
countries for years.

A credible and direct deterrent
capacity based on external partnership and alliance will
transcend beyond the efforts and impact of building one’s
own internal hard power capacity, which will take years and
decades to be fully impactful.

Even in Asia, there is
no single Asian solidarity framework or spirit, it is still
fragmented based on historical discord and animosity, and
there is no Asean regional spirit either, as it is still
divided by mutual mistrust and distrust.

In forming
and choosing a trusted and value based partnership, the
principles of freedom, rule of law and democracy form the
ultimate parameters. From Japan to India, the arch of
democracy and adherence to a rules based order is the
foundation of a credible, solid and dependable axis of
alliance that value mutually beneficial policy returns on
trade, investment, resources, supply chain, energy and food
security, which will translate into the priority of assured
security and defence support in all levels of the
field.

We are no longer in the era of the Cold War
where being neutral can safeguard one from direct economic
or hard power implications. For this current security
entanglement, no one can be safe or be shielded from the
fallout of the regional and global disorder and conflicts.
To minimise the implications, the least one can do is to
build a new integrated economic and security bulwark that is
based on long term values, trust and principles pillared on
the moral high ground and not on easy, cheap and short term
addictive reliance on easy sources and resources that can
entrap one’s future options.

New Economic Model
Transition

Malaysia is facing a critical crossroads
where a strategic and holistic shift and transformation in
our economic model, based on high impact and high income and
assured long term assurance in a knowledge based and high
technology economy, is needed. The US and India have the
most favourable demographic and future economic advantage in
the long game. New Delhi is already in Malaysia’s top ten
trading partners and is projected to be the world’s third
biggest economic power by 2028. Both India and the US still
have their best years and decades ahead in terms of economic
sustainability parameters of a booming and young demographic
advantage, and progressive and sustainable scientific and
high technology capacity in driving consistent economic
tiers and maturity in outcome and returns.

In 2022,
the US, Singapore, and Japan contributed to the highest net
inflows of foreign direct investments to Malaysia, each
amounting to approximately 37.8 billion, 11.3 billion and
9.6 billion Malaysian ringgit respectively. All three
represent the pillars of a values-based economic model which
is based on trust and track record of consistency and
spillover communal impact from the investments.

It is
critical to portray a new shift in the country’s business,
trade and economic climate that is underscored by the
commitment to adhere to these new values, away from the
conventional dogma of low value economic multiplier chain
and in creating new frontiers of trusted high impact,
durable and tangible economic spillover impact on the
people. This will correct the state development gap, address
demographic barriers, propel social mobility and resolve
hardcore poverty with subsequent solutions in breaking the
middle income trap.

Capitalising on Malaysia’s
future economic potential by leveraging on its geostrategic
advantage of being the next epicentre of trade, investment
and manufacturing hub in seizing upon the exodus of top
firms from China and the efforts by the West to shore up its
quest for supply chain, food and energy security and
critical technology resilience, we must remain wise and
strategic in bolstering our chips and cards and align with
the future advantages of the yet to mature economic and
socio-demographic boom of the US, India and parts of
Europe.

Staying Power of the West vs Perceived
Decline

The US and the West have been wrongly
perceived to be in decline, but future trends and prospects
hold them to be more advantageous and reliable based on
traditionally held values and prospects in demography and
economic and technology resilience and maintenance of
unmatched strength in hard power and , hold more prospect
with future lasting demographic capacity and expanded
alliance of allies and high technological advancement with
values.

The strength of the US economic power has been
very much wrongly perceived and undervalued, and this will
prove to be a big strategic mistake for regional
players.

Projections of China overtaking the US as the
world’s biggest economy have faltered repeatedly, first
thought to happen in 2018, followed by a revised projection
to 2020 and again extended to 2030 and beyond. More
analytical arguments and reports have surfaced that it might
not happen at all.

The perpetual rise of China and its
long term consistency are not inevitable, and the much
perceived Western and American decline is not cast in stone.
The future is not necessarily being led by the perceived
boom of the economy and standing of the Global South or the
BRICs, and to ignore the resilient and consistency of the
Western led economic framework and bulwark of future growth
and returns will be a strategic mistake.

China’s
long term economic prospect is declining, and the various
current and medium term indicators have been discouraging.
The internal structural economic cracks, led by the
Evergrande and Country Garden debt crises, the long term
demographic crisis with the ageing society and rising youth
unemployment and disconnect as mirrored in the tai
ping movement where young people are increasingly giving
up on their career and dream prospects all create future
chain fallout on regional economies, especially in existing
projects in the country. Debt trap from mega BRI projects
and potential geopolitical and economic risks as in the
examples of the Iskandar Puteri and ECRL create future
risks. Malaysia’s economic structure must undergo high
technology reform and transformation, and can no longer rely
on conventional cheap capital and reliance on volume driven
capacity.

Quality technology, trust and confidence and
reliable structure in key critical sectors including digital
and communications network, semiconductors and new energy
and green and digital economy must be strategically focused
and this involves the reliance on the future of Western
technology and economic drive. The Huawei 5G concerns remain
a case in point. Value based economy and foreign policy
based on rules based order and a free and open Indo Pacific
remain critical to Malaysia as a maritime and trading
nation, and this involves the need to have strong and
credible security and defence capabilities and a solid
bulwark of deterrence capacity.

The US and the West
currently provide this assurance of defence and deterrence
that are vital for Malaysia’s future sovereignty
especially in facing the risks in South China Sea and the
fallout and chain impact of future Taiwan tensions.
Increasing volatility and future uncertainties in South
China Sea with a potentiality of greater bellicosity from
China which might impact on our oil and gas resources and
the potential of economic tool being used as can be seen in
the case of Australia and East Europe all provide risks if
we are too entangled or in maintaining the perceived need to
get the best of both worlds.

Time for Wise New
Reality Check

Malaysia will have to be wary of being
too quick to jump into the bandwagon of de-dollarisation and
being overly extensive in the overtures to the Global South
or the anti West stance and movement.

The entrenched
bipolar rivalry means that Malaysia cannot afford to get the
best of both worlds, and it would even create a lose-lose
situation where we risk our defence and security commitment
and support with the US which will render our security
weakened and at the same time risk facing a dwindling
economic returns from China or a new security and policy
orientation from China.

Malaysia’s defence needs
will still be predominantly pillared on the goodwill and
support of the US in times of real conflicts, and our
biggest deterrence capacity will still come from the support
from the West and traditional allies especially Japan,
Middle East and others.

Kuala Lumpur will need to have
a strategic long term reorientation of its economic
fundamentals, especially on ensuring a dependable and
sustainable external economic dependence. Current ingrained
argument that the next century of growth will be in Asia,
and that the Asian Century will be led by the Chinese
Economic Century and thus the inevitability of the
country’s main economic entanglement with the next
economic giant, remains a flawed and risky calculation. This
notion that the West and the US have lost their economic
lustre, and left with just the capacity as the security
provider, has reverberated far and wide, and has been
accepted as the primary driver in shaping the region and the
nation’s future policy considerations.

As the rest
of the world has realised the future risks of a slowing and
a declining Chinese economy, and cognisant of the resilience
of the conventional economic powers of the West and new
rising powers including India, the region however, is still
trapped by the perpetual economic dogma that limits options
and responses in facing renewed security
threats.

Malaysia remains a middle power, and does not
have the capacity to self-generate enough credible
deterrence other than diplomatic and dialogue reliance.
Being a small to middle power requires credible, smart and
strategic external assurances and support.

Building
effective alliance and support will need time and trust and
integration of efforts and interoperability of assets and
capacity. It now remains stuck in the dogma of tacit
responses and portraying conflicting and grey zone messaging
spectrum by not stating clearly its stance and orientations.
On one hand it yearns for counterbalancing measures and
support from the West to deter aggression in the region, but
it is not stated publicly. On the other, it remains subdued
by the overwhelming external pressure and presence in the
region on hard power and economic realms.

Malaysia
needs a new model of power relations and security and
defence bulwark of assurance in the region, and Malaysia is
in a strategic position to form a deeper security
partnership with critical partners apart from the US
particularly Tokyo, Seoul, New Delhi and
Canberra.

Amidst friendshoring initiatives and
decoupling and de-risking ventures, Malaysia needs to have
its own version of all-of-nation integrated strategic
responses.

© Scoop Media