Settling Dust: Lessons from Malaysia's Democratic Journey
Settling Dust Report: Kuala Lumpur (2024), ©JUST Impact
In the complex arena of Southeast Asian politics, Malaysia’s transition from a semi-authoritarian regime to a more democratic structure emerges as a remarkable case study, highlighting the challenges and realities of affecting real-terms change. As the country navigates it’s political metamorphosis, numerous questions arise:
Is this yet another false positive for global democracy?
Can grassroots social movements and civil society organisations truly alter a country’s political trajectory?
Can ideologies outweigh elite motivations in influencing democratic change?
To unpack these and other questions, recent political settlements research by JUST Impact co-founder Felix Brown delves into the undercurrents of the political, social, and ideological forces that propelled this change. Read his key takeaways below.
The bigger they are…
Since gaining independence in 1957, Malaysia's political narrative has been oriented around the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) — the immovable central body of the political solarsystem. Broadly characterised by its deft blend of authoritarian governance and ethnically-stratified policymaking, UMNO has long represented the conflicted gatekeeper of the Malaysian state.
At once a crude facsimile of national attitudes, and a necessary bulwark against ethnic conflict, UMNO was, simply put, there to stay. This era, often denoted by the enforcement of 'Ketuanan Melayu' (‘Malay supremacy’), affirmative action and rapid economic development, would set the stage for an inevitable political showdown — one that would not come to fruition for over six decades.
…the harder they fall.
In 2018 the UMNO government fell, and fell hard.
Change came in the largely unanticipated ascendancy of the Pakatan Harapan coalition. This was unexpected not only due to UMNO’s suffocating stranglehold on Malaysia’s internal media, but because electoral tampering and vote-buying had become so irrevocably entrenched in the political system, that change had almost become too impractical to manage through formal mechanisms.
As such, when Pakatan Harapan won by a landslide, many heralded a new progressive era for Malaysian politics; a long-awaited detachment from the pervasive challenges of ethnic division, and a rare chance for a fresh start.
However, while the opportunity was indeed substantial, the reality has been anything but simple.
It is worth noting of course, that Pakatan Harapan’s rise did not occur in a vacuum — indeed, it was referred to on several occasions as Malaysia’s ‘Political Tsunami’ — momentus and destructive. For JUST Impact however, this wave of change was not the result of a single seismic event, but the coalescence of various distinct circumstances that were triggered in short succession.
Causal Positioning of Civil Society and Social Movements (GE14) ©JUST Impact
What stands out in the Malaysian case, is how political change was seeded over the long term. PH’s objectives were closely intertwined with those of several prominent civil society organisations and grassroots movements, each of which gained serious traction amidst fierce resistance, operating over a long 20-year period. Notably, these included the Reformasi Movement (in the wake of now PH leader Anwar Ibrahim’s incarceration in the late 1990s), and BERSIH (the coalition for clean and fair elections).
This momentum peaked alongside the resurgence of Malaysia’s political heavyweight Mahathir Mohamed, and the ongoing spectre of the 1MDB scandal. While each of these events could easily fill several volumes of analysis themselves, important to note here is that each of these events converged with great consequence to the country’s political trajectory in Malaysia’s 14th General Election.
…so, is Malaysia democratic now?
…check back in later.
While it is undeniable that Anwar’s government carries a more progressive mandate than those previously in power, the practicalities of implementation and a waining political will have served to undermine the propensity for real-terms change.
Accordingly, the most optimistic commentaries of PH’s success have slowly begun to fade in the years since 2018.
Issues set in quickly in the immediate aftermath of the 14th General Election, with the government being largely preoccupied with peacekeeping and firefighting. That is to say, the regime change forced the collapse and re-emergence of PH, and the long-awaited ascendency of Anwar Ibrahim to the Prime Minister’s position in 2022, at the head of a highly conflicted ‘Unity Government’ — an unhappy coalition that includes both Pakatan Harapan and a bedraggled UMNO under one banner.
Since then, the much-needed equilibrium in Malaysia’s stormy political climate is still yet to be reached. Political contestation is rife (to the point of royal intervention), while patronage, personality politics, ethnic tensions and democratic demand all continue to loom large.
Calming the storm…
If advocates of democracy are to capitalise on firming up Malaysia’s political landscape, there are a number of key considerations to keep in mind:
Balance requires stability. While calls for wholesale reform are warranted, it is highly unlikely that the tumultuous foundation upon which the PH coalition subsists will successfully yield lasting democratic change. Malaysia’s political settlement presently rests upon the need for stability above all else. Pragmatic electoral reform appears to be the most fertile ground for democratic gain in the immediate future, while moderate change will require solid footing, and a more inclusive settlement. Time and effort is needed to unify and heal before greater reform can be pursued.
Roots run deep. After more than six-decades of uninterrupted rule by a single entity, the political system cannot be expected to deploy lasting change overnight. While it may be possible to adapt and enact new laws, policies and regulations, informal institutions of clientelism, patronage and personality politics will continue to feature heavily in political decision-making for the foreseeable future. Wholesale change will require concerted and consistent effort, not only from the ruling coalition, but also from the rich variety of civil society organisations and social movements that have historically acted as the standard bearers for universalist, democratic reform. Continued collaboration with civil society, as well as bridging the chasms to voters in the Malay heartlands, will therefore be critical to pursuing lasting reform for all Malaysians.
An elite idea? Malaysian politics has long been aligned with the wishes of prominent elites, entrenched by colonial histories, and largely defined by ethno-religious ties. However, as universalist ideology continues to simmer within the country, deep-rooted understandings of ethnic relations may once again bubble closer to the surface. Our research shows that democratising ideas within Malaysia have gained support amongst the electorate by moving beyond elite interests — and it is therefore by cultivating these burgeoning attitudes with close reference to grassroots movements and societal attitudes that lasting change may be affected beyond elite interference.
To understand more about the macro-dominant issues of Malaysian politics that have led to these conclusions, the full research report is available to professionals acting across political science, development and Southeast Asian studies.
If you would like to read the full analysis, or think your organisation may benefit from a similar piece of independent research, please get in touch.
Please cite as: Brown, F (2024). Settling Dust: Lessons from Malaysia’s Democratic Journey, JUST Impact Blog Archive.
