AUFB 5101

MEJ ANUAR TUDM&

LT CDR RASHID

Tutorial Gp 2

WHAT ARE THE FACTORS THAT DETERMINE

MALAYSIA’S FOREIGN POLICY

REFERENCES

• Ruhanas Harun, Malaysia’s Foreign Relations: Issue and Challenges, University Malaya Press, 2006

• Johan Saravanamuttu, The Dilemma of Independence: Two Decades of M’sia’s Foreign Policy 1957-1977, Penang: Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia, 1983

• Mohd Yusof Ahmad, Continuity and Change in Malaysia’s Foreign Policy, 1981-1986, unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Tufts University, 1990

• G.K.A Kumaraseri, Professional Diplomacy and Foreign Affairs Management: The Malaysia Experience, Petaling Jaya, Pelanduk Publications,1992

• Mohd Azhari Karim, Malaysia Foreign Policy : Issues and Perspective, Kuala Lumpur :National Institute of Public Administration, 1990

SCOPE• INTRODUCTION

• FACTORS DETERMINE MFP

• HISTORICAL APPROACH OF MFP

• CONCLUSION

• DISCUSSION

• ‘…‘…the instrument designed to protect and the instrument designed to protect and promote Malaysia’s National interests at promote Malaysia’s National interests at the international level. Foreign policy in the international level. Foreign policy in short is the extension of the socio-short is the extension of the socio-economic and other policies that have economic and other policies that have been carried out by the governmentbeen carried out by the government……’ ’

Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, 2004Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, 2004

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of MFP is to protect and promote Purpose of MFP is to protect and promote national interestnational interest

In studying FP of Third World countries we must stress the importance of nat. needs as a constant dimension in policy formulation.

Thus for M’sia, a small size, low level military capability and its narrowed based, largely primary-producing but industrializing econ,

Its two major external concerns: defence and security within its borders and stabilization of its external revenues deriving from two or three commodities (rubber, palm oil, petroleum)

Malaysia’s Foreign Policy

Changes & continuity in MFP is an indicative of M’sia continual efforts to seek new ways of promoting & achieving its nat. interests & goals

Meaning MFP is something constantly adjusted & attuned to domestic needs of the country

Changes, shift & continuity in MFP cannot be solely a function of domestic concern, because often the impetus for changes comes from external environment of the state

FACTORS DETERMINING MFP

• ECO-HISTORICAL (geographical, demographical & historical)

• EXTERNAL ASPECT (external environment determinants)

• DOMESTIC ELEMENT (social,political,economic etc)

• IDIOSYNCRATIC ELEMENT (change in leadership)

UNDERSTANDING MFP

• Approach that can provide us with insight into MFP its formulation & implementation included.

Historical Approach –this perspective stresses chronological reading of policies from one PM to another. Highlights crucial themes of MFP from independence onwards. We could also relate how external & domestic environment have shaped MFP in order to realise the possible moves to ensure the country’s continued independence & stability.

HISTORICAL APPROACH OF MFP

Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al Haj

(1957-1969)Tun Abdul Razak Hussein (1970 – 1976)Tun Hussein Onn (1976-1981)Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad (1981-2003)Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (2003-2009)

MFP Under Tunku Issues that affected the direction of

MFP under Tunku included: The formation of M’sia Philippines’ claim on Sabah The confrontation with Indonesia The separation of S’pore from M’sia

Tunku’s proposal for a Federation of M’sia, S’pore, North Borneo & possibly Brunei in 1961 was denounced by Indonesia as being a neo-Colonialist’ & ‘neo-Imperialists’ plan. In July 1963, Indonesia announced a policy of ‘Confrontation’ against M’sia.

o Philippines opposed the formation of M’sia & laid her claim on Sabah

o The dominant elements of MFP during this time were pro-British & anti-Communist. Most of M’sian pol. elite, diplomats were educated, trained & socialised in Britain.

After confrontation there was a shift in MFP outlook. During Confrontation, M’sia lost support from Third World countries. The non-aligned countries were not partial to Tunku’s pro-Western orientation

From being very pro-Western and anti-communist, M’sia assumed a non-aligned stance at the 1965 NAM conference in Algiers

Thus began the second phase in this period of MFP – a phase of rethinking resulting debunking of M’sia anti-communist posture for one “co-existence”

This was followed up with establishing diplomatic ties with Soviet Union and other East European countries (Yugoslavia & Bulgaria)

Replacing Anglo-Malaysian Defence Agreement (AMDA) with five-power arrangement

MFP Under Tun Razak

In substantive terms, due to external environment, MFP under Tun Razak shifted from a pronounced pro-Western, anti-communist orientation to a more neutralist position. This was a period of evolution towards strategy of non-alignment & neutralisation

Under Tun Razak, M’sia began to consolidate its relationship in the Southeast Asian region

• This was further bolstered by MFP strategy of promoting a “Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality” (ZOPFAN) in SEA.

• From 1970 to 1975 the decision making process was greatly influenced by Tun Razak’s leadership & domestically certain quarters in UMNO & a group of backbenchers pressure the govt to adjust its MFP more towards the Third World countries.

MFP Under Hussein Onn

Following the demise of Tun Razak, the task of strengthening M’sia posture in ASEAN rest with Tun Hussein Onn. This period saw a consolidation of MFP.

He always emphasised M’sia commitment & contribution to the strengthening and ultimately the success of ASEAN. ASEAN has since become the corner stone of MFP.

Tun Hussein Onn in his capacity as PM carried on the MFP as adopted by Tun Razak. For e.g. M’sia bilateral ties with China was further enhanced and strengthened during his era.

The dominant factors during this phase were regional security situations. Regionally, issues widely discussed included the situation of Vietnamese refugees, the Cambodian conflict, illegal immigrants & the Soviet’s intervention in Afghanistan.

MFP Under Mahathir• His accession to power has meant

that the locus of MFP decision-making has effectively shifted from Wisma Putra to the PM’s office.

• In contrast to the earlier period of a steady evolution of MFP concerns from a pro-Western stance to a non-aligned position & strong belief in regional cooperation, M’sia in the 1980s showed an apparent desire to exercise a leadership role.

Especially as a spokesman for the “South” countries.

M’sia has also been at the forefront in calls for making Antarctica a heritage of Mankind.

Promoting “South-South’ linkages, Islamic unity, condemning apartheid, and calling for less protectionism in trade in the “developed countries”.

• Under Mahathir, the MFP establishment has been enjoined to go beyond traditional diplomatic role by helping to ‘sell’ M’sia (as a country worthy of investing & trading with).

• M’sia under Mahathir seemed to imply a posture that placed Western countries secondary to East Asian countries especially Japan & South Korea, in line with his ‘Look East’ policy.

MFP Under Abdullah Badawi

He is more focus towards building the image a moderate Muslim country, trying to propel M’sia towards Islamic Hadhari

The idea is to transform M’sia into a developed country with high moral and religious beliefs

His style of leadership is non-confrontational, quiet diplomacy, giving more freedom to MFA to act in resolving any disputes or issues that arise in our relations with other countries.

Overall it’s the continuation of the previous govt. policy with not much major changes in our foreign policy direction.

CONCLUSION

• Purpose of MFP is to protect and Purpose of MFP is to protect and promote national interestpromote national interest

• Factors determine MFPFactors determine MFP– ECO-HISTORICAL (geographical, demographical &

historical)– EXTERNAL ASPECT (external environment

determinants)– DOMESTIC ELEMENT (social,political,economic etc)– IDIOSYNCRATIC ELEMENT (change in leadership)

DISCUSSION