SonsoftheSoilBumiputra IRLS501B001 03 09

Sons of the Soil (Bumiputra)
Country Profile: Malaysia
Richard L. Dixon
Dr. Thomas Kirkwood
IRLS501 B001
Comparative Political Systems
Based On The Structural-Functional Approach with Political Articulation as

Outlined In Chapter 17 entitled “Politics In India”
This article is for the intended use of educational purposes only. Permission is
granted for citation in academic documents as long as credit is given to the author
as the original source.
By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Malaysia is a country with a contrast in terms diversity, history, economics, politics, and culture.
As a British Colony under Home Rule, Malaysia was forced to acclimate to a British culture
while at the same time holding onto unto its past. The term Bumiputra or Sons of the Soil is a
Malaysian identity that connects the original population to their land, culture, and ruler
(Sultanate). However, the Sons of the Soil became a different meaning for Malaysia as it evolved
into a pluralistic and multicultural society with the introduction of Cheap Chinese & Indian
Labor. This manifested itself in the May races of 1969 which the Malay majority protested the
inequality economically that they endured at the expense of the wealthier Chinese. Hence,
Malaysia has had to readily adapt a strategy that would uplift the social and economic status of
the Malay population while pursuing a course of racial conciliation and inter-cultural
cooperation. This process was undertaken by the leadership of former Malaysian Prime Ministers
Tun Razak and Dr. Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad, who formulated and implemented the NEP
(National Economic Policy), the Second Malaysian Plan, and Vision 2020. The success of these
monetary strategies was such, that it not only raised the status of the Malay population, but also
propelled Malaysia unto the world scene in terms of economic growth. In conjunction with that
growth, the Malaysians sought to redefine themselves in terms of Modern Islamic thought and

cultural with the concept of HADHARI OR CIVILIZATIONAL ISLAM. Malaysia’s embracing
of Hadhari represented a core value of its religious and political landscape and is a prudent
example of the country maturing as a multi-ethnic and multi-religious democracy The purpose of
this thesis is to explore deeper these different attributes and how they interconnect in making
Malaysia a dynamic sovereign nation-state.
COLONIALISM & HOME RULE
Malaysia like many Southeast Asian countries such as India, Hong Kong Province, Singapore, &
Sri Lanka started off as entities of the British Empire during its height of Power, in those days,
the “Sun Never Did Set” during the reign of the British Empire. “During the late 18th and 19th
centuries, Great Britain established colonies and protectorates in the area of current Malaysia;
these were occupied by Japan from 1942 to 1945. In 1948, the British-ruled territories on the
Malay Peninsula formed the Federation of Malaya, which became independent in 1957. (CIA-
The World Factbook). Under British rule, the Malays who were the indigenous people of the
region were exploited for their labor in the manufacture of Cheap Products.
During British Colonial rule, the Malay Peninsula was combined with territories of Singapore
and Sri Lanka. “In 1826, the ports of Singapore, Penang and Melaka were formed into an
administrative unit called the Straits Settlements, which came under direct British rule.” (Dr.
Carolina López Caballero) Under British rule, Malaysia was further divided into nine Sultanates.
“The Pangkor Treaty was signed, stipulating that the British must be consulted and heeded by the

Sultans in all affairs, except those pertaining to Malay custom and religion. In 1881, the British
North Borneo Company was established in what is now Sabah. In 1896 the Federated Malay
States were established to include Negeri Sembilan, Perak, Selangor and Pahang. The rest of the
‘Malay states’ – Perlis, Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu, and Johor2– while remaining unfederated,
also came under British control through the installation of a colonial advisor to each of the
Sultans. The Pangkor Treaty, with its establishment of the British role as mandatory advisors to
the Sultans, formed the cornerstone of colonial policy toward the nine Sultanates existing within
the region.” (Dr. Carolina López Caballero.). It is important note what roles the Sultans played
during British Colonial rule. Their essential roles in Malay Society at the time during British
Colonial Rule were cultural, political, economical, and religious, because it was that heredictal
foundation what proved to the precursor in the shaping of the Malaysian Nation-state as we
know it today. “People’s position, as being under a Raja, or sultan, served to give them a
definition of both the community, and of the self viv-a-vis the ruler and the kerajaan, or the
sultanate.Adat served as an internalized set of codes concerning the individual, the ruler, and
society at large. This implicit understanding of ‘self’ in terms of these wider relations within the
Malaccan polity is substantively different from the common modern notion of the state’s function
and duty to protect citizens’ rights and interests as individuals.” (Dr. Carolina López Caballero.)
Hence, in actuality it wasn’t the British as it was the Portuguese who changed the role of the
Sultanate in Malaysian society. However, for the purpose of this essay we will concentrate our
examination on the role that the British played in changing the structure and view of the
Sultanate as viewed by the Malay people, but also the eventual transformation of Malaysia from

a Homogeneous to a plural multi-cultural society in the same vein as in the United States by the
introduction of cheap immigrant labor from outside the country. It is this pluralistic society
which has been both a blessing and determinant in the development of Malaysia as a Modern
nation-state. The Sultans were caught between two roles: representing their people while at the
same time trying to adapt and acclimate to British ways and traditions. “Due to British power,
many of the rulers saw that it was to their benefit to submit to the colonizers’ model and
implicitly serve British interests. However, this emulation of the British by some Malay rulers
sparked debate among the community about what it meant to be Malay, and how far alien
understandings could be adopted without compromising Melayu identity, values and traditions.
(Dr. Carolina López Caballero.) Such a conflict between the intrusion of the British world view
and that of the indigenous population in their colonies was not only uncommon but also not
unexpected by the English as well. A prime example is the shaping of the Indian Caste System as
it exists today. Indeed it was the Caste system in India that the British utilized to drive their
empire in Southeast Asia and other parts of their colonies around the world. Such products as
textiles, cotton, and opium were the lifeline of the East India Trading Company. Private Trade,
Free Trade or Globalization as it is called today caused untold deaths of millions of Indians.
“From the 1770s to the 1800s Europe’s trade relations with Asia changed from the supply of
Indian cloth and Chinese tea managed by European chartered companies into a much more
complex pattern of trade in cloth, silk, indigo, sugar and opium from India, and tea, sugar,
bullion and silk from China, that dominated the regional trade of Asia, and represented a large
part of the international trade of Europe and North America. This was accompanied by British

territorial imperialism in India, and the institutionalization of imperial power within the British
state.” (B. R. Tomlinson).
After the Opium Wars by which the British subdued the Chinese with their Naval Sea Power,
they introduced the Indian Model of the caste system informally. Chinese labor was utilized in
the same way as it was in India. “China now took over from India as the centre of British
ambitions in trade and finance in Asia for the next twenty years, and became the next subject of
the fantasies of both free trade manufacturing interests and London-based financial interests.” (B.
R. Tomlison). My purpose in bringing up the issue of both Chinese and Indian cheap labors is
because of the introduction of these cultural groups into the Malaysian cultural structure which
provided the powder keg that led to social unrest both during its time under British Home Rule
and its independence. It was this powder keg which blew up in the deadly race riots of May 1969
because of the cultural resentment against the acquired economic wealth and social standing of
the Chinese compared to their Malay and Indian counterparts. “This period of mass immigration
of the Chinese to Malaysia coincided with the period of rapid growth of the country’s economy,
especially due to tin mining. They were mainly engaged in the tin mining industry, and it was
these which boosted the economy and made the Chinese feel that they played important roles in
the economic development of the country. Indeed the economic dominance of the Chinese began
to take shape with the growth of the tin mining industry. The increasing number of non-Malays
coupled with their increasing control of the economy, has been a source of fear to the Malays
whose claim of indigeneity to the land dated back thousands of years. This fear was among the

early factors, besides resentment against British colonialism, which gave birth to Malay
nationalism between the two World Wars. Up to the present, this fear and jealousy against the
Chinese, is still considered an important factor in organising the Malays politically.” (Firdaus Hj.
Abdullah).
As had been the case in India, and to a certain extend in China (British Hong Kong Province),
the British introduction of a caste system into Malaysian Peninsula where the majority Malays
were considered inferior has been a dark spot in the modern History of Malaysia. “Under the
British, Malays were peasants or civil servants, Indians worked as plantation laborers or in the
professions, and the Chinese ran businesses.” (Cameron W. Barr)
I will show in the next section how this forced introduction of ethnicity on the Malaysian
Peninsula played a pivotal role both positively and negatively in the development and making of
Malaysia as a pluralistic nation.
Statecraft & Multiculturalism
After their independence from England in 1957, the Malaysians were faced with the undoubting
task of building a nation rifted with deepening and severe ethnic divisions. At the heart of the
matter was the huge economic disparity between the Indian, Malay, and Chinese ethnic groups.
To counter this disparity, the Malaysian Government enacted provisions in its constitution giving
special privileges and affirmative action status to the majority Malay population. It further

cemented by various rulings of the Malaysian Supreme Court which had power to overturn
legislative decisions as compared to other British Parliamentary models of government. “Article
153 of the constitution gives the native indigenous people of Malaysia (termed as Bumiputera),
primarily the Malay group, special rights and privileges. These provisions are commonly referred
to as Bumiputera rights. They have influenced race relations in Malaysia. Arguably, the
deteriorating state of race relations in Malaysia is one of the most important issues that the
country is currently facing. This issue has influenced the formulation of the Malaysian
constitution during the pre-independence period. The drafters struggled to balance the provisions
ensuring equality for all citizens and the special rights, as guaranteed in Article 8, with
provisions giving the Bumiputera group special rights and privileges. The effect of these
constitutional provisions on Bumiputera rights in influencing political and social situation in
Malaysia is essential in examining the strengths and flaws of constitutional government in
Malaysia.” (A. Fadzel). To further deal with the specter and culture in the newly independent
state of Malaysia, the Malays, Chinese, and Indians formed an ad hoc political alliance which
became the forerunner of their present day political parties. “This system found its political form
in the Alliance coalition, a triumvirate of three ethnic parties representing the major communities
in the country: The United Malays National Organization (UMNO), the Malayan (later
Malaysian) Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malayan (later Malaysian) Indian Congress
(MIC).” (Graham K. Brown). However, the tensions and anger exhibited by the Malay majority
over the concentration of wealth in the hands of the Chinese Minority led to the deadly riots of
1969 as mentioned in the earlier section. The riots led to the reformation of the Modern Political

Party that exists now. “After the May 1969 general election descended into ethnic rioting in
which more than a hundred people were killed, a state of emergency was declared and parliament
suspended. The prime minister and ‘father of independence’ Tunku Abdul Rahman was eased out
of power and replaced by Tun Abdul Razak, who was more sympathetic to the ultras’ concerns.
The Alliance was expanded through the cooptation of most of the major opposition parties, and
in 1974 renamed the Barisan Nasional (BN – National Front).” ((Graham K. Brown)
It was this group under the leadership of Tun Razak and Dr. Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad, which
formulated and implemented the NEP (National Economic Policy), the Second Malaysian Plan,
and Vision 2020. However, the Chinese and Indian Minorities had to be strong-armed in going
with the plan. “The government, or the Malay political leaders in power, asserted that the
rejection of the NEP or failure of its implementation would be tantamount to frustrating the
Malays again which might result in a recurrence of violent racial riots. Together with such an
assertion, deliberate efforts were also made to highlight the economic and social backwardness
of the Malays inter alia, by presenting objective analyses by a “third party” as well as by
publishing relevant detailed statistics.” ((Graham K. Brown).
In order to secure their economic interest against the Malays, the Chinese & Indian Communities
formed commercial associations in order to consolidate their power. “At similar, smaller,
conglomerate Maica Holdings was set up by the Malaysian Indian Congress, also a BN
component. At a lower level of economic activity, numbers of Deposit-Taking Cooperatives
(DTCs) were set up, again often linked to the MCA, to channel and protect the resources of less

well-off Chinese. ‘Ali Baba’ arrangements also became commonplace, where an often
politically-linked Malay entrepreneur would become in effect a silent partner in a business
arrangement with a Chinese counterpart, providing the benefits of bumiputera status but little
involved in the running of the business.” (Firdaus Hj. Abdullah).
It should be interesting to note that the practices of the Chinese going into partnership with the
Malays as silent partners to get around the Malaysian Government enforced quota system, is
similar to the Minority Front practices here in the United States when dealing with government
contracts which mandate a certain amount of set aside programs for ethnic owned businesses. In
the past, it was not uncommon for White Business Owners to set-up shop with minority fronts
with them as silent partners in order to beat the system. It has been and still is such the case in
dealing with the Malaysian Government Bumiputera (Sons of the Soil) policy of affirmative
action.
The Second Malaysian Plan and Vision 2020 were not only to redress the inequality that existed
in contemporary Malaysian society but also to integrate all races of Malaysian people into the
Sons of the Soil ideology and nationalism. “By democratic right, all Malaysians born here are
sons of the soil Dr. Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad’s purpose introducing the NEP (National
Economic Policy), the irrespective of which race they belong to. We should all be Malaysians,
not bumiputeras and non-bumiputeras.

If we believe in God and basic human values, then we should help all those in need irrespective
of race. We should be fighting corruption which has become the culture of the day. We should
use meritocracy as the yardstick for progress under his leadership Both the NEP and the Second
Malaysian Plan achieved its objectives of fully redistributing the wealth more to the majority
Malays. In fact, Malaysia’s economy rapidly grew as a result of the efforts of Prime Ministers
Tun Razak and Dr. Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad.” (Haris Ibrahim). Yet as much Prime Minister
Dr. Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad liked to believe that both the NEP and the Second Plan not only
redressed pass inequality issues of the Malays and actually bought the various cultures closer
together, there was still a groundswell of discontent by both the Indian & Chinese communities
over the preferential treatment that was given to the Malay majority. “Though it is by no means
certain that the disabilities from which non-Muslims suffer always have some intrinsic
relationship to the privileges conferred on Muslims, the unique status conferred on Malays and
Islam in Malaysia cannot be doubted. Whereas in most countries affirmative action
programmesor quotas are reserved for underprivileged or disenfranchised minorities, in Malaysia
the beneficiaries of government largesse are the bumiputras, (sons of the soil), a category that
includes, expectedly, the orang aslis and other aboriginal people, but also, quite unexpectedly, the
numerically dominant Malays.” (Vinay Lal). The ethnic Indians and Chinese had reasoned to be
disillusioned because they were locked out of top government jobs, denied access to university
slots, and even to do business aboard due to the quota system that had been implemented by the
Malaysian government for the benefit of the majority Malays. A prime example was the denial of
both the Chinese & Indian minorities to set up their own schools and universities by the

government. “In higher education, state institutions were allotted quotas for the intake of
bumiputera. Government funding for places at university, both in Malaysia and abroad, was
almost entirely restricted to bumiputera; between 1980 and 1984, over 95 per cent of the
successful applicants for overseas study grants were bumiputera. An initiative by the Chinese
educationalist Dongjiaozong organizations to set up a private Chinese medium university was
constantly blocked by the government; a legal challenge by Dongjiaozong and the Chinese-based
opposition Democratic Action Party (DAP) eventually reached the Supreme Court, Malaysia’s
highest court, which ruled in favour of the government.” (Graham K. Brown,)
Even amidst the sea of discontent by the Chinese and Indian minorities (yet their combined
numbers almost equalled that of the Malay majority) over the preferential treatment given to the
Malay majority, there is no doubt that the serious inequalities had to be addressed. To understand
how fully that the Malays were underrepresented economically compared to the Chinese I have
included a breakdown highlighting the economic disparity.
“The economic disparity can further be highlighted by the following

figures, computed in the early 1970s on the communal composition of
ownership of various economic sectors.
(a) The value of private property in the Municipality of Kuala
Lumpur owned by the Malays was less than 5% whereas the
Chinese owned more than 75%.
(b) Ownership of public property companies listed on the Stock

Exchange was 1.3% by the Malays and 89.2% by the Chinese;
(c) Capital ownership in limited companies dealing with various
businesses, was 1.5% by the Malays and 22.8% by the Chinese.” (Firdaus Hj. Abdullah)
Affirmative action has indeed played an instrumental role in leveling the playing field for its
Malay majority. Malaysia as had most countries around the world has had to deal with the influx
of immigration that had been fostered upon them by British colonial rule. Malaysia is not the
only former British colony that has had to struggle with multiculturalism. As I had mentioned
before, India shares a lot of characteristics compared to Malaysia in that under the rule of the
British ethnicity was exploited for both political and economical gain. The apex of
multiculturalism in India is the caste system. It determines wealth, power, status, and social
standing in India. “Local castes (jatis) are the basic social units that still govern marriages, social
networks, food taboos, and rituals in India. In the past, caste regulated the choice of occupation
as well, which was typically cast-specific and heredity at the same time. This has changed
rapidly because of modernization, legislation, and urbanization….There are more than 2000 jatis
in India, traditionally divided into four hierarchically ranked board categories called varnas:
1. The Brahmins, who originally performed the traditional function of priests:
2. The Kshatriyas, who were the rulers and the warriors.
3. The vaisysa who were the mercantile classes; and the Sudras, who were the service
groups, agriculturist, and artisans. (Gabriel A. Almond).

In addition, India like Malaysia has had it share of ethnic violence particularly between the
Hindu Majority and Muslim Minority. The ideological parameters behind this violence is the
resurgence of Hindu Nationalist movements such as the BJP Party which has used the caste
system to spark ethnic and religious sectarian violence directed at the poorer Muslim minority.
“In 1992, the Hindu nationalist BJP (Indian People's Party) gave early warning of its intentions
when its members demolished the sixteenth-century Babri Mosque in North India, leading to the
deaths of thousands in Hindu–Muslim riots across the country…. The starkest evidence of Hindu
extremism came in late February and March 2002 in the prosperous western Indian state of
Gujarat. In a region internationally famous for its business communities, Hindu mobs lynched
over two thousand Muslims and left more than two hundred thousand homeless. The violence
was ostensibly in retaliation for an alleged Muslim attack on a train carrying Hindu pilgrims, in
which a car was set on fire, killing fifty-eight people.” (Pankaj Mishra)
Globally countries such as India, Malaysia, Brazil, United States, and South Africa have
struggled with the advent of multiculturalism in their societies in which ethnic groups were either
forcibly injected into these cultures by Colonization exploitation (as in the case of Malaysia &
India), the brutal institution of apartheid which in itself is a caste (South Africa) system, or the
savage institution of slavery (Brazil and the United States). The driving basis behind the racial
exploitation in these societies was economics or Laissez-faire Capitalism and its modern
equivalent uncontrolled Free trade and Globalization. Ironically it was the British philosopher
Herbert Spencer who coined the phrase Laissez-faire Capitalism or survival of the fittest and

defined and dictated its proper role in society. “In the economic arena, Spencer advocated a
laissez-faire system that tolerated no government regulation of private enterprise. He considered
most taxation as confiscation of wealth and undermining the natural evolution of society.
Spencer assumed that business competition would prevent monopolies and would flourish
without tariffs or other government restrictions on free trade. He also condemned wars and
colonialism, even British imperialism. This was ironic, because many of his ideas were used to
justify colonialism. But colonialism created vast government bureaucracies. Spencer favored as
little government as possible.
Spencer argued against legislation that regulated working conditions, maximum hours, and
minimum wages. He said that they interfered with the property rights of employers. He believed
labor unions took away the freedom of individual workers to negotiate with employers.
Thus, Spencer thought government should be little more than a referee in the highly competitive
"survival of the fittest." Spencer's theory of social evolution, called Social Darwinism by others,
helped provided intellectual support for laissez-faire capitalism in America.” (Constitutional
Rights Foundation).
All of these countries have had growing pains and setbacks in integrating ethnic minorities into
their cultural, economic, and societal structures. The one weapon that has been used to rectify
and redress past discriminations and grievances has been affirmative action. Affirmative action
has been and continues to be an effective tool in Malaysia in terms of economic parity for the

Malay in achieving equal status in their country. In 2001 The World Conference against Racism
put out a policy statement which stated affirmative action should be mandated by International,
Law, Statutes, and treaties to provide economic opportunities globally for ethnic minorities and
women. “As the results of these meetings might indicate, affirmative action is strongly endorsed
by international law, as seen through the language of regional and international treaties and the
decisions of global and regional institutions. Countless norms mandate equality and
nondiscrimination, while additionally requiring states to take active measures to guarantee these
rights. Certain norms implicitly require affirmative action where inequalities are present. Some
norms mention affirmative action to note that such actions would be permissible under non-
discrimination provisions. Others explicitly mandate affirmative action. While the contours of
these norms differ slightly, one thing is certain: Where there is proven inequality among people.”
different races, international law— either implicitly or explicitly—requires states to engage in
affirmative action.” (GLOBAL RIGHTS: PARTNERS FOR JUSTICE).
Malaysia proved that it could use economics as a change agent for not only redressing the
inequalities in its society but also as an economic engine to propel the growth of its economy.
The predominant success of Malaysia’s rapid economic growth is the direct beneficiaries of the
sound monetary policies that became an integral part of the National Economic Plan (NEA) and
the Second Malaysian Plan.

Statecraft & Economic Development
Malaysia had planned for its foray as an economic powerhouse years before they declared their
independence from England in 1957. They utilized the British Parliamentary System to institute
a strong constitutional democracy. ” As a parliamentary democracy patterned after the British
system, the chief executive officer in Malaysia is the Prime Minister, who is in charge of
the day-to-day process of policy-making and supervision. His office is supported by the
bureaucracy, which is dominated by the Malays. By practice, the Prime Minister is also the
President of UMNO. He is also the Chairman of the Barisan Supreme Council, which oversees
major decisions arrived at in close-door bargaining sessions among leaders of the various
ethnic communities.” (Ho Khai Leong). Malaysia is a nation that two heads of state. One
ceremonial and the other with administrative powers. The ceremonial head of state is the King
who is elected by the Sultanates who are the heredity rulers of the 13 states that comprises
Malaysia. “Nine of the thirteen states have hereditary rulers (sultans) who share the position of
King (agong) on a five year rotating basis. The King’s functions are purely ceremonial since
constitutional amendments in 1993 and 1994.” (Australian Government). The Prime Minister
holds all administrative power in the daily operations of the country. As a federated
constitutional monarchy, Malaysia’s governmental structure combines elements of the British
Parliamentary system as that of the American ideologies of Federalism, state and local
governmental rule. ” Malaysia has a three-tier government structure: federal, state and local.
There are 24 federal ministries, in addition to a number of departments and agencies. The

Cabinet is the highest coordinating executive body of all government activities and interests. The
Cabinet is assisted in the discharge of its functions by two national councils, the National
Economic Council (NEC), responsible for coordinating all development programs and the
National Security Council (NSC), responsible for national security. There are three other national
councils, the National Council for Local Government, the National Land Council, and the
National Finance Council. The national body responsible for Local Government is the
Ministry of Housing and Local Government, assisted by the National Council for Local
Government.” (Australian Government). The Malaysian equivalent of a state governor is drawn
from the heredity rule of the 13 Sultanates. The Sultanates or heredity rulers report to a State
Executive Council. The Executive Council is picked by the state legislative in each of the
thirteen states that comprises Malaysia. The Malaysian Parliament is bicameral with two houses.
The Senate or Dewan Negara . It has 70 seats. The king appoints 44 of them and the 26 are
elected from the 13 state legislatures. They only serve two three years terms. The lower house is
represented by the House of Representatives or Dewan Rakyat. There are 226 legislative seats.
The lower house is popularly elected to five year terms. It is from the Dewan Rayat (lower
house) that the Prime Minister is selected and is the leader of his party. The Political Party which
dominates the lower house is the one which picks the Prime Minister. Just as with the British
Parliamentary Model, the Prime Minister forms his cabinet from members of his own party as
well with the other parties that form a coalition with his or government. The role of the Prime
Minister in Malaysia is a powerful institution in the sphere of Malaysian Politics. Even though
Malaysia is a federated constitutional Monarchy, the Prime Minister can overshadow the other

institutions based on personality, charisma, and political savvy. The most famous of the
Malaysian Prime Minister who had embodied all of those attributes and characteristics was Tun
Dr. Mahathir Mohamad. “Mahathir bin Mohamad (born December 20, 1925 in Alor Setar,
Kedah) was the Prime Minister of Malaysia from 1981 to 2003. He was succeeded by Dato' Seri
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on October 31, 2003. In 1964, Mahathir, a physician by profession,
entered the Malaysian parliament as a member of the dominant United Malays National
Organization (UMNO) party. He held several ministerial posts in the 1970s, including deputy
prime minister beginning in 1976.” (Knowledge Rush).
It was Dr. Mohamad who was the main architecture for Malaysia’s Explosive Growth through
the issuance and implementation of Key economic policies such as the National Economic
Policy, Second Malaysian Plan, and Vision 2020 (the main thrust is to build Malaysia into a
thoroughly modern nation-state. That means going from second tier nation status to first-tier.).
“During his term in office, Mahathir turned Malaysia into a regional high-tech manufacturing,
financial, and telecommunications hub through his economic policies based on corporate
nationalism, known as the various "Malaysia Plans" which set out the government middle-term
objectives. These policies remained in effect almost to the end of his tenure in office. His pet
projects have included Perwaja Steel, an attempt to emulate South Korea and Japan, the Proton
car company, and Astro, a satellite television service. Mahathir is credited with spearheading the
phenomenal growth of the Malaysian economy, now one of the largest and most powerful in
South East Asia. Growth between 1988 and 1997 averaged over ten percent and living standards

rose twenty-fold, with poverty almost eradicated and social indicators such as literacy levels and
infant mortality rates becoming on par with developed countries.” (Multimedia University,
Historical Society).
Perhaps Dr. Mohamad’s greatest achievements were fostering racial harmony as well as raising
the economic status and stature of the Malay majority. “His greatest success has been to maintain
peace between the various races in Malaysia, by creating a Malay middle class, independent of
the traditionally dominant Chinese minority.” (Knowledge Rush).
Dr. Mohamad has been both an outspoken and strong-willed world figure especially when it
comes to defending the rights of Malaysians and Asians. “Mahathir is also known to be a very
outspoken diplomat both on the national and international stage. He has been a very aggressive
proponent of "Asian values.” (Multimedia University). Even though Dr. Mohamad has been a
strong proponent of Asian values he has not been without controversy within the world
community. In 2003 Dr. Mohamad created international controversy when in a speech in 2003 he
complained of Jewish dominance in the world politically and economically. “In his speech,
Mahathir represented relations between Muslims and Jews as a worldwide frontal confrontation.
Though he only devoted a few sentences to Jews, he presented some new examples of what anti-
Semitism studies call "the theory of Jewish conspiracy." Mahathir said:

1.3 billion Muslims cannot be defeated by a few million Jews. There must be a way. And we can
only find a way if we stop to think, to assess our weaknesses and our strength, to plan, to
strategize and then to counter-attack.
We are actually very strong. 1.3 billion people cannot be simply wiped out. The Europeans killed
six million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others
to fight and die for them.
We are up against a people who think. They survived 2000 years of pogroms not by hitting back,
but by thinking. They invented and successfully promoted Socialism, Communism, human rights
and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong, so they may enjoy equal
rights with others. With these they have now gained control of the most powerful countries and
they, this tiny community, have become a world power. We cannot fight them through brawn
alone. We must use our brains also.” (Manfred Gerstenfeld). It should be noted Malaysia like the
UAE does not allow anyone who is Jewish or Jewish ancestry into their country even though
they proclaim themselves a diverse multi-ethnic society. The purpose of this paper is to do a
comparative analysis of the Malaysian political, economic, social, and cultural structure, not
descend into a political debate about the merits of Dr. Mohamad’s remarks. However, it should
be noted that throughout Malaysia and the rest of Southeast, Dr. Mohamad is revered as a hero,
legend, and crusader for the rights of common men and women. He has proven to be a capable
and flexible level. His leadership really stood out when he guided Malaysia through the Asian
Financial Crisis of the late 1999s.


It was during the 1990’s that countries such as Malaysia, South Korea, China, Thailand, Taiwan,
and India experience unprecedented growth. However, the breaks were put on the growth
because their currencies became devaluated which caused a spiraling out of control inflationary
track and bank failures. The culprits were the IMF and George Soros who over-speculated on the
currency, made his fortune, and dump them on the world market. “The Malaysian Prime
Minister, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, has said the international community should make sabotaging
of currencies by financial speculators a crime. Otherwise, the currencies of developing countries
will continue to be sabotaged," he told the media in Alor Star, a Northern Malaysian town, on 27
July 1997. Dr Mahathir said he was disappointed with countries that preach the open economy to
developing countries but practice double standards when free market manipulation hurts them.
Citing an example, the Prime Minister said when three or four people manipulated the trading of
junk bonds in the US, causing others to incur huge losses; the authorities arrested and jailed
them. "But when this happens to us, they define it as an open market situation… The Prime
Minister said there was much talk about human rights and the protection of people, but the public
"must be protected from people like Soros who has so much money and so much power and is
totally thoughtless because he is not only hurting the people of Myanmar but the poor people in
Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand. These people suffer because the cost of
everything has gone up."

On whether he considered Soros a criminal, Dr Mahathir said: "Well, as much as people who
produce and distribute drugs are criminals because they destroy nations, people who undermine
the economies of poor countries are also." (Martin Khor).
Countries such as Thailand which had taken out huge loans with both the IMF and the World
Bank had to restructure them because the interest rates were too much to bear. It should be noted
that both the IMF and World Bank have been notorious in forcing market based initiatives that
have been proven to be incompatible with the growth based models of second and three-tier
LDC’s (Low Developing Countries). “Despite this growing consensus, aid and debt relief is still
tied to economic policy reforms. The main culprits are the World Bank and the IMF, who
continue to use their aid to push inappropriate economic policies on developing countries.
Their conditions have a significant impact, given the large volume of aid that the World Bank
gives. Moreover, nearly all other rich-country donors (for example the French or British
governments) use the presence of an IMF programme - and compliance to its conditions - as a
signal to give their own bilateral aid to support poor-country budgets. They also often tie their
aid to the framework of conditions developed by the World Bank.” (Oxfarm International).
Asian countries such as Malaysia and Thailand borrowed heavily from the IMF & World Bank in
order to grow their economies by building basic infrastructure projects such as roads, bridges,
canals, water sanitation plants, schools, and hospitals in order to provide for the general welfare
of its people. However, organizations such as the World Bank & IMF would place stipulations on
the aid that were given to poorer countries called conditionalties. That is to say that a country had

to go through certain market based stages and criteria in order to qualify for the money. “But if
this aid and debt relief comes with large numbers of inappropriate strings attached, or what are
known as conditions, its utility can be seriously undermined. Aid should of course come with
some terms attached. Donor countries, which after all are spending the taxes of their own
citizens, have a right to expect their money to be spent in a transparent way and to be clearly
accounted for. They – and poor people around the world – are also entitled to expect the aid to be
used to contribute to goals to eliminate the unacceptable suffering which exists in so many
countries.” (Oxfarm International).
Hence, poor countries such as Ghana & Mali would be hit with back-loaded interest rates if they
didn’t meet the benchmarks or performance standards as set by the IMF from a
Keynesian neoliberalism economic model. Therefore, both second and especially third tier
countries were forced to stop growing their economies and impose harsh austerity measures on
the backs of their people just to make the minimum repayments to the IMF, and that was just on
the interest alone. These austerity measures caused hyperinflation, joblessness, starvation, and
acute forms of poverty which lead to political unrest. Thus countries like Thailand saw the
handwriting on the wall and restructured their debt because they were stuck between a rock and a
hard place between the demands of the IMF and George Soro’s currency killer Hedge Fund.
Dr. Mohamad refused to cave in to the demands of the IMF or George Soros and took Malaysia
along a different path economically so that they could weather the storm of economic fallout.
“There were some discussions between the IMF and the Malaysian government at that time, but

Mahathir rejected the IMF package claiming that it was too restrictive and counter productive.
For example, one of the measures proposed by the IMF was a financial restructuring which
would have had the effect of turning many bumiputras (Malay owned) companies over to
foreign ownership. The IMF also called for the discriminatory practices to be stopped, and
recommended western style democracy and open competition in both private and public sectors.”
(Ser-Huang Poon).
Dr. Mohammad takes steps to protect the national currency called the ringgit by affixing a fixed
exchange rate contrary to the popular practice of speculating on the open market against floating
currencies as had been the case of Georg Soros. It should be noted that all national currencies
around the world were one time at a fixed exchange rate as agreed upon at the Bretton Woods
Conference shortly after WWII. It was agreed by the industrial powers at the summit that the
fixed exchange rates based on the dollar would be the best way to grow their national economies
which would provide for relative stability. It was the Nixon Administration which gutted the
Bretton Woods Accord by taking the U.S. dollar off the Gold Standard and pushed through
legislation through congress to float its exchange rate and exposed it to international speculators
such as George Soros on the international market. The current economic crisis that we are now
experiencing globally is due to such economic blunders by leaders around the world like Nixon.
The other initiative that Prime Minister Mohamad emplaced was to lower the interest rates in
both the bonds market and banking sector. He realized that providing cheap stable credit to
businesses in order to grow their enterprises was the best hedge against the inflationary cyclone

which consumed other Asians such as Taiwan & South Korea. “The high interest rate policy lost
its effect on the spot exchange rate in the second period. Mahathir was justified in cutting the
interest rate, and acting contrary to the advice given by the IMF. With a depleted foreign reserve
and the short-term interest rate losing its influence on exchange rates, the only option left for
stabilizing the exchange rate was to introduce foreign exchange control. To this end, Mahathir
acted swiftly and implemented the control comprehensively.” ((Ser-Huang Poon).
Dr. Mohamad also initiated public sector initiatives in conjunction with the National Economic
Policy and the Second Malaysian Plan in order to shore up the Industrial and Manufacturing by
providing buffer against the inflationary cyclone that had consumed the national economies of
his other Asian neighbors such as Singapore & the Philippines. While the Southeastern Asian
economies during this period became both stagnant and paralyzed with negative growth, the
Malaysian economy achieved real growth. “Several initiatives were introduced to improve
Malaysia’s long-term economic fundamentals. First prioritizing the large infrastructure projects,
especially the ones that required high import content, would improve the quality of investments.
Second the overall balance of payments deficit would become a surplus by reducing the service
account deficit and by strengthening the merchandise account through technological
advancement in capital goods. Third, the government would adopt a relatively conservative fiscal
policy, although it would continue to support economic activities if the crisis should continue.
The measures also committed to maintaining a flexible and responsive monetary policy and price
stability. Finally a flexible wage system, linking wages to productivity, and providing tax

exemptions on bonuses would encourage Malaysia’s labor competitiveness.” (Melissa M.
Appleyard).
With the introduction of these sound economic measures to both grow and stabilize the
Malaysian economy during the Asian currency crisis, Prime Minister’s Tun Mahathir bin
Mohamad actions were vindicated amidst a cry of criticism (especially from the IMF itself) from
worldwide financial market and business leaders. “Mahathir must now feel vindicated two years
on after the crisis in Asia. His lone voice was the one Malaysian people relied on as they waded
through a financial crisis followed by a political one. Many of the recommendations made by the
IMF and rejected by Mahathir have now been showed to be inappropriate. Although there were
fundamental weakness in the Asian economy, the financial crisis was largely a result of financial
market instability.”( Ser-Huang Poon). In retrospect, the reason that the Asian Economic crisis
affected India and China less was because they were not as tied in to the Global currency
exchange and trade. In addition, India was still a state-controlled economy and had just started to
open its borders up to foreign investment during the 1990’s. China on the other hand, has had its
economy planned out since the 1970’s and absorbed the financial market shockwaves that
besieged the rest of its Asian neighbors because the deepening of its Market Based economy.
“The rise of China and India as major trading nations in manufacturing and services will affect
world markets, systems, and commons substantially and hence change the environment in which
other countries make their economic decisions. The question that remains are how should other
countries respond to these new opportunities and challenges—how should they dance with the

Giants? Part of the answer is generic. Any country will be better placed to take advantage of new
markets and to weather competitive pressure if it creates a healthy investment climate and invests
soundly in infrastructure and human resources. And, given the impossibility of predicting
precisely in which subsectors threats and opportunities will arise, there will be a premium on
flexibility—creating circumstances in which entrepreneurs are able to experiment, expand on
success, and withdraw cleanly from failure.” (L. Alan Winters and Shahid Yusuf)
Much has been said throughout this paper about the successes of NEP, Vision 2020, and the
second Malaysian Plan in elevating the livelihood of its citizens. Thus the question what are the
mechanics of these Monetary Policies and how do they fit into Malaysia’s flourishing multi-
ethnic democracy? First it should be stated that Malaysia despite all its infrastructure
development is not a planned economy but a free market one. “Since the early 1980s, we have
stressed that this country will rely on the private sector as the primary engine of economic
growth. In a way we were ahead of the rest of the world, even the developed countries in
entrusting economic growth to the private sector.
In the early years, our fledgling private sector could not fully respond to the challenge that was
issued. Then came the unpredictable and difficult recession and slowdown years. However in the
last three years the private sector has bloomed and responded. The policy is now bearing fruit.
The outcome: in 1988, we grew in real terms by 8.9 per cent; in 1989, by 8.8 per cent; in 1990,
by 9.4 per cent without expansionary budgeting by the Government. Even the tiger economies of
North East Asia have not done so well.


No nation can afford to abandon a winning formula. And this nation will not. For the foreseeable
future, Malaysia will continue to drive the private sector, to rely on it as the primary engine of
growth.” (The Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia).
It is important to note that fact because so much importance has been written and symbolized in
terms of the Market-based economies of both India & China, that there has less focused on the
economic achievements of Malaysia. The crucial key to Malaysia’s success was long-range
central planning. In the early years they moved from an economy that was depended on rubber,
tin, and palm oil (as had been the case of its economical origins as a colonial asset of the British
Empire) to one based on high tech, manufacturing, and banking. “Eventually the country decided
during the seventies to shift dependence from the primary sector to manufacturing under a
protection regiment. Foreign assistance from Japan and the West eased and hastened the process
of transformation. Exports of manufactured goods were soon fuelling the country’s growth.”
(Hasin Zubair). In terms of political articulation, ethnicity has played a significant role in the
planning, implementing, and executing the provisions as Specified in NEP, 2 Malaysian Plan
(subsequent plans thereafter such as the current Malaysian Plan), and Vision 2020. The crux of
these plans is not only raising the living standards of the Malaysian Majority (as specified in
their constitution) but also the eradication of poverty and the inclusion of all Malaysians into a
unified nation regardless of ethnicity or religion. “By the year 2020, Malaysia can be a united
nation, with a confident Malaysian society, infused by strong moral and ethical values, living in a
society that is democratic, liberal and tolerant, caring, economically just and equitable,
progressive and prosperous, and in full possession of an economy that is competitive, dynamic,

robust and resilient.
There can be no fully developed Malaysia until we have finally overcome the nine central
strategic challenges that have confronted us from the moment of our birth as an independent
nation.
The first of these is the challenges of establishing a united Malaysian nation with a sense of
common and shared destiny. This must be a nation at peace with itself, territorially and ethnically
integrated, living in harmony and full and fair partnership, made up of one 'Bangsa Malaysia'
with political loyalty and dedication to the nation. By the year 2020, Malaysia can be a united
nation, with a confident Malaysian society, infused by strong moral and ethical values, living in a
society that is democratic, liberal and tolerant, caring, economically just and equitable,
progressive and prosperous, and in full possession of an economy that is competitive, dynamic,
robust and resilient.
There can be no fully developed Malaysia until we have finally overcome the nine central
strategic challenges that have confronted us from the moment of our birth as an independent
nation.
The first of these is the challenges of establishing a united Malaysian nation with a sense of
common and shared destiny. This must be a nation at peace with itself, territorially and ethnically
integrated, living in harmony and full and fair partnership, made up of one 'Bangsa Malaysia'
with political loyalty and dedication to the nation. .” (The Prime Ministers Office of Malaysia).

The Rhetoric from the Prime Minister’s Office sounds both convincing and captivating. Yet the
reality is that Malaysia is still divided by race from an economic perspective. On surface,
Malaysia is both a Plural and multi-ethnic culture. With the implementation of the affirmative
action features by Dr. Mohamad in order to rectify the racial inequalities and income gap
between the Malays, Chinese, and Indian racial groups, they resulted into forming economic
associations to protect their interests. “However, these measures have also resulted in greater
resentment by those who feel deprived by such policies, resulting at various times in emigration,
capital flight, and ethnic mobilization. Resentment is arguably greatest among the Middle class
where ethnic rivalry is perceived to be greatest. Hence, while it is doubtful that the NEP has
created the conditions for national unity, it has probably mitigated bumiputera resentment of non-
bumiputera domination of business and the professions. Rapid economic growth over the last
three decades, some economic and educational liberalization since the mid-1980’s as well as
greater recognition of external challenges, have also served to mitigate interethnic resentment.”
(Jono K.S.)
Even with the undercurrent of racial polarization that now exists in Malaysia, it has been spared
the political infighting, ethnic conflict, and a full fledged civil war which has besieged
neighboring Sri Lanka. The Malaysians were pro-active after the 1969 Race riots which rocked
the country and motivated the leadership to resolve the deep income gap that existed. In solving
these internal problems to certain extent, the leadership projected Malaysia externally globally as

a rapidly growing economy. According to the World Economic Forum, Malaysia is one of the 24
fastest growing economies in terms of competitiveness, trade, export, and investment.

World Economic Forum © 2008
Global Competitiveness Index rankings and 2007-2008 comparisons
GCI 2008-2009 rank
(among 2007
Country/Economy GCI 2008-2009 rank GCI 2008-2009 score countries)* GCI 2007-2008 rank
United States 1 5.74 1 1
Switzerland 2 5.61 2 2
Denmark 3 5.58 3 3
Sweden 4 5.53 4 4
Singapore 5 5.53 5 7
Finland 6 5.50 6 6
Germany 7 5.46 7 5
Netherlands 8 5.41 8 10
Japan 9 5.38 9 8
Canada 10 5.37 10 13
Hong Kong SAR 11 5.33 11 12
United Kingdom 12 5.30 12 9
Korea, Rep. 13 5.28 13 11
Austria 14 5.23 14 15
Norway 15 5.22 15 16
France 16 5.22 16 18
Taiwan, China 17 5.22 17 14
Australia 18 5.20 18 19
Belgium 19 5.14 19 20
Iceland 20 5.05 20 23
Malaysia 21 5.04 21 21
Ireland 22 4.99 22 22
Israel 23 4.97 23 17
New Zealand 24 4.93 24 24
Luxembourg 25 4.85 25 25
Qatar 26 4.83 26 31
Saudi Arabia 27 4.72 27 35
Chile 28 4.72 28 26
Spain 29 4.72 29 29
China 30 4.70 30 34
United Arab Emirates 31 4.68 31 37
Estonia 32 4.67 32 27
Czech Republic 33 4.62 33 33
Thailand 34 4.60 34 28
Kuwait 35 4.58 35 30
Tunisia 36 4.58 36 32
Bahrain 37 4.57 37 43
Oman 38 4.55 38 42
Brunei Darussalam 39 4.54 n/a n/a
Cyprus 40 4.53 39 55
Puerto Rico
This article is for the 41
intended
use of 4.51
educational
purposes 40
Permission is 36
only.
Sloveniagranted for citation in academic
42 4.50as long as credit 41
documents 39
is given to the author
Portugalas the original source. 43 4.47 42 40
Lithuania 44 4.45 43 38
By Richard
South Africa L. Dixon. Email
45 address: rdixon57@gmail.com
4.41 44 44
Slovak Republic 46 4.40 45 41
Barbados 47 4.40 46 50
Jordan 48 4.37 47 49
Italy 49 4.35 48 46
India 50 4.33 49 48
Russian Federation 51 4.31 50 58
It is quite evident based on these statistics that Malaysia has started to achieve its objectives of
being a thoroughly modern nation.
Statecraft and The Nature of Islam
Malaysia defines itself in the constitution as a multi-ethnic and multi-racial society which
guarantees freedom of religion. Islam is the official state religion in Malaysia as such reflects
that in their culture, politics, economics, traditions, and education. Malaysia has found that it
must balance its Islamic tradition with the demands of a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society.
According to the CIA Factbook, Malaysian society reflects a religious diversity that is parallel to
that of the United States, Canada, and other Western Democracies. ” Muslim 60.4%, Buddhist
19.2%, Christian 9.1%, Hindu 6.3%, Confucianism, Taoism, other traditional Chinese religions
2.6%, other or unknown 1.5%, none 0.8%” (The CIA Factbook). In some respects Malaysia’s
religious diversity on the surface is a shining example of intercultural cooperation, interfaith
dialogue, and the embedding of deep religious traditions in the nation’s moral fabric. Most
recently Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has captured that spiritual
cooperation in the Islamic concept of Islam Hadhari or Civilizational Islam in a speech he gave
at the United Nations University in Japan May 26, 2006.
“MY COUNTRY, MALAYSIA, IS AN ISLAMIC COUNTRY OF NEARLY 20 MILLION

PEOPLE. THIS INCLUDES AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF A NON-MUSLIM
MINORITY OF 33%. BUT WE ARE DETERMINED TO SHOW BY EXAMPLE THAT AN

ISLAMIC COUNTRY SUCH AS OURS CAN BE MODERN AND PROGRESSIVE AND
GOVERN ALL THE PEOPLE FAIRLY AND JUSTLY. WE DRAW INSPIRATION FROM ALL
THAT IS CORRECT ABOUT ISLAM, AND WE CALL THIS APPROACH ISLAM
HADHARI, TRANSLATED INTO THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AS CIVILIZATIONAL
ISLAM. WE HAVE DEFINED IT AS A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO THE
DEVELOPMENT OF MANKIND, SOCIETY AND COUNTRY BASED ON THE
PERSPECTIVE OF ISLAMIC TEACHINGS AND ISLAMIC CIVILIZATION.
BEING A MULTI-ETHNIC AND MULTI-RELIGIOUS COUNTRY, MALAYSIA IS MORE

THAN CONSCIOUS OF THE NEED TO MAINTAIN HARMONY BETWEEN PEOPLES OF
DIFFERENT RELIGIONS AND DIFFERENT CULTURES. ONE OF THE MAIN CAUSES OF
SCHISMS IN SOCIETY RESULTS FROM ECONOMIC INEQUALITY. THEREFORE, EVER
SINCE THE EARLY DAYS OF OUR INDEPENDENCE NEARLY FIFTY YEARS AGO, THE
GOVERNMENT HAS MADE IT A MATTER OF DELIBERATE POLICY TO APPORTION
THE COUNTRY’S WEALTH IN AN EQUITABLE MANNER. THE DISTRIBUTIONAL
STRATEGY AIMS AT REDUCING THE ECONOMIC DISPARITIES AMONG THE ETHNIC
GROUPS AND IMPROVING THE CORPORATE EQUITY OWNERSHIP BY THE
INDIGENOUS COMMUNITY. WE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN IMPLEMENTING THIS
POLICY WHICH IS CAREFULLY CARRIED OUT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF AN
EXPANDING ECONOMIC CAKE. NO ONE HAS BEEN DEPRIVED FOR PURPOSES OF
FAVORING ANOTHER. TO BE FAIR AND JUST AT ALL TIMES IS INHERENTLY
ISLAMIC.” (Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi)
Thus the question must be asked is how does HADHARI OR CIVILIZATIONAL ISLAM fit in
the context of a thoroughly Modern society such as Malaysia? Hadhari gives Islam a human
face and a proclamation to the rest of the global community that there is a place for it in the
world for a Muslim country such as Malaysia. It was also Prime Minister’s Badawi intention to

steal the thunder from the Radical Islamist agenda. Hadhari is Malaysia’s coming out party on
the world stage. It is a proclamation that it belongs with the rest of the democratic societies on
the same level and par. To some, Malaysia’s embracing of Hadhari as a core value of its
religious and political landscape is a prudent example of the country as a maturing multi-ethnic
and multi-religious democracy. ” Islam Hadhari, as introduced by Badawi, aims to achieve ten
main principles, which Muslim nations and communities must demonstrate, namely:
1. Faith and piety in Allah
2. A just and trustworthy government
3. A free and independent people
4. Mastery of knowledge
5. Balanced and comprehensive economic development
6. A good quality of life
7. Protection of the rights of minority groups and women
8. Cultural and moral integrity
9. Protection of the environment
10. Strong defenses

These principles have been formulated to ensure that the implementation and approach does
not cause anxiety among any group in this multiracial and multi-religious country. These
principles have been devised to empower Muslims to face the global challenges of today.”
(Mohamed Sharif Bashir, PhD)
In the past, Asia has always been a region where religious tolerance was central to the stability
of the region. For centuries, Muslims, Christians, Buddhist, & Hindus worked side by side. It
was only recently that the ugly twin heads of Islamic Fundamentalism and Hindu Nationalism
has surfaced. The reason that I have stressed Hindu Nationalism on the same par of Islamic
Fundamentalism is because people have this misconception that it is only Islam as a religion
that can be hijacked by those ardent few to spread terror, kill, and maim innocent people. As I
had demonstrated earlier in this paper, Hindu extremism has exact a toll on innocent civilians
as well. Hence, Prime Minister’s development of Civilizational Islam was a defense strategy to
combat the rising tide of Islamic Fundamentalism and religious intolerance that is now
occurring in Malaysia. But Islam Hadhari should not be viewed merely as a political
instrument. Prime Minister Badawi envisions Islam Hadhari as an antidote to the tide of
extremism ravaging the larger Muslim world, at a time when many Muslim nations are
struggling to reconcile piety with modern realities. “It is our duty,” Badawi said at a conference
last year, “to demonstrate, by word and by action, that a Muslim country can be modern,
democratic, tolerant and economically competitive.” (Ioannis Gatsiounis).

There are those both within and outside of Malaysia who believe that Civilizational Islam is a
smokescreen for the interjection of radical Islam and not the democratic or Moderate form of
Islamism as espoused by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Indonesia, and Tayyip Erdoğan,
Prime Minister of Turkey who is the leader of the AKP. They point to the election of Hamas in
West Gaza are a poignant example of that. That is far from true. Islamic countries such as Egypt,
Malaysia, Indonesia, Turkey, and Tunisia have defined and shaped democracy in their sphere.
Over the years, they have become matured, stable, and strong political bases. The citizens in the
West Gaza stripe had not been conditioned to democratic ideals and traditions. The cultivating of
democracy requires a viable and educated Middle Class. Each of these countries mentioned
possessed all of these characteristics. Turkey under the rule of Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan
has actually democratized Turkey to such an extent, that it has applied for admission for
membership into the European Union. “What was at stake was not just the future of Turkey’s
mainstream Islamist movement. If dynamic young leaders who respected both religious
conservatism and Turkey’s democratic and secular values could emerge from Erbakan’s long
shadow, they might be able to close the gap between Turkey’s traditional masses and its
westernized elite and thus finish the revolution that Ataturk began. (Anthony Bubalo).
The Western interpretation of Democratic Islamic Movements such as what is happening Turkey
is like putting a square peg in a round hole. The conservative influence of Islam in these
countries is not a rejection of Democratic principles and institutions but rather a backlash against
the Moral Decay that they see as characteristic of Western Culture. Turkeys’ applicant for

admission into the European Union would have not been possible without the guidance and
leadership by Prime Minister Erdogan in his quest to mold Turkey into a strong nation-state with
embedded Democratic Traditions. He has been able to successfully sidestep the concept of
Ataturkism (Turkey secularism) which has had such a stranglehold on the political maturity of
Turkey. The fear of an Islamic resurgence and the lost of democracy in Turkey, Malaysia, &
Indonesia are misguided at best and represents the Clash of Civilization mindset as defined by
Samuel Huntington and has been interwoven into Western Foreign Policy with a bias approach
towards stable Islamic democracies. There is no doubt that the best defense against Muslim
Extremism is to cultivate and encourage such movements as Civiilizational Islam in Malaysia
and the move to Europeanization that is now happening in Turkey. In fact, if one were to look
deeper, one would find that there are some countries in the West which harbor and give safe
haven to some of the worst Islamic Terrorist groups in the world. “For London has become a
major global center of Islamist extremism-the economic and spiritual European hub of a
production and distribution network for the most radicalized form of Islamic thinking, which not
only pumps out an unremitting ideology of hatred for the West but actively recruits soldiers and
raises funds for the worldwide terrorist jihad. London is home to the largest collect of Islamist
activist since the terrorist production line was established in Afghanistan. Indeed, one can say
that it was in Britain that Al Qaeda was actually formed as movement. It was in Britain that
disparate radical and subversive agendas, which until then had largely been focused individual
countries, became forged into the Global Islamist movement that was Al Qaeda.” (Melanie
Phillips).

It should be noted that one of the worst terrorist groups that London gives safe haven is the
Kurdish Separate Group call PKK. This group has been documented with causing acts of terror
both within Turkey and outside that is just as bloodthirsty as those perpetuated by Al Qaeda.
Hence, it is the West that is helping to foster homegrown terrorist groups that threatens the
stability of Muslim Democracies such as Turkey, Malaysia, & Indonesia.
The one area that Malaysia must significant progress is the advancement of women in it society.
Malaysia unfortunately along with Thailand and the UAE, has earned the distinction as being one
of the top countries in the world when it comes to the force labor of men, women, and children.
Malaysia has a growing manufacturing sector and as such attracts foreign workers from such
countries as the Philippines, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka to work in these factories for low wages.
Their passports are immediately confiscated by the owner so that they cannon leave the country.
In essence, a virtual slave society exists in Malaysia, one which the government is trying to
eliminate by passing stricter labor laws outlawing this type of human rights abuse. From a
strictly human rights perspective, women are treated the worst. They are sold overseas as sex
slaves and prostitutes to different countries. Therefore, the actions of the Malaysian Government
are of great importance in eliminating this Human Rights abuse because their rhetoric of
Civlizational Islam must also match their deeds.
On the surface, women in Malaysia have equality status in terms of education, marriage, divorce,
and jobs. Yet underneath are there are practices in some part of the country such as Polygamy
that still exist. In addition, with the upsurge of conservative Islamic doctrine, there is the belief

that a woman should be seen but not heard. “Malaysia portrays itself as a modern Muslim
country and indeed it is, in many significant ways. The country is relatively democratic; we have
a Federal Constitution that respects fundamental liberties and equality of persons before the law;
we take a forthright position on the international stage and we are – despite the niggly problems
– proud of our multi-ethnic and multi-religious heritage.
But Malaysia is also caught in the throes of an Islamic resurgence which has given strength to an
obscurantist strand of the religion. This is threatening to reverse the gains we’ve made in our
plural society. These days, a heightened awareness of Islam is felt in almost every sphere of
society, much of it seen in the long list of dos and don’ts for Muslims. Even billboards have not
been spared: in the northern state of Kelantan which is under opposition rule, outdoor
advertisements of women are suitably covered up the Islamic way.” (Rose Ismail)
As a moderate and progressive Muslim state, Islam in Malaysian society is interwoven within the
political and legal structures of the country. In addition, to civil courts Malaysia also has Sharia
courts where judges issue religious decrees on everything from divorce, property, and crime.
Non-Muslims are not part of the process. However, with the increasing presence of Conservative
Islam, the religious police have been known to raid a nightclub and arrest the Muslims while
leaving the non-patrons there to party all night long. If the trend continues though, then it will
not be long before those same party goers will be taken away, both Muslim & Non-Muslims
alike.

Contrast the political and cultural structure of Malaysia with that of Tunisia. Both have Islamic
traditions, both were former Colonial Empires (Tunisia declared Independence from France in
1956, & Malaysia from England in 1957), both declare Islam as the official state religion, and
both have full recognition of the rights of women. The difference though is that Tunisia is truly a
secular state and does not combine religion and state together as has been done in Malaysia. The
greatest example of that was the establishment of the Code of Personal Status which was the
emancipation all women enacted by President Habib Bourguiba in August 1956 and strengthened
by Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in August 1992. The tenets of the code gave women equal status in
the areas of education, jobs, divorce, and property ownership.
“The principle of equality of men and women with respect to citizenship and before the courts is
expressly stipulated in Tunisian legal texts.
As early as 1956, the Code of Personal Status established a new organization of the family based
on equality of rights, through a series of provisions that included:
• the abolition of polygamy;
• the establishment of judicial divorce proceedings, granting both spouses the right to
request divorce;
• setting the minimum age for marriage at 17 for girls, and providing that they must
consent to the marriage;

• in the case of death of the child's father, granting the mother the right of custody of their
minor children.
The new amendments announced by the President of the Republic on August 13, 1992 have,
meanwhile, strengthened the place of women still further, confirming the principle according to
which their rights are inseparable from those of men, eliminating legal provisions that could be
interpreted as discriminatory and sexist. These amendments, adopted by the Chamber of
Deputies in July 1993, stipulate in particular:
• that the two spouses "must treat each other with kindness and consideration, and assist
each other in the management of the household and the affairs of their children." This
provision replaces the former clause providing that "the woman must obey her husband";
• that a mother's consent must be obtained for the marriage of a daughter who is a minor;
• that mothers may participate in the management of their children's affairs, particularly in
the case of a divorced mother who has custody of her children;
• that married girls who are still legal minors have the right to manage their own private
life and affairs;
• that a fund be created to guarantee payment of child support and alimony to divorced
women and their children.
Created by virtue of law 93-65 pf 5 July 1993, the fund for alimony and divorce annuity
guarantee, ensures the payment of pension and annuity decided by the court, which

remain unpaid to divorced women and their children because of the obstinacy of the
condemned party.
• that judges receive training in the field of women's rights, and that specialists be trained
in personal status and in sociological and psychological matters;
• that the provisions referring to child support and alimony be recast in such a way as to
ensure payment of child support for the couple's children until they reach their majority
or finish their schooling; in the case of girls, this allowance continues to be due even after
they reach the age of majority, until they marry, or if they have no income of their own.”
(Tunisia Online)
It was through the introduction of these measures of women rights, equality, and universal
suffrage that President Habib Bourguiba of Tunisia earned a reputation as a reformer and father
of his nation on the same level as that of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk of Turkey.
It is up to the leaders of Malaysia such as Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to make
women’s rights and equality the same focal point in the improvement of the status of their people
just as they did in improving the status of the Malay majority with the introduction of
Affirmative and major economic reforms such as the NEP. If they are to ascend unto the world
stage as a thoroughly modern country representing all races and religions as envisioned by the
founders of Vision 2020, then Women’s rights must be a cornerstone of that agenda.

Statecraft And The Modern Nation-State.
In examining Malaysia from a functional structuralist approach we find a nation that is
steeped in British Parliamentary traditions and procedures political wise but has interwoven
those traditions within the governmental apparatus of their country. What makes Malaysia
stand out with other Asian and Islamic democracies is that they mixed the old customs such
as with the Heredity Sultanates with the modern aspects of both government and democracy.
Hence, the question how do you define a nation? What are its attributes, characteristics, and
social dimensions? “The word nation is sometimes used to mean almost the same as the word
state, as in the name the United Nations. Strictly speaking however, we wish to use the term
nation to refer to a group of people with a common identity. When we speak of a nation, we
thus refer to the self-identification of a people. That common identity may be built upon a

common language, history, race, or culture, or simply upon the fact that this group has
occupied the same territory.” (Gabriel Almond). In essence, a nation is a living and breathing
political entity and representative government is the lifeline that flows through it. As a living
political entity, its primary purpose is to provide for the General Welfare by enhancing the
lives and productivity of its citizens. If representative government is the lifeline that flows
through it, then the republic is the supporting wall of that representative government. “A wall
on which a structure relies is called as supporting wall. Nation state is a supporting wall that
a Republic relies on, supports its systematic and strengthens its resistance. Republic has
preserved its existence by taking heart from nation state.” (Diplomatic Observer)
In this essay I have established that Malaysia as a moderate Islamic state is evolving into a model
democracy that provides for the General Welfare of its people. That was clearly evident in the
launching of the NEP, 2 Malaysian Plan, and Vision 2020 first by Prime Minister Tun Abdul
Razak, and by his eventual successor Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad. Hence, it was Dr. Mahathir
who was the stalwart who both defined and represented Malaysian society as well as Southeast
Asia. “The early 1980s also heralded the beginning of the second phase in Dr. Mahathir’s
engagement with Asia. This is the period of Dr Mahathir’s ‘discovery’ of Asia and its virtues,
when (in almost complete inversion of classical modernization theory) Asia’s cultural
characteristics were listed as the true reasons for its economic growth.” (Sven Alexander
Schottmann). It was Dr. Mahathir who emphasized that all Malaysians regardless of their race,
religion, or ethnicity were Sons of the Soil (Bumiputra). The concept of Sons of the Soil (SoS) is

deeply embedded in the human psyche. Sons of the soil are an elemental concept tying people to
their place of birth and confer some benefits, rights, roles and responsibilities on them.” (Sons of
the Soil). It is that ideology which unites all Malaysians (despite its problems) as a unique
Sovereign nations-state.
ENDNOTES
1. CIA-The World Fact book, “Malaysia,” https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-
world-factbook/geos/my.html (accessed February 3, 2009).

2. Dr. Carolina López Caballero. “The British Presence in the Malay World: A Meeting of
Civiilizational Traditions,” (Felo Pelawat Penyelidik, Dari Northern Arizona University,
di Institut Kajian Malaysia dan Antarabangsa, IKMAS, & Universiti Kebangsaan
Malaysia, 2001 ):13.
3. Ibid., 11.
4. Ibid., 11.
5. B.R. Tomlison, “The Empire of Enterprise: British Business Networks, Trade, and
Remittance In Asia, 1793-1810.” KIU Journal of Economics and Business Studies, no. 8
(2001): 1.
6. Ibid, 13.
7. Firdaus Hj. Abdullah, “Affirmative Action Policy in Malaysia: To Restructure Society, to
Eradicate Poverty,” Ethnic Studies Report (ESR): Vol. XV, No. 2, (July 1997), 6.,
http://www.ices.lk/publications/esr/articles_jul97/Esr-Abdullah.PDF (accessed January
25, 2009)
8. Cameron W. Barr, “How to Keep Asia's Melting Pots From Boiling,” Christian Science
Monitor, Monday 14 December 1998, http://www.hartford-
hwp.com/archives/54/225.html (accessed February 18, 2009).

9. A. Fadzel, LL.B (Hons) (BuckinghaM), LL.M (Queensland), “Malaysia: A Case Study,”
The University of Queensland - T.C. Beirne School of Law, (2005), 3
10. Graham K. Brown, “Balancing the Risks of Corrective Surgery: The political Economy
of Horizontal Inequalities and The End of The New Economic Policy in Malaysia,”
(Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford: Centre for Research on Inequality,
Human Security and Ethnicity, CRISE, 2005), 4
11. Ibid., 4
12. Ibid., 4.
13. Firdaus Hj. Abdullah,
14. Haris Ibrahim, “All Malaysians Are Sons of The Soil,” The Dr Vanaja –Malaysiakini
Blog comment posted on October 10, 2006,
http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2007/05/05/all-malaysians-are-sons-of-the-soil/
(accessed February 18, 2009).
15. Vinay Lal, “Multiculturalism at Risk: The Indian Minority in Malaysia, Economic and
Political Weekly, and (September 2, 2006): 3764.
16. Graham K. Brown, “Making Ethnic citizens: The politics and practice of education in
Malaysia,” CRISE WORKING PAPER No. 23 (Queen Elizabeth House, University of
Oxford: Center For Research On Inequality, Human Security, and Ethnicity, CRISE,
2005), 6.

17. Gabriel A. Almond et al., 9th ed., Comparative Politics Today: A World View, (New York:
Pearson Longman, 2008), 619.
18. Pankaj Mishra, “Impasse to India,” NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, VOLUME 54, NUMBER
11, (JUNE 28, 2007):1-2.
19. Constitutional Rights Foundation,” Social Darwinism and American Laissez-faire
Capitalism,” Bill of Rights in Action 19:2 (Spring 2003), http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-
rights-in-action/bria-19-2-b.html (accessed February 25, 2009).
20. GLOBAL RIGHTS: PARTNERS FOR JUSTICE, “Affirmative Action: A Global
Perspective,” (Washington, D.C.: Global Rights: Partners for Justice, 2005), 1.
21. Ho Khai Leong, “DYNAMICS OF POLICY-MAKING IN MALAYSIA: THE
FORMULATION OF THE NEW ECONOMIC POLICY AND THE NATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT POLICY,” ASIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
VOL.14 NO.2 (DEC 1992): 206.
22. Australian Government, Department of The Environment, Water, Heritage, And The Arts,
“MALAYSIA Â COUNTRY PROFILE,”

http://www.environment.gov.au/esd/la21/guide/pubs/malaysiaprofile.pdf (accessed
February 25, 2009).
23. Ibid.
24. Knowledge Rush Encyclopeida,”Who is Dr. Mahathir Mohamad,”
http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Mahathir_Mohamad/ (accessed
February 26, 2009.
25. Multimedia University, Historical Society,” Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad,” http://www.hs-
mmu.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=36 (accessed
February 26, 2009),”
26. Knowledge Rush Encyclopedia.
27. Multimedia University.
28. Manfred Gerstenfeld, “THE MAHATHIR AFFAIR: A CASE STUDY
IN MAINSTREAM ISLAMIC ANTI-SEMITISM,” Jerusalem Viewpoints, Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs, No. 506 7 Heshvan 5764 (2 November 2003)
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp506.htm.
29. Martin Khor, “Currency "sabotage" should be an international crime,” Third World
Network, TWE No. 167, 16-31 (August 1997), http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/sab-
cn.htm (accessed February 26, 2009).

30. Oxfarm International,” Kicking the Habit-How the World Bank and the IMF are still
addicted to attaching economic policy conditions to aid, Oxford Briefing Paper #96,
(Oxford: Oxford International, 2006), 8-9.
31. Ibid., 6.
32. Ser-Huang Poon, “Malaysia and the Asian Financial Crisis A View from the Finance
Perspective,” Lancaster University, United Kingdom, African Finance Journal, Special
Issue (October 12, 1999): 4.
33. Ibid., 11.
34. Melissa M. Appleyard, “Malaysia Faces the New Millennium (A),” Portland State
University – Management, Social Science Research Network, (October 21, 2008):13.
35. Ser-Huang Poon, 13.
36. L. Alan Winters and Shahid Yusuf, ed., Dancing With Giants China, India, & The Global
Economy, (Washington, D.C. & Singapore: The World Bank & The Institute of Policy
Studies), 31.
37. The Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia, “Some Key Public Sector Economic Policies,”
(http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=page&page=1900 (accessed February 27, 2009).
38. Hasan Zubair, “Fifty Years of Malaysian Economic Development: Policies &
Achievements,” International Islamic University, Malaysia (IIUM), Munich Personal


RePEc Archive, Formerly Published in Review of Islamic Economics, Vol. II (November
2, 2007):2
39. The Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia, “Malaysia As A Fully Developed Country -
One Definition,” http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=page&page=1898 (accessed February
27, 2009).
40. Jono K.S., “The New Economic Policy and Interethnic Relations In Malaysia,” Identities,
Conflict, and Cohesion Program Paper, Number 7 (Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations,
Research Institute, 2004), 11.
41. World Economic Forum, “Global Competitiveness Index rankings and 2007-2008
comparisons,” (2008),
42. CIA Fact book.
43. Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, “ISLAM HADHARI OR CIVILIZATIONAL
ISLAM: Promoting Good Governance within Societies and Goodwill Between Peoples
and Cultures Internationally.” (Speech given at United Nations University, Japan: May
26, 2006),
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/malaysia/docs/UnitedNationsUniversityJap
anMay262006.html (accessed March 1, 2009).

44. Mohamed Sharif Bashir, PhD, “Islam Hadhari: Concept and Prospect,” Islamonline.net,
March 03, 2005
http://www.islamonline.net/english/Contemporary/2005/03/Article01.shtml (accessed
February 27, 2009).
45. Ioannis Gatsiounis, “Islam Hadhari in Malaysia," Center On Islam, Democracy and The
Future of The Muslim World, Current Trends in Islamist Ideology vol. 3 (February 16,
2006) http://www.futureofmuslimworld.com/research/pubID.43/pub_detail.asp (accessed
February 27, 2009).
46. Anthony Bubalo et. al., “Zealous Democrats, Islamism and Democracy in Egypt,
Indonesia and Turkey,” Lowry Institute for International Policy, (New South Wales 1360
Australia: Longueville Media, 2008), 87.
47. Melanie Phillips, Londonistan.1st ed. (New York: Encounter Books, 2006), 6.
48. Rose Ismail, “Women and Islam in Malaysia,” Newsbreak, MARCH 2004,
HTTP://KYOTOREVIEW.CSEAS.KYOTO-U.AC.JP/ISSUE/ISSUE4/ARTICLE_348.HTML (ACCESSED FEBRUARY
28, 2009).
49. TUNISIA ONLINE, “Women and Civil Rights,” Official Internet for The Government Of
Tunisia, http://www.tunisiaonline.com/women/index.html (accessed February 28, 2009).
50. Gabriel A. Almond, 13.

51. Diplomatic Observer, “ NATION STATE IS A SUPPORTING WALL FOR REPUBLIC,”
http://www.diplomaticobserver.com/news_read.asp?id=1454 (accessed February 28,
2009)
52. Sven Alexander Schottmann, “FROM TRIUMPHALISM TO THE ‘NEW DEAL: TUN
DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD AND THE ASIAN CENTURY,” (Doctorate Thesis,
Monash Asia Institute, Monash University, 2008), 6.
53. “Sons of the Soil,” With A Grain of Salt Blog, entry posted February 8, 2006,
http://piquancy.blogspot.com/search?q=E%3A%5CResources+on+Malaysia%5CWith+A
+Grain+of+Salt%21+Sons+of+the+Soil.mht (accessed February 28, 2009).

BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. CIA-The World Fact book, “Malaysia,” https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-
world-factbook/geos/my.html (accessed February 3, 2009)
2. Caballero, Carolina Lopez, Dr. “The British Presence in the Malay World: A Meeting of
Civilizational Traditions,” Felo Pelawat Penyelidik, Dari Northern Arizona University, di
Institut Kajian Malaysia dan Antarabangsa, IKMAS, & Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
2001.
3. Tomlison, B.R.“The Empire of Enterprise: British Business Networks, Trade, and
Remittance In Asia, 1793-1810.” KIU Journal of Economics and Business Studies, no. 8
(2001): 67-83
4. Abdullah, Firdaus Hj. “Affirmative Action Policy in Malaysia: To Restructure Society, to
Eradicate Poverty,” Ethnic Studies Report (ESR): Vol. XV, No. 2, (July 1997),
http://www.ices.lk/publications/esr/articles_jul97/Esr-Abdullah.PDF (accessed January
25, 2009)
5. Barr, Cameron W., “How to Keep Asia's Melting Pots From Boiling,” Christian Science
Monitor, Monday 14 December 1998. http://www.hartford-
hwp.com/archives/54/225.html (accessed February 18, 2009).

6. Fadel, A LL.B and (Hons) (BuckinghaM), LL.M (Queensland), “Malaysia: A Case
Study,” The University of Queensland - T.C. Beirne School of Law (2005):1-28
7. Brown, Graham K. “Balancing the Risks of Corrective Surgery: The political Economy
of Horizontal Inequalities and The End of The New Economic Policy in Malaysia.”
Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford: Centre for Research on Inequality, Human
Security and Ethnicity, CRISE, 2005.
8. Ibrahim Haris. “All Malaysians Are Sons of The Soil,” The Dr Vanaja –Malaysiakini Blog
comment posted on October 10, 2006,
http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2007/05/05/all-malaysians-are-sons-of-the-soil/
(accessed February 18, 2009).
9. Vinay, Lal. “Multiculturalism at Risk: The Indian Minority in Malaysia,” Economic and
Political Weekly, September 2, 2006.
10. Brown, Graham K. “Making Ethnic citizens: The politics and practice of education in
Malaysia,” CRISE WORKING PAPER No. 23. Queen Elizabeth House, University of
Oxford: Center For Research On Inequality, Human Security, and Ethnicity, CRISE,
2005.
11. Almond, Gabriel A., G. Bingham Powell, Jr., Russell J. Dalton, & Karre Strom. 9th ed.,
Comparative Politics Today: A World View. New York: Pearson Longman, 2008.

12. Misha, Pankaj. “Impasse to India,” NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, VOLUME 54, NUMBER
11, (JUNE 28, 2007), 1-12.
13. Constitutional Rights Foundation.” Social Darwinism and American Laissez-faire
Capitalism,” Bill of Rights in Action 19:2 (Spring 2003), http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-
rights-in-action/bria-19-2-b.html (accessed February 25, 2009).
14. GLOBAL RIGHTS: PARTNERS FOR JUSTICE. “Affirmative Action: A Global
Perspective,” Washington, D.C.: Global Rights: Partners for Justice, 2005
15. Leong, Ho Khai. “DYNAMICS OF POLICY-MAKING IN MALAYSIA: THE
FORMULATION OF THE NEW ECONOMIC POLICY AND THE NATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT POLICY.” ASIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
VOL.14 NO.2 (DEC 1992): 204-227.
16. Australian Government, Department of The Environment, Water, Heritage, And The Arts,
“MALAYSIA Â COUNTRY PROFILE,”
http://www.environment.gov.au/esd/la21/guide/pubs/malaysiaprofile.pdf (accessed
February 25, 2009).
17. Knowledge Rush Encyclopeida,”Who is Dr. Mahathir Mohamad,”
http://www.knowledgerush.com/kr/encyclopedia/Mahathir_Mohamad/ (accessed
February 26, 2009.

18. Multimedia University, Historical Society,” Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad,” http://www.hs-
mmu.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=36 (accessed
February 26, 2009),”
19. Gerstenfeld, Manfred. “THE MAHATHIR AFFAIR: A CASE STUDY
IN MAINSTREAM ISLAMIC ANTI-SEMITISM,” Jerusalem Viewpoints, Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs, No. 506, 7 Heshvan 5764 (2 November 2003)
http://www.jcpa.org/jl/vp506.htm.
20. Khor, Martin, “Currency "sabotage" should be an international crime,” Third World
Network, TWE No. 167, 16-31 (August 1997), http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/sab-
cn.htm (accessed February 26, 2009).
21. Oxfarm International” Kicking the Habit-How the World Bank and the IMF are still
addicted to attaching economic policy conditions to aid.” Oxford Briefing Paper #96,
Oxford: Oxford International, 2006).
22. Poon, Ser-Huang. “Malaysia and the Asian Financial Crisis A View from the Finance
Perspective,” Lancaster University, United Kingdom, African Finance Journal, Special
Issue (October 12, 1999):1-17
23. Appleyard, Melissa M. “Malaysia Faces the New Millennium (A),” Portland State
University – Management, Social Science Research Network, (October 21, 2008):1-41


24. Winters, L. Alan and Shahid Yusuf, ed., Dancing With Giants China, India, & The Global
Economy. Washington, D.C. & Singapore: The World Bank & The Institute of Policy
Studies.
25. The Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia. “Some Key Public Sector Economic Policies,”
(http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=page&page=1900 (accessed February 27, 2009).
26. Zubair, Hasan.“Fifty Years of Malaysian Economic Development: Policies &
Achievements,” International Islamic University, Malaysia (IIUM), Munich Personal
RePEc Archive, Formerly Published in Review of Islamic Economics, Vol. II (November
2, 2007):1-19
27. The Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia.“Malaysia As A Fully Developed Country - One
Definition,” http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=page&page=1898 (accessed February 27,
2009).
28. K.S., Jono K.S. “The New Economic Policy and Interethnic Relations In Malaysia,”
Identities, Conflict, and Cohesion Program Paper, Number 7. Geneva, Switzerland:
United Nations, Research Institute, 2004.
29. World Economic Forum, “Global Competitiveness Index rankings and 2007-2008
comparisons,” (2008),

30. Badawa, Abdullah Ahmad, Prime Minister.“ISLAM HADHARI OR CIVILIZATIONAL
ISLAM: Promoting Good Governance within Societies and Goodwill Between Peoples
and Cultures Internationally.” Speech given at United Nations University, Japan: May 26,
2006.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/malaysia/docs/UnitedNationsUniversityJap
anMay262006.html (accessed March 1, 2009).
31. Bashir, Mohamed Sharif PhD, “Islam Hadhari: Concept and Prospect.” Islamonline.net,
March 03, 2005
http://www.islamonline.net/english/Contemporary/2005/03/Article01.shtml (accessed
February 27, 2009).
32. Gatsiounis, Ioannis. “Islam Hadhari in Malaysia," Center On Islam, Democracy and The
Future of The Muslim World, Current Trends in Islamist Ideology vol. 3 (February 16,
2006) http://www.futureofmuslimworld.com/research/pubID.43/pub_detail.asp (accessed
February 27, 2009).
33. Bubalo, Anthony, Greg Fealy, and Whit Mason. “Zealous Democrats, Islamism and
Democracy in Egypt, Indonesia and Turkey,” Lowry Institute for International Policy.
New South Wales 1360 Australia: Longueville Media, 2008.
34. Phillips, Melanie. Londonistan. 1st ed. New York: Encounter Books, 2006.

35. Ismail, Rose. “Women and Islam in Malaysia,” Newsbreak, MARCH 2004,
HTTP://KYOTOREVIEW.CSEAS.KYOTO-U.AC.JP/ISSUE/ISSUE4/ARTICLE_348.HTML (ACCESSED FEBRUARY
28, 2009).
36. TUNISIA ONLINE, “Women and Civil Rights,” Official Internet for The Government Of
Tunisia, http://www.tunisiaonline.com/women/index.html (accessed February 28, 2009).
37. Diplomatic Observer, “ NATION STATE IS A SUPPORTING WALL FOR REPUBLIC,”
http://www.diplomaticobserver.com/news_read.asp?id=1454 (accessed February 28,
2009)
38. Schottmann, Sven Alexander. “FROM TRIUMPHALISM TO THE ‘NEW DEAL: TUN
DR MAHATHIR MOHAMAD AND THE ASIAN CENTURY.” Doctorate Thesis,
Monash Asia Institute, Monash University, 2008.
39. “Sons of the Soil,” With A Grain of Salt Blog, entry posted February 8, 2006,
http://piquancy.blogspot.com/search?q=E%3A%5CResources+on+Malaysia%5CWith+A
+Grain+of+Salt%21+Sons+of+the+Soil.mht (accessed February 28, 2009).


SonsoftheSoilBumiputra IRLS501B001 03 09

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SonsoftheSoilBumiputra IRLS501B001 03 09

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sons of the Soil (Bumiputra)

Country Profile: Malaysia

Dr. Thomas Kirkwood

Comparative Political Systems

Based On The Structural-Functional Approach with Political Articulation as

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

Malaysia a dynamic sovereign nation-state.

COLONIALISM & HOME RULE

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

state.” (B. R. Tomlinson).

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

professions, and the Chinese ran businesses.” (Cameron W. Barr)

Malaysia as a pluralistic nation.

Statecraft & Multiculturalism

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

legislative decisions as compared to other British Parliamentary models of government. “Article

constitutional provisions on Bumiputera rights in influencing political and social situation in

Malaysia is essential in examining the strengths and flaws of constitutional government in

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

publishing relevant detailed statistics.” ((Graham K. Brown).

component. At a lower level of economic activity, numbers of Deposit-Taking Cooperatives

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

politically-linked Malay entrepreneur would become in effect a silent partner in a business

involved in the running of the business.” (Firdaus Hj. Abdullah).

not bumiputeras and non-bumiputeras.

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

Islam in Malaysia cannot be doubted. Whereas in most countries affirmative action

programmesor quotas are reserved for underprivileged or disenfranchised minorities, in Malaysia

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

educationalist Dongjiaozong organizations to set up a private Chinese medium university was

highest court, which ruled in favour of the government.” (Graham K. Brown,)

included a breakdown highlighting the economic disparity.

“The economic disparity can further be highlighted by the following

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

1. The Brahmins, who originally performed the traditional function of priests:

2. The Kshatriyas, who were the rulers and the warriors.

groups, agriculturist, and artisans. (Gabriel A. Almond).

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

laissez-faire system that tolerated no government regulation of private enterprise. He considered

little government as possible.

helped provided intellectual support for laissez-faire capitalism in America.” (Constitutional

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

different races, international law— either implicitly or explicitly—requires states to engage in

affirmative action.” (GLOBAL RIGHTS: PARTNERS FOR JUSTICE).

the Second Malaysian Plan.

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

a strong constitutional democracy. ” As a parliamentary democracy patterned after the British

constitutional monarchy, Malaysia’s governmental structure combines elements of the British

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

Government.” (Australian Government). The Malaysian equivalent of a state governor is drawn

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

prime minister beginning in 1976.” (Knowledge Rush).

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

the traditionally dominant Chinese minority.” (Knowledge Rush).

Semitism studies call "the theory of Jewish conspiracy." Mahathir said:

By Richard L. Dixon. Email address: rdixon57@gmail.com

strategize and then to counter-attack.

to fight and die for them.

Financial Crisis of the late 1999s.