Najib Tun Razak was sworn in as Malaysia’s sixth Prime Minister on 3 April 2009. He takes over the Prime Ministership of Malaysia at a critical juncture in the history of his political party and Malaysia. On the global front, Malaysia is battered by the worst global economic crisis since the Great Depression. Domestically, Najib’s ruling party, the United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) and the coalition that it leads, the Barisan Nasional (BN) are at their lowest ebb, suffering a backlash from citizens fed-up with the blatant abuse of power by a regime that has ruled Malaysia since independence in 1957.
Najib realises that reform of UMNO is critical for his and UMNO’s survival. He watched how Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s fortunes turned from ‘party hero’, leading UMNO and BN to the resounding victory in the 11th general election in 2004 when Malaysian’s gave him the biggest mandate for an incoming administration ever, to ‘a failed leader’ in the 12th general elections where the electorate punished him, UMNO and BN for squandering the mandate given and betraying the people’s trust by not instituting the reforms that were promised. Badawi has since been removed as UMNO needed a scapegoat. Najib knows that he will face the same consequence if he does not deliver victory for UMNO. For all the promises of loyalty and the feudal mentality that pervades it, UMNO nonetheless is ultimately driven by money and power.
Najib, who headed BN’s operations during the election campaign in the 12th General Election in 2008, is aware of the following facts. BN lost four states on the more prosperous west coast of the Peninsular – Kedah, Penang, Perak and Selangor — while failing to retake poverty-ridden Kelantan on the east coast, which has been in opposition control since 1990. BN only obtained 49 per cent of popular votes on the Peninsular. Sabah and Sarawak saved BN. Although BN won 140 of the 222 Parliamentary seats, 54 of them came from these two states on the island of Borneo, confirming that Borneo island politics are not linked to the Peninsular. Most importantly, the popular vote obtained by UMNO in the Peninsular was 35.5 per cent which was matched closely by the combined votes of Anwar’s Justice Party (Parti Keadilan Rakyat) and the Islamist party (PAS).
This trend is also evident in that BN has lost all four by-elections in Peninsular Malaysia with a face saving win in Sarawak, the only by-election to date on the Borneo island. The three most recent by-elections were held simultaneously in an attempt to weaken the opposition’s campaign organisation (two in the Peninsular, one in Sarawak). It was held on 7 April 2009, four days after Najib was sworn in as Prime Minister. BN lost two with a face saving win through one of its component parties on the Island. BN and UMNO campaigned on the platform of giving the new Prime Minister and his policy of ‘One Malaysia, People First, Performance Now’ a chance; however this did not resonate with the electorate. Even more worrying is that in all these by-elections, the opposition’s winning margin increased over that in the General Election despite BN training all it’s and the state’s resources and machinery against the opposition.
Najib also understands that Malaysia’s economic fortunes, BN’s claim to legitimacy are trending downwards. Economic growth over the past 18 years has averaged just a little over 6 per cent while the average growth rate since the East Asian financial crisis of 1997/98 has been only 4 per cent. This is worrying as the performance has undershot all BN government targets. In the Vision 2020 Policy, economic growth was targeted at 7 per cent per annum from 1991 to 2020 and in the Industrial Master Plan III, the target was 6.3 per cent for the plan period from 2006 to 2020, while the 9th Malaysia Plan (2006 -2010) sets the target for 6 per cent. While the reasons for Malaysia’s lacklustre economic performance are varied, the Opposition have successfully laid the blame squarely on BN’s incompetency and corrupt practices as an electorate hard hit by the current global economic crisis and experiencing long term deterioration in government delivery of services have heartily accepted this proposition. This of course has raised serious questions about the credibility of the BN government’s ability to deliver on economic growth – BN’s final claim to legitimacy. The slowdown in the global economy has also made Najib’s task more difficult as Malaysia, the third most open economy in Asia, relies heavily on international trade.
Najib also faces a weakening domestic fiscal position. Ever since affirmative action was introduced in a big way through the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1970, the government has never had a balanced budget or surplus except for the period 1992 – 1997, interestingly when Anwar was Finance Minister. Budget deficits have been the norm despite economic cycles and, since 1999, budget deficits have consistently exceeded forecast outcomes. While Federal government debt for the period 2000 – 2008 averaged at 42.6 per cent of GDP is manageable, it is steadily increasing as revenues progressively fall due to limited sources of new growth areas, higher thresholds before individuals are taxed, increased exemptions from taxable incomes, depleting natural resources and mismanagement and wastage of public funds.
Najib also realises that he comes with heavy baggage. He is the ultimate UMNO insider. He was ushered into politics upon the death of his father in 1976 at the age of 23, taking over his father’s Parliamentary seat. Najib, the son of the highly respected second Prime Minister, Tun Abdul Razak and the nephew of the third Prime Minister, Tun Hussein Onn, enjoyed a secure path up the ladder in UMNO. His tenure as Chief Minister of the state of Pahang and Deputy Minister or Minister of the various other ministries was lacklustre. Most telling was his tenure as Defence Minister, which was scandal-ridden with allegations of various shady defence deals, high numbers of deaths of Malaysian armed forces personnel while flying obsolete and poorly maintained fighter planes and helicopters (almost 90 military personnel and civilians are reported to have died flying Nuri helicopters) and a National Service program which has resulted in the deaths of 17 young Malaysians participating in the program and culminating with the allegation of being complicit in the murder of a Mongolian national.
With all these setbacks, Najib realises that the he must convince UMNO and BN that the critical challenge to his and their survival is to deliver on economic growth and improve race relations by ending or at least tempering patronage politics and improving government efficiency, which had been the hallmark of the successful BN machinery of yester-years. Najib’s policy slogan of ‘One Malaysia, People First, Performance Now’ may demonstrate that he (and UMNO) is beginning to understand that although Malaysian remains a country with deep-rooted racism, Malaysians of all races, creeds and colours are increasingly doubtful about BN’s continuing rule. The BN/UMNO’s strategy of dividing the races has not worked in the same way as in years gone by. Voting patterns especially among the younger generation (below 35) reveals the willingness of voters irrespective of race and social class to vote for opposition.
Najib may also realise that only substantive reforms will give him and UMNO a serious shot at redemption. Immediately after becoming the Prime Minister, he released 13 individuals (including three Hindu Rights Action Force (HINRAF) leaders – a people’s movement advocating fair treatment for the minority Malaysians of Indian heritage) – held under the Internal Securities Act (ISA) – an Act that provides for detention without trial for unlimited period. Najib also revoked the suspension on the biweekly internal newspapers of PAS and PKR hoping to influence the by-election. It however had no effect. Najib correctly pointed out after the by-elections that BN had to ’shape-up or ship out.’
Although 80 per cent of Najib’s Cabinet comprises ministers from the previous Badawi administration and many having dubious records, it is unclear how his administration will proceed in addressing the work that is needed given all the challenges UMNO, BN and Malaysia is facing. Najib, following previous trends have indicated that there is a need for reforms and has implemented some symbolic changes. Whether it is sufficient — only time will tell. But one thing is for sure, Malaysians will not tolerate ‘Business As Usual’.
Gregore Lopez is a PhD student at the Crawford School of Economics and Government, at the Australian National University.
7 responses so far ↓
1 hclau // Apr 28, 2009 at 12:29 am
The ruling Govt is unlikely to change regardless of the dangers that it may face in the next general election. If one looks beyond the hollow words and slogans, and just observe the actions, the conclusion is obvious – business as usual.
If the opposition should actually win at the federal level election – the current govt might just do a “Thailand”
Sorry I digress, but here’s two examples to show what I mean by “business as usual”
1. During Mahathir time Rafidah Aziz lost the “Wanita” presidential position in the UMNO election. Being one of Mahathir’s people, he ignored the election result and made her the Trade Minister and gave her a position in the “supreme council” of UMNO. The president of the Wanita wing got nothing – sorry wrong camp
Present day – Khairy jamalludin won the UMNO Youth wing Presidency, and Mahathir’s son Mukriz came in last in votes. Najib ignored that and made Mukriz a deputy minister. Khairy got nothing – sorry wrong camp
2. Ali Rustum the chief minister of malacca was found guilty of “money” politics and was barred as a canditate in the UMNO general election (found guilty by UMNO’s own disciplinary board, no less)
najib ignored that – he is still the chief minister and made a member of the UMNO supreme council.
Business as usual
2 Ph O Piette // Apr 29, 2009 at 8:20 pm
All true and to the point. Just one note about Rafidah Aziz, talking from personal experience, she is probably one of the best ministers that the cabinet had. Very effective in handling her job and created a very effective ministry. So she really was an asset to the country and Dr M was right in the choice.
3 hclau // Apr 30, 2009 at 12:41 am
May agree with the job as Minister, but no excuse for the supreme council position. BTW, Rafidah created the AP for cars and made a bunch of cronies very rich doing basically nothing. It is wealth creation like this that has proved very unpopular, even amongst the “unconnected” Malays.
Artificial wealth creation which requires no input nor work simply decreases the efficiency of the economy. It has to come from somewhere, you cannot create something out of nothing.
4 Greg Lopez // Apr 30, 2009 at 3:17 pm
In response to Ph O Piette.
It would be useful to clarify what you mean by “very effective in handling her job” .
Was it that her Ministry (MITI) was efficient (will need some objective indicators) and was she the reason that MITI was efficient of was it the fact that in deadling with international competition, MITI had to be efficient to attract FDI.
Was she efficient in policy making? Was she responsible for the policies that Malaysia an attractive place for FDI. Was she responsible for the various policies that improved Malaysia’s technological capacity and capabilities?
Would appreciate further clarification on why you perceive her to be one of the ‘best ministers’?
Thanks
Greg
5 Ph O Piette // Apr 30, 2009 at 8:56 pm
First of all let me be quite clear that I am not an apologist for the Malaysian government. But as a business owner and operator in various South East Asian countries, I am neutral in political matters and only rely on what I experience and observation. Obviously living since a number of years in Malaysia, Vietnam and Thailand I also develop strong opinions and views.
1) Was it that her Ministry (MITI) was efficient (will need some objective indicators) and was she the reason that MITI was efficient of was it the fact that in deadling with international competition, MITI had to be efficient to attract FDI. The leadership, in this case Rafida, is responsible to deliver results. MITI does, and by far better, in a timely and more efficient way, than any other country in the region. I am still waiting for responses to issues from Thailand after 2 years. But let me illustrate the point. The FDI procedure was fragmented with immigration issue handled by the Immigration department, so when work permits needed to be issued/renewed, besides a cumbersome procedure, the Immigration department often took their time and made repeated mistakes. When it came to her attention, she immediately took action by instructing the staff on what to do and who to contact. In the next 12 months she was instrumental to change the procedure and Immigration Services were provided directly through MITI, simplifying and streamline the procedures.
2) Was she efficient in policy making? Was she responsible for the policies that Malaysia an attractive place for FDI. Was she responsible for the various policies that improved Malaysia’s technological capacity and capabilities? She was probably one of the people who certainly contributed to making Malaysia an attractive FDI place. Historians will with time be able to judge better to which extent. Dr M was certainly the visionary behind the whole policy, but Rafida was in charge of execution and she did. Look at the FDI numbers for Malaysia. That is the objective proof.
3) Would appreciate further clarification on why you perceive her to be one of the ‘best ministers’? She struck me as not only bright and savvy, but open minded and a good listener. She also knew her papers well. She did her homework. Now that is for sure something that you do not encounter often among politicians. I can not say that of others that I have met.
In response to hclau
I disagree with you. Would you not want experienced, proven and capable people on your team? Rafida is that for sure. Rafida did not create the AP for cars, she was instructed to do this by Dr M. As all these type of government programs you will have cronyism. That is everywhere in all countries. Like the Old Richard Dailey from Chicago is quoted as saying “if I can’t take care of your family and friends, why would I want the job?” Sure it decreases economic efficiencies. No question about it. But it is collateral damage, if I might use the term.
The way I see it is that in all systems, a team/party that stays to long runs out of ideas and energy. The best thing for Umno would be to loose a national election, as it would force to renew themselves. The best thing for Malaysia, and for all countries, is to have an effective opposition. Malaysia is in a transition phase. Dr M was/is a visionary. He is like a typical business entrepreneur. He has/had the will, energy, drive to develop his dream. Not all his projects were a successful, but on balance it was an overwhelming success. Anybody who has been to Malaysia can attest to that. When he stepped down, it was time for the professional manager to step in. Like most successful entrepreneurs, Dr M did not choose the strongest candidate to step in our shoes. Badawi is too much a gentleman and that was his weakness as PM. He did not have the killer instinct. What Malaysia currently needs is a professional manager that can correct, maintain and rebalance the system.
6 Greg Lopez // May 1, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Thank you Ph O Piette for your response.
As I continue my research on ASEAN and Malaysia, honest and objective feedback such as your allows me to understand better the different stakeholders and how they perceive politicians and governments that form the ASEAN member states.
7 hclau // May 1, 2009 at 11:52 pm
To Piette,
(caveat – I have no personal grudge against any politician – just see them as what they are)
While I do not disagree with you on Rafidah capabilities, I would also not give her too much on the efficiency of the immigration dept. In my view, the most efficient dept in Malaysia now is the immigration dept – this refers to service for malaysians – not necessary for expats etc etc.
Example – getting a passport renewal now takes about two (2) hours if one uses the machine at the dept. 24 hours if you apply at the counter.
The “success” of Malaysia can be partly attributed to BN (umno) but mostly to petroleum. From 1974-1976 when malaysia nationalised its oil resource, the govt coffers got a nice boost, allowing it to be inefficient and still have development.
However, in comparision to Singapore / Taiwan Korea etc, Malaysian development falls far short, given its resources. Up till the 80s, Singapore was on par with Malaysia and Taiwan was well behind. IN the early 80s, Taiwan as a cheap country to visit for Malaysians. When I was visiting there, the Taiwanese were marvelling at how wealthy Malaysia was, and many wanted to go to malaysia to work (for the then better pay) There is no need to even discuss Singapore S$1 = RM$2.4 says it all.
Does croynism exist everywhere – yes. Does it create inefficiency – yes, but in Malaysia, especially during the last 10 years of Mahathir tenure, it was way too excessive.
I can quote many examples of extreme corruption, some from personal experience and some second hand from close friends – but this article is not about that.
The question is – Can najib survive? Yes, things have not changed, and Najib has learned from both mahathir and Badawi. badawi was too soft and not ruthless enough. mahathir was ruthless in getting rid of opponents, both outside and inside of UMNO. Najib is relatively ruthless, but does not have the same support or clout as Mahathir had. Given time, he will get those.
However, I believe Badawi will eventually be remember as the PM that opened up malaysian politics by allowing dissent OR be remembered as the PM that destroyed malaysia for the same reason. Only time will tell
Leave a Comment
Please note: New Mandala encourages vigorous debate. However, for the moment we will only be publishing high-quality comments that make original contributions to discussion. There will, of course, still be space for pithy, humorous, eccentric and cheeky input. Short and sweet will usually trump long and involved. Repetitive ranting, unimaginative point-scoring and idle abuse will not be entertained. Comments which carry a real name are also more likely to be approved. Thank you for your ongoing interest and contributions.