Outline of Anwar’s foreign policy clarifies in China visit

Overborne by concern for domestic issues, Anwar Ibrahim’s first four months as prime minister have necessarily been short of intimations of what his foreign policy would be like.

Hence, his address to Tsinghua University in Beijing earlier this week, delivered in the course of a three-day visit to China, will be scrutinised for what it may indicate about his administration’s leanings in foreign policy.

Though Bernama’s report of the speech was skimpy, a quotation it cited from Anwar’s speech was notable as a statement of his stance on an issue of global significance:

“The period of colonisation and new imperialism is gone. No county can dictate to another. People want to assert their independence and decide what is best for themselves and their country.”

On the face of it, nothing is earth-shaking in this pronouncement because most small countries in the world like Malaysia would readily join in the chorus of agreement that the age of colonisation is well and truly over.

New imperialism

But what did Anwar mean by the term “new imperialism”?

Given that the terms colonialism and imperialism are nearly synonymous and have been around for as long as historians of both phenomena have written about them, could the appending of “new” to the term “imperialism” be a reference to events of recent vintage?

Russia’s “special military operation” launched against Ukraine in February last year has been described in some quarters as an example of “new imperialism”.

The desire of a waning big power to reassert its suzerainty over contiguous former possessions who have long shed their yoke and gone on to forge bonds with countries the ex-overlord was once hostile to is being denounced in some quarters as an example of “new imperialism”.

Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin met in Kremlin recently

If as an example of “new imperialism” Anwar meant Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, launched in February 2022, he chose a rather tenuous venue at which to give it utterance.

This is because China has chosen to ally itself with Russia on the issue of Ukraine and though Beijing wants to play the role of peacemaker in the conflict, its support of Russia will bolster Russian obduracy rather than conciliation.

In any case, Anwar’s use of the term “new imperialism” to describe threats that small nations face in the 21st century was laudable for what it may reflect of Malaysia’s desire to take a stance against big powers wanting to lord it over smaller nations.

It was reported that in talks with his Chinese counterparts, the latter had urged Anwar to reject the re-emergence of a Cold War mentality which the Chinese accuse the Americans of trying to regurgitate.

If diplomacy is the art of fishing tranquilly in troubled waters, the best Anwar could have done in Beijing was to steer clear of the complexities of big power politics and rely on bland denunciations of matters like “new imperialism” while plumping for better trade relations and more investment from his hosts.

Myanmar issue

Of course, there is the issue of Myanmar on which Anwar is in favour of a more vigorous push for conciliation between the Tatmadaw and the deposed government of Aung San Suu Kyi.

The chances of this push succeeding are not good if China does not back it.

Myanmar’s deposed leader Aung San Suu Kyi

But Beijing is famously reluctant to interfere in the internal affairs of other nations.

Malaysia and Asean as a whole would want China to back a policy of bringing the military and the opposition in Myanmar to a modus vivendi.

But how to overcome Chinese reluctance to prod the Tatmadaw in the direction of a negotiated end to the stalemate in Myanmar where the military is getting more and more brutal?

All Malaysia and Asean can do is to convince Myanmar that the infamy of its increasing pariah status in the comity of nations is a ruinous proposition, and hope that China will do its part in making that argument stick.

The wheels of Anwar’s Asian Renaissance vision adumbrated a quarter century ago, will be oiled by Malaysia’s efforts in securing peace in Pattani and in prodding a benighted Tatmadaw towards shedding Myanmar’s tag as the “Sick man of Asean”. - Mkini

---

TERENCE NETTO is a journalist with half a century’s experience.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.