Sunteți pe pagina 1din 2

Malaysias Foreign Policy: Where Malaysia Stands

and What It Means

Photo source: https://ripplesoftruth.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/kuala-lumpur-25.jpg


Habibah Hermanadi, Intern staff ASEAN Studies Center UGM
In 2012, The Edge Malaysia published a concise explanation regarding Malaysias position and
how it sees ASEAN. It stated that ASEAN has never been the cornerstone of Malaysias foreign
policy and he emphasized on the fact that the condition will not likely to be altered anytime soon.
Malaysias foreign policy will aim for her own national goals which is becoming a developed
country; the agenda included the need of cohesive nation, constructing a strong, effective,
transparent and accountable state that is responsive to her citizens, transforming the economy
into a human capital intensive, deepening the democratic form of government, high income one
to achieve global competitiveness and recognition (Alagappa, 2012). Lastly, Malaysia opted to
ensure national security and regional stability, and only from that factor Malaysia took the
existence of ASEAN into account. Was the analysis proven right that there will be not much of
alteration by the Malaysian government regarding its position for the ASEAN?
According to the latest publication by the Malaysian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Malaysia had
shifted its vision and as a state it has explicitly accepted ASEAN as the cornerstone of her
foreign policy. It mentioned the urgency for Malaysia as Malaysia is one of the founding
members of ASEAN, therefore the foreign policy of Malaysia continues to emphasize on the
relevance and importance of ASEAN as the forum and catalyst for regional dialogue. The
principality of Malaysian foreign policy had been divided into specified pillars, mainly it
includes in maintaining peaceful relations with all countries regardless of its ideology and
political system; adopting an independent, non-aligned, and principled stance in regional and
international diplomatic affairs; forging close relations and economic partnerships with all
nations, particularly with ASEAN and other regional friends; promoting peace and stability in the
region through capacity building and conflict resolution measures; playing an influential

leadership role as Chair of the ASEAN, Non-aligned Movement (NAM) and Organization of
Islamic Conference (OIC); participating actively and meaningfully in the United Nations,
especially in the efforts to end injustice and oppression, and to uphold international law; and
lastly projecting Malaysia as a leading example of a tolerant and progressive Islamic nation
(Ministry of Foreign Affairs Malaysia, 2016).
Malaysias Pragmatism
According to the given principals of Malaysias foreign policy, it reflected the pragmatic way of
shaping its foreign policy in order to gain Malaysias best interest. As Datuk Seri Anifah Aman
mentioned on the dynamic of Malaysias foreign policy that the status quo requires Malaysia to
implement its foreign policy initiatives and make it a realization in order to remain relevant and
necessary in response to changing regional dynamics and the recessionary global economy,
Anifah said that this will enable the country to continue building on its good relations with
strategic partners and to have more focused relations with key countries (Divakaran, 2016). To
assure its chairmanship role in ASEAN, Malaysia has also been promoting the idea of
strengthening ASEANs internal institutions, particularly by the ASEAN Secretariat. Moreover,
Malaysia has launched the idea of AEC 2025, which builds upon ASEANs earlier idea of a
single market and production base extending it further to include sustainable economic
development (Das, 2015). However, the chairmanship failed to meet its expected target of further
negotiation on the status of South China Sea, Malaysia was expecting to gain statements on the
South China Sea during its April Summit and ASEAN Foreign Ministers Meeting in August, yet
they could not secure a joint declaration for the ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting in
November. Nonetheless the failure of joint declaration could not solemnly be pinpointed on
Malaysias chairmanship but also on the mechanism of ASEAN itself, the ASEAN Dispute
Settlement Mechanism has been claimed as slow and redundant since it is subject to parties
consent on such measures; an opposed party can thus prevent the ASEAN High Council from
being formed (Nguyen, 2015).
As a state Malaysias foreign policy really portrayed the domestics tendencies in Malaysia,
starting from the pragmatic approach of foreign policy pairing it up with economic preferences in
fostering economic environment for the other ASEAN member states as how the agenda will be
fruitful for Malaysia and furthering ASEAN economic integration. Although due to this blunt
tendency and its current chairmanship position it is only fair to question where Malaysia will
position itself in between the Trans Pacific Partnership and Regional Comprehensive Economic
Partnership, its back and forth reaction signaled others that Malaysia wanted the best of both
world Malaysias, considering that Malaysias membership in the TPP does not imply that she is
shifting away from China and moving closer to the United States. Much like Singapore,
Malaysia will spread both its wings, courting the United States and China; extending concessions
to both in equal measure or as opportunities arise, regardless of their source (Nambiar, 2016).
Where does Malaysia stand now cannot be easily defined, as we can see Malaysia stands for
itself, despite of its current Chairmanship Malaysia is utilizing its position to gain what is needed
for the country. Moreover, Malaysia juggles over the influence of superpowers out of its strategic
means. Future steps are being observed by many, as Malaysia is heading either the TPP or RCEP
and her decision will affect the dynamic of the region.

S-ar putea să vă placă și