Malaysia: How Will It Perform on the UN Security Council?
The country brings some baggage of its own to the Council.
Jared Ganser, The Diplomat
In 2014, Malaysia has made international headlines with the two Malaysia Airlines tragedies. The country did not, however, make much news when it was elected to the United Nations Security Council yesterday, yet the election gives this Southeast Asian country the opportunity to work with the global powers on a host of pressing and complex issues, among them the threat of terrorism from the Islamic State, the conflicts in Iraq, Ukraine and Syria, and the panoply of rampant human rights abuses worldwide. How well equipped is Malaysia to contribute to the Council, and will its own domestic policy agenda get in the way?
To start with, the country’s economy is performing well. A 2015 budget introduces more deficit-slashing measures, including subsidy reforms and a higher goods and service tax. These measures should improve the national balance sheet. But as the middle and lower classes are forced to cope with higher prices, questions remain as to whether adequate steps are being taken to combat corruption and diversify the country’s revenue base, which is still heavily reliant on oil exports.
At the United Nations, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak has said much about leading a “Global Movement of Moderates” to combat extremism around the world. A laudable goal, no doubt, but the story at home is hardly one of moderation and tolerance.
Most notable has been the government’s crackdown against opposition and civil society groups under its anachronistic Sedition Act of 1948, a law that the UN Human Rights Council has strongly criticized and the New York Times called “deplorable.” The Act criminalizes any speech spoken “to excite disaffection” for the government. The law is currently being reviewed by the High Court to determine if it is constitutional. In the meantime, within the past year, dozens of dissidents, academics and activists have been charged, and face up to 30 years in prison if convicted.
While critics of the government are hauled up on charges, however, groups sympathetic to Najib’s ruling UMNO party are given free reign to incite violence and racial tension. From calling for the burning of Bibles to telling Malaysia’s ethnic Chinese and Indians to “go back home,” these groups act with impunity.
The Sedition Act is not the only tool the government has to subdue opposition and dissent. Fearful of the traction the opposition has gained, the Government has twice managed to conjure up dubious sodomy charges against opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim, in both cases on the heels of a strong electoral performance by the country’s opposition coalition. Moreover, two of Anwar’s lawyers have themselves been charged with sedition, in one case, simply for commenting publicly on the case itself. The allegations alone are damning enough in a predominately Muslim country; the fact that Anwar could well be sent back to a second lengthy prison term is a clear sign of Prime Minister Najib Razak’s fundamental insecurity and unwillingness to allow his government to face serious questions about its performance.
Perhaps nothing has been more emblematic of Malaysia’s backwards slide on the human rights agenda than the state of the media. In the last thirteen years it has dropped consistently on Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index from a high of 110 to its current low of 147 out of 180 countries surveyed, which places it next to Russia, Burma, and Turkey.
Yet domestic issues are not the only thing that Malaysia has to worry about now. It will be compelled to engage on some of the biggest challenges facing the world and, if it wants to have any impact, Malaysia will have to a stand up on tough and potentially divisive issues such as terrorism and human rights. Its strategy to get on the Council was pretty straightforward: Be a moderate voice representing the interests of a small Muslim, Asian country. This was feasible as Malaysia solicited election votes; staying moderate will be another challenge altogether.
Malaysia’s messaging and domestic policies will be subjected to close scrutiny. Its record on human rights leaves much to be desired, with the Sedition Act just one example of the country falling short of international human rights norms and setting a poor precedent for other states in region. One can only hope that Malaysia will not try to avoid having a spotlight focused on its own abuses by giving a free pass to repressive governments on the Council’s agenda.
When it comes to international conflicts and terrorism, Malaysia’s voice is typically subdued. It does take a stand publicly on horrific abuses, but only after clear red-lines are crossed.
