The Malaysian personality is a little...inscrutable. You want to accept everything at face value, but if you are curious, like me, you do tend to wonder what's actually going on behind the veneer. There is no doubt that Malaysia's people are warm, genuine and hospitable. It's the face of the society that I really wonder about: especially the way the newspapers insist upon an image of Malaysia that upholds racial and cultural harmony, democracy and Islam simultaneously. The face of the opposition government is conspicuously absent, apart from one or two negative portrayals in opinion pieces.
Enquiring minds among us had plenty of opportunity to dig around under the surface over the last two days, as we met with a selection of the top political and academic minds in the country. On Wednesday we were privileged to meet with distinguished Malaysian ex-prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the retired patriarch often credited with bringing Malaysia into the twenty-first century.
Dr Mahathir does not see himself as a visionary. He speaks in very simple, unassuming terms. Rather than admitting to ever actually having a "vision" he prefers to say that "as you go along" it becomes clearer as to what needs to be done. He believes his bequest to Malaysia to has been not so much a vision, as a "contribution the development of a country."
Dr Mahathir likes to use simple Malaysian sayings to express himself. "If you lose your way go back to the beginning" is one that he shares with us. He has applied this principle to his views on Islam, and to his economic observations. He believes we should refer back to the Qur'an and the undisputed Sunnah for religious grounding, and that we should trade by the good, old-fashioned gold standard.
He speaks more about Islam than I had expected, and proficiently. He explains that our understanding of Islam should facilitate social harmony, and that there ought to be an emphasis on justice rather than process and punishment.
I find that Dr Mahathir's approach to Islam is more sophisticated than I had experienced from various speakers and sheikhs I had encountered when I first converted, usually on the internet, who often espoused an idealistic vision of "shariah" without ever explaining exactly what it was they meant. Until I began to study Muslim societies, I did not realize that men like Mahathir, and countries like Malaysia, have had to grapple with actually making a Muslim society work, with some semblance of democracy and concern for human rights, and so their approach to Islam is likely to be pragmatic and objective-oriented. But how is it that Malaysia has been able to retain Islam and approach democracy, when other Muslim societies have only been capable of producing authoritarian and somewhat medieval-style governments, such as Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan? This was a persistent question which we carried into each meeting with us and we wondered when it would be satisfactorily addressed...
After leaving Dr Mahathir's office, we drove to the International Islamic University of Malaysia (IIUM) for a program of lectures and discussion. First we heard from Professor Dr Abdelaziz Berghout, Deputy Rector and social scientist who specialises in Worldview Studies, particularly the development of Worldview Studies from an Islamic framework.
Upon Googling "Worldview Studies" one can clearly see the need to address and imbalance in the discipline: upon examining the first three pages of results, it became clear that the area is thoroughly dominated by Christian and Creationist thought. On the third page there was a website about Eastern Worldview, which only referred to Buddhist and Hindu thought. But why is Worldview Studies important for an Islamic Society and for society as a whole? This harks back to another of Dr Mahathir's simple wisdoms, "to know is to love": understanding other cultures facilitates social harmony. Prof Dr Berghout believes uniformity "degrades meaning" as per this Qur'anic verse:
Oh mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise each other).
(Surah Al Hujurat, verse 13) Prof Berghout sees the challenge posed by our differences being addressed by individuals and groups possessing a "globalised worldview" and therefore being well situated to understand each other and live together peacefully.
IIUM Rector, Professor Dato' Sri Dr Zaleha Kamaruddin finally joined us in time for question and answer. She was asked to comment on Islam and democracy in Malaysia: was it unique? Different? Why? Prof Kamaruddin did not make a profound or detailed statement on this, but used the Malaysian tea ritual as a metaphor to attempt to explain a culture of discussion and dialogue which she believed existed in Malaysia and aided its democratic efforts. Further elucidation on Islam and democracy by Dr Aldila Dato' Isahak failed to shed any more light on the Malaysian democratic experience for me, in fact I found it difficult to comprehend her argument. Maybe it was just me...
While we left IIUM feeling that we still had unanswered questions, we felt extremely grateful for the generous hospitality and attention to detail with which our delegation was hosted. It was seamlessly organized, warmly delivered and we were extremely well fed! Thanks IIUM.
Malaysia is relatively peaceful multi-cultural, multi-ethnic nation, as is our own Australia. But while our media seems to have enjoyed stirring the racial pot in the lead-up to Australia Day, the Malaysian media daily publishes exhortations towards racial harmony and unity. The New States Times, delivered to our door every morning, seems to have a definite government agenda, with a reassuring, somewhat paternalistic tone. It emphasises and re-emphasises the need for racial tolerance and harmony, and one wonders if it paints a more rosy picture than what actually exists on the ground.
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad in our meeting on Wednesday seemed proud of the racial harmony of Malaysia, whilst also acknowledging that there have obviously been upheavals and sad days along the way. Several young people I have spoken to on the streets of KL so far report having friends from a variety of ethnic and religious groups.
Malaysia seems like a kind but careful, slightly old-fashioned parent. For a long time any discussion of racial issues was prohibited because it was felt that it caused more problems than it solved, a view upheld on Wednesday by Dr Mahathir Mohamad. To date there have been laws to prevent students here from engaging in political activism, not because, I believe, Malaysia is by nature an oppressive state, but because it was felt that such activity distracted students from their exploration of knowledge.
But a new shift in consciousness accompanies moves to amend those laws by the government because the perspective that they may actually stunt students' political growth has moved more to the forefront of Malaysian thinking.
Malaysia is by and large a peaceful and successful society that tends to err on the side of caution, but also demonstrates the courage to step up, courageously and always thoughtfully. Like any careful parent it understands that a certain amount of turmoil is required to facilitate growth, however much it can hurt.
Prof Dr Abdullah Ashan pointed out on Thursday afternoon at the Institute of Islamic Thought an Civilisation (ISTAC), that all the political parties in Malaysia are actually based on race, and he believes that a coalition government is better, towards the aims of plurality, transparency and accountability. Until recently I had not realized that Malaysian schools are also divided based on race, even though there are steps forward being made, such as the children's native languages beginning to be taught during school hours, instead of as an after school extra. Indian Malaysians whom I have since met in Australia tell me they have come to our country to study because of the limited access to university places for Chinese and Indian Malaysians.
To me, the Malaysia meetings felt like climbing a mountain, and not just because the trip timetable was often arduous. It was because as we proceeded, it felt like the scholarship got more incisive and as we ascended through the ranks, ultimately to sit with Professor Dr Hashim Kamali, conclusions became more satisfying and the view became clearer and more comprehensive. See my summary of his remarks at Appendix III.
Post Script: Finally, Anwar, in Istanbul!
While newly acquitted Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim was elusive in Malaysia, we were astounded to find that he was in Istanbul when we arrived, and lecturing at the Prime Minister's residence.
Anwar spoke astutely and authoritatively on democracy. On the question of the compatibility of Islam and democracy, he points to Muslim majority southeast Asian nation, Indonesian, which held free elections as early as 1955 and which he considers "more democratic than Florida".
Democracy, he asserts, is no stranger in the Muslim world.
Malaysia, however, he does not consider to be truly democratic, observing that there is "freedom of speech, but no freedom after speech". It is not surprising that Anwar is unconvinced of Malaysia's democratic status, considering what he has gone through at the hands of the corrupt system. Suffering an astonishing fall from grace after the 1997 Asian financial crisis, Anwar was fired from his position as Deputy Prime Minister, which he had held since 1993, staunchly allied to Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. He was subsequently sentenced to six years in prison for corruption, and a further nine years on sodomy charges. The conviction was reversed in 2004 but in 2008 he was again arrested for alleged sodomy, the charge being overturned in 2012. During his time in custody he alleges he was mercilessly beaten and tortured.
During the Istanbul lecture he more than hinted at the true nature of his dramatic dismissal in 1998 and the events that followed. In fact, he revealed that it was his unwillingness to participate in corruption at the highest level that hastened his dismissal. Further, that it was his reluctance to be a party to the bailing out of Mahathir’s son that saw him so roundly dismissed and thoroughly degraded. It is hard to believe that the hospitable elderly man we met in Putrajaya was capable of orchestrating, or at the very least condoning the despicable treatment of Anwar Ibrahim that has lasted well over a decade.
Anwar spoke deftly on Maqasid al-Sharia, with an obvious practical knowledge of the subject and its application. On the topic of the Arab Spring and Turkey as a possible model for ensuing Arab democracy, he echoed journalist Kerim Belci, feeling that assistance could be given by Turkey but essentially, “let the Arabs decide.”
No comments:
Post a Comment