MGG Pillai Commentary View

<< Previous || Next >>

Students And Malaysian Ambassadors

The Prime Minister, Dato' Seri Mahathir Mohamed, says Malaysian students overseas "are not an easy lot to deal with because other Malaysians come to disturb them". Who are the "other Malaysians" he talks of? Why do students listen to "other Malaysians" and not to what he has to say of Malaysian policy? What happened to the "well-staffed" students affairs departments in Malaysian embassies and high commission? Why are not they engaging the students? More to the point, why does he want Malaysian ambassadors to cultivate the students now when they have ignored them for years?

He wanted Malaysian ambassadors brought back to be briefed about national policies, a normal occurrence in diplomatic practice throughout the world, to engage with students overseas. He cannot have "some" Malaysians -- he does not mention who but it is fair to assume that they include Dato' Fadhil Noor, Haji Hadi Awang, Mr Lim Kit Siang, Dr Chandra Muzaffar, Datin Wan Azizah -- "incite" the students, many of whom become anti-government. Therefore, he announces, that "in future, our ambassadors are required to be in close contact with out students".

This unexpected concern for students overseas is real: despite UMNO's overwhelming presence amongst them, it has been the government's boast that the students overseas -- here he refers to the Malay rather than the Indian or the Chinese -- had a clear understanding of official policy and could be relied upon to support the government in its policies. But that worked only so long as the issues were notional: a better life for Malaysians in the years to come. The students were required to do no more than to beat the official drum, and be rewarded for it by invitations to the UMNO General Assembly. Indeed, the embassies and high commissions, despite the presence of student counsellors, ignored the students.

The students, in other words, live in a vaccuum in a foreign country, generally ignored by the high commission or embassy, and left to their own devices. Nature abhors a vaccuum, and all it requires to attract them is to talk to them regularly and help them with problems as they arise. When Islamic proselytisation was at its height, many joined student Islamic societies and challenged the Malaysian government worldview of what they ought to do. The government did not act swiftly and determinedly. Into this breach, PAS stepped in and got their loyalty. The government lost this confrontation. It reacted, as usual, in bits and pieces: a few ministers would rush down to put out the Islamic fire, make a few speeches dutifully reported at length in the mainstream newspapers, and backs patted for a job well done.

Then came 2 September 1998. And students, even the rabidly pro-government, wants answers. Why was the deputy prime minister, one Anwar Ibrahim, sacked, detained under the Internal Security, beaten to an inch of his life by the Inspector-General of Police no less, jailed for 15 years on questionable charges of corruption and sodomy? No minister could face them anymore, even if only to talk of the weather. The students overseas, in a bloc, shifted away. The Anwaristas had got to them, systematically and regularly, that the government lost them yet again. It still cannot. When the Prime Minister speaks to students overseas, it is in controlled conditions, guests checked, and those with questions told bluntly if they veer to the critical.

Dr Mahathir puts the cart before the horse. He assumes the ambassadors and high commissioners can hit the ground running. But do the diplomatic missions overseas have a list of Malaysian students in their countries? It does not. It has a list of government scholars, but of no one else. And it is often not even up to date. Contrast that with Singapore, for instance. They not only know who their students, private and scholarship, but also of Malaysian students who do well, and keep in close touch, offering jobs and citizenship to those who would agree to settle on the island. If the government wants to win this battle, key student leaders must be properly briefed and asked to spread the word. But it is probably too late for that. For it must first energise the ambassadors and high commissioners to start talking to them. They used to once. Not any more. The rigours of diplomatic life is just too hectic -- what with the constant round of diplomatic parties, golf games, and rushing to the airport to receive visitors from home -- for them to take on this additional chore.

One Malaysian high commissioner was ticked off for not turning up in the middle of the night at an airport 1,000 miles away to keep his minister company during a one-hour stopover en route to London. Another ambassador was asked to explain why he visited, without permission, a "foreign" country 3,500 miles away -- the desk officer did not know that it was within the territorial boundaries of the country he represented and he did not need special permission to go there. Wisma Putra over the years have lost its raison d'etre, especially when it took the fatal decision more than a decade ago to promote the Prime Minister and his views as that of the land. Ambassadors were punished for not being so supportive of his views, or even questioned or worse challenged them.

Ambassadors and high commissioners are kept on a tight leash that most just give up the ghost and enjoy themselves. Wisma Putra's response to events of the day, especially now in the confrontation between the Prime Minister and his nemesis, is to send them copies of the mainstream newspapers. I have seen some of these reports, which ambassadors and high commissioners show me when I call on them in distant lands. That is those who would see me. There are too frightened of what would happen to them if they are seen with me and many who just ask me off their premises.

When this is the culture, with ambassadors and high commissioners frightened of their own shadows, how could Malaysian representation convince even their own students? As the episode with Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim's medical problems ensured, the government accepts no official action but to question Dato' Seri Anwar's motives. How it mishandled this, and other political issues which dominates the Malaysian landscape since September 1998, is so patently obvious that one cannot assume this latest directive would work. The government will not put the issues before the ambassadors and high commissioners as neutrally as it should, but want them to go on to bat for the government in a local political squabble.

It is interesting also that this brief to engage the students applies to those studying overseas. No one attempts to engage them locally. Is there anyone in the cabinet who could do that? I can think of no one, even with battalions of armed policemen at hand to keep the peace, who would dare to go to all Malaysian institutions of higher learning and engage with them about Malaysian political developments. Could the Prime Minister? The deputy prime minister? The mentris besar? any UMNO leader? If they cannot, how could the ambassadors and high commissioners? If they dare not, would the ambassadors and high commissioners?

M.G.G. Pillai
pillai@mgg.pc.my