KUALA LUMPUR – Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has once again courted controversy, this time with his racially tinged remarks targeting Malaysian Indians during an interview with the Chennai-based satellite television channel, Thanthi TV.
His statements, questioning the loyalty of ethnic Indians in Malaysia, have ignited a debate on whether Dr Mahathir’s intentions are to contribute meaningfully or merely to stay relevant in the public discourse.
As the senior statesman’s comments continue to evoke anger among many Malaysians, a crucial question emerges: Are Dr Mahathir’s bold statements a genuine expression of concern for the nation’s well-being, or are they a strategic move to remain in the spotlight amid evolving national dynamics?
In addressing this, analysts have weighed in on whether the two-time prime minister can offer authentic contributions to the country’s development or if his provocative remarks are simply a calculated effort to retain public attention.
‘He feels he’s still the best to lead Malaysia’
For Assoc Prof Syaza Shukri of the International Islamic University Malaysia’s Political Science Association, Dr Mahathir believes he is the best leader for the nation, and his statements reflect his vision for Malaysia.
“I don’t believe he thinks he’s irrelevant. He thinks he is still the best person to lead and guide Malaysia. I think they are both what he truly believes,” she said.
Echoing this sentiment, Singapore Institute of International Affairs senior fellow Oh Ei Sun noted that Dr Mahathir’s views resonated strongly with the majority of Malays, suggesting a strategic alignment with popular sentiments.
“As a politician, you make certain statements only if you believe they will be well-received by a large audience.
Meanwhile, Prof Kartini Aboo Talib @ Khalid from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia’s Institute of Ethnic Studies emphasised Dr Mahathir’s growing relevance due to his willingness to ask unconventional questions and provide vocal answers.
“Dr Mahathir is becoming so relevant now because he asks questions people don’t dare ask and is vocal enough to answer them point-blank,” she added.
Why has Dr Mahathir sidelined the contribution of Malaysian Indians?
Oh criticised Dr Mahathir for dismissing the contributions of non-Malays, including East Malaysians, to the nation-building process, a pattern observed throughout his political career.
“He must have calculated that there is still a large or even expanding receptive audience for such opinions,” Oh remarked, pointing to the recent electoral victories of PAS as indicative of this sentiment.
This criticism stems from Dr Mahathir’s controversial interview with Thanthi TV, where he asserted that Malaysian Indians had not been entirely loyal to Malay culture and Malaysia.
“This is not new on the part of Dr Mahathir. He has been expressing similar opinions since his first days in politics,” Oh said.
“By continuing to express such opinions, he must have calculated that there is still a large or even expanding receptive audience for such opinions.”
Syaza expressed disappointment with Dr Mahathir’s comments, deeming it “unfortunate” for him to question the citizenship of Malaysians of different races.
“It is unfortunate to think about being ‘compensated’ when every citizen has the right to make the best of being Malaysian,” she said.
On the contrary, Kartini defended Dr Mahathir, citing examples such as the establishment of MCA and MIC under Barisan Nasional and his introduction of meritocracy at universities as evidence that he has not neglected non-Malays.
“Dr Mahathir is the one who introduced meritocracy at universities. Where is the thank you? He always says that Melayu ‘mudah lupa’ (forget easily), but I think the Indians are forgetting all his good deeds, and yet he never belittled the Indian community,” she said.
Is Dr Mahathir’s call for cultural assimilation acceptable?
In acknowledging Dr Mahathir’s political strategy, Syaza said that his statements were “not that surprising”, given his long-standing emphasis on assimilation. However, she emphasised the importance of embracing diversity while contributing collectively to the nation.
“What’s wrong with diverse cultures? We can have different backgrounds and still be Malaysians and contribute together to the nation.
“This will create a sense of togetherness,” she said.
Oh noted that while Dr Mahathir may promote “racial supremacist” views, the majority of non-Malays, including those in Sabah and Sarawak, would resist total assimilation.
“In his own very special way, he thinks he is protecting this country, which in his view is a nation state of the Malays,” he said.
In response, Kartini highlighted Malaysia’s adoption of an integration approach to unity rather than assimilation, contrasting it with practices in other countries like Thailand and Indonesia.
“If assimilation is practised in Thailand and Indonesia, Indians will not be even allowed to speak Tamil, Telugu or Urdu. Everyone retains their vernacular identity and later forgets to be thankful.
“They must assimilate with the host society, for example, in the way they eat, talk, and practise the host society’s culture,” she said.
“In Cambodia, Pol Pot, a leader of the Khmer Rouge’s totalitarian regime, killed people in the name of ideology and assimilation.
“This doesn’t happen in Malaysia. Everyone retains their vernacular identity and later forgets to be thankful.” – January 16, 2024