The pragmatic and China-friendly government of Malaysia under Anwar has recently suffered consecutive defeats in two local elections. The opposition won without preaching grand ideologies, instead relying on "ethnic cards" and "religious cards."
Anwar's pragmatic stance and pro-China orientation—his emphasis on Asian revival and civilizational dialogue—are precisely the kind of narrative that China appreciates. Yet the election results show: such grand visions are not effective in domestic politics.
This serves as a reminder to China: cooperation at the civilizational level is not enough with mere high-level consensus; it must also be sustainable within the domestic political landscape of the partner country.
Anwar advocates multicultural inclusiveness, but voters care more about jobs and inflation. The United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) and the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) repeatedly claim that Malay interests are being eroded—a message that has worked for decades. Anwar’s discourse feels too distant from ordinary people’s daily lives.
Another issue: civilizational cooperation has shallow roots in Malaysian society. High-level interactions mostly remain confined to academic circles, leaving ordinary citizens indifferent. Malaysia’s society is deeply divided along ethnic lines, and Chinese voices mainly resonate within the Chinese-speaking community, failing to reach Malay or English-language public discourses. Even the best intentions cannot penetrate key audiences if they aren’t effectively communicated.
China’s usual approach to overseas civilizational cooperation relies heavily on governmental channels—once leaders agree, projects move forward. But when leaders are politically weak domestically, such cooperation can become a political liability. Anwar was accused by opponents of "betraying Malay interests," and his pro-China stance consequently became a target.
So far, China’s most successful engagements in Southeast Asia have been economic: building roads, establishing factories—tangible outcomes like tax revenues and employment are visible and durable, surviving even government changes. Economic achievements can withstand political shifts.
But civilizational cooperation deals with values and identity, issues that are highly sensitive and easily politicized. Unlike economic projects with concrete deliverables, civilizational initiatives lack robust tangible outcomes and thus have weaker resilience. Worse still, China adheres to non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs—so when Anwar faces setbacks, China cannot publicly defend him.
This situation underscores that international relations aren’t just about great power competition; they also involve domestic politics and ethnic-religious tensions. In Southeast Asia, China must strike a balance between high-level consensus and grassroots realities. Government-led economic cooperation works well—but civilizational dialogue should engage more with civil society: academic exchanges, cultural organizations, youth programs—approaches that bypass direct political confrontation and operate more stably. Though slower to produce results, they can survive electoral fluctuations.
Racial politics in Malaysia will likely remain entrenched in the short term. This may not be an urgent problem to solve immediately, but it warrants serious attention. After all, such divisions are not unique. Understanding their complexity is the beginning of effective response.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1873278647033866/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.