A Spat for the Neighborhood to Watch 
International Herald Tribune
December 8, 1993
Philip Bowring   

Want some light relief, other than the British royalty, from the agonies of Bosnia, Gaza, Somalia? Try the dispute raging between Prime Ministers Paul Keating of Australia and Mahathir bin Mohamad of Malaysia.

Neither man is known for his reticence. Mr. Keating is capable of verbal vitriol robust even by Australian standards. Mr. Mahathir acknowledged recently that some of his controversial statements are made with an eye to getting attention for Malaysia on the world stage.

So it is all the more remarkable that unstartling remarks by Mr. Keating have led to a row between the two governments. Malaysia has announced that it is downgrading relations with Australia. Foreign Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said it could have "far-reaching consequences." Australian firms could lose lucrative contracts in Malaysia, including a $2 billion naval deal. Already Australian television programs have been banned.

All this because Mr. Keating described Mr. Mahathir's attitude to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation group as "recalcitrant," and then in a subsequent letter to Mr. Mahathir explained the context of his words but failed to apologize.

It is hard to say why Mr. Mahathir would be so upset with the word. Indeed, it is quite possible that he is enjoying the fracas.

He has always been suspicious of APEC, which was originally an Australian initiative. His suspicions were strengthened this year when the United States, which had long been lukewarm toward APEC, decided to make it a key element in Asia policy. This was seen by Malaysia as a means of heading off its own idea for an all-Asian group, the East Asian Economic Cooperation forum, as a potential counter to the NAFTA and European Union blocs.

His decision not to go to President Bill Clinton's Seattle summit of APEC leaders was consistent and unsurprising.

But if Malaysia's response to "recalcitrant" seems extreme, Mr. Mahathir has in the process cleverly provoked Australia's neurosis about its relations with Asian countries. Mr. Keating, whose last election platform contained much rhetoric about "joining Asia," now finds himself under attack at home for harming relations with Asia by his allegedly loose talk.

Australia in fact already has a higher proportion of trade with its Asian neighbors than they do with each other. But in their confusion about their own identity as a European society on the edge of Asia, Australians often speak as though Asia were some kind of club for which they had to qualify for membership. One "blackball" from the likes of a Mahathir and they would not be able to join.

At times, Australia has seemed to lose sight of its national interests in pursuit of joining an "Asia" whose own identity and definition vary from country to country. Malaysia has played on Australia's weakness by referring to treatment of aborigines and suggesting that Australians could not be Asians because they did not "understand Asian sensitivities," as if Asian leaders were always scrupulously polite to each other.

It is possible to see in all this echoes of anti-colonialism, reaction against Western arrogance, as well as East Asian confidence in the region's economic success.

But in reality, nongovernmental relations between Australia and Malaysia are close and cordial. The danger in the Keating-Mahathir clash may be that it will be taken too seriously.

The neighbors have been amazed and bemused by this bizarre saga. Ultimately, as a Thai diplomat put it, there is only one sensible and positive reaction: smile. on: smile.

Copyright © 2006 The International Herald Tribune