Since I can remember, throughout my entire adult life we
have heard debates about whether a non-Malay can become Prime Minister in
Malaysia. Then the question follows: must he or she also be a Muslim?
This is the direct effect of our main political actors on
both sides of the divide, mainly UMNO and DAP, whose politics continue to
revolve heavily around race and religion.
When a political party’s engine runs on race, that becomes
the main commodity that is transacted.
That is why we have yet to hear any serious discussion
about the possibility of a Prime Minister from the Borneo states. I seek to
change that.
First, let us learn from two global corporate examples
where organisations chose leaders who were within the system but came from
different backgrounds. These choices helped rejuvenate the organisation and
strengthen their brands in line with changing market needs.
Volvo
In the early 1970s, the board of Volvo chose a CEO from
outside the traditional circle of automobile executives. The Swedish carmaker
appointed Pehr G. Gyllenhammar as its CEO at the age of 36. Unlike many leaders
in the automobile industry, Gyllenhammar was not an engineer or lifelong car
executive. His main professional background was in the insurance sector, where
he had served as CEO of the Swedish insurance company Skandia.
Coming from insurance gave him a different perspective on
risk, safety and human factors. Under his leadership, Volvo strengthened its
global identity as the car company most committed to safety. The company also
experimented with new factory systems that gave workers greater autonomy and
responsibility. Volvo’s brand became strongly associated with safety, quality
and human centred values. By choosing a leader from outside the traditional
automobile establishment, Volvo sharpened its purpose and built one of the most
distinctive identities in the global car industry.
Citibank
A similar example can be found at Citibank. In the 1970s
and 1980s, the bank faced a strategic crossroads. Traditional bankers focused
mainly on corporate lending and elite financial clients. Retail customers were
often seen as secondary. At this moment the board elevated John Reed, a leader
whose thinking differed from the conventional culture of corporate banking. His
interests were strongly shaped by technology and systems rather than by the
traditional corporate lending mindset.
Reed believed the future of banking lay with ordinary
consumers supported by technology. Under his leadership, Citibank invested
heavily in automated teller machines, global electronic banking networks and
mass consumer credit cards. This shift transformed Citibank into one of the
world’s largest global consumer banks. By choosing a leader who
approached banking from a different angle, Citibank repositioned itself ahead
of many competitors and moved from a product driven bank to a customer centred
financial services platform.
What does this have to do with Malaysia?
In both examples, the change in leadership produced
something deeper than a new face at the top. It produced a change in
orientation. Citibank moved from a product driven bank to a customer centric
financial services platform. Volvo moved from being just another automobile
manufacturer to becoming the global benchmark for safety and human centred
design.
In both cases the leader did not merely manage the
organisation. The leader helped the organisation see its purpose differently.
Malaysia may also benefit from such a shift in orientation.
For decades our political system has largely been driven by
race centred politics. Political competition often revolves around which group
gains more power, protection or privileges. Naturally, this produces endless
debates about whether a Prime Minister must come from a particular race or
religion.
Over time, this orientation begins to influence almost
every national conversation. Many challenges in the country are viewed through
the same racial lens. Even areas where compromise should never occur, such as
corruption, sometimes become entangled in political calculations shaped by
race. Hypocrisy is tolerated because of racial loyalties or political
alignments. In this environment, even policies that are fundamentally sound,
such as affirmative action for the genuinely needy, become diluted because they
are framed through race rather than need.
Because race and religion are closely intertwined in
Malaysia, religious matters too are often drawn into the same political
currents. Issues involving temples, places of worship and religious
celebrations can easily become part of wider racial debates. The political
culture in Sabah and Sarawak, however, has historically been less burdened by
such deep seated racial and religious sectarianism.
But what if we shift the orientation?
Instead of asking who represents which race, we could ask a
different question. Who can best serve the nation as a whole? In other words,
Malaysia too can move from a race driven political framework to a nation
centred leadership framework.
One way to trigger such a shift may be to look beyond the
usual political mould. A Prime Minister from Sabah or Sarawak could symbolise
exactly that. The Borneo states sit somewhat outside the intense race based
political competition that dominates Peninsular politics. Their political
culture has historically been more multi ethnic, more pragmatic and more
grounded in local realities.
Choosing a leader from Borneo would therefore not simply be
about geography. It could represent a shift in how Malaysia thinks about
leadership itself. Just as Citibank reoriented banking toward customers, and
Volvo reoriented the automobile industry toward safety and human values,
Malaysia too could reorient its politics toward national purpose rather than
racial contestation.
After all, Malaysia was founded as a federation of regions
and peoples. Perhaps the time has come to reflect that spirit in our highest
office.
So the question may not be whether it is possible.
The question may simply be:
Why not?
Peace,
Anas Zubedy
Penang
NOTE: This is the first article in
a series on this subject. I have begun with the question “Why not?”. In the
coming pieces, we must also discuss the “How” and what needs to be done to make
such an idea possible.
In Malaysia, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong appoints as Prime
Minister the Member of Parliament who, in His Majesty’s judgment, commands the
confidence of the majority of the House. In practical terms, this means the
individual who is able to secure the most parliamentary support.
There is therefore much that needs to be thought through
and done if such a possibility is to become reality.
If this idea resonates with you, please reflect on it and
expand the conversation. Share it with your family and friends. Let the
discussion begin and gather momentum.
Perhaps this could be one of the ways we move Malaysia
toward a more united and confident future. Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment