What Duterte can learn

from Mahathir
By: Richard Heydarian - @inquirerdotnet
Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:24 AM September 18, 2018

President Duterte’s supporters often like to compare him to the late Singaporean leader
Lee Kuan Yew. It’s a flattering comparison, because centuries from now, the
Singaporean leader will likely be remembered as one of the titans of the millennium.
His eloquence, breathtakingly boundless knowledge of global affairs, and stubborn
commitment to perfection secured him an eternal spot in the pantheon of the great men
of history. In many ways, he was the modern embodiment of Plato’s philosopher-king.

But the Singaporean leader never had the chance to test his skills at ruling a
conventional country with its own complex rural-urban dynamics. As the late Chinese
leader Deng Xiaoping, who lifted more people out of poverty than any other leader in
humanity, icily told Lee: “If I had only Shanghai, I too might be able to change
Shanghai as quickly [as Singapore]. But I have the whole of China.”

In fact, as The Economist has noted, Singapore, at its moment of independence, was
nothing like a poor backwater but instead a middle-income nation and a bustling
entrepôt, fortuitously perched at the convergence of global trade.

In short, any objective analysis would suggest that Singapore, even with a mediocre
leadership, was almost destined to prosperity in the age of globalization. In this sense,
the Duterte-Lee comparison doesn’t hold much water.

One could argue, however, that Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohamad has more to teach
junior peers such as Mr. Duterte. Mahathir ruled over a mid-sized country and, over two
decades of rule, steered Malaysia, long torn by urban-rural and ethnic tensions, toward a
modicum of industrialization and upper-middle-income prosperity.
To be clear, social science teaches us to be skeptical vis-à-vis the hagiographical
descriptions of leaders at the expense of appreciating the unique structural ingredients
that made countries like Singapore and Malaysia successful in the late 20th century.

Both were strategically located nations (Malacca Straits) and benefited from the British
tradition of bureaucratic excellence. Malaysia even had the added benefit of huge oil
reserves relative to its modest population. In this sense, both Mahathir and Lee were
lucky heirs of relatively well-positioned nations with robust institutional legacies.

It’s not authoritarian rule, but instead strong state institutions, as well as smart industrial
and trade policies, that define the success of nations. Even if you have the best leaders,
weak state institutions and bad policies tend to doom nations to failure.

Yet, it’s also hard to dismiss the crucial role of human agency in shaping history. And
this is why, for every enlightened authoritarian leader like Mahathir and Lee, one can
find dozens of Mugabes and Gadhafis that condemned their nations to destitution and
chaos.

Notwithstanding the horrors of his authoritarian past, what makes Mahathir a “great”
leader is his dynamism on two fronts.

Politically, Mahathir, at the age of 92, played an unlikely yet momentous role — as the
harbinger of the democratic transformation of Malaysia. In direct contrast to his
authoritarian past, this year saw Mahathir leading a democratic opposition to power for
the first time in the country’s history. As one of his advisers told me, he is expected to
step down within two years, paving the way for democracy activists such as Anwar
Ibrahim.

Instead of perpetuating himself or his family in power, Mahathir is focused on

stabilizing the process of regime change and holding the Najib administration
accountable for its widespread corruption.

Geopolitically, Mahathir is now the leading voice against the “new colonialism” of
China, canceling up to $40 billion in Chinese investment projects due to concerns over
corruption, lack of economic viability, and exclusion of Malaysian labor and
companies. Meanwhile, he is also standing up to Western hegemony and Donald
Trump’s Islamophobic rhetoric and policies. In this sense, Mahathir represents the true
spirit of an “independent” foreign policy.

At once and at last, Mahathir may have become both the voice of freedom for his nation
as well as of collective autonomy for smaller countries squeezed between the
imperialism of the West and the East.

rheydarian@inquirer.com.ph

Read more: https://opinion.inquirer.net/116155/duterte-can-learn-

mahathir#ixzz5RjeGrZKA
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook