PERSPECTIVES 2022

Hubungan Malaysia-Jepun menyaksikan pelbagai kejayaan dalam sektor kritikal sejak 64 tahun hubungan diplomatik terjalin. Bermula dengan komitmen Bantuan Pembangunan Rasmi (ODA) pada 1966 melalui penyaluran komitmen pinjaman yen, kerjasama teknikal dan bantuan geran, kerjasama diperkukuh dengan Perjanjian Perkongsian Ekonomi yang ditandatangani pada tahun 2006 serta Perkongsian Strategik pada 2015 ke arah hubungan yang lebih signifikan. Kini fasa baharu hubungan menerusi Dasar Pandang Ke Timur (DPT) 2.0 dilihat telah merintis kepada pelbagai peluang sejak 39 tahun perlaksanaannya. DPT 2.0 yang lebih menumpukan aspek ekonomi bagi memajukan potensi bidang perdagangan dan pelaburan dilihat menjadi keutamaan. Inisiatif DPT 2.0 sememangnya berpotensi mewujudkan peluang antaranya meningkatkan pelaburan, liberalisasi perdagangan dan kepakaran yang berpotensi mempercepatkan penerimaan Malaysia dalam Revolusi Perindustrian Keempat (Industri 4.0). Melalui DPT 2.0, Malaysia meletakkan sasaran secara sistematik yang didorong tenaga kerja berteknologi tinggi dalam memudahkan penerimaan Industri 4.0 apabila bekerjasama dengan syarikat Jepun sedia ada di Malaysia antaranya Sumitomo, Panasonic, Hitachi, Sony dan Sharp yang telah menerima pakai Industri 4.0 di Jepun. Walau bagaimanapun, sekiranya dinilai berdasarkan aspek “retorik dan realiti”, keperluan untuk memikirkan semula kualiti sebenar fasa baharu DPT 2.0 yang lebih menumpukan kepada bidang perdagangan dan pelaburan amat signifikan. Liberalisasi dan kerjasama ekonomi strategik Malaysia-Jepun di bawah fasa baharu DPT 2.0. DPT yang tidak melalui proses legitimasi dan tidak pernah dibincangkan di Parlimen apabila Dr. Mahathir menggunakan kuasa autoriti ke atas permulaan perlaksanaan dasar tersebut signifikan dikaji bagi menumpukan kepada impak dasar tersebut. Analisis mendapati bahawa DPT 2.0 tidak ada hubungan bersifat jangka panjang antara pelaburan dan perdagangan. Kedua, DPT 2.0 dan tidak memberi impak secara statistik ke atas pembangunan ekonomi. Ketiga, defisit perdagangan akan dibantu oleh kerjasama ekonomi yang pelbagai seperti ODA.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor, MALAYSIA

Bagi menjana pertumbuhan mampan dan inklusif untuk menghadapi perubahan industri di bawah Dasar Kebangsaan Industri 4.0, Malaysia meletakkan sasaran melalui model DPT 2.0 untuk liberalisasi ekonomi. Kerajaan telah mengambil inisiatif dengan mewujudkan persekitaran pelaburan kondusif yang menggalakkan dan menyokong lebih banyak syarikat Malaysia melakukan inovasi dan menjalankan perniagaan secara lebih berstrategi. Walau bagaimanapun, bagaimana kualiti sebenar fasa baharu DPT 2.0 ke atas liberalisasi ekonomi berjaya membantu aspek pelaburan dan perdagangan negara. Tiadanya kertas dasar yang jelas dengan hanya berpandukan Pekeliling Jabatan Perdana Menteri mengenai dasar baru Kerajaan menjadikan kurangnya pemahaman pentadbir mengenai falsafah sebenar DPT. Sebagai contoh projek kereta api laju Kuala Lumpur-Singapura (HSR) yang mana Jepun antara pembida projek bernilai RM55 bilion tersebut. Ini antara contoh mudah untuk menilai kesalahtafsiran pentadbir dan DPT 2.0. Realitinya, projek HSR tiada kaitan dengan DPT 2.0 kerana pendirian Jepun adalah jelas untuk menawarkan teknologi, memberi latihan kepada jurutera serta menyenggara dan menguruskan stesen pengangkutan berteknologi tinggi tersebut.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor, MALAYSIA

Why the SCS is matter for China?

China’s aggressive action in the South China Sea come amid renewed tension with some ASEAN countries, especially Vietnam and the Philippines, and the US in recent years. China try to establish a relationship with mutual trust with ASEAN countries in order to stablise its own interest in the SCS. The China’s latest moves, however, according to Collin Koh, would only deepen the lack of trust among ASEAN countries. He also argue that such moves are going to be counterproductive and backfire to Beijing. Those moves deepen the concern of its neighboring countries and form threaten in this area with international increasing attention on the matter, albeit China keep emphasizing that foreign power and international community without legitimacy to intervene China’s affair and its strategy of peaceful rise. I would like to discuss why the SCS is matter for China and what is be reflected behind such aggressive moves from China’s perspective. Why the SCS is matter for China?

Geopolitical strategy: According to the historic experience, the need of exclusive sphere which is a strategic backyard become urgent for a rise power. The volume of a country sovereignty (population, land, resource) is always relatively limited. Therefore, major power uses its own advantages in economy, politics, military, etc. to make the backyard become its source of natural resource and labor and open the market of backyard to dump its goods and services. In the view of China, southeast Asia is the most vital strategic backyard due to its huge potential of development in the future. To date, it is not realistic that expand exclusive sphere by land, China attempts to include southeast Asia into its exclusive sphere via proclaim its sovereignty and jurisdiction in SCS and make SCS as a fulcrum of China’s influence in southeast Asia. In spite of this, it can not legitimatize the aggressive moves took by China in the SCS. Moreover, as pointed out by legal advisor of the US Department of State, the “historic bay and title” claimed by China does not comply the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Even if it still has legal force, it should belong to the earliest declared sovereignty of the Republic of China, Taiwan.

The major transportation route: The SCS is the main shipping route connect with east Asia, Europe, Africa and the east coast of the US. Simultaneously, the SCS is also air passage of east Asia and southeast Asia. In addition to shipping and air transport safety, it also shows China’s ambition to control the economic benefits of this water area.

Military strategy deployment: As the core of the SCS, Nansha island as air and navy base, Both fighters and warships can easily reach Southeast Asia in a short time. It can also be used as a transit supply base. Furthermore the depth of the South China Sea basin is about 4000 meters. China's nuclear submarines can directly dive into the deep sea to conduct combat readiness from Sanya base. It has greatly improved the survivability and activity capability of China's sea-based strategic nuclear strike forces. Therefore, effective control of the South China Sea can greatly improve the survivability and deterrent capability of China's strategic nuclear submarines.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor, MALAYSIA

What could be reflected from China’s aggressive moves?

In the framework of realism: In recent years, not only in the dispute of the SCS, but also in its foreign policy have an obvious and comprehensive thinking of realism. First of all, realists believe that “state” is the main actor. According to the foreign speech of China, it is keeping emphasize the notion of sovereign state and opposite with “foreign intervention” in its “internal affair”. For example, China absence the arbitration for the dispute of the SCS between the Philippines and PRC and refused the outcome of the arbitration in 2013. Because China considers that the end point of the dispute involved in this case is beyond the scope of the adjustment of the Convention and the delimitation of maritime areas. The example demonstrates that China has less credit to the values of international organisation and rules, and believe as a sovereign state it can make rational decision which meet with the opinion of realism. Although China repeatedly claims the principle of peaceful rise and don’t want to damage the contemporary international system. The moves of the SCS issues, however, are different with what it committed significantly. Secondly, realist believes that state is interest maximizer, which is mean state’s action and policy are based on its own interest. According to the presses of Ministry of Foreign Affair of PRC, the spokesmen and spokeswomen always emphasize “core interest” and show the strong determination to maintain state’s sovereignty, security and interest when they talk about the dispute of territory, including the SCS dispute.

The rise of national identity: Domestically, Chinese from China have unprecedented strong national identity. It is not only strengthen CCP’s legitimacy in domestic, but also provide great support and also pressure for China’s government to take aggressive actions to the SCS. Based on the argument from Francis Fukuyama, if national identity go to radical intention, it could be main obstacle to cooperation and exacerbate tense regionally or internationally.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor, MALAYSIA

How was ASEAN economic cooperation connected with "Growing ASIA"? How can ASEAN benefit?

Growing Asia used to mean China and India. But now the focus of global growth is shifting towards south-east Asia. ASEAN, at $2.4 trillion, would be just the third largest in Asia. On the other hand, it would be the fifth largest in the world. In addition to providing some measure of economic integration, ASEAN provides stability to a region that was the site of war and genocide for much of the late 20th century. Although the progress is slow, ASEAN’s Economic Community (AEC) is bringing down trade barriers and moving towards a freer market. The AEC doesn’t mean free trade and free movement of labor, but it has meant freer trade and freer movement of labor. ASEAN also has played a central role in giving a platform for big Asian economies to negotiate and trade.

With rapid urbanisation and industrialisation, a young demographic, digitisation, growing access to education and rising female empowerment, Southeast Asia is predicted to gain a new position in the world. Corporate America is also tilting towards south-east Asia. Although US president Donald Trump withdrew the US in 2017 from the planned Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), whose other members were to include Japan and Vietnam, US imports from Vietnam kept growing. There is more to come as the EU seeks a trade agreement with ASEAN based on its existing deal with Singapore, and a post-Brexit UK strives for a stronger presence in Asia. There are so much potential that will benefit ASEAN as the world is trading multilaterally and more economies are shifting towards Southeast Asia.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor, MALAYSIA

ASEAN has been doing great since it first established in 1967. As per the graph below by United Nations Conference On Trade And Development (UNCTAD) (2017), the members’ GDP has undergone rapid increase from 1970 to 2015 by almost 400%. In 2015, Brunei and Singapore have the highest GDP per capita levels at $25,663 and $38,228, however for presentation purposes, UNCTAD did not include the amount into the figure below. Every country is seen to have increase in GDP per capita and it can be considered as one of the achievements of the economic integration and cooperation in ASEAN.

However, Tan Sri Datuk Rebecca did mention when she was answering one question from the audience that ASEAN does not have that much funds to actually develop more especially when ASEAN does not have its own funding organisation like Asian Development Bank (ADB). I agree with this. Most of the ASEAN’s members are consist of developing countries and they do not have a lot of fund and therefore, developed countries like Singapore or even a bit better from the CLMV like Malaysia or Brunei has to help the CLMV countries to develop in terms of capitals, infrastructure or even agriculture. If ASEAN has its own funding organization, it would definitely help these countries to push more efforts in developing many areas of development. However it is amazing that despite that they do not have many funds, the members of ASEAN manage to take it as an advantage to improve their relationship with each other by giving ideas and help whenever they are in need.

Furthermore, another challenge is that there are still people with lack of foreign language skills. As all ASEAN members have different languages, they will need one language to connect with each other which is English. However, there are still people who are not able to converse in English which will then hinder the efforts for regional integration. For instance, according to Nhan Dan Online (2017), Vietnamese Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Nguyen Quoc Dung sees Vietnam to be lagging as compared to other ASEAN countries and the businesses have “certain limitations in economic integration process due to lack of experience and foreign language skills.” Not just Vietnam, Thailand is also one of the countries who suffer lack of foreign language skills. Thailand has a higher labour cost as compared to Vietnam and with the availability of infrastructure and facilities for manufacturing, Thailand also has “sufficient of skilled workforce in terms of manufacturing” (Onyusheva et al., 2018) but the researchers also found out in another study by Mursalim et al. (2017) that Thailand is lack of foreign language skills as compared to Singapore and Philippines. Vietnam and Thailand are countries with high potential to develop but they need to improve their English proficiency so that they will be able to meet the market demands.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor, MALAYSIA

A seminar on the topic “Japan-Korea-China Economic Relations” was organized by the Korea Economic Institute of America and invited speakers Mr. Joshua Meltzer, Fellow Global Economy and Development from The Brookings Institution, Ms. Mireya Solis, Associate Professor in American University and Mr. Derek Scissors, Senior Research Fellow of The Heritage Foundation.

Mr. Meltzer, the seminar's first speaker, discussed Korea's recent trade and economic policy, stating that while Korea has a significant growth rate, its export share with the US has been declining. He then goes on to say that Korea has begun to integrate its production network with that of Japan and China's large corporations. He went on to say that bilateral FTA negotiations with China are currently underway. He concluded by stating that Korea will most likely not join TPP, which I agree with given that Korea has yet to join despite President Moon Jae In's consideration on that matter. Ms. Solis, the next speaker, took the floor and discussed Japan's trade policy and what Japan needs to do to avoid marginalization. She went on to say that Japan needs to be a real player in the FTA movement because they are currently at a disadvantage. Furthermore, the speaker addressed what makes Japan's FTA deals unappealing, such as competing projects with China, and there is greater convergence on FTA content between ASEAN and China. She explained why the TPP stands out and believes that Japan needs to join the TPP to avoid falling behind, which I agree was a great argument given that Japan is now an active member of the CPTPP.

The last speaker, Mr. Scissors then started his presentation specializing on China’s factor in the economy and trade framework. He said that China likes market ratifying agreements rather than market-opening agreements, as the like agreement can protect what they have. He also believed Mongolia is more important to China than Japan and Korea as the country does not compete with China in anything, and it can be seen by China’s finance investment as it is higher in Mongolia compared to China and Japan.

The seminar then moves on to the Questions and Answers session, where Mr. Scissors answers a question about Japan-China integration. He stated that while there are gains between countries in terms of high-tech integration, it is not easy to achieve in terms of agriculture. Then, in response to the question of how TPP can assist Japan in the trade agreement, Mrs. Solis believes it will open the door to possible upfront negotiations with European countries. Mr. Meltzer then adds his perspective, stating that Japan only focuses on the WTO because they believe that only the WTO can help them. When asked about US support for TPP, Mr. Scissors stated that if the House was led by Republicans, he believed they would agree, whereas most Democrats opposed the idea. However, this is contradicted by the fact that ex-President Obama of the Democrats ratified TPP in 2016, while ex-President Trump of the Republicans left TPP in 2017.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda & Farha Zulkefly Balan

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor

MALAYSIA

Malaysia is the Southeast Asian country with the biggest potential, regarding the relative youthness of the population, a land proportionately underpopulated, and political stability, which opens opportunities for new businesses to prosper. The excellent orator shared the ambitious digitalization goal to make Malaysia into a digitally sovereign nation. Digital sovereignty means that the data generated by Malaysian internet users would be domesticated in Malaysia, which would necessarily mean to leave the GAFAM internet environment like China did for instance, and to build a new one. The initiatives presented aimed to shift to the digital economy not to revolutionize the Malaysian virtual space to have control over the user’s data that still benefit overall to the silicon valley’s internet giants.

On the other hand, the management of the syndemic worldwide was a traumatic event with disastrous consequences on the population, millions of people lost their jobs and the economy is in intensive care. Children, students and workers were forced to spend hours behind the screens with serious effects on their physical and mental health. Further digitalization of the economy riske to accelerate these phenomena. Therefore, there is a need to rethink business and investment, with a recentration on the real economy, and to go beyond economic models that disturbed the ecosystem and created an unbalanced power relation based on exploitation.

The long-celebrated gig economy as the way to freedom and financial independence became a more precarious professional condition for freelancers that lost their status as workers and

therefore, their social gains that were acquired decades ago. Instead of top to bottom projects that may recreate precarity and exploitive relations, it’d be beautiful to see Malaysian society debating about a living together model that would be desirable and emancipatory.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda & Lina Azzouni

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor

MALAYSIA

We can clearly see the trade policy strategy of South Korea, Japan, and China. For Korea, it has taken an aggressive and active approach by trying to achieve free trade agreements (FTAs) with not just its main trading partners such as the United States, European Union, and China, but other countries as well. The reason behind the active approach is because Seoul believes that FTAs can lead to increased efficiency among its local producers. Having FTAs will open Korea's market and this will require the local producers to compete with foreign products. It is through competition that the local producers will improve their products.

However, unlike Korea, Japan is very protective of its agricultural market and hesitant to bring in foreign workers. It was due to these two reasons that many other countries especially the developing countries find that Japan's FTA is not appealing. Interestingly, domestic politics can influence greatly the trade policy of a country as shown in the case of Japan with regard to Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The two main political parties in Japan, the Liberal Democratic Party and Democratic Party of Japan had divided views on TPP and this somehow has hindered the participation of Japan into the TPP.

China has increasingly become crucial for Japan and Korea because it is one of the main trading partners of both countries. The main question is whether China's economy will reform from statism to liberalization because it is argued that if China undertakes economic reforms, it will spur more cooperation with Japan and Korea.

Dr. Mohd Ikbal bin Mohd Huda & Ahmad Zikri Rosli

Centre for History, Politics and International Affairs,

Faculty of Social Sciences & Humanities,

National University of Malaysia,

43600 Bangi, Selangor

MALAYSIA