마하티르 재집권과 급변하는 말레이시아 어디로?

마하티르 총리

[아시아엔=무티아 알라가파 美아메리카대 교수, 말라야대 객원교수] 5월 9일 실시된 말레이시아 총선은 전례없이 매우 인상적이었다. 절대권력을 쥐고 있던 나집 총리의 집권당이 무너진 것이다. 특히 이 과정에서 태국과 같은 쿠데타나 1998년 인도네시아에서 발생한 것 같은 어떠한 소요사태도 없었다. 선거는 92세 노령의 마하티르 모함마드의 재집권으로 결론났다. 1981~2003년 국무총리 재직 중 독재를 통해 경제발전을 이룬 그는 몇년전부터 나집 라작 총리에 필적할 만한 세력을 다지고 있었다. 그의 집권에는 나집 전 총리의 부정부패가 한몫 단단히 했다.

예상치 못한 결과에 대해 일부 시민들은 군대 개입이나 비상사태를 우려했지만 실제 그같은 일은 일어나지 않았다. 오히려 선거 직후 새 정부는 나집 전 총리의 자택을 압수수색하는 등 그의 사법처리를 서둘고 있다. 많은 사람들은 말레이시아의 평화적인 정권 이양이 가능한 것은 소셜미디어 덕분이라고 말한다.

하지만 말레이시아는 새로운 시대에 적잖은 어려움을 겪게 될 지 모른다. 대중들의 높은 기대는 선거때 약속한 것들을 지키도록 압력을 가할 수 있다. 마하티르 수상은 과거 말레이 민족주의를 앞세워 독재적인 방식으로 통치를 해나가는 것이 쉽지 않다는 것을 금세 알아차릴 것이다. 나아가 자신과의 협력관계인 안와르 전 수상의 요구를 수용하는 것도 쉽지 않을 것이다.

마하티르 수상은 선거 기간 내내 집권하면 경제를 최우선 순위에 놓겠다고 말했다. 이는 한편으로는 국가부채와 정부지출을 줄이며, 재정수입을 늘려야 가능한 것이다. 선거 당시 국민들은 생활비가 너무 많이 들어 가장 걱정이라고 답했다.

마하티르 앞에 놓여있는 것은 경제문제만이 아니다. 나집 정부의 부정부패에 신물이 난 국민들은 ‘깨끗한 정부’와 정치개혁을 요구하고 있다. 말레이시아 국민들은 정치개혁과 동시에 경제적인 안정을 동시에 기대하고 마하티르에게 표를 준 것이다.

중요한 것은 정치발전이 없으면 경제발전을 생각하기 어렵다는 사실이다. BRICS 국가 중 하나인 브라질의 경우 정치위기가 경제위기를 가져왔다. 그동안 아시아 국가 대부분은 경제발전을 꾀하려면 정치발전, 즉 민주주의는 어느 정도 희생돼도 괜찮다고 여겨왔다. 하지만 지금은 전혀 상황이 바뀐 것이다. 말레이시아가 진정으로 선진국으로 도약하려면 민주주의적 기본요소를 동시에 충족시키지 않으면 안된다.

가령 2020년까지 선진국으로 진입하겠다는 마하티르 수상의 과거 비전은 이미 나집 정부에서 써먹은 바 있다. 나집 정부는 2020년 비전의 최우선 목표로 고소득 국가진입으로 잡고 이에 주력했다. 그런데 결과는 아다시피 실패였다. 같은 실수를 반복하지 않는 게 중요하다.

다시 강조하지만 정치발전과 경제발전은 결코 떼어놓고 생각할 수 없는 새의 두날개와 같은 존재다. 그 중 하나가 다른 하나를 위해 절대 희생될 수 없다는 얘기다.

마하티르 수상의 말레이시아는 정치발전에 주력함으로써 중앙정부와 주정부 그리고 국민들이 하나가 돼 정치·경제적인 제반 문제를 풀어갈 수 있을 것이다. 정치발전은 여러 방면에서 나타날 수 있지만, 특히 민주적인 정부로의 통합이야말로 마하티르 정부가 우선순위를 둬야 할 점이다. <요약번역 최수아 인턴기자>

 

다음은 원문 전문입니다.

Seizing Malaysia’s Moment

Malaysia’s historic May 9 election was dramatic, sweeping and unprecedented. A ruling party in power with seemingly impregnable advantages was ousted through the ballot box. There was no extra constitutional uprising, as in the Philippines in 1986, no military coup as in neighboring Thailand, no rioting and turmoil as in Indonesia in 1998. The curtain was pulled aside and suddenly the mighty Barisan Nasional and its main component party, the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), was shown to be vulnerable, its Achilles’ heel of corruption rendering it weak, at least for now.

Much of the credit must go to the new prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, who has stunned the world with his return to power at the age of 92. A Malay nationalist, he forged a reputation for building the economy ? and acting harshly against his opponents ? during his long tenure as premier from 1981 to 2003. His moves against former prime minister Najib Razak in recent years set the stage for what was to come. Ultimately, the leadership of Anwar Ibrahim’s Parti Keadilan Rakyat joined forces to form the Pakatan Harapan Coalition led by Mahathir. Behind the scenes, weariness with Malaysia’s deteriorating national image under the scandal-plagued Najib government enhanced domestic and international support for change.

Immediately after a result that few predicted, fears that the military might intervene or a state of emergency be declared soon evaporated. The system in place actually worked. The hereditary rulers supported the outcome and the transformation has been as peaceful and orderly as it has been stunning. From the police raids on Najib’s homes to the rapid release of Anwar from prison on charges of sodomy, the extraordinary has become ordinary in Malaysia.

The changes also buck a dismal regional trend. Thailand has become a stage-managed military state, the Philippines under Rodrigo Duterte is unwinding democratic freedoms won over a period of decades, Hun Sen in Cambodia has cemented his autocratic rule. But in Malaysia, long among the most repressive states in Southeast Asia, a vibrant free press driven by social media is reasserting itself and citizens feel empowered to speak out.

Malaysia will face a great many challenges in this new era. High public expectations may overwhelm the capacity of the new government to deliver on its promises. In addition, the Malay nationalism and strongman tendencies in Mahathir’s political past may be a hindrance. Further, accommodating Anwar’s desires could prove difficult, and the sooner he becomes part of the government the better it will be for the new prime minister. This does not minimize the historic change, but it is important to reduce euphoric expectations. The primary purpose of this essay is to draw attention to the need for political development in the country to proceed on the basis that ultimately sovereignty resides in the people.

The outcome of the last general election ? GE 14 in local shorthand ? should be used to push through some hitherto unimaginable (and, to some, unpalatable) policies to ensure the long-term health of the country. Mahathir has said that the economy will be his priority. This would include replacing the unpopular General Sales Tax (GST) with the previous Sales and Services Tax (SST), trimming the national debt, cutting back on excessive government expenditure, increasing transparency in government procurement and instituting better management of the economy. The Merdeka Center pre-election survey indicated that the high cost of living was a primary concern of voters.

At the same time, it is important to recognize the basis on which the election was contested. The differences between the Pakatan Harapan coalition and Barisan Nasional were not limited to economic and financial policies but extended to fundamental political issues including clean government and the basis for the Malaysian nation. The government must not lose sight of the reform agenda. I am not arguing that economic growth and development are unimportant, only that it is equally if not more important to address political development issues that will have a long-term effect on the health and economy of the country.

It should be noted here that in the absence of political development, it will be difficult to sustain economic growth. The Brazilian economy, one of the five BRICS economies, for example, has become a victim of a politically induced crisis in that country. Recovery and development there hinges on resolution of the political conflict that induced the crisis in the first place. In Malaysia, whether one agrees or disagrees with the pro-Malay New Economic Policy, it was formulated on the assumption that a Bumiputra affirmative-action policy would spur stability and economic growth. Malaysia is not alone in this dilemma ? political development has been ignored by most Asian countries in favor of economic growth.

Mahathir’s previous vision to create a developed country by 2020, for example, was increasingly interpreted by the Najib government in economic terms. But a truly democratic Malaysia should be an integral part of becoming a developed country. Conveniently, the Najib government focused on becoming a high-income economy as the overriding goal of the 2020 vision. It is crucial to avoid the same mistake. The focus must be on both political and economic development. One cannot be sacrificed for the other.

It is clear from numerous cases in Asia that economic growth and development alone cannot resolve political disputes and conflicts. Asia is strewn with countries that confront deep crises as a consequence of outdated notions of nation, state and sovereignty. By focusing on political development, Malaysia can become a beacon for countries confronting political (and economic) challenges rooted in dated conceptions of nation, state and sovereignty.

Political development can occur in many ways. Here we focus on three crucial elements: making a strong nation; building an effective, politically neutral state to implement government policies; and consolidating democratic governance.

Muthiah Alagappa is a distingushed Scholar in Residence at American Univ. in Washington, DC.