Malaysia and UN Security Council: the anatomy of deception?

As expected, Malaysia won its bid as one of the 15 non-permanent members in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).

That means Malaysia will now have voting rights in the UNSC.

Together with the four other new members – Angola, Venezuela, Spain and New Zealand – Malaysia will sit in the UNSC for two years from 2015 to 2016.

Basically, Malaysia, Angola and Venezuela ran unopposed under their regional groupings of Asia, Africa and Latin America. The only real contest was among New Zealand, Spain and Turkey from the Western European and Others Group (WEOG), in which Turkey lost. 

This is not the first time Malaysia sits in the UNSC. Prior to this, Malaysia had been on the UNSC in 1965, 1989/1990 and 1999/2000.

However what makes it different this time around is that the number of countries which supported Malaysia is the highest. Malaysia received overwhelming support, taking 187 out of the total 192 votes with one abstention.

Malaysia received 143 votes in 1989/1990 and 174 votes in 1999/2000.

Technically, that means Malaysia is a “favourite” in the international arena despite all the criticism back home.

Internationally, Malaysia deserves applause for being elected into the UNSC.

With this new role, it looks like Malaysia has a lot on its plate for next year. In 2015, it will take over as the chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), and what makes it more significant is that 2015 is also the deadline set by Asean in the building of the Asean Community.

Although it is nothing new for Malaysia as a non-permanent member in the UNSC, given the contemporary political atmosphere, it does mean a lot.

Under the UN Charter, candidates for UNSC’s membership should not only be contributors to the maintenance of international peace and security, but also promoters to universal respect for human rights.

Therefore, it is good timing for the civil society groups to grab this opportunity to put pressure on the government to fulfil what they have pledged. For example, Malaysia has been slow in ratifying core human rights conventions compared to other Southeast Asian countries.

In his video message after the election, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak highlighted his vision to advance peace and moderation.

I quote: “Malaysia has a strong record of promoting peace, moderation and security around the world. Our brokering of peace in southern Philippines is one example… Our selection to the UNSC is an endorsement of Malaysia’s foreign policy. We are increasingly being recognised and valued as a global partner for peace and security.”

The PM outlined Malaysia’s five priorities in its role in the UNSC. The five points are to advance moderation globally; advocate mediation as an approach to conflict resolution; promote UN peacekeeping operations; facilitate the peace-building process in strife-torn countries and pursue deliberations on the UNSC’s comprehensive reformation.

In the international arena, Malaysia is often known as a player who knows how to “play its game”. Its excellent diplomatic skills have earned Malaysia a “good name” in the eyes of the world.

However back home, many Malaysians do not share the same view because matters like the “Allah” issue and most recently, the banning of Indonesian Muslim scholar, Dr Ulil Abshar Abdalla from entering Malaysia, simply do not reflect the PM’s vision of moderation.

The government’s crackdown against dissenting voices under the Sedition Act 1948, which was also criticised by the UN Human Rights Council, does not reflect the element of moderation either.

By having such contradictory stands, how far can the PM actually lead the laudable “Global Movement of Moderates”?

Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman said engagement is the best way forward in the UNSC.

Well, the foreign minister is right that engagement is the key. But engagement is not only important at the level of UNSC; engagement should also be emphasised back home.

UNSC is the most important executive organ in the UN. At the same time, its internal reform itself has been a greatly controversial issue over the last decade. It is not as glorious as some might perceive.

Under the UN Charter, the UNSC has central responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. However the problem is that members often put their national interests above everything else.

Hence, if Malaysia continues to stay in its “comfort zone”, to continue its strategy to follow and not to lead, then I am sceptical of any substantial contributions that it could possibly make.

Then perhaps, we could be “proud” of qualifying four times for the UNSC.

In order to earn respect from other member countries in the UN, the PM should start doing at home what he preaches to others in the international arena. – October 20, 2014.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.