My comments as per an article (see below) by anil netto
Serious dilemma though; but the recent reasonably fair and 'non-violent' elections is good news for global business/investors. The election voting patterns reveal citizenry maturity and understanding of policy and economic needs/issues.
I think pragmatic investors would view positively of the so called 'GOV-IN-WAIT' led by DSAI; at least in the long term. The challenges noted by John Hilly are reasonable views but fails to highlight the strong two party system emerging in Malaysia. The capital flight probably is temporary, and may be good if its bad capital in the first place.
The MEA is not abandoning NEP, but merges with some of NEP's core principles of helping the poor and uneducated (I believe)
The unique nature of malaysia, being a majority muslim country with secular traditions provides a great oportunity geopolitically in building bridges between nations; post 911 era of exremism and extreme action.
It appears DSAI has the political will and moral courage in undertaking those challenges.
LP 4/29/08
The following text is part of what was reported in an srticle by anilnetto in http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/6848/84/
So will the end of the NEP lead to radical changes towards a people-led economy? Not necessarily, warns political scientist John Hilley, author of the book 'Mahathirism, Hegemony and the New Opposition'.
For one thing, the international private sector would view the removal of the racially-divisive NEP as another 'necessary step' on the road to a more open free-market, deregulated economy, he said. ''And this begs the bigger question, and problem, for the opposition (PR) of how to advance policy ideas that don't just abandon 'outdated' social instruments for more market 'solutions'.''
This he said was a serious dilemma for any socially ambitious 'government-in-waiting', fearful of anxious marketeers and capital flight. ''The blackmail threats and constraints of the global neoliberal (dis)order cannot be easily dismissed,'' he told IPS in e-mailed comments. ''Yet, until there are imaginative efforts to craft and pursue people-led economics, the same social divisions, inequalities and business-first agenda will prevail.''
Policies that would promote social investment and poverty-focused spending would thus probably be welcomed by the public. What is lacking though is the political will and radical creativity to realise such policies, pointed out Hilley, adding that the post-election phase ought to be used to explore and build credible alternatives to those proclaimed by corporate interests and the 'market evangelists'.
He stressed that the key impetus for meaningful economic change would have to come from civil society itself -- active NGOs, reformist lobbies, community groups, academic activists and others -- rather than ''a hopeful reliance on politicians whose idea of 'economic delivery' becomes mediated by political office and tamed by the 'realistic' demands of big business''.
