Yiswaree Palnasamy in Malay Mail, 12 October 2021, where the title reads thus “Hishammuddin: Aukus can potentially disrupt South-east Asian peace; Malaysia won’t stand by”
Malaysia has made it clear to Australia that it won’t stand for any external threat to the peace and stability in South-east Asia, Parliament was told today.Defence Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein said the federal government’s position has been very clear and consistent regarding the three-way security pact Australia has with the United States and the United Kingdom in the Indoe-Pacific region, better known as Aukus. “The latest stance of the Malaysian government on Aukus remains consistent with the stance affirmed by the prime minister, that the formation of Aukus raises concerns as it has the potential to disrupt peace and stability in Southeast Asia.
KUALA LUMPUR, 5 Okt — Menteri Kanan Pertahanan yang juga Ahli Parlimen Sembrong Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein ketika Mesyuarat Khas Penggal Ketiga Parlimen Ke-14 di Parlimen hari ini.?–fotoBERNAMA (2021) HAK CIPTA TERPELIHARA
“It will also provoke other powers to act more aggressively in the region, especially in the South China Sea,” he said in the Dewan Rakyat. The senior minister said Malaysia’s stance remained unchanged even after his phone conversation with his Australian counterpart Peter Dutton and a recent meeting with Australia’s representative, Vice-Admiral David Johnston.
“In both these discussions, I have stressed that Malaysia does not want to be dragged into the geopolitics of the considerations of huge powers. I also emphasised that, as an Asean nation, Malaysia holds the principle of maintaining Asean as a Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality,” Hishammuddin added.
He said Australia must respect the Asean principle on neutrality and Malaysia’s stance on nuclear-powered submarines operating in its waters, including under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the Southeast Asian Nuclear-Weapon-FreeZone Treaty. Hishammuddin said that he had also informed Australia that it needs to obtain consent from Malaysia if any of its nuclear-powered warship or submarine wishes to enter Malaysian waters or ports.
He said Johnston had last week explained that Aukus is not a military alliance but a collaboration for nuclear-powered submarine technology. He said the Australian official also said the nuclear-powered submarine does not involve nuclear armaments, in line with Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty 1968.
But he reminded both Dutton and Johnston that all parties should refrain from using any military action that is considered provocative or has the potential to increase tensions and provoke conflict. “I also emphasised that Malaysia’s stand will not budge, that is, any problems, differences and disputes must be addressed, consistently and clearly through dialogue and consultation,” Hishammuddin added.
**** ****
AN ASSESSMENT by Fair Dinkum, 15 October 2021
“This is an unusually strong response from the Malaysian Defence Minister. Normally, Malaysia doesn’t respond to what Australia says or does. Despite good diplomatic ties on the surface, Malaysians are weary of Australia’s true motives when it comes to their attempts to interfere into Asia. Malay expression is usually calm and soft, but beneath the surface of this response, it is clear Malaysia is deeply troubled by AUKUS, having to remind Dutton and Morrison of Asian sensibilities concerning security and peace, which clearly differs from Dutton and Morrison’s thinking.
It is also worth noting Australia and the US media have distorted and misrepresented Singapore’s position, claiming Singapore “welcomes AUKUS”, but if you read the Singapore newspapers and what their leaders have said, they have expressed genuine concerns about AUKUS and they definitely didn’t say they “welcomed” AUKUS.
Certainly the media in Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia have raised serious concerns about AUKUS.
Meanwhile, the Asia link of Melbourne University have produced an essay with the heading “There is no Anglo vs. Asia in AUKUS” which is repeating Australian government rhetoric. Clearly, white Australians have difficulty raising to consciousness how deeply embedded Anglo sensibilities are in every fabric and structure of Australian society. It is simply untrue to claim there is no Anglo vs. Asia in AUKUS. Of course, it is Anglo as the power structures within Australia have never divested itself of Anglo prejudices which are instilled into us from birth. Our country has always been run by white Anglophiles. Indigenous Australians or those of Asian, African, Middle Eastern or Pacific ancestry have never been strong in changing Anglo sensibilities and values. There are no Asian/African/ME/Pacific sensibilities within the power structures of Australian society. Absolutely none. Remember Tony Abbott arguing the Western Civilisation Centre for Sydney was not just about teaching European and Anglo history and values, but intensely “in favour of it” to the exclusion of any other value system. What fools does Melbourne University take us for?
Asian sensibilities are different to Anglo ones which guides Asian leaders’ thinking about what constitutes peace, freedom, and prosperity in Asia, which is not the same as Anglo people.
Of course, it is Australia’s agenda to push such rhetoric because this type of propaganda is an attempt to persuade Asian countries to accept AUKUS and not raise arguments against it, or oppose it, even though they should oppose it.
If ASEAN were to become divided and splits into positions as a result of AUKUS, in the way the US and Australia are trying to manipulate them to do, the outcome for Australia would be disastrous and they would never be seen as a friendly partner ever again.
There are big differences in the way the media in Australia, US and Taiwan, on the one hand, and media in Southeast Asia and the Middle East have reported on AUKUS. As expected, the US and Australian media and their diplomats adopt a kind of benevolent father figure watching over Asia, while Gulf and Southeast Asian newspapers see AUKUS as destabilising the Asian region.
I don’t know why Australian academics seem to think their views about Asia are superior. It suggests that residues of colonialism still exist deep down in their subconscious.
