ISiS Focus No.6 Jun 2013

7/27/2019 ISiS Focus No.6 Jun 2013

1/16

ISIS FOCUS

LimitedCirculation

INSTITUTEOFSTRATEGICANDINTERNATIONALSTUDIES(ISIS)MALAYSIA

www.isis.org.my

IssueNo.6 June2013 PP5054/11/2012(031098)

ISIS International Affairs Forum

Australias MulticulturalIdentity in the Asian Century


2/16

Publishedby

InstituteofStrategicandInternationalStudies(ISIS)Malaysia

No.1,PersiaranSultanSalahuddin

P.O.Box12424,50778KualaLumpur,Malaysia

Tel: +60326939366

Fax: +60326915435

Email: [email protected]

Website:www.isis.org.my

The Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS)

Malaysiawasestablishedon8April1983,inrealizationofa

decisionmadeby theMalaysianGovernment to setupan

autonomous, notforprofit research organization that

wouldact

as

the

nations

think

tank.

ISIS

Malaysia

was

envisioned to contribute towards sound public policy

formulationanddiscourse.

TheresearchmandateofISISthereforespansawidearea.It

includes economics, foreign policy and security studies,

socialpolicy,and technology, innovation,environmentand

sustainability.

ISIS Malaysia today fosters dialogue and promotes the

exchange of views and opinions at both national and

international levels. Itundertakes research incollaboration

withnational and internationalorganizations, in important

areas such as national development and international

affairs.

ISISMalaysiaalsoengagesactively inTrackTwodiplomacy,

fostering highlevel dialogues at national, bilateral and

regional levels, through discussions with influential

policymakersandthoughtleaders.

RESEARCHEconomics

Research inthisarea isgenerallyaimedatpromotingrapid

andsustainedeconomicgrowthandequitabledevelopment

inthenation.Westudyspecific(ratherthangeneric) issues

that concern the nations competitiveness, productivity,

growth and income. Areas of research include

macroeconomicpolicy,

trade

and

investment,

banking

and

finance, industrial and infrastructure development and

human capital and labour market development. The

objectiveofallourresearchistodevelopactionablepolicies

andtospurinstitutionalchange.

ForeignPolicyandSecurityStudies

The primary aimof this programme is to provide relevant

policyanalysesonmatterspertainingtoMalaysiasstrategic

interestsaswellasregionaland international issues,witha

focus on the AsiaPacific Region. These include security

studies, foreignpolicy,SoutheastAsianpoliticsandmilitary

affairs.

Socialpolicy

Demographic and sociocultural trends are changing

Malaysian society and the social policy programme was

established to respond to these developments. Research in

this area is concerned with effective nation building, and

fostering greater national unity. In particular, we look at

issues involving the youth, women and underprivileged

communities. In conducting its research, ISIS Malaysia

networks with nongovernmental organizations and civil

societygroups.

Technology,Innovation,Environment&Sustainability(TIES)

The TIES programme provides strategic foresight,

collaborative researchandpolicyadvicetothepublicsector,

businesses andpolicy audiences,on technology, innovation,

environmentandsustainabledevelopment.Itsfocus includes

green growth as well as energy, water and food security.

Towards this end, TIES has been active in organizing

dialogues,forums,policybriefsandconsultancies.

HIGHLIGHTSISIS Malaysia has, among others, researched and provided

concretepolicyrecommendationsfor:

Greaterempowerment

and

revitalization

of

anational

investmentpromotionagency;

A strategic plan of action to capitalize on the rapid

growth and development of a vibrant Southeast Asian

emergingeconomy;

AMasterPlantomovetheMalaysianeconomytowards

knowledgebasedsourcesofoutputgrowth;

Theconceptualizationofanationalvisionstatement;

Effective management and rightsizing of the public

sector;and

Strengthening of ASEAN institutions and cooperation

processes.

ISISMalaysia

has

organized

the

highly

regarded

Asia

Pacific

Roundtable, an annual conference of highlevel security

policymakers,implementersandthinkers,since1986.

INTERNATIONALNETWORKING

AsamemberoftheTrackTwocommunity,ISISMalaysiaparticipatesinthefollowingnetworks: ASEANISISnetworkofpolicyresearchinstitutes; Council for Security and Cooperation in Asia and the

Pacific(CSCAP); NetworkofEastAsianThinkTanks(NEAT);and PacificEconomicCooperationCouncil(PECC).It is also a partner institute of the World EconomicForum(WEF).

EditorialTeamStevenWong

SusanTeoh

ThangamKRamnath

DesignRazakIsmail

JefriHambali

PhotographyJefriHambali/HalilMusa

ABOUTISISMALAYSIA


3/16

ISISFOCUS NO.6/2013 1

There are amillion differentways to talkabout the topic of AustraliasMulticultural Identity in the AsianCentury. I figured forthisaudience thebestway

to

start

that

conversation

would

be

to

start

in

the

17th

century in Europe. The reason I do that is

because it is useful to begin any discussion of

diversitywithinanation,andthewaythatnation

manages itsdiversity,by thinkingof the concept

of thenation itself,andnational identity.So that

takes us necessarily to 17th

century Europe and

thetreatiesofWestphalia.

This is really thebeginningof thenation

stateandthemythologythatsurroundsthenation

state.

And

in

spite

of

whatever

politicians

might

want to say, the nation state is a mythologized

fictionthatwekeepalivethroughthewaythatwe

talk about it, so I think its important to get an

understandingofwhatthatmythologyis.

In Westphalia, in what is now Germany,

whatbegantherewasan ideathatputanendto

the foreign affairs norm of imperialism, where

borders were temporary, where they were

constantly shifting in response to who could

conquer what territories, where nothing was

really fixed, andmost importantly, therewasno

fixednotionof sovereignty.And itwouldntbea

surprisetoanyone inthis room toknow thatthe

foreignpolicyapproach ledtoa lotofbloodshed,

andtoahugeamountofinstability.

So the idea formedeventually,aftera lot

of lives being lost at this particular point in

historyandweare talkingabout the intersection

oftheeightyyearswarandthehundredyearswar

that,maybe,thereisadifferentwayoforganizing

ourselvespolitically. So the conceptof inviolable

sovereigntywasbornatthatpoint.

It did not resolve in a nation state

immediatelybut the idea that is indispensable to

the creationof thenation statewasborn the

ideathatyouleaveusalone,weleaveyoualone,

andthatwewillhavefixedborderseventuallyand

thatwillbethat.And itworked.Theeightyyears

war and the hundred years war ended as the

resultof these seriesof treaties.And in time the

ideaofthenationstatecametobeborn.

Australias MulticulturalIdentity in the Asian Century

Mr.WaleedAlyisaLecturerinPolitics,SchoolofPoliticalandSocialInquiry,MonashUniversity,Australia.

HespokeatanISISInternationalAffairsForumonAustraliasMulticulturalIdentityintheAsianCentury,

on 30 April 2013. The Forum was moderated by ISIS Senior Director, Mr. Steven Wong. ISIS Focus

reproduceshistalk*here.

WaleedAly

*Thetalkhasbeeneditedforclarity


4/16

2 ISISFOCUS NO.6/2013

But when you come up with a political

creationlikethis,inorderforittowork,whatyou

need is the mythology that makes it seem real.

Andhere

we

are

talking

about

17th

century

Europe the mythology that was constructed

wentsomethinglikethis:thateachnationstateis

afixedidentitythatreflectssomekindofrealityof

thepeoplethatarewithinit.

So every nation state has a kind of

inherent homogeneity about it. All the people

withinthatnationstateareinsomeessentialway

the same. And the nation state exhibits an

essentialdifference from theothernation states

thatsurround

it.

So

there

is

something

inherently

FrenchaboutFranceandthepeopleofFrancethat

is definitely not British. And there is something

inherently British (and I understand the

problematicnature aboutusing the termBritish)

about Britain that definitely is not German and

thatsdefinitelynotItalian.

Andthis isallperfectlyunderstandableas

the main generating foreign policy norm. But

exercising thatmythologywas problematic for a

coupleof

reasons:

one,

it

was

never

really

true

all these nation states had quite a high level of

diversitywithin,andtwo,thatdiversityneededto

bemanagedinonewayoranother.

When you are trying to create a

mythology on the back of the idea of a

homogenous population, one of the principal

waysinwhichyoudealwiththatdiversityistotry

tolimitit.Soregionallanguageswoulddieoutand

therewouldbeviolencewithinstates inorder to

createthat

homogeneity

and

we

saw

the

lingering

effectofthatinEuropewellintothe20th

century.

And Francos Spain is all about this. For

example (at least, according tomy lonely planet

travelguide), thewayyousaySpain inSpanish is

LasEspanols.

Its

plural

for

Spain

because

there

aresomanydifferentregions inSpainthatareso

different,andwithsuchlinguisticdiversity.Franco

wastryingveryhardtoundo thattoassertthe

idea of a single unproblematically unified,

homogenous Spain. This is the result of that

legacy.

Whenyoucreateanideaofanationstate,

and you create with it an accompanying

mythology that says everyonewithin thatnation

stateis

essentially

or

broadly

the

same,

and

everyone outside of that state is somehow

different,youhavetotryand identifythewaysin

whichthepeoplewithinthatnationstatearethe

same.

Andso inEurope, itstrangelycamedown

to understanding the nation state as an

embodiment of culture, ethnicity, language and

oftenreligion.Thatwas theEuropeanmodeland

itheldforaverylongtime.Andyoumightargueit

stillholds,

although

Europe

is

now

facing

areal

challengetothatbecauseofthelevelofmigration

thatisgoingintoEuropeandthediversityofthose

societies.

Andthat isoneway,andIwouldsaythat

isthedominantway,inwhichthenationstatehas

been constructed:onpillarsof cultural, linguistic

and sometimes religious homogeneity and if

nothomogeneity,thensomelimiteddifference.It

Soeverynationstatehasa

kindofinherent

homogeneityaboutit


inEurope,itstrangelycame

down

to

understanding

the

nationstateasanembodiment

ofculture,ethnicity,language

andoftenreligion


5/16


mightbeanationseenasbeinghalfCatholicand

half Protestant but that in itself is part of the

identityof thatnation. Sowhat Illdo is, Ill call

that

in

purely

descriptive

terms,

with

no

judgmentattachedto ittheoldworldnational

identity. Because that is what it is. It was a

productof thatoldworldthatemerged from the

Europeancircumstance.

There is however another way of

constructing a national identity, and here if you

wanttolookatthequintessentialexample,forthe

perfect, the most idealized example of that, at

least in theory,youwouldprobablyhave to look

nofurther

than

the

United

States.

WhatistheUnitedStates?Whatis itthat

defines an American? And here is the

understanding of the historical circumstances of

thecreationofthatnation.Thatitwasfoundedby

agroupofpeople fleeingreligiouspersecution in

Europe. They established their own nation, and

one of the key principles that they needed to

establish that nation on was the principle of

Australias Multicultural Identity in the Asian Centuryreligiousfreedom.Andfromthatemergedamuch

broader idea that is really thewhole ideaof the

UnitedStatestheideaofindividualliberty.

There is something very important about

constructing a nation that way that is different

fromconstructinganationthewaytheoldworld

did.Becauseonceyouuseasyourbeginningas

your starting point for the very idea of your

nation the concept of individual liberty, you

thenrun intotheproblemofdiversity.Youmust.

Because liberty carries with it implications of

peopledoingthingsthatyoumaynotlike,holding

positionsthatyoumaynotlike,havingvaluesthat

youmay

not

like,

and

having

cultural

attachments

thatyoumightfindstrange.

Andso,whattheUnitedStateshasended

upwith,really,fromitsverybeginningandthis

isnotjusta functionofmodern immigrationbut

reallyfromitsverybeginningisasocietythatis

quiteradically,plural.Ithadtobe,ithadnochoice

aboutthat.But italsoendedupwithan identity,

an American identity, that was not of the old

(Fromleft)RidwaanJadwat,WaleedAlyandStevenWong


6/16



world,because itwasnotculturalor linguisticor

evenreligious andIsaythatunderstandingthe

importance of religion in public discourse in

America.But

because

it

was

not

built

on

an

identitythatwascultural,itwasinsteadbuildinga

nationalidentityinasenseofitselfandinasense

ofAmericanessthatwascivic.

Sotosay,`IamAmerican,isacivicclaim;

itisnotaculturalclaim.Tosay,`IamGerman,has

foraverylongtimenotbeenacivicclaim.Itsnot

merelyaclaimaboutwhereyourtaxesgo,orwhat

yourpassport is;it istosayIamGermanic.There

are two very different ways of approaching

nationalidentity:

cultural

identity

as

away

of

constitutinganationandcivicidentityasawayof

constitutinganation.Theyareverydifferent.

But civic identity and civic national

identityreally issomethingthatcomesoutofthe

newworld. It isnotsomethingthattheoldworld

could have produced because as I mentioned

when Istarted in17th

century, thecircumstances

ofthatcreationwerevastlydifferent.Thesewere

notpeoplewhowerefleeingonepartoftheworld

for another, theywere not peoplewhowere in

searchof

aparticular

idea

or

aparticular

political

experience. The circumstances that gave rise to

theUnited Stateswere such that itwas in some

waysinevitableoratleastnotremotelysurprising

thatacivicidentitywouldbeborn.

With that in mind I want to think for a

momentaboutAustralia.What isAustralia?Orto

putitasoneratherunkindEnglishgrandmotherof

a friend of mine put it what is the point of

Australia?Whyhave it.Whatdoes itdo?Thatsa

veryEnglish

perspective,

Ishould

say.

And

of

course, as far as the English are concerned,

Australiahadaveryclearpoint,andthatwasthey

neededaprison. Itbeganasapenalcolony.Itdid

notbeginastheUnitedStatesbeganasapolitical

experimentorindeedas itcontinuesasapolitical

experiment. Those are not derogatory terms.

Those are termsofGeorgeWashington, andnot

meaning it in any kindofdisparagingway. Itdid

Participantsattheforum


7/16


not begin as a project to realize some kind of

progressive political ideal in the case of the

United States, the idealwas of individual liberty

andthe

maximization

of

individual

liberty.

But nor did it begin as a nation with a

population that had been there for centuries,

culturally defined as a civilization that would

develop into anation state. Ithas an indigenous

populationthe indigenouspopulationthatwas

persecuted upon arrival of White settlement

but itwasan indigenouspopulationof incredible

diversity,and thatwasnot really recognizable to

Western eyes as any kind of organization that

wouldapproximate

anation

state.

It

simply

didnt

operatethatway.

Sowhat is it? Itwas something thatwas

created,asocietythatwascreatedmoreorlessas

amatterofpragmaticpolicymakingonthepartof

theBritish.Therewasdiversitywithin itfromthe

verystart.Thefirstfleetsthatarrived inAustralia

were more multicultural than is often

acknowledged, partly because the United

Kingdomwasmoremulticultural thanwas often

acknowledgedat

the

time.

But the main divisions within early

Australians were really to do to with class and

authority. Sometimes there were nationalistic

divides:thedowntroddentheIrishoftencalled

themselves thedowntroddenwith respect to the

English. And this was a major divide within

Australian society for a very long time the

CatholicProtestant division, the Irish and the

English it showed up atmajor flash points in

Australianpolitical

history

like

the

debate

over

conscriptionintheearly20th

century.

Australias Multicultural Identity in the Asian Century

Thisisnotanationthatwasfoundedona

particular idea,but it couldnt claim tobeof the

oldworldeither. Itwassoclearlyanewcreation

of some description, a new political creation.

Everyone

apart

from

the

indigenous

population

that was relatively small in number whether

theycamewillinglyorunwillingly,wasamigrant.

It isverymuchpartofthenewworld,but itvery

muchhasaBritishlineage.

Australia never declared war on Britain.

Sometimeswhenwe debatewhether or notwe

shouldbecomea republic, itwas something that

wasjokingly suggested, that perhaps we should

declarewaronBritainandthatwouldbeourway

todiscovering

our

independence.

But

we

have

never done that. We still have the Queen. We

votedtoretaintheQueen,althoughthatwasona

verytechnicallegalargumentintheend.

So the idea of Australia that originally

arosehadverymuchatitsheartthisideathatthis

isabrashnewyoungnation thathasall sortsof

possibilities.Andoneofthe ideasthatcamevery

clearlytodefineAustraliaearlyonwastheideaof

egalitarianism. Britain is a very class structured

society;Australia

was

not.

It

didnt

have

to

be.

So therewas a resistance to authority, a

kindof rejectionof the ideaof authority and an

understandingthatweareallequallydeservingof,

Isuppose,equaltreatment.Itwashoweveratthat

pointverymuchaWhitenationandthatwasstill

an important part of theway thatAustralia saw

itself. The phrase that is often used to describe

this is that Australia would seek to become a

Everyone..whetherthey

camewillinglyorunwillingly,

wasamigrant

Andoneoftheideasthat

camevery

clearly

to

define

Australiaearlyonwasthe

ideaofegalitarianism


8/16

Australiahasbecome,whether

bydesignornot,oneofthe

mosthyperpluralsocieties

anywhereintheworld

weresosignificantthattheysoradicallychanged

the composition of Australian society. Some of

them came as refugees a large number of

refugeescame

to

Australia

from

Vietnam

for

example. Some came as economicmigrants it

could have been people like my parents from

Egypt,couldhavebeenpeoplefromSouthAfrica,

whocametoAustraliaandactuallydidreallywell

because the Rand was very strong at that time

They bought a lot of property in Australia, and

those properties appreciated. But it was people

fromallovertheworld. Europeanmigrants,yesa

lot of them were, but not British migrants

necessarily.

Ahugewaveof Italianmigration through

the 70s and the 80s changed the complexion of

Australian society forever. And then a wave of

Asian migration through the 80s changed

Australian society again. And now waves of

migration from the Middle East and from Africa

arechangingitagain.

Itsnowuptoapointwherethemigration

intake into Australia is distinctly not European.

Australiahas

become,

whether

by

design

or

not,

oneofthemosthyperpluralsocietiesanywherein

the world. Only the United States, I would say,

really rivals it. The UK has a claim, London

certainly has a claim, but the rest of the UK, I

wouldargue,isnotpluralinquitethesamewayas

Australiais.

And that raisesanother realquestion for

Australia.Whatisit?Whatisitnow?Ifwewerent

exactlysurewhatitwasbefore,howcanwefigure

`White working mans paradise; labour rights

wouldbeprotected.

Andthis

was

avery

important

aspect

of

theideaofAustraliathatwasemerging,butitwas

definitelyWhite.Andwehadwhat is infamously

referred toas the `WhiteAustraliaPolicy,which

persistedon thebooks inAustralia right through

the 1970s, although it had clearly broken down

wellbefore that.Becausemyparentscame from

Egypt in the 1960s and didnt have any trouble

doing so. So someone either wasnt paying

attentionor itwason thebooks farmorethan it

wasinpractice.

But it was very much part of the

Australian consciousness in the first part of the

20thcentury.AsAustraliawent towaraspartof

theBritishempire inWorldWar I, itwenttowar

reallyasBritainasmuchasanything.WorldWarII

wasdifferentbecauseyouhadaparticularthreat

coming out of Europe, and Asia as well, in the

formoftheJapanese,butstill,theAustralianself

image was very much related to Britain. We

understood ourselves as a nation in relation to

Britain.The

way

the

British

saw

us

and

the

way

we

saw Britain was a very important aspect of our

ownselfimage.

In fact, if you go to Australia House in

London,youwillfinditisanamazinglyimpressive,

very unAustralianlooking building. It looks

incrediblyBritish.But its strategically located, so

that every single powerful person of the upper

middle classes in England,or in London at least,

will see it andwill notice thatAustralia is there.

Thiswas

part

of

the

aspiration

of

what

Australia

was it isverymuchtiednotjusttoEnglandor

BritainbutactuallytoLondonasacity.Youcould

not be an Australian Prime Minister, really,

withouthavingfondregardforLondonatthevery

least.

ButthensomethinghappenedinAustralia

thatchangeditfundamentally.Levelsofmigration

came intoAustralia from allover theworld that




9/16

out what it is today, when it is so radically

different from what it was? Well heres the

thing you do have a couple of things from

Australian history that continue to inform what

the Australian image should be. One of those

thingsis

that

it

is

inescapably

anew

nation.

A

nation foundedonmigration.Onceupona time,

thatmigrationwasWhite.NowitisfarlessWhite.

Eitherway,itisfoundedonimmigration.

Thepopulationgrowth inAustraliacomes

becauseof thehigh levelof immigration thatwe

have. We have an open market economy. We

embracedtheglobaleconomybackintheHawke

Keatingera,throughthe80sandthe90s,through

deregulation and the floating of the Australian

dollarand

so

on.

And

that

meant

that

we

became

verymuchanopenmarketplaceand thatmeant

migration economic migration as well as

humanitarianmigration.

Wehavealsoanethic Iwouldcall ita

mythology because its not always true, but it

almost doesntmatterwhether or not it is true,

because it is our imaginationof ourselveswe

haveanethicofegalitarianism.Itsanideathatin

AustraliagetsthrownaboutinaphraseIfindabit

grotesquebut

nonetheless

remains

apart

of

the

Australianethosof the fairgo.We like to think

that, whatever else, we are fair, and that,

ultimately,wedont really carewhere you come

from.Wemightcarewhatyoudowhenyougetto

Australia, and the contributions that you make,

butwedontreallycarewhereyoucamefrom.

Andhere IwouldsayAustraliahasavery

clearnewworldquality,moreakin to theUnited

States,thatisdifferentfromtheoldworldquality

ofEuropeandthatis,itsnotionofAustralianess

isevolvingmoreandmoretowardsacivicnation.

That today, to say that you are an Australian is

becomingmore

and

more

acivic

claim.

It

is

to

say

thatthestatewillregardyouasacitizenandthen

asknomorequestionsofwhoyouareonlyof

whatyoudo.Ifyouappearbeforethecourts,the

backgroundthatyouhaveiscompletelyirrelevant

to theway the courtwill proceed. It is relevant

onlytotheextentthat,ifyouneedatranslatoror

something,thecourtwillprovidethat.

It did not warrant separate laws for

separate groupings of people because it has

becomeanation

that

has

established

itself

more

andmore in linewiththetenetsofliberalismand

understanding people as individuals within the

state.Andpeoplearenotperceivedby the state

as belonging to any particular social grouping.

Thatdoesnotmeanhoweverthatpeopledidnot

regard themselves as being part of a social



Thattoday,tosaythatyou

arean

Australian

is

becoming

moreandmoreacivicclaim

ElinaNoordiscussingapoint


10/16



grouping. And here we are running to a debate

that Australia inevitably was always going to

confront, once high levels of migration started

comingintoAustraliathatis,thedebatearound

multiculturalism.

I want to say two things about

multiculturalism. The first is, if you take the

Americanapproachtothe issue,thatsortofpure

andnewworldapproach to the ideaofanation,

then,debatesaboutmulticulturalismsimplydont

arise. You dont need a debate about

multiculturalism because you have a nation

founded on the idea of individual liberty,which

includeswithinittheideaof thelibertytochoose

onesculturalattachmentandexpressonesown

culture.

TheonlyreasonIwouldsaythatAustralia

has a debate about multiculturalism is because

within the Australianmindset there is still some

residue of that historical experience and that

lineage to Britain. But the thing about the

multiculturalismdebate inAustraliaand there

aresomewithinAustraliathatwouldargueabout

whether or not Australias experience in

multiculturalismhasbeenagood thing is that

thosevoices

are

inescapably

now

irrelevant.

Becausewhilethosevoicesarenowinthe

minority there have been distinctive polls to

show public support for multiculturalism with

rates rightupto90percentofthepopulation

while those residual voices are talking about

whether or not Australia should embrace

multiculturalism, its become such a profoundly

multiculturalsocietythatthereissimplynowayof

undoing it. And it has become a multicultural

society without particularly needing to try very

hardatdoingthat.

Andhere

Iwould

say

there

is

amarked

difference in the way that Australia does

multiculturalism and the way that Europe has

done it or at least, the experiences of

multiculturalismthatEuropehashad,whichhave

been variously declared a failure by different

European leaders. And I would describe the

European experience as really an experience of

parallelmonoculturalism.

Multiculturalism is not simply having

peoplewith

different

cultural

backgrounds

and

different ethnicitieswithin a country. It is about

the interrelationship of those people with each

other and theirexperienceswithin the state and

society.

Because Australia is leaning more and

moretowardsacivicidentityratherthanonethat

is,definednarrowly,cultural,themulticulturalism

that Australia has evolved organically, is one in

which people understand and can understand

themselvesas

Australian

and

something

else.

So

thereneednotbeanexclusiveAustralian identity

that says that if you are an Australian, you are

definitely not Greek or Italian or Chinese, or

Malaysian (there is a quite significant Malaysian

populationinAustralia).

I think what Australia has successfully

managed to do, whether deliberately or not

andAustralia iswonderful atachieving thingsby

accident is createa socialenvironmentwhere

peoplecan

maintain

what

Icall

dual

authenticity.

They can be authentically one thing and

Australiastillhasthis

debateabout

whether

it

is

tobedeterminedbyits

historyorbyitsgeography

Australiahassuccessfully

managedto..createa

socialenvironmentwhere

peoplecanmaintainwhatI

calldualauthenticity


11/16


authenticallyAustralianandthosetwothingsneed

not be in contradiction. That, as far as the

Australianstate isconcerned,andbyand largeas

faras

Australian

society

is

concerned,

their

`Australianess is not compromised by their

attachmenttosomeotherculturalaffiliation.

Australiaisnotcompletelythereyetinthis

regard. Australia still has this debate about

whetheritistobedeterminedbyitshistoryorby

itsgeography.That is, itshistorybyBritain,or its

geography,really,inAsia.Butthatdebateisslowly

starting to recede and there is a reason it is

starting to recede, aside from the levels of

migrationthat

we

have

seen,

and

that

is,

frankly,

money.AndthisiswheretheAsianCenturycomes

in.

Does anyone here use the phrase Asian

Century? So this is just a phrase people in the

Westuse?Igetthefeeling.Ithinkitisindicativeof

somethingofanatmosphere.Acivilization that

theyhave felt forcenturiesprecedinghadalways

been theirs.And suddenly theemergenceofAsia

challengesthat. AndAustralia is inaveryunique

placewhen

it

comes

to

that,

for

acouple

of

reasons.

One,geographicallyspeaking,ournearest

neighbour is Indonesia. And Malaysia is not far

away,Chinasnotsofaraway,andJapanhasbeen

ourmajor tradingpartner foravery long time

which, when you think about the fact that

Australia and Japan were on opposing sides in

WorldWar II, isquiteanextraordinaryfeat.Now,

theAustraliaChinatradingrelationship ispossibly

themost

important

one

to

the

Australian

governmentat themoment.Ourentireeconomy

seems to be built now on the back of resources

beingsoldintoAsia,andChinaisaverymajorpart

ofthat.

But also for well over a hundred years,

Australia has had a very significant Asian

population. There have been times, in those

hundred years, where Australia has not

particularlywantedtohavethatAsianpopulation.

But there was a point, maybe right through the

20th

centurywhereAustraliaunderstoodthatthat

actually could be an asset and now its being

understoodmore

and

more

that

that

can

be

an

asset.

So one of the things that is the focus of

theAsianCentury,inAustralia,istheideathatthe

nationhasaveryflexible,openconceptofnational

identitythat isopentothe levelsofdiversitythat

it now inevitably has to sustain.With that in its

capital, and its proximity to Asia and its

population, a huge number of whom have an

understandingofAsiathatisintimatebecauseitis

throughfamily

connections

and

lived

history,

AustraliadoesntneedtobeseenasanEuropean

outpostinAsia.Indeeditdoesntneedtoseeitself

asanEuropeanoutpostinAsia. Itcanseeitselfas

intrinsically part of the Asian story. That the

AustralianstoryhasanAsianchapterwithin it

justdomestically.

In fact Ioften talk inAustralia about the

history of Islam in Australia and of Muslims in

Australia. And one of the things that is very

surprising,even

to

alot

of

Australians,

is

that

that

historybegins,atthemostconservativeestimate,

in about the year1600when youhad fishermen

comingfromMakassar,Sulawesi,intothenorthof

Australia forsixmonthseveryyear.Theymarried

the indigenous people there are words from


A participant posing a question


12/16


their language in indigenous languages in the

northofAustralia.There isavery longhistoryof

thatengagement.

So

the

Asian

chapter

of

Australia

actually

isaverylongone;itsjustthatithasntbeentold

until recently.And the fact that itsbeing told is

essential tounderstanding theway inwhich the

Australiansocietyisbeginningtochange.

But heres the thing about economic

integration and about taking economic

opportunities.Youdonttakethoseopportunities

well ifyoudontalsoevolveculturally.That is, if

the future AsiaAustralian story is purely an

economic one, then it will actually have a very

limited future in Australia. Asia probably wont

mindsomuchbecause itwillgoongrowingand

becoming an emerging power house. Australia

willminditwillhavetomind.

And so, to the extent that Australia is

caughtbetween these twocompetingnotionsof

nationalidentities,onethatowesitselftotheold

world the ethnocultural understanding of

Australia andone that ismore civic, the shift

hasbeenmoreandmore towards thecivic.And

thatshiftwillonlygrowandgrowandgrowtothepoint,Ibelieve,whereanydiscussionofAustralia

andAustralianessasanethnoculturaldiscussion

willbegintosoundlikesomeverystrangecolonial

relic rather than having anything meaningful to

sayaboutacontemporaryAustralia.

It isactuallyaverypowerfulevolution in

thesocialhistoryofAustraliaandwhenyouthink

aboutit,itsquitearemarkableachievementthat

acountrythathashadaveryshorthistory,really,

asanation.Imeanitbecameanationin1901a

nationwiththatshortahistoryandthatbeganits

timewithawhiteAustraliapolicy.Oneofthefirst

ActsthatthenewlymintedAustralianParliament

passedwas the ImmigrationRestrictionAct it

wasconcernedwithimmigrationfromChina.That

thatcountry

has

become

acountry

that

is

now

notonlyhyperplural,butisdevelopinganational

identitythatcandealwiththathyperplurality,at

atimewhenIthink it isfairtosaythatEuropean

nationalidentitiesarestrugglingwithit.

Because the very essence of what it

means tobelong toanation is a flexiblenotion,

becoming more and more flexible in Australia,

partlybynecessity,partlybyaccidentandpartlyI

think by that underpinning Australian ethic of

egalitarianism.And

although

its

not

always

lived

up to, itat leastmeansnewarrivals toAustralia

haveanargumentabouttheirplace inthenation

andthechancesthattheyshouldbegiven.And I

thinkthatstheAustraliathatyouwillstarttosee

evolvingintheAsianCentury,evenifyouhaveno

ideawhattheAsianCenturymeansandwethink

wedo.Thatisnecessarilywhatwillhappen.



SotheAsianchapterofAustralia

actuallyis

avery

long

one;

Itsjustthatithasntbeen

tolduntilrecently


13/16

ISISPublications


MalaysiaUSRelations20002011

ByPamelaSodhy

KualaLumpur:ISISMalaysia,2012

126pages

Ebook

Thismonographlooksat thepresentrelationshipbetweenMalaysiaand

the United States during a decadelong period, covering the main

political, economic, and sociocultural relations during the prime

ministerships in Malaysia, of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Abdullah Ahmad

Badawi,andNajibTunRazakandthepresidenciesintheUnitedStates,of

GeorgeBushandBarackHObama.

Download:http://www.isis.org.my/attachments/e

books/

Pamela_Sodhy_MalaysiaUS_Relations_Oct2012.pdf


14/16

12 ISIS FOCUS NO. 6/2013

ISISPublications

Malaysia:Policies&IssuesinEconomic

Development

693pp. 2011 RM80.00/US30.00

ISBN9789679473087

The book, consisting of more than 20 chapters, covers four main themes:

Macroeconomic Management, Economic Growth and Transformation,

ManagementofGrowthandEquity,andEnablingEnvironmentandInstitutionsfor

Development.Theauthorsaredrawnfromvarioussectors,withwiderangingand

richexperienceinacademia,thepublicsectorandtheprivatesector.

Comparedto

previous

studies

which

focused

mainly

on

the

development

process,

thisbooktakesadifferentapproachtoMalaysianeconomicdevelopment.Ittraces

landmarkachievements,andpresentschallengesandpitfalls facedby thenation

overthelastfivedecadesafterIndependence.Moreimportantly,itpaystributeto

theroleand contributionsofvariousplayersandprotagonistsinthisdevelopment

process.

Availableatalllocalbookshopsorpleaseemail:[email protected]


15/16

ISISFOCUS NO.6/2012 10ISISFOCUS NO.9/2011 9

NOTES


16/16

INSTITUTEOFSTRATEGICANDINTERNATIONALSTUDIES(ISIS)MALAYSIANo.1,PersiaranSultanSalahuddinPOBox12424,50778KualaLumpurMalaysia

Tel

:

+603

2693

9366

Fax:+60326915435Email:[email protected]:www.isis.org.my

Documents

ISiS Focus No.6 Jun 2013