Leadership

He put his deputy and former political protégé in prison ostensibly for sodomy, and he has not hesitated to wield draconian police powers to stifle political dissent.

Yet when Mahathir Mohamad stepped down last week after 22 years as prime minister of Malaysia, there were Filipinos who wished the land of people power had a leader like him.

Malaysia had Mahathir; Singapore had Lee Kuan Yew. We, on the other hand, had Ferdinand Marcos. The heavens cursed us with the wrong autocrat. No one misses strong-arm rule in this country. Yet as the 2004 elections approach, Filipinos are wondering who among the lackluster presidential aspirants has a grip firm enough to keep this chaotic country from spinning out of control.

* * *

We are often warned to be careful what we wish for, because the heavens have a way of giving us what we want. I don’t think Filipinos really want a leader who will lock up his political opponents on charges of sodomy. And no matter how anarchic the nation becomes, I don’t think Filipinos will want to return to the days when political dissidents could be arrested and detained indefinitely without formal charges.

But you get the people’s drift. Just compare Malaysia and the Philippines, circa 2003, and consider where the two countries were four decades ago, before our homegrown strongman imposed martial law. Malaysia was a backwater of rubber plantations while we had a vibrant economy and a democracy that worked.

Even US President George W. Bush, during his recent visit here, noted that the Philippines led the way for democracy in this part of the world. People didn’t think democracy would work in Asia, but the Philippines proved them wrong, Bush gushed.

Maybe Bush should have asked Mahathir about that. After the 1986 EDSA revolt, Mahathir, relatively new in his post as prime minister, often publicly scoffed at Philippine-style democracy. He and Lee Kuan Yew sang the same refrain, pointing to the Philippines as a good example of what happens when a nation has too much individual freedom, and why democracy is not the right system for Asia. Mahathir said this even during a teleconference with fellow leaders of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Mahathir and Lee argue that developing countries need economic liberation first. Individual freedoms can then follow. They think the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an imposition of the West, and believe that freedom from poverty is a basic right that must be tackled first.

* * *

If we are to go by the results of experiments on benevolent authoritarianism and the so-called Asian way, it is tempting to believe that Mahathir and Lee got their formula right. Their countries are among the most prosperous and efficient in the region. They have adequate infrastructure, the level of education is high, their political systems are stable and corruption is kept in check. In fact Singapore, with its professional bureaucracy, is consistently rated as one of the least corrupt countries in the world.

Even their draconian security measures have served them well amid the terror threat. When Jemaah Islamiyah and al-Qaeda lowlifes think of a country for terrorist plotting and R&R, they think of the Philippines, not Malaysia or Singapore.

If the Americans can forget Mahathir’s tirades against the West (including the "moron" George Soros) and "the Jews who rule the world by proxy," they may even want to take a closer look at how a predominantly Muslim nation can be such a success. Mahathir may have something useful to say about building a modern Muslim state from the rubble of Iraq and Afghanistan. Those folks in Kabul and Baghdad aren’t going to look up to democratic Philippines as an example of what their nations can be if they get their act together. But they might be enticed to consider Malaysia as a role model.

Some Americans think (or hope) Mahathir’s "sins" – such as imposing currency controls, which started during the Asian financial crisis – will soon prove costly for his country. They frown on the continued incarceration of Mahathir’s former deputy Anwar Ibrahim. They also point to the gro-wing strength of Malaysia’s Islamist opposition party.

Until Mahathir’s retirement, however, there didn’t seem to be any type of problem that could undermine the systems and institutions he had set firmly in place. Malaysia has faced tougher challenges and survived.

* * *

Our nation has faced tough challenges as well. It has been said that what doesn’t kill you should make you strong. Instead of learning our lessons and getting stronger, however, we simply muddle through, and there are those who think we have progressively become weaker.

Just consider how the region fared in the wake of the Asian crisis. Two of the countries worst hit by the contagion, Thailand and South Korea, have made remarkable recoveries. Even Indonesia, riddled with racial strife and separatism and now home to Jemaah Islamiyah, is currently doing better than the Philippines.

Admittedly, we all share some of the blame for our sorry state of affairs.

In our country, it’s every man for himself. There is no sense of a greater good, no closing of ranks during a national crisis. During the Asian contagion, people in the worst hit countries turned over their jewelry to their government to arrest the slide of their currency. In our country, Filipinos hoard dollars and bet against their own currency, and spread rumors to further bring down the peso.

Apart from those general attitudes, however, we have been saddled with populist leaders who can’t lead, people whose idea of governance is enriching themselves at public expense.

The crisis over the impeachment of Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. is just one example of everything that’s wrong with our national leadership. This is a failure of all three branches of government, and we don’t seem to be any closer to a solution that will prevent a repeat of this disaster.

No wonder there were Filipinos who looked at Malaysia with envy and wistfulness as Mahathir bade government good-bye. Call him a pugnacious autocrat and a homophobe. Mahathir, however, had what our nation has lacked for too long: leadership.

It’s doing what you firmly believe is right for the nation, not what you believe will help get you elected.