14 Leaders The EconomistJuly 20th 2019
2 an embargo, once issued, cannot be easily dispelled.
The broader geopolitical context makes Japan’s self-harm
even more reckless. Regional supply chains are already under as-
sault. South Korean and Japanese companies are scrambling to
find alternatives to China as a manufacturing base to avoid
American tariffs. Mr Trump has threatened both countries with
import duties on their cars.
Ultimately, it is up to South Korea and Japan to repair rela-
tions. But America’s waning interest in diplomacy does not help.
And Mr Trump is normalising the use of trade weapons in politi-
cal spats. His tactics teach others how to find an excuse for these
actions: by citing national security. Japanese media have sug-
gested that South Korea has allowed the shipment of sensitive
chemicals to North Korea, a far-fetched claim but one that could
feature in a defence of its export restrictions. Under a differentpresident, America would be doing more to bind together Japan
and South Korea, two indispensable allies. Barack Obama
pushed the Trans-Pacific Partnership that included Japan, and
that South Korea was expected to join eventually. One of Mr
Trump’s first acts was to ditch that deal.
It is not too late to defuse the situation. The commercial dam-
age has been limited so far. Japan is aware that, notwithstanding
America’s current tactics, export controls look bad; it is thus sus-
ceptible to pressure from other trading partners. The two coun-
tries will discuss their disagreement at the World Trade Organi-
sation later this month. This is shaping up to be a test of whether
the global trading system can, despite great strains, still soothe
tensions—or whether it is being supplanted by a new, meaner or-
der, in which supply chains are weaponised and commerce is
purely an extension of politics. 7T
here aremany ways this editorial could fall foul of Malay-
sian law. If it is too critical of Malaysia’s government, or of its
courts, or of its system of racial preferences for Malays (the big-
gest ethnic group), or of its pampered and prickly sultans, it
could be deemed seditious. If it contradicts the government’s ac-
count of any given event or circumstance, it could be in breach of
the Anti-Fake News Act, adopted last year. Then there is a series
of restrictive laws about who can publish what and who can give
offence to whom (it is essential to steer clear of anything that
might be construed by a paranoid prosecutor as an insult to Is-
lam, in particular). These rules give the police an excuse to arrest
irksome journalists and hand censors the authority to ban and
seize offending material. If all else fails, a trio of laws that allow
long periods of detention without trial can be used to lock up ac-
tivists, opposition politicians or anyone else.
Happily, Malaysia is currently run by a co-
alition that is not inclined to use these sweeping
powers. In part, that is because many senior fig-
ures from the Pakatan Harapan (ph) govern-
ment were themselves tormented by the same
laws while in opposition. The party in charge
until elections last year, the United Malays Na-
tional Organisation (umno), built an elaborate-
ly repressive edifice to keep itself in power. In addition to all the
restrictions on freedom of speech, umnomanipulated the elec-
toral system, curbed public protests and prosecuted opponents
on trumped-up charges. In the run-up to the vote, phpromised
that, if it won, it would repeal or amend the laws that were being
used to hobble it. But phhas been in office for over a year now,
and the abusive rules remain on the books (see Asia section).
To be fair, when it comes to civil liberties, phis streets ahead
of umno. Journalists and opposition politicians regularly take
the new government to task, without ending up in prison. It has
called a halt to most—but not quite all—prosecutions under the
laws it criticised while it was in opposition. It has appointed as
attorney-general a man who has spent his career fighting against
the manipulation of the law for political purposes. It is in the
process of amending one of the laws at issue, to make it easier tohold public protests. And its failure to do more stems from trou-
ble setting priorities (its manifesto contained 464 different ini-
tiatives), as well as opposition from umno and its allies which
still control the upper house, rather than from any hidden au-
thoritarian impulses.
Yet doing away with the government’s critic-cudgelling arse-
nal should be a much higher priority. Although many senior
members of the government have been victims of umno’s re-
pression, the prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, himself a de-
fector from umno, eagerly and frequently abused the govern-
ment’s authority during a previous stint in power from 1981 until- At one point he had over 100 critics detained without
charge, in theory to preserve public order. Dr Mahathir (pictured)
does genuinely seem to have turned over a new leaf, but it is only
natural that defenders of civil liberties are not
inclined to take his word for it when he prom-
ises that the law on sedition, for example, will
soon be replaced by something more palatable.
Moreover, restoring political freedoms is not
just one item on a long to-do list. It is the reform
that underpins all others. The laws in question
helped keep umnoin power for 61 years without
interruption, even when it was palpably unpop-
ular. This is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make politics fairer
and more competitive. If phdoes not get the economy going, it
may wind up in opposition for a few years; if it does not refurbish
Malaysia’s democracy, it may be out of office for a generation.
Try freedom
More important still, if Malaysians are not confident that they
can voice their opinions and debate public policy without reper-
cussion, then phcannot hope to fulfil their aspirations, because
it will not know what they are. Civil liberties are not a hindrance
that fair-minded politicians must put up with. They are a tool to
help them do their jobs well. umnoended up losing power be-
cause it did not have an accurate sense of just how unpopular it
was. If it had not been so busy silencing its critics, it might have
found better ways to answer them. 7Time to bury the tools of oppression
The new government should abolish repressive laws while it has the chanceDemocracy in Malaysia