As the Russia-Ukraine war drags into its third year, its impact has stretched far beyond the borders of Eastern Europe. What began as a regional conflict has become a global litmus test for power, ideology, and influence.
For Europe, the war has exposed
deep vulnerabilities not just in military terms, but in its economic stability,
political cohesion, and moral authority.
From Malaysia’s vantage point in
Southeast Asia, the shifting tides of this conflict present a unique
opportunity to reassess long-standing global hierarchies and revisit the legacy
of Orientalism in framing international relations.
The Western response to the war,
particularly from European capitals, has relied heavily on moral narratives.
Russia has been framed as a revisionist power led by an authoritarian regime,
threatening the liberal democratic order.
This portrayal echoes Edward
Said’s concept of Orientalism, a framework where the West historically cast the
East as irrational, backward, and dangerous. In this narrative, Europe
reaffirms itself as the rational, civilised centre standing against an
unpredictable and despotic East. Russia, though geographically part of Europe,
is culturally and politically portrayed as "the Other," fitting
neatly into this Orientalist mould.
Malaysia, shaped by its colonial
past and a post-independence commitment to non-alignment, views these
narratives with caution. The country has long resisted simplistic dichotomies
that reduce global conflicts to battles between good and evil, democracy and
authoritarianism, or West and East.
In the case of the Russia-Ukraine
war, Malaysia has maintained a position of neutrality, consistently calling for
peaceful resolution, diplomacy, and the upholding of international law. It has
avoided aligning explicitly with either side, opting instead to focus on
humanitarian concerns and multilateral engagement.
This approach is not just a
matter of political pragmatism but it is a conscious rejection of the
ideological framework imposed by former colonial powers. Malaysia’s foreign
policy reflects a desire to craft an independent voice in global affairs, one
that is informed by its unique cultural, historical, and geopolitical
experiences. It challenges the West’s tendency to dominate global discourse and
rejects the moral superiority that often underpins Western interventions in
international conflicts.
Europe’s declining influence in
the wake of the war has only reinforced this position. Internally, the European
Union is struggling to manage economic instability, energy crises, and
political divisions, while externally, it faces difficulties in mobilizing
global consensus against Russia.
The war has also highlighted the
limitations of Western leadership in securing a just and stable international
order. For Malaysia and other countries in the Global South, this weakening of
Europe’s moral and political clout serves as a reminder that Western narratives
do not hold universal validity.
Instead of taking cues from
Europe, Malaysia is looking to a more multipolar world, where influence is not
concentrated in the hands of a few traditional powers. The country maintains
active engagement with both Western and Eastern partners, including the United
States, China, India, and Russia, balancing its interests while avoiding
entanglement in ideological conflicts.
This strategy underscores
Malaysia’s refusal to be cast once again in the role of the subordinate
“Oriental”, a passive actor in a world ordered by the West.
However, Malaysia’s position is
not without its challenges. The humanitarian crisis caused by the war, its
impact on global food and energy prices, and the growing influence of external
powers in Southeast Asia require Malaysia to navigate carefully.
While maintaining neutrality, the
country must also ensure that it does not appear indifferent to aggression or
violations of international norms. Its credibility as a principled advocate for
justice particularly in other global causes such as the Palestinian struggle that
depends on consistent and coherent diplomacy.
At the same time, Malaysia’s
stance offers a valuable counter-narrative to the dominant Western framing of
the conflict. By refusing to view the war through a rigid East-West binary,
Malaysia promotes a more inclusive and balanced approach to international
affairs.
Its foreign policy highlights the
importance of sovereignty, dialogue, and mutual respect, principles often
overshadowed by the West’s tendency to moralize and intervene.
The Russia-Ukraine conflict thus
becomes more than a geopolitical crisis; it becomes a moment of reflection for
former colonies like Malaysia.
As Europe struggles to maintain
its grip on global influence, countries in the Global South are asserting their
right to define their own positions, free from the legacies of imperialism and
the distortions of Orientalism.
Malaysia, in particular, is
demonstrating that post-colonial states can chart independent courses based on
pragmatism, principle, and a refusal to be cast in roles scripted by others.
In conclusion, the war in Ukraine
has exposed not only the fault lines in European security but also the deeper
assumptions that continue to shape global power dynamics.
Malaysia’s response, grounded in
neutrality and shaped by a post-colonial consciousness, challenges the enduring
frameworks of Orientalism that still colour Western foreign policy.
In doing so, it asserts a vision
of international relations that is more equitable, more multipolar, and
ultimately more reflective of the realities of the 21st century.
5.10.2025
Kuala Lumpur.
https://focusmalaysia.my/malaysia-orientalism-and-europes-waning-influence/
Comments