Indian Council of World Affairs

M: Thank you very much, Your Excellency, for those inspiring remarks, the words of a true visionary. Ladies and gentlemen, we have time for, Prime Minister's kindly agreed to take a few questions. So we have a few minutes for that. Please raise those interested in asking questions. Please raise your hands, identify yourself and keep your questions brief and to the point. Yes, please. 

M: Hello, my name is Shreya, I'm a student from Lady Shri Ram and this year India hosted a multilateral military war game called Milan, and Malaysia, along with other ASEAN countries, participated as well. So do you think this could collaboratively lead to an effective development in a strategic maritime security strategy that could potentially address the challenges in the South China Sea and the Malacca Strait such as IUU fishing etc. and also tackle and potentially restrain China's Blue Dragon strategy? 

R: I think I will respond briefly to say that the ASEAN position and the Malaysia position of centrality to engage with all countries. We have not encountered problems with India, therefore we continue to have an engagement including common defence strategy. We have not encountered problems with China and therefore our relations remain excellent and we should use that peace and trust to enhance the collaborative efforts in all fields. That's our position and therefore when we talk about maritime or defence strategy or engagement or collaboration, we take in a positive light to contain terrorism, to contain undue threats or whatever attempts to scuttle the peace process but otherwise our position remains like ASEAN centrality, that want to engage with all our neighbours because in the ASEAN region, as you know, with the slightest commission within domestic issues of Myanmar, it is the most peaceful sub-region in the world and the fastest growing sub-region in the world. And it is to our advantage we keep that format and work together with our important neighbours. Thank you. 

M: Thank you sir, my name is Pramit Lahiri. I am a LAM Fellow, which stands for Legislative Assistant to a Member of Parliament. So, sir, thank you so much for this speech. My question is this, that given the rising uncertainties, as you were saying, regarding climate change, I wanted to know your thoughts on how do you approach on building climate resilient structures and economies and partner with India in this same line of thought. Thank you so much. 

R: Well, certain initiatives taken by India is impressive in dealing with climate change. But as you know, this is a global calamity that requires a global resolve. We have, of course, COP28, COP29. The pledge by the rich nations to provide the initial $100 billion has not been forthcoming. Typically, the condescending attitude of certain powers-that-be would just impose and dictate and hector. And we thought that we have had enough of that. That is why I think the position taken by the Global South is, to me, paramount, because we can address the situation and compel the others to also participate. You create this problem and then we are supposed to resolve all the issues. I mean, this is, of course, unacceptable. That is why, to my mind, what we can do, we'll do the maximum. I mean, even Malaysia was a small country. Fifty percent still remains forest, most of it virgin jungles. But what else do you do elsewhere? That's why their commitment is also pertinent. Hectoring is no longer acceptable. It's a common resolve. Save the world is a major problem. Now, notwithstanding whether they are doing it or not, we can't avoid. That is why I think the collaboration between the Global South has to take a position. We ourselves need to do it. And I think most countries in the South have taken that position. But we should also use this forum to compare the rest, to respect order, and be more realistic in terms of their position by showing a good example and taking up part of the responsibility. Thank you. 

M: Hello. My name is Ashutosh. I'm a student from Jamia. So my question is actually very particular. It pertains to the palm oil export ban that India had. It pertains to the palm oil export ban. And so regarding that, since major export of Malaysia has been the palm oil to India, it counts for about two-thirds, as you have already said. So do we look to diversify this bilateral trade ties between India and Malaysia? Because the four-month ban really affected the economy and the trade part of India and Malaysia, so please respond. 

R: As you know, as I alluded to in the speech even by Ambassador, that initially the dependence was mainly on palm oil in the exports. Now of course it's gone to one third, but India is of course the major importer of palm oil and we are thankful to that. And we are also diversifying. Malaysia in the region is the most important hub for semiconductors, but it has got to go through a phase. And initially our dependence was rubber and tin, similarly, it is changing. The only problem is, of course, some countries in Europe, and the United States, in their vigorous campaign against the use of palm oil, but more so to protect soybean. So we have to deal with this. But I think certainly we are diversifying and that is why it is also important strategically to open up and broadening the range of investments and trade between Malaysia and India, beyond what is deemed to be traditional products. 

M: Hi, sir. This is Abhishek Jha from CNN News 18. You talked about countering radicalism and extremism in this region also. There is one religious preacher whom the Indian agencies have been wanting to question for a long time and there is an appeal for extradition also. I am talking about Zakir Naik. So my question is, did that issue was also discussed when you had a meeting with the Prime Minister and what is Malaysia's stand on this extradition process that Indian agencies have been wanting?

R: Well firstly it was not raised by the Prime Minister. He did raise it much earlier many years back. But the issue is, I am not talking about one person, I am talking about the sentiment, of extremism, of compelling case and evidence that suggest the atrocities committed by an individual or group or faction or parties. These are of concern to us. The atrocities of Israeli forces in Gaza, that is real, and killing 40,000 people, that is atrocity, that is fanaticism as far as I'm concerned. Now, issues raised by countries to contain, to secure understanding and to ensure that we have good bilateral relations would continue and we are open to any ideas and if evidence is submitted, we will not condone terrorism. But we have to produce a compelling case to support. And we have been tough, we have been working together with India in many of these issues against terrorist cells. But I don't think one case should deter us from further collaboration and enhancing our bilateral cooperation. 

M: Good evening sir, this is Yeshi Sali from the New Indian Express. I have two small questions. Prime Minister Modi spoke about you know trade in local currencies between India and Malaysia. Can you throw light on that? And also, our neighbours, whether it is Bangladesh or Myanmar, are unstable right now. Did that come up for discussion? Were there any things that you talked about?

R: The decision to use as much as possible local currency is something which we acknowledge is important, a priority. Our central bank has agreed the use of rupees and ringgit. We have done so successfully at least 20% of our trade with China or 18% with Thailand or close to 20% with Indonesia. So we are expanding this to use local currency denominations in our trade. And I certainly responded very positively to the proposal by Prime Minister Modi on the need to use local currency, rupees and ringgit. And I think it's time that countries in the Global South wake up and depend on themselves and their comrades, rather than depending on the more obsolete monetary system that has weakened our position in many fields. On the issue of Myanmar, yes, we did discuss. We're a bit concerned about the developments now, but I think we need to engage a bit more. ASEAN position of the five-point consensus is not to recognize. But notwithstanding that, we do accept the need to engage at a different level. And I've mentioned this because India can participate in this process. We're all concerned. Now on Bangladesh, the development, of course, is still being debated. I did make a call to Professor Muhammad Yunus to say that, you know, we wish them well, hopefully the country is stable, and protect the issue of human rights and the rights of minorities. He has given categorical assurance of that effect, and we need to give them some time. And we, as neighbours, particularly India, I mean, should do whatever we can to ensure that there's a peaceful transition in Bangladesh, what the people decide, but finally through a democratic process. And I just hope well for the people of Bangladesh, and I think our duty is to make sure that there is peace immediately, and the transition that they plan should happen as soon as possible, particularly a democratic transition, because economically they were doing relatively well, and they need to sustain that and probably enhance that, or propel economic growth. 

M: Prime Minister, Rezaul Laskar with the Hindustan Times. I was just wondering if we could throw some more light on the cooperation with India in food security. Malaysia has been wanting more rice from India, and there has been, I think, one consignment that was approved today. If you could throw some more light on food security cooperation. 

R: Well, we did a little bit on this, and the technical (inaudible 0:49:04.9) must work and our style of governing something a bit different. We see in three months we need to have specific programs to be forwarded by the officers to be submitted to both Prime Ministers. But on food security is, of course, a priority. We still spent about close to 15 billion dollars of import which is totally unacceptable for a country that's with fertile land and abandoned land at our disposal. We are doing it. We have asked Indian support for the technology, for the expertise, the research, and jointly they have asked us to assist in some areas, including palm oil, which we will of course reciprocate positively. And we still import rice and I have asked for the assurance of Prime Minister to make sure that the supply is stable from India. But I think both in the research, in the technological transfer, in joint operations, in investments and food security was given a priority in our discussions. And incidentally, the Hindustan Times have been kind to me in my period of adversity. Thank you very much. 

M: Yes. Good evening Prime Minister. This is Manas Pradeep Goyal. I work for PTI, Press Trust of India. It's a news agency. I'd like to ask you about the overall situation in Indo-Pacific, particularly in the context of great power competition that we have seen in that region. And there have been criticisms against the formation of various blocs, case in point is Quad. So how do you see Quad's overall agenda, particularly vis-a-vis the Indo-Pacific and overall situation, your assessment? 

R: Our position on ASEAN centrality is to avoid any action or decision or policy or move that could be construed to be unnecessarily provocative. So that position, to me, is paramount, is pertinent in ensuring a peaceful region, particularly the Asia-Pacific, both in the Indian Ocean or the South China Sea. And I think that position should be respected. As far as we are concerned, bilaterally we should engage, multilaterally we should engage. So any move that could be deemed, it may not be intentionally construed as provocative, but if it's seen by the other side as provocative, you need to engage and avoid, because there's too much at stake. And to me, politics and governance is about welfare of the people, not ego of one or two personalities. Our people have suffered immensely, and it is our commitment, having leading governments and leaders, to ensure that we have policies that remain sane, to focus on the welfare of our people. And this is, to me, an excellent time. Post-COVID, after such hardship, it is time that we refocus. That is why I can, for example, be strong in some of my views, be it the oppression in Myanmar or the colonisation of Gaza, but for our region we should avoid. We have learned in the sub-regions where there is calamity, where there is wars, it is the people that suffer. Thank you. 

M: We have overshot our time, but since Prime Minister has been so kind in answering questions, yes, we perhaps can have one or two more. Please. 

M: My question is, in future, if (Chinese) Yuan were to supersede the (US) Dollar, would Malaysia have any problem with that, in a rising Global South? 

R: You ask about the future. Normally when people ask me about the future, I say, okay, Sarah, Sarah. No, no, jokes aside. No, why should we be tied? I mean, we use the dollar, it is still an important currency for exchange, but why should we be obsessed or dependent on that? What we are doing now is to work on a viable alternative that will be more just. I told the Prime Minister during the bilateral session, you know, last year investments grew, growth was impressive, inflation was down, low, 2%, unemployment 3%. And still, major attack on the ringgit. Nothing to do with economic fundamentals, just what Fed in Washington DC decide. So there's nothing much we can do except to use other avenues where we can help resolve and ease the impact. That is why, whilst we still are dependent in some areas, the transactions in dollars, but we use our own local currency denominations to ensure that at least we have certain percentage in our deals that could probably reduce the negative impact. Because finally, in managing an economy, we talk about fundamentals. The fundamentals are well-guarded and there are tough measures, subsidisation, getting ensured that the quality education and public health and basic infrastructure, all being done. And good governance, wiping or combating against excesses and corruption, all those are being done. But still, we are finally subjected to the decision of the Fed. This, of course, is nothing about a fair international financial architecture. No. I used to be one time even chairman of the World Bank and IMF Development Committee. My position has been consistent. I mean, the over-dependence of a system that do not cater for the interests of the majority, for the principle of just order, be it in the trade or in financial architecture, cannot be accepted any longer. Now, since we do not have the capacity to change now, we do it in our own way, at least reduce the impact. And I think if we can use, for example, with the $20 billion trade or $80 billion trade, a fraction, 20 percent, 30 percent, in our local currency, it will ease the negative impact.

M: I am Bassem Hilles from Palestinian Embassy. I want to thank you very much, Prime Minister, because you mentioned about our situation in Palestine, exactly in Gaza. We hope in the future to stop this aggression to our civilian Palestinian people. Thank you very much.

R: Thank you. I think India has got familiar from the time of Mahatma Gandhi. That position was strong and uncompromising. And I think what we try to do is just to at least give a message, a very clear message, that this hypocrisy must end. I mean, you can't talk about genocide in Ukraine because bombings of some villages. And 40,000 people killed, well, this is the impact of war, we can condone that. This is shocking, and I call it sheer hypocrisy but not standing to fight it has to end. I mean, it doesn't matter whether the victims are Muslims or Christians or Hindus or Buddhists or whatever. I mean, they are human beings, and in this age for us to feel that, no, I'm sorry, nothing can be done is atrocious. I used to refer to adversities, politics of dispossession. I mean, we fought, India, Malaysia, Algeria, Vietnam, all fought against colonialism. There is no right for any country, for whatever reason, to conquer, control, or dispossess any other society or country. But why give exceptions to Palestine and Gaza? Well, because some of the terrorists, tell me which country you don't have terrorists in many forms and outlets. But our position on terrorism is clear, it's uncompromising. But so it is tough, it's difficult, not necessarily popular. But I think in politics and governance, the Ambassador would know sometimes we have to do what is right. I think, again, I remember Gandhiji said what is morally right cannot be politically wrong, what is politically right cannot be morally wrong, the great Mahatma Gandhi. But who bothers now? So be patient and may God help us.

M: Thank you very much for that answer, Prime Minister. We can take one last question, perhaps, yeah, gentleman at the back. 

M: Prime Minister of Malaysia. Salamat datang, dan terima kasih kerana melawat India. I'm Rahul Mishra, Associate Professor at JNU. I had the privilege to teach at University of Malaya for six years. Datuk Seri, in your speeches earlier, including at the Asia-Pacific Roundtable just this year, you highlighted Malaysia's Madani policy and how that is going to steer Malaysia's foreign policy in years to come under your leadership. My question is how do you connect the Madani policy with the Global South agenda and India's role in it? Thank you. 

R: Thank you. Thank you. I mean good to know that you are from Jawaharlal Nehru University. It is a great university and I look forward to visiting it sometime. The Madani principle, we talk about sustainability, no sustainability without justice or equitable distribution. Because to me economic growth must be with compassion. Yes, we must propel economic growth. We have all the ecosystem parameters, policies that would be able to be seen to be supportive and able to propel economic growth. But what is to me essential in the Madani framework is that we do put additional emphasis to the issue of values, of freedom and justice, because there is deficit in issue of governance and politics, including international politics, an issue of values, of humanity, of compassion. You talk about religion, minus humanity and compassion. You talk about politics and governance, minus humanity and compassion. So you condone excesses, you condone aggression, you condone intimidation or harassment of groups. And there's no Madani. The Madani principle essentially is human principle and I think it is important to engage and to remind business leaders, political leaders, you see, while politics and governance is important or business and profit is of paramount importance to a country, the economic fundamentals, but it has to be humane, it has to believe in principles of justice, it must have compassion, then you honour dignity of men and women. Otherwise, as we have seen, there is trust deficit, there is deficit in terms of moral failure, moral precepts, because how is it you find people can condone killings or discrimination or abuse and insults because they have differences in terms of colour or creed or religion. That's because you talk about governance but devoid of the values of compassion and humanity. Well, that's my view and I'm not acting on philosophy, but this is so important because people become so pragmatic, so technical, you know, to develop this. You forget the fact that you're dealing with human beings and without the essence of ihsan or compassion and justice, then you can have great strides and excellent performance in terms of digital technology or in terms of financial capability or even economic success. But where's the humanity? Where's the equitable distribution? Why do we condone, in the name of IT, a greater divide between the very rich and the very poor? And that's where I think the principle of governance that must not ignore the importance of values, including justice and compassion. Thank you. 

M: No, we are, sorry, we are completely out of time now and I, alright, one last question. 

M: Thank you for a wonderful speech and thanks a lot for addressing Gaza in your speech. My question is related to climate change. According to many scientists and some Nobel Prize winners, there is no climate change. Actually, it's a hoax created by a deep state just to bring new world order and to destroy the middle class. Even Donald Trump considers climate change as a hoax and in his first term of Presidency, he, US took exit from the Paris Climate Summit. What's your view? 

R: My dear friend, mere dost. You always hear this, but finally you have to decide based on facts and data. And this is incontrovertible facts to suggest that you can see the decline. I mean, never mind about the scientific gyanis. A basic formula in all religions and sages, from the great Hindu sages, to Islamic thought, to whatever, Western, Eastern. This destruction of land, destruction of environment, even in a small household, you go and throw everything beside your house, it gives you an additional smell, and it's intolerable. And I don't think it's too difficult to understand. There are, of course, climate denials, the Holocaust denial, there are 9-11 denials. It makes the world rather exciting, and makes some of the odd features emerging from some quarters. But please, go back to the facts. Like the same, don't be too surprised when you talk about denial of climate change, climate issues or problems, because there's also climate denial. I've heard some congressmen in the United States, senators say, what atrocity, what calamity in Gaza, we have not seen any, and this guy is not blind. So, there will be, so that's why I say the challenge of moral precept, of humanity, because of different colour, or different race, the decision is different. To me, it doesn't matter, whether Hindu girl, or Muslim girl, or Christian girl, if she's raped, or she's killed, action must be taken promptly, period. You see, I don't ask, I mean, I'm from Malaysia, and it is a multicultural, multiracial country, too. Of course, the majority are Muslims, but we have a significant number of Hindus, 7-8%, and Christians and Buddhists, and I can't say, I am Prime Minister for the Muslims, and I deny the right of the minorities, because there will be denial. I mean, the same principle of state of denial, denial syndrome. And my worry is not just climate, if you can deny a basic fact like that, it is a danger to humanity at large. So, you have to counter them with strong, as I say, incontrovertible facts, to defend our case, and don't take it lightly. If students have been, for example, told about this sort of mischief, in the name of science, then it has to be fought with reason. And I think, ultimately, we will win. If we do not win in this sort of battle, then it will be a recipe for disaster for the world. I've heard this in some of my dialogues with the students, they say, why do you choose to listen to the hectoring of the West on climate change, when actually I come from a village, I don't see any problem. I say, please use your motorcycle and go to the towns and see the squatters and the dustbins not available, or the beaches full of plastics. So I think be patient, but have a clear resolve in dealing with these issues. Finally, it is a matter of reason, based on facts and data available. And don't ever, ever, ever subscribe to this sort of fringe or aberrations within our society, that is simply in a state of denial, because that is, does not all go well for our society and our countries.

M: Thank you Prime Minister for so graciously taking all these questions. It’s been a real privilege for all of us to listen to your thoughts, especially on humanity and human-centric development. We come to the end of this session now.

*****