The shopping crowd in Kuala Lumpur's Megamall at this time of the year shows all is apparently well with multiracial Malaysian society. The facade, however, belies the entrenched racial polarisation since the 1969 race riots.

After three decades of social engineering with its "one citizenry, one language, one culture" credo, the government has seen few fruits in building a collective consciousness of what it means to be a Malaysian.

A proposal by the Defence Minister Najib Abdul Razak in November last year to introduce a six-month national service for all 18-year-olds starting in 2004 reflects the clutch at new strategies to unite its citizens. But given the long history of race-based policies of recruitment and promotion in the army, navy and air force, it begs questions of how non-Malay parents would endear to seeing their sons through national service.

There is even a Chinese saying, " hao nan bu dang bing " (a good son does not do soldiering), which underlines the low status accorded to military activities apart from the unspoken sentiment that non-Malays will have little access to equal career opportunities in a predominately Malay civil defence sector.

While would-be national service recruits may not recall the 1969 race riots, the general population still resent, albeit privately, the indefinite racial policies instituted in 1971 to address the inequities of that time. The New Economic Policy, now National Development Policy, have led to distinctive demographics in the public service and university population. Students continue to congregate by ethnicity in class and on campus grounds.

Race relations is a problem serious enough for the Malaysian government to legislate against critical public debates on racial issues. The probable causes of inter-racial anxiety and animosity are thus often left to conjecture behind closed doors. Privately conceived but publicly denied, racial stereotypes are somehow manifested in the way that Malaysians conduct their daily affairs. Thus, the stereotyped perception of the self-effacing laid-back Malays, money-minded self-centred Chinese and pretentious 'slippery' Indians.

These generalised characterisations were implied in a study of 600 business executives aged between 25 and 40 from the Malay, Chinese and Indian communities. Its conceptual limitations aside, the study and focus group discussions led by management consultant and part-time academic, Mark Loo, at Multimedia University, notes that each community shows a mutual distrust pattern.

Racial stereotypes

The Malay is seen as most trusting and trustworthy, while the Indian has the highest levels of distrust towards all races including themselves and suffers the highest levels of distrust from other races including their own. "The Chinese distrust the Indian most, their own race next and the Malay last," Loo says.

The Chinese is seen as most focused, punctual, hardworking, independent and resourceful survivors, "good to do business with, good in making deals, can be trusted and always pay up. But, they are also perceived as greedy, cunning and treat time as money".

Although the Malays are perceived to be less hardworking, Loo says they are "noted for honesty, generosity, religiosity and their mind can be read easily" while the Indian is seen as somewhat "slippery to catch, difficult to understand".

On the propensity to risk taking, the Malays and Indians rate the Chinese highest although the Chinese rate themselves lowest. Loo says the Chinese ratings could be due to their interpretation that the Malays and Indians may not have worked out the risks when entering a business deal. "As such, they are taking big risks whereas the Chinese calculate the risks before taking up a deal."

While the study implies that prejudging individuals based on race, culture and other perceived bio data is intrinsically offensive, racial stereotyping is somehow unavoidable in a country steeped in racial, religious and cultural differentiations. A local business editor says: "The survey tell us the things that we (already) know, and perhaps the things that we do not want to know."

The 2000 population census shows that out of 23.3 million, 65 percent are Malays (bumiputra); 26 percent Chinese; and eight percent Indians. Bumiputra are further segmented into sub-groups such as the Malays who are concentrated in the peninsula; and the Dayak, Melanau, Bajau, Kadazan, and Murut in Sabah and Sarawak. The Malays are historically agrarian. As a result of British colonial distribution of powers, Malays predominate in local, state and federal politics.

The urban-oriented Chinese are known by subgroups based on clan identities the Hokkien, Cantonese, Teochew, Hakka and Hainanese. The Chinese are much more diverse in their religion and dialect, having arrived from China in the late 19th century to work the tin mines, small cottage industries and restaurants. The older generation still see themselves as 'guests' of the country, thus the opposition's politicised notion of "second-class citizens". Many Chinese parents still send their children to independent vernacular schools.

The Indians migrated to Malaya during British rule as indentured labour from South India. They mainly worked in the rubber plantations and railways. However, today's Indian intelligentsia have carved a niche in public administration and in the professions of medicine, engineering, law and academia.

Pockets of migrant labour currently add to the country's ethnic diversity. Labour estimates note that in 1999 there were 1.75 million foreign workers, about a million of them illegals mainly in the construction and small cottage industry. The largest group of foreign workers are Indonesians followed by the Bangladeshis, Filipinos, Thais, Pakistanis and Burmese. Most are clustered in the state of Selangor.

ERIC LOO is the head of the Graduate School of Journalism in Australia's University of Wollongong.