After the first 100 days in power, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is being publicly assessed by all quarters, both domestic and foreign. One relatively positive assessment is in the conduct of Malaysia's foreign relations.

Abdullah has obviously shown that he is different in style and personality from predecessor Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who was widely perceived to be an all-purpose rabble-rouser against even legitimate Western, especially Anglo-American, interests and values.

Malaysia-Singapore bilateral relations had also deteriorated in the last few years of Mahathir's 22-year regime.

In contrast, Abdullah has been seen to be less ideological, provocative and confrontational in making public statements and remarks on issues that affect Malaysia's foreign relations.

Above all, he seems to be keen in restoring damaged relations to normal and working level, especially between Malaysia and the United States, Australia and Singapore.

The difference in style may be attributable to the political or even 'personal' personalities of Abdullah and Mahathir respectively.

Environmental influence

However, three environmental factors have also necessitated changes over the last three months for regime security or enhancement of personal prestige in domestic politics:

1. Since the 1997 East Asian financial crisis, Malaysia has been proven to be highly dependent on the increasingly globalised economy whose agenda is dictated by the West, especially the US, and by China.

2. The increasing loss of coherence, efficacy and unity of purpose in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Non-Aligned Movements and Organisation of Islamic Conference in vital areas like politico-military alliance and foreign policy orientation after the Cold War, has resulted in Malaysia finding it increasingly difficult to posture itself as a leader or spokesperson of a non-Western bloc of small and medium-sized countries.

3. The reassertion of the values and interests, as well as projection of political and military powers, of the Anglo-American alliance after the Sept 11, 2001 attacks in the US - as well as their military strikes on Afghanistan and Iraq - suggest that the global balance of power has shifted away from Mahathir's paradigm which was articulated during the era of Vietnam War in the 1960s and its immediate aftermath in the mid-1970s.

In other words, as the United States revitalises and strengthens its alliances in the Middle East, Central Asia, South Asia, North-east Asia, Southeast Asia and South-west Pacific, any rigid continuation of Mahathir's foreign policies and conduct of international and regional relations will only serve to marginalise and isolate Malaysia politically, economically and diplomatically.

Seen in the context of this fundamental shift of the geostrategic environment of Malaysia, Abdullah's posture and conduct in foreign relations seem to be based also on realist calculation of regime and national interests, rather than be purely reflective of his personal amicability, idealism or altruism.

It could be argued that even Mahathir has, for the moment, consented to the calculation and changes, although he will not admit this publicly for reasons of 'face-saving' and strategic flexibility. The normally anti-Western Mahathir's insistence on the pro-Western Najib Abdul Razak being appointed as Abdullah's deputy is telling.

Complexities ahead

How far Abdullah can go in the new direction - beyond a more amicable style and acceptable language - is still open to question:

1. Given the seemingly widespread and even deep-rooted Islamist, ethno-nationalist or Third-Worldist (or a combination of) political cultures and psyches in Malaysia - especially in the official Malay-language media and among the ideological supporters of Mahathir in academia - it could be reasoned that resistance to Abdullah's more substantive changes in the conduct of foreign relations will surface if and when the vested economic interests and semi-authoritarian system of governance are deemed (however irrationally as in the case of jailed former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim ) to be threatened by 'Westernisation' or 'Americanisation'.

If that happens, would Mahathir and his hardcore supporters - who are all keeping quiet for the moment - not sacrifice Abdullah as just another Anwar, and restore the status quo ante, for regime preservation and political popularity?

2. It is still unclear if Abdullah, a long-time Umno member and leader as well as bureaucrat within the Umno-dominated system, is himself a reformist at heart in foreign policy and conduct of international relations, or just a personally more amicable or diplomatic conservative (or even reactionary) who attempts to conduct exercises of public relation for the regime whose essential ideology is still unchanged.

On the assumption that Abdullah is actually a conservative or reactionary at heart, it could be argued that the positive image, language and posture of the last three months are purposely contrived as propaganda to awe domestic voters and oppositionists by giving the impression that the regime - as well as all its policies and measures - is 'supported' or at least 'accepted' even by the international community and major powers.

If that is the case, then it is unrealistic to expect substantive changes or reforms after the ruling coalition has gained overwhelming support in the coming elections. Moreover, Mahathir and his hardcore supporters could 'hijack' the overwhelming electoral support for Abdullah to restore Mahathirism in Malaysia's foreign policy and conduct of international relations as means to protect vested economic interests as well as the semi-authoritarian system of governance.

On the same assumption, it could also expected that, while Abdullah would selectively or opportunistically welcome closer relations between Malaysia and the West in defence and security fields that would be used to serve to strengthen regime security, he would also reject or resist any international attempts to help liberalise the economy as well as the domestic political system.

All in all, it is still early to conclude that Abdullah's worldview and political values and interests are fundamentally different from those of Mahathir, and it is also premature to suggest that more positive image, language and posture on the part of Abdullah will necessarily lead to equally positive changes in substance in foreign policies and worldview.

Above all, Abdullah is still a politician and, for that matter, a rare and strange survivalist. He is certainly not a Scout master.

JAMES WONG WING ON is chief analyst of Strategic Analysis Malaysia (SAM). Wong is a former member of Parliament for Kampar (1990-1995) and a former columnist for the Sin Chew Jit Poh Chinese daily (now Sin Chew Daily ). He read political science and economics at the Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. While in Sin Chew , he and a team of journalists won the top awards of Malaysian Press Institute (MPI) for 1998 and 1999.