If Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has made an impact in the 100 days that he has been in office, it is because his agenda for the nation reflects the aspirations of the people. He has promised to improve the public delivery system, eradicate corruption, enhance transparency and strengthen inter-ethnic harmony.

He has not just articulated goals; he has implemented concrete measures. From shelving the RM14.5 billion double-tracking rail project to the establishment of an independent royal commission that will examine the performance of the police, Abdullah has proven that he is a competent leader courageous enough to make bold decisions.

Although he has done remarkably well so far, many Malaysians realise that translating his national agenda into reality is going to be a formidable task. He faces at least three major obstacles.

Resistance to reform

Abdullah is operating within a deeply entrenched system of power, privilege and prestige. As a coalition, the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) has exercised overwhelming power and authority for more than 46 years. Consequently, the comfort of power, like the privilege of incumbency, has become a habit. Because the BN has been so dominant for so long , the vested interests which have become intertwined with its power will not take too kindly to reforms aimed at curbing their excesses.

If the BN was functioning within an environment in which public accountability and transparency are established norms, its long, uninterrupted stay in power would not have been a serious problem.

As a case in point, the social democrats of Sweden, though ensconced in power for decades, succeeded in checking corruption while introducing wide ranging reforms aimed at ensuring social justice for the weaker segment of society, partly because accountability was such a cherished principle of governance.

In contrast, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) of Japan allowed the lofty standards of governance it set immediately after World War II to deteriorate during its long years of national stewardship, since the prevailing political culture did not stress the virtues of transparency and openness. The BN, it is obvious, is closer to the LDP.

This is one of the reasons why it has been so difficult to persuade the ruling coalition to create a truly independent, autonomous commission to investigate both public and private sector corruption. This is a shame, considering that Malaysia was the first newly independent nation to set up an Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), albeit in the Prime Minister's Office, in 1967. If the ACA's stature and authority have not grown over the years, it is because of an overwhelmingly powerful executive which has not been compelled to subject itself to searching public scrutiny.

It is this executive, the public will recall, that pledged to provide a bersih, cekap dan amanah (clean, efficient and trustworthy) administration in 1981. Within two years, the administration's reputation was badly tarnished as a result of its gross mishandling of the infamous Bumiputra Malaysia Finance scandal. Now, 20 years later, the same government under a different leader has found it necessary to renew that oft-repeated pledge to fight corruption-proving yet again that the well entrenched, well-oiled BN- led system of power, privilege and prestige does not yield easily to reform on certain fundamental challenges.

There is yet another example of how impervious the system is to reform, closely related to Abdullah's concern about the effectiveness of existing public delivery mechanisms. In the early 1970s, then prime minister, the late Abdul Razak, toyed with the idea of creating the office of an ombudsman. A structure of authority that is independent of the executive, the ombudsman, which has worked well in New Zealand and a number of Scandinavian countries, would not only have encouraged the public to ventilate their grievances about the management of government departments but would have also forced the bureaucrats to be more accountable and transparent in their dealings with the person-in-the-street.

Though the idea has been revived from time to time in the last 30 years, it has not been implemented. The bureaucracy and even the political elite would be terribly uncomfortable - to say the least - with the sort of independent scrutiny that is inevitable in the ombudsman system which incidentally owes its origin to the institution of hisbah in early Islamic civilisation.

Ethnic-based power structure

It is not just the dominant power of a political elite and a bureaucracy with their various appendages of authority preserved and perpetuated over decades with minimum adherence to the tenets of accountability that is the bane of reform in today's Malaysia.

There is yet another formidable obstacle which at a glance appears to be somewhat paradoxical. It is because the existing system has enjoyed some success in ensuring political stability, economic prosperity, social justice and inter-ethnic harmony that it may not be easy to initiate fundamental changes.

When a system is functioning relatively well, neither the leaders nor the people will be convinced of the need for certain long-term changes which could upset the existing arrangements.

Nothing illustrates this situation better than the ethnic-based power sharing code which holds the BN and indeed the nation together. There is no denying that this code which recognises the indigenous Malay community as the core of the national power structure while incorporating the other communities into an equitable power sharing arrangement has been the key to Malaysia's political stability - political stability which in turn has contributed in no small measure to economic development and social equilibrium.

And yet it is this ethnic-based system which ramifies into every sphere and segment of society that is partly responsible for communal polarisation. Because ethnicity legitimised in the political, economic and cultural facets of Malaysian life has become so pervasive, ethnic boundaries have become more and more sacrosanct.

Interaction among Malaysians of different ethnic backgrounds - if it occurs at all - is largely functional. This is why in their perceptions of institutions, policies, issues and personalities, the ethnic factor is always lurking in the recesses of their consciousness. In such a situation it is inevitable that there would be little emotional bonding between the different ethnic communities. Without inter-ethnic empathy, no multi-ethnic society would be able to survive a serious communal crisis.

This is why if Abdullah wants to strengthen inter-ethnic harmony, he must address the challenge of an ethnic-based system which in the long run will only undermine that semblance of unity that exists at the moment. Will the power-holders and beneficiaries of the system allow him to reform the system? Wouldn't they argue that its relative success justifies its perpetuation ad infinitum ?

And yet without an earnest, conscious attempt to strengthen institutions, interests and values which transcend ethnic boundaries, it would not be possible to create that empathetic bond among the different communities which is so vital for the future well-being of multi-ethnic Malaysia.

Mindset change

There is a third obstacle that stands in the path of a reform-minded leader. Abdullah has time and again emphasised the importance of changing the mindset of the people so that they would be able to manage and utilise first-class infrastructure with a first-class outlook. This requires in essence an outlook that embodies a sense of civic responsibility.

A sense of civic responsibility manifests itself when individuals and communities are not only conscious of their obligations to their fellow human beings but also develop an abiding commitment to the public good. How would one cultivate such an outlook within the context of a neo-feudal culture in which the notion of individual responsibility for the public good is weak because of the tendency to allow the leader (the protector) to determine what is good for the community (the protected)?

Would the political leadership be prepared to work towards the elimination of this culture when neo-feudalism has played a major role in sustaining the power and authority of the ruling class?

Apart from the negative impact of a neo-feudal culture which in some ways is most visible within the Malay community, we also have to contend with the adverse consequences of a post-immigrant psychology upon the sense of civic responsibility of the non-Malay communities in particular.

A post-immigrant psychology often chooses to subordinate the larger public good to the interests of the individual. Hence tending and caring for social infrastructure and for public amenities is accorded less importance than the single-minded pursuit of one's own material success.

This is perhaps an attitude rooted in a distant past when what mattered most to the immigrant was his survival. Would the non-Malay citizenry and its leadership want to change this mentality? What would be the political cost of doing so?

This leads us to four other challenges confronting Abdullah. He has alluded to each of these challenges in the course of the last 100 days. They are as important as the three obstacles we have analysed.

Popular participation

One, there must be a sincere endeavour to encourage popular participation in the democratic process. Right at the outset of his leadership, Abdullah asked the people to work with him, not for him. This was an open invitation to the citizenry to participate in building a better Malaysia. He has followed it up by holding consultations with civil society groups on issues of public importance such as the alarming rate of traffic accidents in the country.

There are other issues of significance on which Abdullah should also dialogue with the people. Economic justice, the eradication of corruption, public accountability, the independence of the judiciary, the state of education, the public healthcare system, ethnic relations, the role of religion in society and Malaysia's foreign policy are some of our other major concerns which demand some form of public discourse.

But to make dialogue and discourse really meaningful, laws which deter people from participating in the democratic process should be abrogated. This means that a whole gamut of restrictive, often draconian laws ranging from the Printing Presses and Publications Act to the Internal Security Act should be repealed at some point or other.

At the same time, the mass media, especially those newspapers and television stations linked, directly or indirectly, to the government should adopt a more evaluative approach towards the national leadership and public policies.

This is perhaps beginning to happen with the return of investigative journalism on a couple of television channels. Certain newspapers have also become a little more issue-oriented rather than personality-centred.

In more specific terms, this means that the prime minister is not always on the front page of the nation's newspapers. Even in radio and television news bulletins he is no longer the predictable lead news item.

The media should go further and subject Abdullah's policy pronouncements to critical scrutiny. After all, Abdullah himself had asked the people to speak truth to power.

Redefining Islam

Two, Abdullah should embark upon a mission - a mission which will go beyond his lifetime - to make the Malaysian Muslim understand that Islam is not merely a religion of rules and rituals. It is a faith founded upon justice, compassion and humanity.

Here again, he has begun to persuade the Muslims to view Islam in inclusive rather than exclusive terms, as a universal rather than a particularistic religion. It is a long and arduous process. To bring about the desired transformation in the Malaysian Muslim worldview, the content of religious education at all levels will have to be reviewed.

Religious teachers and preachers and even Muslim scholars and academics will have to be exposed to a more universal, progressive, values-based understanding of Islam through organised learning programmes. The media should also play its part.

Economic justice

Three, given that economic disparities between those who have a lot and those who have a little - in contrast to the haves and have-nots of the 1960s - have become more pronounced since the 1990s, the Abdullah leadership should focus upon concrete measures that will help to increase incomes, expand opportunities and improve facilities for the disadvantaged sections of society.

The new emphasis upon the agriculture sector and co-operatives is undoubtedly a step in the right direction. But much more will have to be done from boosting wage levels of those at the lower echelons to skills acquisition programmes and affordable housing schemes for them.

In responding to the needs of the dispossessed, Abdullah will have to contend with the realities of an economy which over the last couple of decades has become even more integrated than before into an unjust, unequal global system driven by the so-called neo-liberal capitalist credo.

Liberalisation, deregulation and privatisation, essential ingredients of this rapacious ideology, have not only resulted in the transfer of more wealth into the hands of a few but has also led to the diminution of the responsibility of the state for the well-being of the majority, a lot of whom have become more acutely conscious of their relative deprivation in an extraordinarily consumerist culture.

Will Abdullah be able to check these negative aspects of neo-liberal capitalism in Malaysia? Will he be able to reverse the trend and work towards a more just and equitable Malaysian society?

Foreign policy

Four, in tandem with the quest for economic justice, the government should also seek to strengthen the sinews of our principled but pragmatic foreign policy. While continuing to engage and interact with all nations including the hyperpower of the day, the US, for our own interest, Malaysia should never cease to take the side of the poor and powerless who constitute the majority of humankind in the international arena.

More than at any other time in recent history their rights and aspirations are being treated with utter contempt by a global system dominated by the self-serving hegemonic agenda of a Washington helmed elite working in collusion with Zionist ideologues in the US and Israel.

This utterly unjust and inhuman global situation demands that Malaysia together with other like-minded states and groups strives to achieve an alternative international order where power, wealth and knowledge are equitably distributed.

More specifically, global democracy, a just financial architecture, fair international trade, equitable sharing of scientific and technological knowledge, respect for cultural and religious diversity and a harmonious relationship with environment and ecology should be some of the collective goals that we should endeavour to achieve within a reasonable timeframe.

In a more immediate sense, the Abdullah government should continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with the people of Palestine and Iraq as they struggle against occupation and subjugation by imperialistic and hegemonic forces.

This has become even more compelling now since Malaysia is the chair of both the Non Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC). From my interaction with intellectuals and activists from the South and the Muslim world in overseas conferences, it is apparent that they are beginning to be concerned with what they perceive as a lack of leadership on the part of Malaysia in these two bodies.

In this regard, Abdullah should consider putting forward two separate modest, feasible action plans on behalf of NAM and OIC. If these plans materialise, it is hoped that they would include proposals to establish relations with global civil society actors from all over the world who are committed to real, meaningful change in the international arena. For it is in the vast terrain of global civil society - and not along the corridors of power - that the seeds of a just, compassionate and humane universal civilisation are being sown by tens of thousands of loving hands.

Sincere leader

Needless to say, there are other challenges that I have not elaborated upon that the people would expect Abdullah to address - challenges related to the healthcare system, primary, secondary and tertiary education, scientific research and innovation, cultural creativity and so on. Since one is constrained by space, these and other issues will not be examined in detail.

Suffice it to say at this point that on his own Abdullah - in spite of the power and authority that he commands as prime minister - will not be able to overcome the myriad challenges confronting the nation. He will need the solid support of not just his entire cabinet and bureaucracy but also the business sector, trade unions, the media, the intelligentsia, civic groups and indeed each and every segment of society.

Does Abdullah have such support? If support means a deep commitment to his agenda demonstrated through actual deeds, there is very little evidence of it. For instance, no one has heard of say a big business corporation taking concrete measures to discourage its executives from 'entertaining' public enterprise officials as a way of curbing corruption.

Neither has one come across a public sector union encouraging its members who may be serving in some frontline government department to provide more efficient service in line with Abdullah 's call to the bureaucracy to improve its performance. In fact, even his cabinet colleagues - the occasional verbal endorsement aside - have little to whip up public support for his battle against corruption just as only a handful of them have attempted to restructure their own ministerial departments in order to enhance efficiency.

What this suggests is that after 100 days, the Abdullah agenda for change is very much the agenda of one man guided by some good values who is interested in doing a few good things for the people. The great strength of this man is his sincerity. It is a sincerity that is rooted in the bedrock of his moral-spiritual being.

In the end it is this - and perhaps this alone - that gives us a glimmer of hope. Hope for a more just, a better, Malaysia under Abdullah's stewardship.

DR CHANDRA MUZAFFAR, a former opposition politician, is president of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST).