James Wong Wing On concludes his session with Tan Kai Hee ( right ), secretary of the Malaysia-China Friendship Association, on the ties between Malaysia and China.

Question: Do you think Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi would continue Malaysia's friendly policy on China even in this unipolar world?

Tan: I am certain that Abdullah will continue the policy. This has to do with the continuity of a national policy. But I also think that, although Abdullah is quieter than Mahathir, he may do even better than Mahathir.

Abdullah is a pragmatist. It is impossible for him to be another spokesman for the Third World and also for him to be accorded by China the same level of appreciation it gave to Mahathir but he (Abdullah) would most likely do some practical things to upgrade some aspects of Malaysia-China relations which are not 'sensational', like economic ties, cultural exchanges, social interactions and political understanding, on the basis of mutual benefits. He will do these things quietly. There will be no sensation but many will feel his impact later.

Although some say that he would eve better than Mahathir because he (Abdullah) has distant ancestors from China, I think it is not a very important factor in policy making or implementation. It is still politics and economic considerations that are more paramount.

Economic threat

China's economic growth in recent years is also said to be an economic threat to Southeast Asia because it diverted a large sum of investment capital, skilled manpower and technologies from Malaysia. How true is this assessment?

When Malaysia and Southeast Asia grew economically in the past, China never said we threatened it. All countries have their economic cycles and vicissitudes of fortune.

Now, China's labour cost is lower and it therefore attracts more foreign capital. The question of threat does not arise at all. China has already made it clear that its economic growth would bring indirect benefits to Southeast Asia.

What happens if China's poor and its people have to emigrate again? Would we benefit from an outflow of poor Chinese people seeking jobs everywhere in the world and Southeast Asia?

So, when China was poor, it was labelled a threat but when it developed and is no longer that poor, it is still said to be a threat. When China develops too fast, it is described as 'overheating' but when it now tries to slow-down, the world is also worried about its negative impact on global demands for goods and services.

My view is simple and straightforward: economic development is a natural process that cannot be completely manipulated by human beings.

The most powerful country - economically, politically and militarily - on earth now is not China but the United States. Why can't we say US is a threat to the world?

Some tourists, students and workers from China have been negatively publicised as breakers of law and order in Malaysia. Don't you think it is a serious problem that has given China a bad image in Malaysia?

Right to a certain extent. But it is only a small proportion if we measure their number against the entire population of China. Malaysians, Taiwanese and peoples of other nationalities also have similar problems the world over. This is part of the problem associated with the global movement of human beings.

'Empire in the region'

An American political scientist Samuel P Huntington has expressed concern and fear that the Chinese Southeast Asian, including Malaysian business communities are forming an informal China-centric economic 'empire' in the region. What do you think?

There is no China-centric economic 'empire'. Nobody is 'king' here because everybody has to cooperate with, or depend on, one another.

Moreover, unlike the United States or Britain, China does not hold any strategic stockpiles of any commodities in order to manipulate their pricing, supply and demand in the global markets. China is also not as economically powerful as the United States which can cause troubles in the global markets of certain goods like steel if it decides to erect tariff.

China also never threatens any small countries with economic sanctions. China's guiding principle is 'forever win-win' .

As for the so-called political 'Greater China', I think the restoration of Hong Kong and Macau to China's sovereignty is only a natural and legitimate process of national reunification. Like Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau have always been the sovereign territory of China.

Culturally, 'Greater China' may emerge because many ethnic Chinese all over the world aspire to preserve their culture. But, even then, citizens of Chinese origin in different countries are politically loyal to their respective nations and polities. There is no doubt about that.

Chinese culture, especially Confucianism, is for peace. Why so worried about it?

In the immediate aftermath of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, China decided not to devalue its currency Reminbi in order not to further harm the Southeast Asian economies. But the decision has also caused China to bear a heavy financial burden. Do you think China would review its decision and devalue Reminbi thus causing Chinese exports to be even more competitive vis-a-vis those of Malaysia and other Southeast Asian countries?

I can't speak for the government of China. It has its own national interests as well as moral and ethical responsibility towards its neighbours to calculate or balance.

But I think China has indeed made sacrifices by not devaluating Reminbi for so many years, especially since the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis.

Note: This is the final part of a five-part series.

JAMES WONG WING ON is chief analyst of Strategic Analysis Malaysia (SAM). Wong is a former DAP 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.