During the sixty years since its independence, Malaysian foreign policy has fluctuated from alignment to antagonism with the global order, towards a more established middle power's diplomacy. This chapter shows that only the combination of successive decision-makers’ idiosyncrasies, domestic constraints and the international context can shed light on the country's apparently wavering diplomatic postures. While foreign policy objectives and methods have fluctuated over time, the search for autonomy has been a recurrent theme in Malaysian foreign policy discourses. The Mahathir era (1981-2003) was a central moment of empowerment for Malaysia's foreign policy. The fourth Prime minister's vocal postures on the international scene have greatly contributed to Malaysia's emergence and recognition as a middle power. The rapid economic growth experienced by the country throughout this period facilitated the achievement of such status. Yet, the decreasing internal legitimacy of Malaysian ruling coalition Barisan Nasional has tempted governments to make greater use of diplomatic tools in the service of Malaysian internal policies since the 1990s. As such, the coherence of the Middle Way sought by Malaysia on the international scene has been hindered by contradictory foreign policy moves designed to serve domestic purposes.

Independent since 1957 and a founding member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) ten years later, Malaysia has tried constantly to assert itself beyond Southeast Asia. The steady increase in staff and number of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ permanent missions abroad demonstrates the commitment of successive governments to be heard globally. From only six embassies in the early 1960s, Malaysia had 111 diplomatic missions worldwide by 2017. In the same year 123 foreign permanent missions were installed in Kuala Lumpur, reflecting the mutual interest of the rest of the world in a country straddling the Malay Peninsula and the north of the island of Borneo.

The meandering course of Malaysian foreign policy, however, is enlightened neither by the political continuity at the government level, nor by the similar general objectives put forth by its national leaders since 1957 – such as national independence, territorial integrity, national survival, economic development, sovereignty. As in a musical score, the use of a tonal system does not predetermine the tune to be played.