Politics and National Issues

2004 was very much Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's year. In defining his leadership, he experienced the whole gamut from the triumph of being the reason for one of the most sweeping election wins in history for the ruling coalition … to heeding the rumblings that had him say publicly at the end of the year that his honeymoon was over.

Abdullah quickly forged his own course for the nation, but kept some fundamental dynamics in consonance with his predecessor, the man who steered Malaysia for 22 years. One fundamental he shared with Mahathir Mohamed was a deep sense that it was the government, but more specifically the leader and “the role of leadership”, which made the difference in the success or failure of a nation. Abdullah said, “Why is it that some Islamic countries are poor and weak? Why is it that some [Islamic] countries are not poor and weak? There is a difference, and the difference is in terms of the government, the role played by the government and the role of the leadership.”

Such a sense of leadership — whether Abdullah's or Mahathir's — is a heavy mantle to assume. It is even more burdensome when the medium and the messenger change. Mahathir's style of leadership was about deciding, demanding, and if necessary, deriding. However, Abdullah is courteous and consensual, not wont to showing — and thus giving notice — that he wants his way. But Abdullah Badawi knew the enormous task he faced as a leader, because of his huge mandate from the people. Amidst celebrations over their electoral victory in March, he constantly reminded his political party that much was now expected of them.

With that overwhelming electoral mandate from Malaysians came expectations which he seemed to have not fulfilled sufficiently by the end of just one year. Abdullah has undertaken the enormity of reforming governance and politics, but at the helm of the same crew who are used to a far stronger style of leadership and the ensuing conformity it demanded.