The End of The Mahathir Era

With the recent passing of Tun Taib, another figure from the Mahathir era, Malaysia witnesses the departure of yet another influential personality. Despite receiving support from the political class, the average Malaysian on social media has expressed less-than-kind sentiments toward the former governor's legacy. Meanwhile, Mahathir finds himself again in the hospital, prompting allies to dispel rumours that this might be his final visit. In light of the mixed response toward Mahathir, it is worth examining his legacy.

Mahathir Mohamed's political journey, spanning almost 75 years, appears to be nearing its end as he recedes from relevance amid the current intense political landscape. An evaluation of the past four years, during which he served as prime minister for 20 months, reveals a complex legacy.

Throughout his career, Mahathir's bold actions shaped Malaysia's trajectory for better or worse. The late 1990s marked a period of perceived success with significant infrastructure projects. Anticipated to transition to the international stage after his initial 22-year tenure, Mahathir focused on influencing domestic politics, contributing to the rise of leaders like Najib Razak and the formation of Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia. Despite this, there was a willingness to overlook these shortcomings as his era seemed to have passed.

These shortcomings, in retrospect, would have turned heads and set social media ablaze if they were committed in contemporary Malaysia.

Notable instances include the BMF scandal in the 1980s involving financial losses and fraudulent activities at Bumiputera Malaysia Finance, a subsidiary of Bank Negara Malaysia. The Perwaja Steel scandal in the 1980s and 1990s raised allegations of financial mismanagement and corruption in the government-initiated Perwaja Steel project, although Mahathir was not directly implicated.

Another significant controversy was the judicial crisis of 1988, where senior judges were suspended, raising concerns about political interference in the judiciary during Mahathir's tenure. The trial of his then-deputy, and now Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, in 1998 on charges of corruption and sodomy attracted international attention, with critics alleging political motivations.

Despite initial optimism regarding Mahathir's reformative stance after the 2018 election, disillusionment grew as the government failed to deliver promised reforms. Mahathir's participation in the Malay Dignity Congress strained relations within Pakatan Harapan. The turning point in February 2020, where Mahathir appeared to support a government aligned with Malay supremacists but later resigned, shattered hopes for a new Malaysia free from race-based politics and corruption.

And now, he sees himself as a target of the MACC, as one by one, his friends and family find themselves embroiled in investigations aimed at dismantling the wealth he had purportedly built on the backs of the average Malaysian.

Mahathir's legacy, entrenched in the mess that we now call Malaysian politics, reflects an almost unshakable commitment to maintaining Malay-dominated governance, leading to a repressive state and a three-tier class society. The disillusionment among those who voted for Pakatan Harapan indicates a complex and controversial legacy for Mahathir Mohamed, with the potential for historians to view his influence on UMNO and party splits with a critical lens.