While Dr Mahathi Mohamad has said much in 'confronting' the Abdullah Ahmad Badawi administration and the responses read almost like a who's who of those in power, it is regrettable that the entire debate lacks perspective.

This is most unfortunate because anyone familiar with the country's political economy since colonial days must surely see the implications as being structurally very serious indeed.

Unless and until there is a realistic attempt to come to grips with the substantive issues involved in what Mahathir is saying, and these are dealt with in a concerted way, we may be heading for a situation of political instability.

In my recently published book, 'Speaking Out: Insights into Contemporary Malaysian Issues', at least three articles give a clear perspective on the main issues at the heart of this confrontation.

These are 'The continuing Malay dilemma', 'A mandate for radical social reform' and especially 'Not the changing of the guard, but passing of the baton'. Under the chapters on social issues and politics, many other relevant questions are covered as well.

In the third article, I write: "The prime minister designate (Abdullah) will essentially be taking over the baton to run the same race on the same track and on the same playing field, while of course looking at alternative ways to make this field more level... Dr Mahathir has 'set the stage' nationally and internationally as no other prime minister had done, or indeed will ever do."

Mahathir in just over two decades blazed the trail to push through his ideas and policies and thereby had to tackle entrenched institutional and structural barriers and overcome constraining value systems such as feudalism and the colonial hangover.

As a result "over the past two decades, the government embarked on what arguably have been some radical attempts at dismantling and restructuring post-colonial economic and social institutions within a democracy ever attempted by any multiracial developing country in recent history".

It needs to be emphasised that the Mahathir adminintration will go down in history fundamentally as the Malay/Bumiputera Era. 'The Malay Dilemma' and the New Economic Policy (NEP) showed up that, fundamentally, the majority of Malays had effectively gained little since independence. Mahathir was bent on addressing this problem, come what may, for political stability.

It is important to mention that non-Malays, notably the Chinese business community, recognised the gravity of this situation and, despite having to make some serious sacrifices, went along with these policies in the interests of political stability and peace.

Unfortunately, the Mahathir model of economic growth and distribution through building up an elite business class to spearhead the creation of a Malay/bumiputera business community failed. They just took what was offered, sold it and asked for more.

Therefore, as mentioned in the article, Abdullah will have to give priority to the "outcome and distributive effects associated with the NEP which has resulted in the widening gap between the haves and the have-nots that overlap with race/ethnic formations. There is also the question of so-called Islamic extremism, which will have to be accommodated realistically."

Adverse economic changes

With the greatest respect, I believe that the Mahathir Confrontation has much to do primarily with the changes being introduced in the economy by the Abdullah administration that has particularly adversely affected the majority of Malays and indeed the low-income groups of all communities.

While there is no question that reforms such as those undertaken by Malaysia Airlines (MAS) are essential in the interests of competition and indeed that the petrol/electricity hikes are in keeping with globalisation, I believe that insufficient attention is being given to the provision of realistic alternatives.

It is unrealistic to say that some 6,000 MAS employees, most of whom are Malays and who were given jobs because they were Malays, have to be laid off. What options has MAS offered them apart from hoping that AirAsia will absorb many of them?

The same scenario can be applied to the hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers of all racial groups in dead-end jobs, who are struggling to make ends meet and are likely to be retrenched because of rising prices of petrol and gas. It is unacceptable for the prime minister and his deputy to ask them to accommodate these changes by changing their lifestyle.

Finally, I am convinced that the Mahathir Confrontation is timely because it has shown up the government as lacking capacity, capability and especially experience to understand the meaning of the social changes taking place, and to implement realistic plans and policies to meet these.

The classic case here must surely be the 9th Malaysia Plan which has been drawn up by bureaucrats, many of whom have never worked outside Kuala Lumpur, and with hardly any grassroots input from the rural areas in Peninsula Malaysia/Sarawak/Sabah.

The only saving grace in the 9MP is the ideology of Islam Hadhari which, to be meaningful, has to permeate policy decisions and implementation. But to put it bluntly, I do not think the bureaucracy has the capacity or capability to do this meaningfully.

DR COLLIN ABRAHAM holds a doctorate degree in race relations from Oxford. He was initially a civil servant attached to the Welfare Ministry as well as undertook research projects with the Ministry of Rural Development and Economic Planning Unit. He was subsequently seconded to Universiti Sains Malaysia where he was associate professor in sociology, and more recently visiting fellow. He is currently pro-tem president, Malaysian Association of Social Impact Assessors.