Malaysia’s duo tilting at windmills

From the look of it, the ongoing campaign for the upcoming election in Malaysia, scheduled for May 9, has effectively become a nasty political brawl – probably the worst since the country’s independence more than 60 years ago.
On one side is the firebrand 92-year-old former prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, pitted against the incumbent and protege, Najib Razak, who is coming into the arena with quite a few feathers on his cap: the creation of 2.7 million jobs, nearly 6 per cent economic growth last year and the near-elimination of poverty.
Positive reviews from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund add to the fund of goodwill, not to mention the fact that Kuala Lumpur has made itself indispensable in the global war on terrorism, as well as the effort to counter violent extremism. 
Because of these factors, Najib’s Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition is widely expected to return to power. 
But whether they can muster a majority of the popular vote is another matter entirely. Indeed, one cannot overlook the growing frustration among the minorities and the youth.
The BN has been in power since independence. But over the years, it has been slowly losing parliamentary seats to the opposition. 
Unfortunately, the clashes between Mahathir and Najib have overshadowed real issues that could have been debated, such as public debt and how that could undermine the country’s economic performance and stability in the future, or how to get out of the middle-income trap. 
A former World Bank economist, Lim Teck Ghee, warned that the debt could exceed 1 trillion ringgit (Bt8 trillion) by 2021 and 2 trillion by 2028. 
Mahathir, who was in power for 22 years, from 1981 to 2003, accused Najib of overseeing a corrupt system that he is determined, if elected, to destroy. 
Mahathir’s throwing down of the gauntlet suffers from serious credibility issues. He was in power for more than two decades and he helped lay the foundation for what Malaysia is today. 
Besides cementing the race-based affirmative policies in favour of ethnic Malays and other indigenous people, the one-party-state arrangement that Mahathir created also benefited Najib and embedded him in power. 
Mahathir has constantly attacked Najib over the 1Malaysia Development Bhd, a vehicle that was supposed to attract more foreign-direct investment but ended up mired in corruption. But he has little to say about changes or reforms in fundamental terms.
In fact, his victory could spell fiscal disaster: Mahathir has pledged to abolish the 6 per cent goods-and-services tax, which could worsen the country’s debt situation.
As Thailand during the Thaksin Shinawatra years proved, populism can get you votes at the ballot box but such schemes are not sustainable.
Both men, in fact all candidates, owe it to the people of Malaysia to come up with a plan for a better future. 
Najib and Mahathir talked about creating high-skilled jobs and strengthening human capital through education. But these are all just talk, seriously lacking in the details. Their stated plan will require talking about boosting incomes and taming inflation 
They could start by ending their relentless bickering about who is more pious or who is less corrupt, and place the interests of the country at the heart of the debate. Foreign investors will be least interested in their rhetorical outpourings while deciding whether to pour money into the country.