Nov 3

Nov 3 The Dominance of Realpolitik Over Islamic Unity in Malaysia

Asia, Politics & Government, International Diplomacy

Malaysia faces a diplomatic dilemma. As a Muslim-majority country, it contains domestic reasons to worry about the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in China’s Xinjiang region. Yet China remains one of its most important economic partners, with trade, investment and infrastructure projects tying the two countries closely together.

Malaysia’s response has not been entirely consistent. In 2018, Kuala Lumpur released 11 Uyghur detainees and allowed them to travel to Turkey, despite objections from Beijing. More recently, however, Malaysia has maintained a cautious approach to the wider Uyghur issue, balancing domestic calls for Muslim solidarity against the costs of antagonising a major economic partner. This tension reveals a central feature of Malaysian foreign policy; the pursuit of national interests often comes first, over sustained confrontation on human rights.

An Indispensable Economic Partner

China’s economic importance to Malaysia helps explain Kuala Lumpur’s diplomatic caution. According to Malaysia’s Department of Statistics, China remained the country’s largest trading partner for the 17th consecutive year in 2025, with bilateral trade reaching RM542.2 billion. This relationship extends beyond trade to investment, infrastructure and industrial development.

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has become a prominent part of this cooperation. Projects such as the East Coast Rail Link aim to improve domestic connectivity, while Chinese investment supports Malaysia’s ambitions to strengthen its industrial base and position within regional supply chains. For Kuala Lumpur, these projects offer opportunities to advance national development without relying on a single source of economic growth.

The relationship also serves China’s interests. Malaysia’s position along the Strait of Malacca, one of the world’s key maritime trade routes, gives it strategic importance in regional commerce. Closer economic ties provide Beijing with opportunities to expand its commercial presence in Southeast Asia. This does not mean that Malaysia aligns with China politically. Rather, both countries maintain productive relationships despite differences in their political systems and international priorities. For Malaysia, a prolonged diplomatic dispute with Beijing could complicate economic cooperation without necessarily producing a meaningful change in Chinese policy towards the Uyghurs.

The economic relationship therefore creates a strong incentive for restraint. When deciding how forcefully to raise human rights concerns, Malaysian leaders must also consider the potential consequences for trade, investment and wider diplomatic relations.

Muslim Solidarity Meets Diplomatic Reality

The Uyghur issue is particularly sensitive in Malaysia, where Islam plays an important role in public life and political identity. Allegations of repression against Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang have attracted attention from Malaysian religious groups, activists and political figures. Some have required stronger action in defence of the community. As Hew Wai Weng’s analysis for Georgetown University’s Berkley Center explains, the issue sits at the intersection of religious activism, domestic politics and competition between China and the United States. Malaysian politicians face pressure to demonstrate solidarity with Muslims abroad, but they must also consider the economic consequences of antagonising Beijing.

Malaysia’s record nevertheless shows that diplomatic caution does not always mean compliance with Chinese demands. In October 2018, Malaysian authorities released 11 Uyghur detainees who had fled to the country and allowed them to travel to Turkey rather than return to China. Reuters reported that the decision prompted objections from Beijing, while the detainees’ lawyer said the charges against them had been dropped on humanitarian grounds. The episode complicates any suggestion that Malaysia places economic interests above humanitarian concerns. Kuala Lumpur proved willing to take a decision that displeased China when it judged that a different course would serve it better. The broader pattern, however, has been one of restraint rather than sustained confrontation. Malaysia has had to balance domestic expectations with the practical realities of its relationship with Beijing. The Uyghur issue remains politically sensitive, but it has not displaced economic cooperation as a central feature of bilateral relations.

Realpolitik in Practice

This balancing act reflects realpolitik: an approach to foreign policy that places national interests and practical considerations at the centre of decision-making. For Malaysia, these interests extend beyond trade. As a middle power in Southeast Asia, it seeks to maintain strategic autonomy, preserve freedom of manoeuvre and avoid becoming too closely aligned with any single major power. We must therefore understand its relationship with China within the wider context of regional competition. The country has continued to advocate constructive engagement with Beijing while maintaining relationships with other major powers, including the United States. Its approach reflects a desire to preserve options rather than allow great-power rivalry to dictate its foreign policy.

This balancing strategy becomes especially important as competition between Washington and Beijing intensifies. Malaysia holds economic and diplomatic reasons for avoiding choosing sides outright. Confrontation with China over the Uyghur issue could complicate this position, particularly if it produced limited practical benefits or prompted a deterioration in bilateral relations. The approach does not require Malaysia to abandon its religious or humanitarian concerns. Instead, it allows the government to acknowledge domestic sensitivities while limiting the extent to which they shape its dealings with Beijing. The result is a foreign policy in which values remain relevant but do not necessarily determine diplomatic action.

The distinction matters. A country can express concern about human rights while choosing not to make that concern the basis of a wider diplomatic dispute. Whether such restraint is defensible depends partly on the circumstances, the alternatives available and the consequences for those whose rights are at stake.

The Costs of Pragmatism

Malaysia’s approach offers diplomatic flexibility, but it also carries risks. When a government expresses solidarity with Muslim communities abroad yet responds cautiously to allegations of abuses involving an important economic partner, its position can appear selective. This tension is not unique to Malaysia. Governments routinely balance human rights, economic development and security interests. Yet Malaysia’s Muslim-majority identity makes the Uyghur issue particularly difficult to separate from domestic expectations. A restrained response may protect relations with Beijing, but it can also invite criticism from activists and religious groups who expect stronger action.

The assumption that economic cooperation necessarily requires political restraint also has limits. Malaysia’s decision in 2018 to release the 11 Uyghur detainees shows that Kuala Lumpur retains room to act independently when humanitarian considerations carry sufficient weight. Economic ties influence the choices available to the government, but they do not eliminate its agency. Nor should Malaysia’s relationship with China be described simply as dependence. Kuala Lumpur has its own development priorities and seeks to benefit from international trade and investment while preserving its ability to make independent decisions. Its relationship with Beijing represents an important part of that strategy, not its entirety.

The central question is, therefore, not whether Malaysia should abandon economic cooperation with China. It is whether the pursuit of economic and strategic interests leaves sufficient room for a credible response to human rights concerns. A policy that consistently places diplomatic convenience above such concerns risks undermining the principles it claims to uphold.

A Delicate Balance

Malaysia’s approach to the Uyghur issue illustrates the difficult choices facing Southeast Asian states as they navigate economic interdependence and great-power competition. China offers significant opportunities for trade, investment and infrastructure development, while Malaysia will remain attentive to the treatment of Uyghur Muslims for domestic and international reasons.

The two priorities are not necessarily incompatible. Malaysia’s 2018 decision demonstrates that it can act against Beijing’s preferences in particular circumstances. Yet the broader relationship encourages caution, limiting the likelihood of sustained diplomatic confrontation. The challenge for Kuala Lumpur is not simply to choose between economic cooperation and Muslim solidarity. It is to determine how far it can protect both without allowing strategic interests to overshadow humanitarian concerns. Its experience shows that realpolitik is not always a matter of abandoning principles outright. More often, it is a question of deciding when those principles will shape foreign policy and when other interests will take precedence

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the wider St Andrews Foreign Affairs Review team.