Engaging the uncomfortable: Dialogue means talking to those who disagree

Some see the invitation as a betrayal of principle; others view it as a diplomatic necessity.

But beyond politics, this moment asks a deeper question: what does dialogue truly mean?

Dialogue, in the Malaysian tradition of Masyarakat Madani — first articulated by Anwar Ibrahim in Jakarta in 1995 — has never meant conformity or submission.

It is the willingness to speak with, not merely about, those with whom we differ.

Real dialogue begins when we engage those who disagree, offend, or even oppose us.

As the late Nelson Mandela reminded the world, “If you want to make peace with your enemy, you have to work with your enemy.”

To reject dialogue is to retreat into moral isolation.

To engage, however, is to believe that persuasion and conscience still matter — that moral courage can still shape power.

Malaysia’s current leadership has embodied that belief.

Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim has shown remarkable consistency of courage in defending the cause of justice for Palestine — not from the safety of echo chambers, but in the most powerful halls of global politics.

He raised Palestine in San Francisco during APEC and in New York at the United Nations.

He did so again in Beijing, in the presence of President Xi Jinping; in Moscow, before President Vladimir Putin; in Berlin, before the German Chancellor; and in Riyadh and Doha, before Arab leaders and international financiers.

And perhaps most strikingly, he delivered the same moral message at Davos, the annual meeting of the world’s political and economic elite — a forum few expected to hear a firm and fearless defence of Palestine.

Now, his conviction has gone even further.

Anwar Ibrahim has become the Patron of the Global Sumud Flotilla Nusantara — a humanitarian coalition of conscience from Southeast Asia determined to break the blockade and deliver aid to Gaza.

It is an unprecedented move for a sitting head of government, signalling not only solidarity, but moral courage and political risk in standing with the oppressed.

Each time, and on every platform, Anwar’s message has been the same: humanity must not remain silent in the face of injustice.

This is not the diplomacy of convenience — it is the diplomacy of conscience.

Anwar Ibrahim’s voice reflects Malaysia’s identity as a nation that refuses to separate moral conviction from strategic engagement.

In truth, this idea of engaging those who disagree is not new to Malaysia’s diplomacy — it is deeply rooted in the Islamic tradition.

The Prophet Muhammad S.A.W. himself practised dialogue even with those who rejected, opposed, or misunderstood him.

At Hudaybiyyah, he signed a treaty with his adversaries from Quraysh; with the Christians of Najran, he welcomed them into his mosque and engaged in respectful debate; with the tribes of Medina, he built the Constitution of Medina through mutual consultation — the first civic charter of pluralism.

Even when confronting his former enemies at the conquest of Mecca, the Prophet’s words were not of vengeance but of mercy: “Go, for you are free.”

He showed that truth does not fear conversation — it shines brighter through it.

This Prophetic example teaches that leadership is not measured by whom we silence, but by whom we are willing to speak with — and still uphold justice.

Malaysia’s approach under Malaysia MADANI follows that same prophetic ethic: firm in principle, patient in persuasion, and guided by compassion even toward those who disagree.

As ASEAN Chair, Malaysia’s responsibility is not to take sides, but to lead with principle.

Inviting any world leader, even one as polarising as Donald Trump, does not signal agreement — it signals Malaysia’s commitment to engage for peace.

Dialogue is not a reward for good behaviour; it is the method through which we challenge bad behaviour with moral clarity.

This approach — what I call Dialogical Diplomacy — is a hallmark of Malaysia MADANI.

It blends Restraint, Equilibrium, and Legitimacy, drawing from the moral strength of Islam’s call for justice (adl) and compassion (rahmah).

Through dialogue, Malaysia seeks not to please the powerful but to remind them of the power of justice.

Under Malaysia’s chairmanship, ASEAN has a historic opportunity to assert its leadership in championing global justice and peace through dialogue under the leadership of Anwar Ibrahim.

At a time when major powers are divided by wars, sanctions, and ideological blocs, ASEAN can demonstrate that moral leadership and moderation remain Asia’s most valuable contribution to the world.

If ASEAN shows such bold conviction and consistency on the crisis in Palestine and Gaza, it may also inspire hope for resolving other difficult challenges closer to home — particularly the Rohingya tragedy in Myanmar, which urgently requires a new, courageous, and humane approach to achieve a peaceful outcome.

This is ASEAN’s moment to transform from a regional association into a moral voice for humanity, proving that our unity in diversity is not merely political, but civilizational.

The ASEAN Summit will test whether our region still believes in dialogue as a tool of peace in a divided world.

If Malaysia chooses to engage the United States under Trump, it should do so not with deference, but with dignity — as a nation that has spoken truth to every capital, east and west.

We have seen how isolation breeds suspicion, but conversation can open unexpected doors to understanding and change.

In a world where many talk only to friends, Malaysia must be the nation that dares to talk to everyone — and still stand firm for justice.

Because real dialogue, like real leadership, begins not in comfort, but in courage.