ABSTRACT

This epilogue brings to date the developments of US trade and FDI within the changing competitive context in post-colonial Malaysia. The first section briefly discusses the economic developments through five decades starting from the 1960s. Section two traces to the present day the three MNEs that are the subject of case studies in this work. This is followed by a brief account of the reasons why Ford Malaya, in contrast to Pacific Tin and USRC, chose to remain in the country. External influences and internal factors together played a role in the divestment of US FDI in post-colonial Malaysia. The slowing demand of the US industries for rubber had a significant impact on how, what were once, strategic commodities became valued. Synthetic rubber overtook natural rubber as the dominant material for tyre production. In the case of tin mining, Pacific Tin chose to diversify into mica and plastics production, thus reflecting the increasing consumer (as opposed to industrial) demand for household products and electrical appliances.The postIndependence period also saw a shift in Malaya’s status within the global tin and rubber market. Malaya was no longer a colony where it was conveniently subservient to the economic needs of the colonial masters. The localisation factor (referring to the efforts of newly independent countries to increase local selfdetermination and participation in the economy as well as national identity) entered into the equation, in some cases sooner than must have been anticipated. The localisation factor for Malaysia came in the form of the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1970, where a timetable was specifically set and the agenda of pursuing the creation of a bumiputera capitalist class explicitly formulated. Since then, the reversal of the colonial past has assumed an accelerated propensity through acquisition of shares with the objective of securing a controlling stake in large firms and corporations which were mainly owned by foreigners.