Commentary: Can unhealthy air quality in Malaysia translate to political action on haze?
The haze is a recurring regional risk that can be forecast, prepared for and diplomatically managed, says Oh Ei Sun from Pacific Research Center of Malaysia.
Haze blankets a road in Serian, Sarawak, on Sep 3, 2026. (Photo: CNA/Fadza Ishak)
New: You can now listen to articles.
This audio is generated by an AI tool.
Read a summary of this article on FAST.
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST
Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
KUALA LUMPUR: East Malaysia recently experienced its worst haze in years, forcing Sarawak to declare a state of emergency in one district. Outdoor events were cancelled, flights disrupted and schools closed. The state of emergency was lifted three days later as extreme conditions eased. Over September, air quality has fluctuated between moderate and very unhealthy levels across Sarawak.
Sarawak’s state of emergency raises questions about how prepared authorities were for the crisis. Is Malaysia moving from emergency reaction to genuine anticipation?
After decades of transboundary haze, Malaysia is certainly better prepared than it once was. There are established haze action plans, air-quality thresholds, satellite monitoring and procedures for closing schools or restricting outdoor activities.
These are important improvements. But a system that waits for pollution to become dangerous before mobilising fully is still largely a reactive system.
Guess Word
Crack the word, one row at a time
Buzzword
Create words using the given letters
Mini Sudoku
Tiny puzzle, mighty brain teaser
Mini Crossword
Small grid, big challenge
Word Search
Spot as many words as you can
A GRADUATED APPROACH
This year’s episode should encourage a more graduated approach. Hotspots, weather patterns, wind direction and rainfall can provide valuable warning before smoke becomes a public health emergency.
Federal and state authorities should therefore establish clear escalation levels, allowing firefighting resources, medical preparedness, public communications and protective measures to be activated well before the most severe air quality readings are recorded.
This is especially important in Sabah and Sarawak. Their proximity to Indonesia’s Kalimantan makes them particularly exposed to fires elsewhere on the island of Borneo.
A permanent Borneo haze coordination mechanism, bringing together federal agencies, both East Malaysian states, meteorological and environmental authorities, health agencies and disaster management bodies, could turn scattered information into a common early warning and response system.
But there is a limit to what Malaysia can achieve by looking inward.
CONSTRAINED BY SOVEREIGNTY
Much of the haze affecting East Malaysia originates from fires in Indonesia. Here, Malaysia’s leverage is inherently constrained by sovereignty. Kuala Lumpur cannot send enforcement officers or firefighters into Indonesian territory without Jakarta’s consent, nor can the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) simply fine a member state because smoke has crossed a national boundary.
This is why Malaysia’s call for ASEAN to revisit its transboundary haze agreement is politically understandable but should be approached realistically. A stronger document is useful only if member states are prepared to implement it.
ASEAN’s traditions of consensus, consultation and non-interference will continue to place limits on any enforcement mechanism.
Malaysia nevertheless has diplomatic leverage that it can exercise.
The first is to regionalise the issue. The haze should not be framed merely as another Malaysia-Indonesia dispute. Singapore, Brunei and parts of Thailand can also be affected, while Indonesia itself suffers enormous health, environmental and economic losses from fires.
A coalition of affected ASEAN states would give the issue greater political weight without turning it into an anti-Indonesia campaign.
The second is transparency. Instead of simply asking Indonesia to “stop the haze”, Malaysia should press for systematic sharing of satellite hotspot data, concession information, investigation results and enforcement actions. The discussion then becomes less about exchanging accusations and more about establishing responsibility.
This is where corporate accountability becomes particularly important. If Malaysian-linked companies are found responsible for fires in Indonesia, Malaysia should investigate them rather than automatically defend them.
Jakarta should be encouraged to apply the same principle to companies under its jurisdiction. A government that demonstrates accountability at home is in a much stronger position to demand it from others.
NOT A ZERO-SUM CONFRONTATION
Malaysia can also use its considerable economic and diplomatic relationship with Indonesia more constructively. The two countries have extensive trade, investment, labour and people-to-people links.
On Sep 16, Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi announced Malaysia will seek a high-level coordination mechanism with Indonesia to manage transboundary haze. He dismissed calls for Malaysia to demand compensation from Indonesia, and said preventative measures are key.
Haze diplomacy therefore need not be conducted as a zero-sum confrontation. Kuala Lumpur can offer technical cooperation, satellite information, firefighting assistance and peatland-management expertise, while expecting greater transparency and enforcement from Jakarta.
This is arguably more effective than public diplomatic pressure alone. Indonesia is unlikely to respond well to being lectured by a neighbour, but it has strong reasons of its own to reduce recurring fires.
ASEAN, meanwhile, should concentrate less on producing another expression of concern and more on making its existing mechanisms operational. Better satellite and meteorological data-sharing, rapid-response protocols, common reporting standards, concession transparency and more systematic corporate accountability would give the regional haze framework considerably more practical value.
THE REAL LESSON
Ultimately, Malaysia cannot control what happens inside Indonesia. But it can control how quickly it detects the threat, how effectively it protects its population and how effectively it mobilises ASEAN.
That is perhaps the real lesson from this year’s emergency. Malaysia needs to stop thinking of haze as an annual surprise. It is a recurring regional risk that can be forecast, prepared for and diplomatically managed.
The objective should not be to win another argument with Indonesia when the skies turn grey. It should be to make the next haze episode less severe, less disruptive and, eventually, more predictable in its consequences.
That requires both better fire-fighting at home and more persistent, evidence-based diplomacy abroad.
Oh Ei Sun is Principal Adviser at Pacific Research Center of Malaysia and Senior Fellow at Singapore Institute of International Affairs.
Source: CNA/el
Sign up for our newsletters
Get the CNA app
Stay updated with notifications for breaking news and our best stories
Get WhatsApp alerts
Join our channel for the top reads for the day on your preferred chat app
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST
Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
