Asia will miss its stormy petrel, Mahathir Mohamad, when he steps down as prime minister of Malaysia. So, if truth were told, will the west, which is nothing if not pragmatic. Despite understandable flashes of irritation at Dr Mahathir's acerbic rhetoric, western leaders did not underestimate his achievement in shaping Malaysia into one of the world's top 20 trading nations. They probably also know that his verbal vitriol often does reflect the hurts and humiliations of a wide swathe of Asian society.
No wonder western governments did not allow pique to stand in the way of doing business with someone who could deliver. The United States turned a blind eye, for instance, to the Malaysian Petronas Corporation's US$2 billion deal to develop Iran's South Pars oilfield, which fell foul of America's 1996 Helms-Burton legislation, known as the Libertad Act. The legislation called for sanctions against anyone who had dealings with the 'rogue states' of the day, Cuba and Iran topping the list. Madeleine Albright, the Clinton administration's secretary of state, explained that it would not be in America's national interest to invoke the Libertad Act against Malaysia. Obviously, the US benefited from its political and economic ties with Dr Mahathir's 22-year regime.
The other example is better known because of the furore it raised. Britain's former Conservative prime minister, Baroness Thatcher, was more than happy to negotiate a GBP417 million (HK$5.4 billion) aid package to build Malaysia's Pergau Dam, in exchange for orders for British fighter aircraft.
Clearly, the expected arms sales were attractive enough to suppress warnings that the project would destroy large areas of rainforest, threaten the habitat of rare wildlife and degrade the environment. No one would ever have been the wiser about this secret deal if a private memo had not been leaked to a British newspaper.
The actual state of bilateral relations was nowhere near as acrimonious as some of the public exchanges suggested. That might explain why Kuala Lumpur did not experience the kind of massive protests against the war in Iraq that convulsed many other Asian cities.
True, Dr Mahathir thundered against Operation Iraqi Freedom. True, too, he warned of America's double standards and global isolation, levelled accusations against Jews and complained of Muslims being under attack. But he also signed a joint counterterrorism declaration of co-operation with the US and urged members of the Organisation of Islamic Conference to quickly adopt an internationally agreed definition of terror.
In short, there is more hardheaded calculation than might be supposed on both sides of the fence. In the ultimate analysis, the west places its economic and strategic interests above lofty concepts like democracy and human rights to which it swears allegiance. Similarly, most successful Afro-Asian leaders have to take into account the cultural and political sensibilities of the lowest common denominator among their constituents.