Fight for it First!

Tourism Minister started the food fight in retaliation to claims of many things Malaysian by Indonesia. Now another way is being waged with the nation from across the Causeway. She may be the one that opens Pandora's Box but certainly be the one to bite the bullet;as Malaysia is often the talk and hardly the walk,

Truth be told,top businessmen and executives from around the world were gathered at the Ritz Carlton hotel ballroom in Singapore as early as during the 2005 Chinese New Year for a glittering award ceremony dinner. At the centre of each table was a colourful raw fish salad, known to Malaysians as “yee sang”.

"Welcome. I hope you enjoy this dish which is unique to Singapore," said the host to the excited guests as they reached for their chopsticks.

This incident is likely a common one in the city state with different types of food and illustrates what has become a contentious and possibly explosive issue of "food hijacking" between the two neighbouring countries that share a common heritage and was once a unified nation.

When Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Ng Yen Yen suggested that Malaysia promote its rich culinary heritage and claim certain dishes as its own however, it sparked off a storm of protest across the Causeway and was also condemned by some Malaysians.

The fact is, however, Singapore is already ahead in branding itself with food — chilli crabs being the most famous example as it has become synonymous with the island republic, with no Malaysian equivalent. However, chili crabs were famous in China even after the war years and found its way to the china-towns of the mighty US of A.

One incident vividly recalled by many Malaysians is when celebrity chef Anthony Bourdain made a visit to Singapore and was filmed eating Ampang yong tau foo, instantly creating an image in the minds of millions of foreigners who watch his popular show that Ampang yong tau foo is a Singapore dish.

Michael Tung, a product management and marketing executive at DiGi, one of Malaysia's most savvy marketing companies, says that it was an illustration of how Singapore benefits due to good marketing.

"Singapore did a good marketing job and we didn't," he tells The Malaysian Insider. "If other people start claiming a particular food, we lose an edge and an asset."

Tung agrees with the view that branding specific dishes will boost tourism.

"Just look at Sipadan, for example. If you don't market it, Malaysia will be known in general for nice beaches but nothing specific. Tourists won't know where to go. But Sipadan has been marketed as one of the top 10 dive sites world and it has paid off. Marketing something specific in that sense, you never fail to gain benefits," he says.

Beyond tourism, the concept of identifying a country with certain products also boosts pride and has long-term economic benefits.

A few years ago, a top Singapore businessman shared some insights with a gathering of his Malaysian counterparts in Kuala Lumpur about how the island republic was looking for ways to create something that would always be unique to the country.

"Everyone thinks of Swiss chocolate and English tea even though Switzerland does not grow cocoa and England does not grow tea," he said. "This is something you can think of doing for Malaysia."

Some companies in Singapore have apparently taken this concept to heart and attempted to sell Malaysian rambutans as "Singapore lychee".

It is also more likely for foreigners to know Singapore laksa and Singapore bee hoon but not Malaysian laksa or Malaysian prawn mee.

Tung warns however that Malaysia should execute the food campaign well and pick its fights carefully.

"Marketing is all about who shouts the loudest, the longest. If you want to do it, do it right or don't do it at all. If you want to market Ampang yong tau foo, for example, you must do it comprehensively and not half heartedly otherwise there will be no impact," he says.

“Make sure all the brochures carry it and tourist guides and hotel staff are knowledgeable about where to eat it. Select the right channels such as the Internet to promote it as that is where tourists go to do research."

He adds that the government should carefully research the origins of dishes which are being disputed or risk a backlash as what is already happening with the torrent of abuse towards Malaysia in Singapore cyberspace.

The dishes mentioned by Ng that are most passionately disputed by Singaporeans are chili crab, Hainanese chicken rice and to a lesser degree nasi lemak and bak kut teh.

Of these dishes, probably the one most widely accepted as Malaysian in origin is bak kut teh which is said to have come from Klang though Singapore has a peppery version of it.

A communications and public relations executive, Tan, tells The Malaysian Insider that he feels the whole exercise could come off "in bad taste".

"Food is all about caring and sharing. Trying to claim something as our own, it just goes against the spirit of our food culture," he says.

One way Malaysia can market its food and limit the risk of antagonism is by simply branding its dishes as a Malaysian version but without claiming exclusive rights to it, the way California, Chile, Australia and France have branded their wines.

In terms of dishes like Penang laksa and Ampang yong tau foo or Terengganu keropok lekor, it can consider the way Japan has marketed Kobe beef or France its Champagne sparkling wine. In intellectual property law, this is called geographical indications.

Done right, Malaysia could derive tourism dividends from its food, heighten national pride and yet keep relations with its neighbours intact.

But let us not shout too loud and too long without first doing our homework first. We might just find our shoe not on our feet but in our mouth!