IGP and Home Ministry – A castle very divided

Home ministry denies Musa’s ‘interference’ claim

By Yow Hong Chieh | Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 8 — The home ministry today denied it had meddled in police matters, as claimed by outgoing Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Musa Hassan yesterday.

Home ministry secretary-general Datuk Seri Mahmood Adam explained that the ministry’s involvement in weekly meetings with the police to discuss resource allocations and review case files might have given rise to such a perception.

“Sometimes the recommendations… of the Royal Malaysian Police cannot be considered by the home ministry so we are seen as interfering,” Mahmood said after witnessing Musa hand over control of the police force to Tan Sri Ismail Omar at Bukit Aman Police Headquarters here today.

Yesterday, Musa spoke out against what he saw as excessive interference by “third parties” in police business, naming the home ministry among others.

“All kinds of people interfere. People from the ministry itself, outsiders, people with vested interests like those who want to do things that are not right — they will try to interfere,” he had said.

However, he refused to comment on whether Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, with whom he is rumoured to have a strained relationship, was the person responsible for the meddling.

Following this revelation, Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers urged the top cop to lodge reports with an ombudsman, the Public Complaints Bureau and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to eradicate such problems from the police force.

Musa today appeared to have taken the suggestion to heart, maintaining that he will consider pursuing further action regarding the alleged third-party interference.

“I’ll have a look,” he said simply when asked by reporters.

However, he declined to identify individuals who may have interfered in police affairs or comment further on Mahmood’s statement.

Musa’s allegations yesterday appeared to be a repeat of comments he made about an interfering “third force” in a March interview with Mingguan Malaysia.

In it, he claimed that politicians and “certain individuals” had issued orders directly to his subordinates in contravention of Section 4 of the Police Act 1957, which states that all actions and supervision falls under the IGP.

Around the same time, reports surfaced that Musa had tendered his resignation due to differences with Hishammuddin. Musa, however, denied that he had given notice, and instead accused “some quarters” of wanting to remove him from his post.

Hishammuddin invariably gave fodder to the rumour mill when he said over a week later that he knew who would replace Musa, despite keeping mum on whether or not Musa’s contract would be extended.

The home minister finally ended speculation when he announced last Wednesday that Deputy IGP Ismail would replace Musa as the country’s new IGP come September 13. Hishammuddin added that Internal Security and Public Order Director Commissioner Datuk Hussin Ismail would be the new deputy IGP.

Mahmood today also denied that the home ministry had not informed Musa that his contract would not be renewed a third time.

He stressed that he had informed Musa verbally that his contact would not be extended a week before Hishammuddin announced the new IGP, and again on the day of the announcement itself.

Mahmood added that a formal letter of termination will be issued to Musa once the prime minister presents his recommendation to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Constitution.

——-

Musa tells police force: Don’t be ‘yes men’

By Regina Lee | Malaysiakini

Even in his last outgoing speech as the Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan fired a thinly veiled attack at the Home Ministry.

Not wanting to go down without a fight, Musa reminded his officers and men to remain steadfast despite “pressure from above and outside”.

“You must not act as ‘yes men’. Don’t be servants. If the police are made up of yes men, the entire force would rot and collapse,” he said during the handing over ceremony to the new IGP, his former deputy Ismail Omar.

“Don’t be lenient or compromise,” he said.

It is no secret that Musa has regarded the Home Ministry to be “interfering” with police work.

In his rare outburst at his final Press conference on Monday, he had named the home ministry as one of the “third parties” causing excessive interference in the police force.

“All kinds of people interfere. People from the ministry itself, outsiders and people with vested interests who want to do things that are not right,” he was reported to have said.

Don’t work in cliques

In his speech, Musa also reminded his officers not to work in cliques.

“During my time, no one knew which officers who were close to me. I never called officers to my house, nor did I go out to restaurants and dine with them.

“It made my work a lot easier this way, since I don’t have officers currying favours from me,” he said.

Earlier, he also tipped his hat to Ismail, saying that he has full trust in him.

“Ismail will work well. But he needs the support of all. I hope that after I retire, he will improve the force, and to see to the end of every plan and strategy,” he said.

“I’ve had a lot of public complaints against myself and the force because we are seen to not give th best service, or that we are untrustworthy or corrupt. But I hope that after I was appointed, we have made some improvements to the force.

“And now, I will sit outside as an observer. I used to be scrutinised and now it is Ismail’s turn.

“Don’t be involved in abuse of power, and make sure that you bathe in blood to protect this country,” he said.

Musa, 58, was a career policeman for 41 years. His contract was extended twice after he had reached retirement age, and his contract officially expires on Sept 12.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 8 September 2010, 4:20 pm and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Patrick Teoh: A still-unfulfilled Merdeka wish

By
Ding Jo-Ann
 | The Nut Graph

WHEN Malaysians hear the name Patrick Teoh, it’s a voice, and not a face, that springs to mind. Teoh had no inkling when he landed his first radio job at Redifussion 45 years ago that he would go on to become one of Malaysia’s most recognisable voices.

“People do say sometimes, ‘Patrick, your voice is still the same as I remember. I used to tune in to you and you kept me company when I was staying up late mugging for exams’,” Teoh tells The Nut Graph. “Those times are nice, being part of someone’s life when they were growing up, it’s the best part of the job.”

Other than his many years in radio broadcasting in Redifussion and Radio 4, Teoh worked as a part-time newscaster for TV3 when it first started broadcasting the news. Teoh also appeared alongside Chow Yuen-Fatt and Jodie Foster in Anna and the King in 1999, acting as a judge. He is now a full-time actor and a member of the Instant Café Theatre Company.

Teoh also writes on his blog
Niamah!!!
, where he comments, sometimes caustically, on the Malaysian political scene and public affairs in general. Teoh calls his blog an “outlet” and his small contribution in trying to combat Malaysian apathy.

The Nut Graph interviewed Teoh in Petaling Jaya on 27 July 2010.

TNG:
Where were you born and where did you grow up?

Teoh
: I was born in 1947 in Ipoh. I grew up in Ipoh. I attended St Michael’s Institution from Standard One until I finished with the School Leaving Certificate. At that time, you had to take an entrance exam to do the Higher School Certificate or A-Levels. I failed the entrance exam, that’s why I didn’t go to Form Six. So there went my mother’s dreams of her son going to university.

School was not so exciting for me. Due to my physical disability, I was not involved in sports or games. I did stuff like being president of the photographic society, debating, because that’s the one thing I could do, and elocution contests.

What are your strongest memories of the place where you grew up?

When I was growing up, we felt proud of our surroundings and country. I remember I used to swell with pride when we read geography books and they said Malaysia is the world’s biggest producer of tin or Malaysia has the best road system in Southeast Asia. Ipoh, then, had the reputation of being the cleanest town in Malaysia.

I remember seeing these road-sweepers with brooms fashioned out of bamboo. The broom would consist of two sticks of bamboo, slightly curved, with the leaves still intact and about 10 to 12 feet long. The sweepers would come twice a day to clean the streets.

I also remember that Ipoh was famous for the Chinese herbal tea stalls.

Can you trace your ancestry? How did your grandparents come to Malaya?

My paternal grandparents I did not know very well. My paternal grandfather died when I was five. He worked for the colonial government as a chief clerk in a government department. My paternal grandmother was from China. She was one of those traditional ladies who always wore black, put her hair in a bun, and had bound feet and blue shoes. My father was born here.

My maternal grandparents were both from China. My mother was born [there]. She came over to Malaya when she was 14 years old.

My maternal grandfather died before I was born. My maternal grandmother lived until she was almost 100 years old. My best memories of her would be a humongous birthday party every year during her birthday. Our family had close to 200 people, grandchildren included, who’d come back from all parts of the country to celebrate in this huge mansion they had. They were very wealthy – they owned rubber estates and were involved in tin mining.

My father and mother were both Eng Choon Hokkien.

Are there any stories you hold on to from your family?

My mother told me about her life when she was a little girl in China. Back in those days, the family hierarchy system was very strict. At any meal, none of the daughters were allowed to eat at the first sitting. That was reserved for the mother, father and male offspring. Whatever they left behind became the girls’ meals. They were also not given rice, but gruel. Or they would be given leftover rice from the previous meal, added with hot water, for bulk.

It’s not that they were treated badly by their parents, they weren’t, but that was the way it was. Of course, going to school was reserved for males. They were not allowed to go out or go to school. All my mother’s sisters were not educated, including her, except for her youngest sister, who was born here.

Are there any aspects of your identity that you struggle with as a Malaysian?

I didn’t use to have any struggles at all being a Malaysian. But nowadays, I ask myself, what does being a Malaysian actually mean? I never had that problem before.

Until 15 or 16 years ago, I was a staunch supporter of the New Economic Policy (NEP) and the Barisan Nasional government. I had no problems with bumiputera status. I thought, simplistically and naively, I suppose, that being a citizen of a country with rich and poor, those richer have a duty towards those poorer. The NEP as a concept was very noble. It was supposed to lift people up to an average level.

But about 15 years ago or so, my feelings changed. Like many other Malaysians, I begin to see so much abuse. The NEP is not doing what I feel it should do; it’s not benefiting anyone that it should. We’re still the same as we were. And there’s this growing sense that I’m being asked to contribute more and get less.

Sure, we’re called pendatang, [by] clowns [who] say this. But after a while, you begin to feel that maybe it’s not just the clowns who are saying this, maybe it’s the government of the day who is also beginning to feel that way. Maybe it’s the government that actually wants people to believe that.

Describe the kind of Malaysia you’d like for yourself and for future generations.

We’re not that difficult a country to handle if only the politicians would stop politicising everything. We are blessed [with] so many resources, we should have built paradise on earth by now. Why is it that we are still the way we are? There is still abject poverty, there’s a wide gap between the middle class and the poor growing every day. We have an education system that does not work, and a public transport system that’s a joke. Why?

We have everything to make everybody have a very comfortable life. We only have 28 million people. For years and years, we’ve had Petronas making billions, pumping oil like crazy, where’s that money gone to? Without being an economist, you would know that with the money Malaysia generates from its resources – palm oil, petroleum, tin – we are more than capable of building a wonderful country where everybody can partake of the fruits of the resources. So, it must be the management of the country that’s at fault, not the people.

We need to go back to the basics. [Take the film-making industry.] Like in so many other things, Malaysia was the leading film-making country in Southeast Asia not so many years ago, [surpassing Thailand and Singapore]. We were exporting our people to the Middle East, Hong Kong, Taiwan. Now, less than 20 years later, Thailand has a booming movie industry which is becoming recognised globally. Singapore is also the same. Where is Malaysia?

The Thai and Singaporean governments recognised the film-making industry’s role in bringing in foreign investment and technology transfer to the local industry. They actively backed the film industry in Thailand and Singapore. In Malaysia, the government talked about it and never did anything about it.

What is your Merdeka wish this year?

My Merdeka wish is one that I’ve made for more than 20 years, and which still hasn’t come true. That we will be one bangsa Malaysia, instead of always having to be defined as Chinese, Indian, Malay, lain-lain, Muslim, non-Muslim.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 8 September 2010, 3:00 pm and is filed under
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #31

By
M. Bakri Musa

Chapter 4:      Modern Model States

The Relevant Lessons For Malaysia  (Cont’d)

Moving on to South Korea, it is an example of what sheer determination, discipline, and an obsession with learning and education could do for a nation.  When General Park took over, he whipped the nation into strict discipline and regimentation, with a single-minded purpose of economic growth and competitiveness.  Being an ethnically and culturally homogeneous society, Park was able to ramrod through many changes without giving rise to sectarian dissatisfaction.  In Malaysia, with its racial diversity, any political or social initiative inevitably would be analyzed into which race would benefit more and which group would lose.  This invariably leads to the politics of envy and resentment.  No such problems arose in South Korea.

             As Korean society changed however, Park remained the same.  Pursuing the army analogy, even though his initial recruits were now disciplined and accomplished officers, Park still treated them as if they were still a bunch of raw recruits.  The Koreans expected greater political and personal freedom commensurate with their economic gains, but the military-backed Park and his successors still persisted with their authoritarian mindset.

             The initial cohesiveness soon began to unravel when ordinary Koreans began looking on the tycoons much like they viewed their ancient warlords.  Indeed these new captains of industry treated their workers much like the ancient warlords treated the peasants, with contempt and as cogs in their companies’ wheels.  Thus despite its racial homogeneity, the Koreans soon developed fissures along class and social lines.

             South Korea recovered from the Asian contagion rather quickly.  The election of a reformist and populist-minded non-military leader, Kim Dae Jung, helped immensely.  The fast recovery was also attributed to Koreans being extremely well educated and technologically savvy.  Their stock of human capital was unaffected by the economic crisis.

             South Korea also serves as a ready example that ethnic and cultural homogeneity does not guarantee a society from being polarized and divided.  When poor, hard working workers see affluent Koreans luxuriating, these underpaid peons do not feel any reflected glory.  As a consequence South Korea had tremendous difficulty implementing the measures recommended by the IMF in response to the 1997 economic crisis.  Much-needed reforms were greeted with bloody street riots and ugly demonstrations.  By contrast in Malaysia, despite the racial and cultural diversity of its population, similar reforms were greeted with remarkably less divisions and acrimony.

            Like Malaysia, South Korea benefited immensely through its commitment to foreign trade and free enterprise.  Both nations have heavy state involvement in the private sector and with it, the inevitable evils of cronyism and corruption.  Thus far in Malaysia there has been no major scandals exposed comparable to the Korean variety but this is because they have yet to be uncovered.  (Author’s note:  This book was published in 2003.  As can be seen, since then we have had far too many instances of mega financial shenanigans!  MBM]

             Malaysia does not lack for financial shenanigans; they just do not evoke the same public outrage as in Korea.  I can name a few: the London tin scandal, the Bank Bumiputra fiasco, and Bank Negara’s foreign exchange debacle.  List such scandals and Malaysians just yawn. “What else is new?” seems to be the jaded response.

             Argentina, like Malaysia, guards its rich natural resources and considers foreign investments in those sectors as exploitation.  This love-hate relationship with foreigners is typical of most Third World nations.  They consider multinational companies as exploiters or worse, new colonizers – echoes of the dependencia mentality.  Unfortunately these sentiments arise just as competition for foreign investments are heating up.  There are now hosts of new nations from the break up of the former Soviet empire all eager for foreign investments.  Malaysia now has to compete with the likes of Turkestan and Belarus.  China is also now discovering the wonders of free market and is enticing eager foreign investors.

             China is a formidable competitor for two reasons.  One, the Chinese are willing to work for even less money than Malaysians.  China is also using forced prison labor.  Try competing with that!  Two, China’s domestic market dwarfs everyone else, a major attraction to any investor.

             Of the three countries, only Ireland has a tradition of democratic rule.  South Korea and Argentina have seen their series of military rulers; only recently have they adopted truly free elections.  Unlike Argentina and South Korea, Malaysia is fortunate in having a professional military that shows little inclination to meddle in the affairs of state.

             The most obvious common element between Ireland and Korea is their serious commitment to education, which overrides everything else.  The only enduring value a nation has is the quality of its people.  And with greater mobility of labor and ease of migration with globalization, that advantage too could easily disappear.  Note the number of talented Indians and Chinese residing outside of their native land.  Both countries would rapidly leap into First World status if they could only attract their own talented nationals back home.

             The examples of these three contemporary societies, together with the three from the past explored in the preceding chapter, provide useful lessons for Malaysia as it faces the challenges of globalization.  The rest of this book (Part Two, Chapter Six and beyond) will examine some of the strategies that Malaysia could usefully adopt to fully benefit from globalization.  Before that however, I will discuss what globalization is all about.  This will be the focus of the next chapter.

 Next:   Chapter 5:  Understanding Globalization

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 9 September 2010, 9:48 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
globalisation
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysian universities falling out of top 200 universities in QS World University Rankings 2010 latest proof that Najib’s NEM are just empty words lacking political will and leadership necessary to effect Malaysia’s economic transformation

Malaysian universities have again fallen out of the top 200 universities in the latest QS World University Rankings 2010, with University of Malaya falling from last year’s ranking of 180 to 207.

This is the latest proof that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s New Economic Model are just empty words lacking the political will and leadership necessary to effect Malaysia’s economic transformation to escape the decades-long “middle-income trap” to become a inclusive and sustainable high-income developed country by 2020.

The Najib premiership is fast developing a split personality – plugging the NEM for international consumption with its recognition of human talents as the most valuable national assets in the era of globalization while ignoring NEM  locally for fear of evoking extremist opposition to its proposals on new affirmative policies based on meritocracy and needs.

During the Sibu by-election in May this year, I had referred to the latest QS Asian University Rankings 2010 where the country’s premier institution of higher education, University of Malaya had dropped two places to 41st this year from 39 last year while Universiti Sains Malaysia, which was granted Apex status in 2008 only managed to maintain its ranking at 69, and lamented Malaysia becoming the “sick man of South-East Asia”-
with a decade of economic stagnation and national decline in all aspects of national life, whether educational excellence, good governance, institutional professionalism, human rights or environmental protection.

The warning by NEM, crafted by a panel of local and foreign experts that  “We must act now before our position deteriorates any further” had failed to make any impact or impression whatsoever as far as the government leadership is concerned.

I have today received an email from a post-graduate student in University of Malaya expressing his concern at my lamentation.

The email reads:

I’m a postgrad student in University of Malaya.

Prof Ghauth Jasmon was appointed as a Vice Chancellor of UM two years ago with a great vision to make this university a world class university. Being the vice chancellor of the oldest university in this country which is also well known of producing many great and famous leaders, is a heavy burden.

I completed my bachelor degree in this university and registered my PhD right after that which was in the same year Prof Ghauth Jasmon was appointed as the VC of the university.

In that time, I had witnessed a great change and improvement he had implemented in this university in a goal to improve quality and the world ranking of the university.

Prof Jasmon is a meritocracy oriented academician and he has opened up a vast opportunity to many lecturers and famous researcher to join this university regardless of their ethnicity, complexion or religion.

A series of good but strict rules and policies had been made to achieve the goal. In the eyes of some profs, academic and admin staffs who used to live an easy life, appointment of Prof Jasmon as VC has become a nightmare to them. Thus, some resistance force has arisen and stood against his way but yet he is still standing firmly and continue doing his job to make this university a better university.

I notice there is a drop of ranking of UM this year but the ranking is disputed and it cannot be fully used as a reference in judging the quality of the university.

I support Prof Ghauth Jasmon and I think he deserves more support from the government and all the political parties in this country to achieve the goal.

I hope DAP can go easy on the drop of the ranking of local universities this year.

In fact, compliment and credits should be given to him for all his hardwork in improving the university in terms of increment in number of publications and number of academic staff.

If this post-graduate student is right, and I know many who have the interests of University of Malaya and the nation at heart share this view, it only means that University of Malaya would not have just plunged 27 rankings but probably double the drop if not for Professor Ghauth Jasmon at the helm of University of Malaya.

This is indeed serious food for thought.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 9 September 2010, 10:12 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
NEM
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Not too late to suspend Musa Hassan as IGP with his honourable discharge subject to full investigations into his dereliction of duties and serious allegations of corruption and abuses of power against him

A war of words have broken out between the outgoing Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan one the one hand and the Ministry of Home Affairs represented by the Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein and the Home Ministry Secretary-General Datuk Seri Mahmood Adam on the other.

Since Hishammuddin’s announcement that there will not be another extension as IGP for him, Musa has been hitting out at “excessive interference from third parties” against the police force, zeroing in particular on the Home Ministry.

Yesterday, he told police officers and personnel not to be “yes men” or the entire force would “rot and collapse”.

It would appear that Musa was content to be a “yes man” to the political “powers-that-be”  so long as he  continues to be IGP, which was why the police under his leadership reached the bottom of its “rot and collapse” of public confidence and support in the history of the Malaysian police force, despite the blueprint formulated by the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission in 2005 to restore plummeting public confidence by transforming itself into an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service.

Musa  was the foremost antagonist to the full acceptance and implementation of the recommendations of the Police Royal Commission of Inquiry– particularly the key proposal for the establishment of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) – at one stage even threatening police revolt against the elected government of the day.

Musa has now confessed that there was “excessive interference by “third parties”, naming the Home Ministry, outsiders and people with vested interest “who want to do things that are not right”, in the work of the police.

Musa failed in his duties as IGP when  he did not lodge official reports to initiate investigations to halt such “excessive interference” with the police.

As Musa’s term as IGP will not expire until Sept. 13, it is not too late for him to be suspended as IGP with his honourable discharge subject to full investigations into his dereliction of duties as IGP as well as serious allegations of corruption and abuses of power  which have been against him.

The ball is in the court of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Hishammuddin.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 9 September 2010, 9:55 am and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Salam Aidilfitri

Let us celebrate this Syawal together as Malaysians regardless of race and religion.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 September 2010, 11:27 am and is filed under
Announcement
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


To Modernize, Can Malaysia Move Beyond Race?

Time

Sunday, Sep. 05, 2010

By Michael Schuman / Kuala Lumpur

Malaysia is that rare country with an unequivocal national narrative. It goes something like this: Malaysia’s 28 million people, comprising mainly Malays, Chinese and Indians, make up a moderate and modern emerging democracy. Unlike members of other multiethnic countries, they respect one another’s beliefs and values and share a commitment to achieving prosperity. The official religion is Islam, but other faiths are freely allowed and celebrated. This is one harmonious place.

Much of that narrative is true — but not all of it. Malaysia’s economic miracle has stalled, and while the nation is, indeed, somewhat pluralistic, it is no melting pot. Indeed, it is a society where people define themselves first and foremost by race.

The country’s political leadership has in some respects reinforced those ethnic identities. For the past 40 years, policymakers have doled out special privileges — in education and business — to one community: the majority Malays. The program is one of modern history’s greatest experiments in social engineering and possibly the world’s most extensive attempt at affirmative action. But the policies have also bred resentment among minorities, distorted the economy and undermined the concept of a single Malaysian identity.

Now a movement is gaining strength to finally change the system — and it’s coming from the very top. Prime Minister Najib Razak, 57, has surprised the country by advocating a fundamental reform of the pro-Malay program first introduced, ironically, by his father, who was Malaysia’s Prime Minister in the 1970s. Though the specifics of the new policies remain hazy, Najib’s intent is not. “I want Malaysia to be globally competitive,” he told TIME in an exclusive interview. “For that, we need to get every single Malaysian to be together.”

Najib’s proposals have simultaneously raised hopes, ire and fear. The mere idea of changing the affirmative-action system has reopened old wounds in Malaysian society and reactivated the long-running debate on how best to fuse Malays, Chinese and Indians into one nation. The direction Malaysia takes, moreover, has repercussions beyond its shores. The issues raised by Najib’s proposals are relevant to any upwardly mobile developing economy, especially a multicultural one: how to increase wealth and do so equitably.

In confronting these sensitive challenges, Najib is taking enormous political risks. The primary base of electoral support for Najib’s political party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), is the Malay community, and altering decades-old perquisites could cause voters to defect to the opposition. But Najib believes he has little choice. If Malaysia’s economy is to compete with China, India and other rapidly emerging neighbors, Najib sees no other route but reform. “The competition is much greater and some would describe it even as cutthroat,” Najib says. “There is a realization that what has worked in the past may not necessarily work in the future.”

The Malay Card

Najib is facing the same dilemma his predecessors have since the earliest days of Malaysian independence: balancing the perceived needs of the Malays, both political and economic, with those of the country as a whole. At the heart of the problem is the reverse-pyramid shape of the Malaysian economy. Though the Malays and other indigenous peoples, together known as bumiputra in Malay, make up about 60% of the population, they have traditionally been poorer than the Chinese and Indian immigrants, who have long dominated the nation’s business and trade. After Kuala Lumpur was struck by race riots in 1969, a shaken leadership determined that communal peace was impossible without economic balance. The result was the New Economic Policy (NEP), introduced in 1971, which aimed to raise the Malays’ share of the economic pie. Malays were given preferential access to public contracts and university scholarships. Any company listing on the stock market had to sell 30% of its shares to bumiputra investors. Though some measures have been softened or eliminated over the past two decades, many pro-Malay privileges remain. Certain government contracts are available only to bumiputra-controlled firms, for example. Malays even receive special discounts on home purchases. The affirmative-action program has become so ingrained in the Malaysian psyche that it is akin to a national ideology.

It is also controversial. Critics contend that the pro-Malay program too often benefits the connected few over its intended targets: the poor and struggling. All car-import permits, for example, are awarded to bumiputra-controlled firms, a policy intended to foster entrepreneurs in the community. But government audits have revealed that Malay businessmen with access to the permits sometimes sell them to minority traders who don’t — at an instant profit. (The Ministry of Trade and Industry, recognizing the problem, says it will phase out the permit system by 2020.) “Unfortunately, as [the NEP] was implemented over time, some of the zealots, politicians and bureaucrats included, tended to become more racial and emphasized more on the people who have relationships with them,” says Razaleigh Hamzah, an UMNO dignitary and former Finance Minister. “That’s where it went wrong.”

Despite four decades of special aid, 3 in 4 of the poorest people in Malaysia are still bumiputra. Adli Ahmad Ghazi, the Malay co-owner of Malaysian Defensive Driving & Riding, a 70-employee driving school in Kuala Lumpur, complains that the pro-Malay policies do little to help a small businessman like himself. In 2008, Adli tried to get financing from three agencies tasked with supporting Malay businessmen or small enterprises, but got rejected. When he has to deal with the bureaucracy, Adli says, he faces the same red tape as any other businessman. It took him two years to buy a parcel of land for his company from the local government. “The [NEP] rules don’t really apply to people on the ground,” Adli says. “They say the NEP would help the Malays, but it only helps a small percentage of the Malays.”

Comfort Zone

Affirmative action may not be helping the overall Malaysian economy either. Though Malaysia has been among the best-performing economies in the world since World War II and boasts a spectacular record of improving human welfare — the percentage of the population living in absolute poverty has plummeted from 50% in 1970 to less than 4% today — the story is now stuck on the same chapter. Malaysia has fallen into what is called the “middle-income trap.” Having elevated itself to a comfortable level of income, Malaysia has been unable to take that next leap into the realm of advanced economies. While growth has slowed, Malaysians have watched other fast-paced Asian rivals zip by. In 1970, the gross national income per capita of South Korea, at $260, was below Malaysia’s $380, but by 2009, South Korea’s was almost three times larger, at $19,830 vs. $7,230, according to the World Bank.

Malaysia’s struggles reflect those facing Southeast Asia as a whole. The region’s economies once seemed among the world’s most promising emerging markets, but in recent years, progress in almost all of them has been stymied by upheaval and poor governance. Thailand remains rudderless as its fragile democracy has degenerated into perpetual factional strife. The promise of the Philippines remains unrealized as its feeble government has continually failed to enact the tough reforms needed to turn around the underperforming economy. Indonesia is only now returning to its place as one of the world’s premier emerging economies after a decade of political uncertainty scared off foreign investors.

If it is able to change its economic system, Malaysia could show its neighbors the way forward. Malaysia’s essential problem is that its growth model — export-oriented manufacturing, often by foreign-invested factories — has become mismatched with its needs. Malaysia must become more innovative if its rapid development is to continue. But that’s not happening. Private investment has fallen from a third of GDP in the mid-1990s to only about 10% today, labor-productivity growth has slowed, and R&D spending remains anemic. Instead of developing new products with highly skilled technicians, Malaysia’s manufacturing sector still too often assembles goods designed by others, using imported technology and low-skilled foreign workers. “There is a growing realization that Malaysia’s relative position compared to other countries that are catching up very quickly is not improving,” says Philip Schellekens, a senior economist at the World Bank. “Relative to where they want to be, there is still a long road.

Though it would be incorrect to blame the pro-Malay policies for the economy’s woes — Malaysia did, once, achieve remarkable rates of growth with the perquisites in place — they are nevertheless dampening business sentiment, scaring off talent, curtailing investment and stifling domestic competition. Chua Tiam Wee, president of the SMI Association of Malaysia, a small-enterprise organization, believes relaxing the NEP preferences would create a more level playing field on which the most capable firms could advance, making the economy more merit-based and upgrading Malaysian industry. The affirmative-action policy is “a source of a lot of distortions to the economic system,” Chua says. By limiting the opportunities available to minorities, the NEP is likely contributing to a brain drain, in which some of the country’s most talented people choose to work elsewhere. The government estimates that more than half of the 350,000 Malaysians working abroad have a college education. Stéphane Garelli, director of the World Competitiveness Center at IMD, a business school in Switzerland, believes that the affirmative-action regulations have made Malaysia less attractive to foreign investors. Malaysia’s “bargaining power to put such restrictions on foreign investors is not as big as other nations’,” he says.

Chinese and Indian entrepreneurs in Malaysia certainly believe the pro-Malay policies cap their business opportunities. Pardip Kumar Kukreja, the Malaysian-Indian chairman of Grand Paradise Holdings, a Kuala Lumpur — based firm that manages and owns hotels and operates travel agencies, laments that he can’t get access to lucrative contracts providing travel services to the government due to regulations that favor Malay-owned enterprises. Removing such restrictions, he says, can act as an incentive to invest. Kukreja recently decided to launch an Internet-based business to sell travel services worldwide because Najib’s administration liberalized affirmative-action rules for the tourism sector last year. “There are many things we’d like to do, which we hope we’ll be able to do in the near future,” he says. “To a small and medium entrepreneur, he wants to make his own decisions.”

New and Untested

Najib is convinced the old ways must go. The centerpiece of his economic reform program, introduced in March, is called the New Economic Model (NEM). The plan envisions reducing red tape to encourage more private investment and internal competition, decreasing the state role in the economy and improving the education system to produce more skilled workers. “For us to move up a few notches, we have to address the structural problems,” Najib says. “We cannot be in denial.” Most of all, the NEM also proposes a major reform of affirmative-action policies to phase out remaining racial quotas and focus efforts on uplifting the poorest 40% of the population — irrespective of race. Says Najib: “I don’t want anyone to feel that they’ve been left out or marginalized.”

There are urgent political reasons he feels that way. UMNO, which has ruled Malaysia in coalition since its independence from Britain in 1957, lost ground to opposition parties in a hotly contested 2008 general election, and Najib is faced with the daunting prospect of expanding UMNO’s political base outside its core Malay constituency. The NEM is an effort by Najib to turn stodgy UMNO into the party of change and outmaneuver its rivals. Some powerful voices within UMNO are egging on Najib to push his reforms. “We have to be bold and brave to ensure [our] long-term competitiveness,” says Khairy Jamaluddin, an UMNO member of Parliament.

Yet Najib has also come under pressure from conservative elements in the Malay community to hold back. “The bumiputra are still lagging behind,” complains Ibrahim Ali, president of Malay nationalist organization Perkasa. “If the economy is not balanced, then everything will lead to trouble.” As a result, Najib doesn’t have full support from an UMNO worried about scaring off Malay voters. Najib’s reform program “is a tough sell within the party,” admits Khairy. “There will be people who resist the changes.”

The split in UMNO reflects the greater divide within the Malay community over the future of affirmative action. Some Malays believe that they still don’t possess the skills and resources to contend against Chinese businessmen, making continued affirmative-action policies indispensable. The program “should stay in place and improve,” says Rizal Faris, president of the Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce. “What [officials] want to achieve is a level playing field where all parties are able to compete on their merits, but we need to ensure that the Malay community has been sufficiently skilled and pulled up.” But others believe the time has come for Malays to step up and compete on their own, without special government aid. Akmal Syahirah, a 21-year-old law student at the University of Malaya, says that affirmative action should be eliminated, even though her family has greatly benefited from it in the past. Her father acquired land to produce palm oil through a pro-Malay development scheme, and her three younger sisters received tuition for extra after-school studies. But now, “I think we need to change,” she says. “We can’t just let Malays stay in their comfort zone.”

Balancing Act

Faced with such contending forces, Najib is trying to please everybody. Affirmative action won’t be eliminated entirely under the NEM, but altered to weed out abusive practices, target money where it is most needed and support the most worthy Malay businessmen, all the while trying to open up opportunities for minorities. Najib sees no contradiction in such a strategy. “Affirmative action remains in place, but the way it is carried out would be different,” he says. “When it comes to helping the poor and the vulnerable groups, it should be irrespective of race. But there are certain affirmative actions which are still necessary, because the bumiputra are still very much behind and they must be helped. We want to help those bumiputra who are potential winners.”

Even as he faces the daunting task of reforming Malaysia, Najib must deal with the domestic and international fallout from the divisive trial of Anwar Ibrahim, the opposition’s most prominent leader. In 2008, only months after the opposition’s electoral success, Anwar was charged with sodomy, a serious crime in Malaysia. The trial has a déjà vu flavor. Anwar was convicted of sodomy in 2000 (and abuse of power a year earlier), but the ruling was overturned in 2004 and he was freed after six years in prison. Anwar has pleaded not guilty to the latest charge and attacked his trial as a politically motivated attempt to discredit the opposition. The government denies that, saying the courts have a duty to conduct a fair trial. Yet the case has tainted Najib’s administration. In a joint essay in the Wall Street Journal, former U.S. Vice President Al Gore and former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz wrote that Anwar’s trial threatens “all those in Malaysia who have struggled for a freer and more democratic nation.”

The biggest test for Najib still awaits. All eyes are watching for the detailed policy prescriptions of Najib’s NEM, which could be released in October. Some Malaysia experts expect the final package to be underwhelming. Najib “doesn’t have the strength to follow through, whether politically or personally,” says John Malott, a former U.S. ambassador to Malaysia. “He’s not a transformational figure.” Najib insists his critics underestimate him. “I want to transform Malaysia,” Najib says. “I want Malaysia to be a 21st century nation and I am determined to do that.” Malaysia’s future — and new narrative — depends on it.

The article originally appears in the September 6, 2010 issue of TIME Asia magazine.

— with reporting by Liz Gooch And M. Krishnamoorthy / Kuala Lumpur

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 11 September 2010, 2:58 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
NEM
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Umno and the average Malay

By
Cheong Suk-Wai
, Senior Writer

The Straits Times
, June 1, 2010

TABLE TALK WITH MAZNAH MOHAMAD

IT USED to be that whenever it came to election time in Malaysia, the country’s ruling party Umno would gets its community development workers to fan out to all the hamlets on bicycles and on foot to take the political temperature and assure villagers that Umno was the best doctor for them, taking care of their births, deaths and everything in between. But then village youth began migrating en masse to towns from the 1980s and Umno lost these rural forts.

Malaysian sociologist Maznah Mohamad recalls Umno’s women telling her how urban folk would shoo them away and even hurl insults at them if they tried to woo them. Dr Maznah, 54, notes wryly: ‘You can’t go knocking on doors in, say, Subang Jaya. People will just chase you away. There’s no community spirit in such neighbourhoods. Anyway, they’re urbanised, so why would they need you to help them?’

An alumna of Macalester College, Stanford University and the University of Malaya, Dr Maznah knows a lot about such matters, having studied Malays in general, and Umno in particular, in her 27 years as a don in Penang’s Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM).

She retired from USM in 2006, and has since been a visiting senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore’s Asia Research Institute. Her husband, Dr Johan Savaranamuttu, is a visiting senior research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies here. They have two children.

She spoke to The Straits Times recently about her country’s New Economic Model (NEM) and where Umno stands today:

Who is the average Malaysian Malay today?

He is male, Muslim and has an excess of rights and privileges without too much responsibility, for he benefits from what I call a vulgarised affirmative action policy formally known as the New Economic Policy (NEP).

Why ‘vulgarised’?

Simply because it has veered from its original aim and has metamorphosed into a scheme that equalises rewards rather than opportunities… After a while, even a conscious policy like that is not necessary because it assumes its own dynamics – like people from the same ethnic group drawing their own (into workplaces), so you don’t even need racial quotas… But it is difficult to undo a policy that’s so entrenched.

So life is good for the average Malaysian Malay?

Besides NEP rights, Malaysia’s Islamic laws today are biased towards male rights, such as polygamy and the unilateral right to divorce. Even Jakim, the Department of Islamic Development, has had to set up a RM15 million (S$6.4 million) fund to assist single mothers who have not received maintenance from their children’s fathers. This is not good because the state picks up after these errant males… The average Malay male is treated with kid gloves.

Why so?

Well, there’s really a lot of disjuncture in the system. The (average Malay) has all these rights and privileges, but for a Muslim man who’s poor, that’s where the problem starts: Psychologically, he might think that he’s powerful and head of the household but, realistically, he’s not able to maintain it… That’s why you find many among them just leaving the family. You also have Muslim wives who earn a lot more than their husbands, yet are forced to be obedient and subservient. There is this whole entrenchment of a kind of politics and culture that does not actually assess (Malays) realistically.

So what is Umno’s attraction to them these days?

The attraction in joining Umno today is still that it’s a sure ticket to a plum appointment or business contract because there isn’t anything idealistic in Umno today. Sixty years ago, it was about wanting to help the Malays but that is not so today because Malay rights and privileges are already guaranteed in the Constitution… If Umno pays you RM300 a month to deliver letters to its branches, that’s enough to pay, say, the loan on your motorcycle. So Umno is more like a job than a party at the end of the day.

Which begs the question: Who wouldn’t want to join it?

Well, those who don’t need to, don’t have to, right? Also, those who join the opposition Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS) have an idealism that has trumped even material benefits.

That puts Umno in quite a spot, surely?

Exactly. Umno’s lifeblood has been helping the Malays get to a certain level. So if the Malays are backward and not able to catch up, Umno would then be forever relevant… But now, what other language can Umno use?

So why are its leaders saying the NEM must replace the NEP?

In a way, it’s the right moment to do so because, on the one hand, Prime Minister Najib Razak isn’t exactly all that strong because he hasn’t gone through the baptism of elections and was endorsed by Umno when it was at its weakest. On the other hand, you have a growing Malay middle class that is clamouring for reform. This convergence of the weak and the strong makes Malaysia ripe for the NEM.

Having said that, it’s a misnomer to call the NEM a model. It’s really just a government wish list. Nevertheless, it’s going to provide a platform for some very important talking points.

How fresh are these points?

There are three which have not been stated explicitly before: The first links corruption to the faltering economy; before, corruption was there but it wasn’t considered a moral evil… But now the NEM has made that connection, albeit with the fancy-sounding term ‘rent-seeking in economic practices’. The second is trying to get rid of affirmative action, using the code phrase ‘affirmative action that is friendly to market policy’ – which is an oxymoron, right? The third – and this is very important – is how they’re going to stimulate the economy by bringing back ‘talented Malaysians’ which, again, is a code phrase for non-Malays… I don’t know if that’s possible under the present circumstances, but at least they’ve identified that as what they’ve to do. So let’s give them the benefit of the doubt.

These three things are good because a good policy has something which people desire commonly. So the NEP was very successful because it was made out to be something that could prevent future ethnic conflicts and also eradicate poverty – and who could quarrel with that?

But hasn’t the NEP rendered Malaysians uncompetitive?

Yes, but it never hurt the economy – until now – and so Umno became complacent and mixed up short-term necessities with long-term realities.

Can Umno change?

The only way it can change is if it loses… That’s because nothing has changed in Umno, not even its rhetoric. Has money politics changed? No. Histrionics? No. Keris-waving? No.

Is this Umno’s darkest period yet?

There are two ways of looking at it. If you view it in terms of election performance, Umno did very badly in 2008. But if you’re looking at Umno versus PAS, Umno is still ahead of PAS by a long shot. In Umno’s worst years, 1969 and 2008, it won 35 per cent of the parliamentary seats. PAS’ best year was 1999, when it won just 14 per cent of the parliamentary seats. See the gap?

So who or what is Umno’s biggest threat now?

Fence-sitters. The 2008 election was really about them; a lot of seats were won very narrowly and that was when the fence-sitters mattered.

Hard talk

SOCIOLOGIST Maznah Mohamad is an avowed feminist known for her incisive and perceptive views. Here she is on:

What the average Malaysian Malay wants out of life

‘Nothing much, really – well, except maybe pride and dignity – because he has too many rights and privileges but too few responsibilities.’

Malays and affirmative action

‘Many Malays increasingly do not feel comfortable about continually receiving handouts – unless they have political ambitions, then it’s tied to that.’

How she feels about being Malay

‘In Malaysia, it is about being inadequate culturally; in Singapore, it is about being inadequate professionally. So Malays like me feel neither here nor there.’

How she lives with that

‘Actually, I’m quite comfortable because it’s good to be in a category where you’re able to confuse people.’

1Malaysia

‘Umno doesn’t want to promote a Malaysian Malaysia because that’s associated with the People’s Action Party. And then you have this peach of a slogan which means the same thing.’

The ruling coalition

‘They’re pandering to race and religion and people don’t need that. They need good food, good jobs, good education, good transport and good health.’

Former Malaysian premier Mahathir Mohamad

‘He was neither maverick nor Machiavellian; he was actually mainstream. He did bring radical change with Vision 2020 and he tried to create a Bangsa Malaysia. But he wasn’t forceful enough…and instead perpetuated race-based politics.’

The opposition Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)

‘Many of its members were from Umno and so expected the same gravy train to come their way. But they’ve waited and waited and PKR is still not the government, so you can expect them to leave it.’

Malaysia’s future

‘We can still go out for hawker food; it doesn’t matter that the buildings are falling apart.’

——-

Dr Maznah Mohamad – PROFILE

Dr Maznah Mohamad joined Asian Research Institute (ARI) of the National University of Singapore (NUS) as a Visiting Senior Research Fellow in 2006. Concurrently, she is a Visiting Senior Fellow at the Southeast Asian Studies Programme, NUS.

Before joining ARI, she taught at the Universiti Sains Malaysia and also held a visiting chair appointment (ASEAN and International Studies) at the Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto.

Dr Mohamad obtained her Ph.D. in Southeast Asian Studies at the University of Malaya and her M.A. in International Development Education at Stanford University. She also holds a Bachelors degree in Sociology (cum laude) from Macalester College.

Maznah’s publications include, The Malay Handloom Weavers: A Study of the Rise and Decline of Traditional Manufacture (ISEAS, 1996); Risking Malaysia: Culture, Politics and Identity (co-edited, Penerbit UKM, 2001) and Feminism and the Women’s Movement in Malaysia (co-authored, Routledge, 2006). She has also published articles on Malaysian politics, Islam, democracy and human rights.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 12 September 2010, 10:45 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
NEM
,
NEP
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Competitiveness Not Unity Basis for Strength

By
M. Bakri Musa

Hardly a day goes by without Malay leaders of all persuasions lamenting our lack of unity.  If only we are united, they earnestly assure us, we could take on the world!

            I respectfully disagree; their conviction is misplaced.  The force that would make Malays strong is not unity rather competitiveness.  If we are competitive, then our place in Tanah Melayu (Malay Land) or even Dunia Allah (God’s World) would be assured.  If we are not, then we would forever have to be indulged with such silly fantasies as Ketuanan Melayu (Malay Hegemony).  We would perpetually have to pin our hopes on such political amulets as Article 153 of our constitution (guaranteeing our special status).

            Our leaders’ quixotic quest for “unity” is not only misplaced but also distracting.  It distracts from the pressing challenge of making us competitive.

             These leaders’ obsession with unity is misguided for another reason.  They take unity to mean unanimity.  To them we are not united unless we parrot their views.  Any disagreement is an expression of “disunity.”  They prefer us to be like a flock of sheep.

             They would like us to believe that their leadership is of the shepherd leading the flock from one lush meadow to the next, ensuring that no one is left behind or be preyed upon.  J.S. Bach’s cantata Sheep May Safely Graze (BWV 208) is a beautiful rendition of this benign biblical imagery of the pastoral ideal.

             Unfortunately, the harsh reality is that far too many of our leaders today are sly foxes cloaked in shepherd’s clothing.  Instead of tending to us, they would be the first to prey upon us.  Instead of protecting us from the elements, these “shepherds” would ensure that they have their istana kayangan (fantasy palaces) first, and if there were the odd lumber pieces left over, only then could the flock hope to have a wall to their shed.

             We have nine sultans, all fabulously wealthy luxuriating in their Shangri la palaces at taxpayers’ expense; likewise our political leaders, as obscenely exemplified by former Selangor Chief Minister Khir Toyo and Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi.  I challenge anyone to name a charitable foundation funded by any of them.

             These are the leaders who are forever exhorting us towards “unity.”  It is a unity to serve their purpose, not ours.

Strong Pillars of Society

 This quest for unity is foolish for yet a third reason.  A collection of weak twigs no matter how tightly bound (“united”) will never make a strong pillar.  Likewise, a community will never be strong no matter how united its members are if individually they are weak.

             A strong pillar requires top quality cement and steel re-bars.  If the cement is corrupted with too much dirt, the pillar will not be strong or enduring; likewise if the re-bars have been weakened by corrosion.

            The sturdy pillars of a community require citizens (cement) of high quality (productive) and leaders (re-bars) of uncompromising integrity (uncorrupted).  Endlessly exhorting for “unity” would be a poor substitute for either.

            History is replete with examples of societies once destined to perpetual servitude today commanding great respect.  We can learn from them; there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

            The Koreans, long colonized and brutalized by the Japanese, are today besting their former masters.  Yes, the Koreans do occasionally pay homage to their patriotic passion for unity with their brethren to the north.  Likewise the Irish; occasionally they too would stir up their republican nationalism with calls for unity with their compatriots in Northern Ireland.  However, after the rousing speeches, patriotic singing, and exuberant flag waving they would be back hard at work on matters that really count – being economically productive.

            The elements contributing to the strength of a society are its social, human, and financial capitals, in that order.  Focus on these three and forego the illusory quest for unity.  Besides, unity is more likely to be achieved once we are prosperous; then we would more likely be generous not only materially but also in our views and attitudes.

           We can borrow financial capital, and to some extent human capital, through liberal immigration policies a la America, but not social capital; hence the order of importance.

             Developing financial capital means we must save more and forego current consumption.  Additionally, we must have efficient intermediaries to connect owners of capital (savers) to its potential users (entrepreneurs and businesses).  Even in a well regulated economy, these intermediaries can sometimes stray and be negligent in their fiduciary obligations.  The consequent wreck they impose on the economy and on our lives can be considerable, as Americans are currently experiencing, and as we did in 1997.

             As a community, Malays mistrust banks and other interest-charging institutions.  The successes of Islamic banks and mutual fund-like entities as Tabung Haji indicate that this can be surmounted and that we are aware of the merits of savings.

             Our cultural tendency for conspicuous consumption abetted by the gaudy examples set by our leaders (huge weddings stretching for days) results in us having the lowest savings rates, and thus a thin financial capital base.  Not a strong springboard to catapult our development.  Yes, we can borrow but if we are not productive then we would not be able to service the loan.

            Human capital refers to the skills, knowledge and other attributes of the citizens that would enable them to produce something or a service that is of value to society.  We enhance human capital through health and education.

             Improving health begins with such basic essentials as providing potable water, reliable electricity, garbage pick-up, and unclogged drains as well as elementary and inexpensive public health measures like vaccinations.  Then consider the vast number of Malay kampongs that lack these basic amenities.

             We improve the skills of our people through quality education.  Quality is measured not by years of formal schooling or resources allocated rather by how effective our schools and teachers are.  The OECD’s Program for International Students Assessments has shown that economic productivity is causally linked to quality education.

             Put differently, Malaysia’s aspiration of quadrupling the per capita income within a decade would forever remain a dream unless we improve our schools and universities.  Poland has demonstrated that a commitment to reforming education could produce results as early as a few years, and with that, commensurate improvement in economic performance.

             Malay educational achievement lags behind the other communities.  Closing this should be our top priority, not meaningless pursuit of empty unity.  Subsidize education and healthcare if need be.  In truth they are not subsidies but prudent and profitable investments in human capital.  It is also the right thing to do.

             Social capital refers to the relationships we have with each other; the shared norms, values and understanding which facilitate us working together.  Any relationship, economic or otherwise, must begin with trust, a crucial component of social capital.  Banks would be chronically crippled by “bank runs” if depositors lacked trust in them.  The current crisis in the West is in part a manifestation of “bank runs” on “shadow banking” institutions by major (corporate) depositors.  Likewise, even the most meticulous contract crafted by finicky lawyers cannot substitute for trust.  Only peace treaties imposed by the victor upon the vanquished do not involve element of trust.

             Perversely our preoccupation with unity with its attendant intolerance of divergent views erodes our social capital and poisons our relationships, in economics and other areas.  It makes an UMNO government deny contracts to competent Malays simply because they sympathize with the opposition.  We already see this poison spread to other spheres, as with some mosques reserved only for UMNO Malays.

            By focusing less on our misguided quest for “unity” and more on learning to tolerate the differences amongst us, we enhance our social capital.  I would go beyond simply tolerating to embracing and welcoming these differences.  Only through robust debates and subjecting our views to the rigorous scrutiny of the marketplace of ideas could we ensure that we would not be pursuing a false path.

             So if unity is equated with unanimity, then the less “united” Malays are the better.  What we desperately need is a diversity of fresh views and perspectives to replace our current fossilized mindsets.  Interestingly, once Malays can tolerate if not embrace the differences amongst us, then we are more likely to tolerate and embrace differences with our fellow Malaysians.  That can only be good for plural Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 13 September 2010, 9:02 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Daydreams That Turn Disastrous

By
Richard Loh

What
Wiki
 said about Daydream:

A daydream is a visionary fantasy, especially one of happy, pleasant thoughts, hopes or ambitions, imagined as coming to pass, and experienced while awake. There are many different types of daydreams, and there is no consensus definition amongst psychologists. Daydreams may involve fantasies about
future scenarios or plans, or reminiscences about past experiences
, and may include vivid dream-like mental images. They are often connected with some type of emotion.

While daydreaming has long been derided as a lazy, non-productive pastime,
it is now commonly acknowledged that daydreaming can be constructive in some contexts
.

Malaysians as well as the leaders have daydreams in the political atmosphere which we can termed it as political daydreams. In such political daydreams the constructive contexts will be different depending on which side of the divide you are aligned to.

The political opposition daydreamers are dreaming for a two party system, the hope and ambition to take over as the government of the day. Today, we are not talking about the daydreams of the political opposition which we will leave it for another day.

The present ruling government were able to form the federal government with a coalition of 13 political parties that won a simple majority after the 12th general election. The losing of five States and the two third majority in Parliament had shattered the core bone of the coalition which until then was unshakable.

Prior to the 12th general election, everything looks easy for the coalition government, no serious work were needed to ensure their continuing stay in power and what they needed to do were to daydreams of how to enrich themselves and family members while the people were influenced with another type of daydream, that only this coalition is capable of governing this country.

Everyone, one time or another have daydreams. When you get wind that you are going to be promoted to be a manager, you will somehow start to daydream of how you are going to manage your subordinates and the company. How you are going to treat your enemy within, how you aim to go higher up. Your daydream will be effective or not upon sitting inside the manager’s room depends greatly on how you play out your daydream.

The PM of a country is no difference, when as DPM and upon learning that he will soon become the next PM, he will has his daydreams but these daydreams are bigger from that of an ordinary manager.

We are quite sure that the present PM of this country had his many daydreams, years before he was even a DPM. His daydreams became more complex as the days get closer for him to become the PM and making it worst was the great lost at the 12th general election.

Why I called it the daydreams of the PM and not planning is because when you make plans, you can really see the whole structure of the ongoings in a transparent manner by a group of people or team work, irrespective whether the plan succeed or fail while the daydreams are only the dreams of the PM alone without full support from others within his team and rushing to implement his daydreams make the situation worst.

The particular outstanding daydream of the PM is to ensure that the coalition continues to hold on to power. Daydreams are often connected with some type of emotion and the emotion of the PM after seeing the lost of the two third majority in Parliament by his predecessor and the fear of losing power in the coming 13th general election is negatively enormous.

One special daydream of the PM is to see a “1Malaysia, People First Performance Now” implementation which by now can be seen by all that it had turned into a disaster. This daydream is good but failed because the PM did not create supportive meaningful daydreams to give it the credence that it needed to succeed. The television stations, TV1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and 9 have been continuously screening the 1Malaysia ideology using the PM’s daydream but it is just about that and what we actually see happening on the ground is totally different and the opposite of what they are showing us.

Daydreams are pleasant thoughts, hopes or ambitions that can actually be translated into meaningful actions if the applications are put into the correct perspective without any further disturbances from other newly created daydreams.

The PM, in rushing to put his half-baked daydreams into reality and affirmative actions were met with furious retaliation from all sides because he failed to daydreams about other factors that were required in order to see through his ambition of wanting to hold on to power.

The PM, by playing out his daydreams without first opening them up for discussions and further planning, especially among the various races, had indeed became a big disaster.

Creating daydreams one after another can be disastrous if not handled and play out correctly for it will turned into a horrible nightmare as seen from the latest racial and religious confrontations.

The justification to say the PM is daydreaming for over one and a half years by trying to implement his odds and pieces daydreams is from seeing the continuing  failure of the country in every aspect, especially in the economy, judiciary, education, crime, corruptions, suppression of free speech and further racial and religious intolerance.

If one do not know how to turn one’s daydreams into good and useful actions, just leave it as a dream.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 13 September 2010, 8:55 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


INDONESIA: We Are NOT, I Repeat, Your Whipping Boy

By
Tunku Abdul Aziz

If media reports on the meeting in Kota Kinabalu between our Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah and his Indonesian counterpart Dr. Marty Natalegawa are accurate, then I am afraid we ended, as usual when dealing with international issues, drawing the “short straw.”  The Malaysian Foreign Minister in his anxiety to show his newly minted diplomatic template, designed on the trot, totally missed the point about the need to drive home to the Indons, in the strongest possible terms, the increasing difficulty of our trying to contain and control the anger of our people.

 How much longer can we be expected to continue to stand by and watch the flag we ran up, so proudly for the first time 53 years ago, trampled and desecrated by one ugly and uncivilised mob after another? The official Indonesian response borders on the moronic arrogance of a people sustained by delusions of moral and cultural superiority. I am always amused listening to countries such as Indonesia parading their democratic credentials, including the freedom to participate in aggressively violent demonstrations, and looking down on us for our poor democracy record by comparison. My one liner rejoinder which puts the cat among the pigeons, as I am wont to do in such a situation, and which always works is, “What use is your democracy on an empty stomach?”

 That having said, I am a firm believer in the biblical saying that “man does not live by bread alone” and Najib’s current rhetoric about transforming this country must be translated straightaway into removing all policies and laws that have denied and deprived our people of the basic and fundamental human rights as citizens of a democratic country that we are supposed to be. Trotting out the preposterous justification for repressive laws to protect our national security is the mantra of the insecure

That same argument in its infinite manifestations and with its many embellishments has also apparently become the last refuge of a government living in fear of its own shadow. It is a most unconvincing argument and one that has been totally discredited. The government’s glib answer to criticisms of its undemocratic regime is to say that general elections are held regularly, omitting to mention how they are conducted. The punch line runs something like this, “The elections are conducted fairly because the government loses some seats from time to time.” Again an inconvenient truth is left out which is that “in spite of the cheating and blatant manipulation, we don’t always win because Malaysian have become too damned clever. Is that not enough proof that we are democratic.” But as a former US ambassador and a true friend of Malaysia once said, “Democracy is not just about elections, but it is about what happens between elections.” He was responding to Mahathir’s supercilious claim that Malaysia practised democracy; his own inimitable brand of what is best described as “father knows best” democracy, and don’t ask too many questions!

I have digressed. I make no secret of my loathing for Indonesia and all things Indonesian. This almost pathological aversion had its roots in the way Sukarno, their uncouth megalomaniac dictator who once told his adoring millions to eat rats if they had no food, treated our Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, a prince and gentleman, in the course of their “peace meetings” in Manila and Tokyo during the ill-fated “Ganyang Malaysia.” But for the grace of God and our stupidity in allowing their hungry millions to find work in this country, the great dictator’s legacy to his people might come to pass.

We did not end British rule for the benefit of millions of Indons who are “fixed deposits” for an unfriendly Indonesia,  whose millions in the hated Malaysia represent an important investment in a ready  reservoir of “fifth columnists” who are to be encountered throughout the length and breadth of this land. Malaysian capitalists and housewives must learn quickly that in the long term interest of peace, well-being and security of this country, they must forgo the luxury of exploiting cheap Indon labour.  Indonesia, a country that cannot feed its burgeoning population, is happy enough to encourage their miserable human flotsam and jetsam to find comfort and succour in this country they so despise, but we would be putting ourselves at great risk if we did not address this potential national problem.

We have enough trouble integrating our own citizens without the curse of an unnecessary distraction of an unfriendly nation’s intransigence. Our government that is ever so quick to justify the use of the ISA for national security reasons should start to develop a plan for economic growth without relying solely on cheap foreign labour. It cannot be right that we should leave this unfinished business for future generations of Malaysians to wrestle with. Unless we stand up to Indonesian blustering and bullying, there might not be the 1Malaysia of Najib’s fantasy. We are a sovereign country after all and that must be clearly understood by all nations big and small.

I for one will not forgive our government for not responding much more robustly to the totally unacceptable and uncivilised pattern of behaviour of a morally bankrupt nation. My nation’s flag represents and symbolises my love and devotion to this, my country. And damn you for dishonouring  that which is the object of my love and loyalty.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 13 September 2010, 7:12 pm and is filed under
Foreign
,
Tunku Abdul Aziz
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


ANALYSIS – Malaysia “top-down” reforms set to disappoint

By
David Chance
 | Reuters

Malaysia’s plans to revitalise investment by backing national champions and ending race-based policies may sound ambitious, but the details are hazy and real economic reform will face formidable obstacles.

The government starts public consultations this month on a new round of reforms, but there is growing resistance from voters and disappointment from investors over measures taken so far.

A government think tank has identified a dozen growth industries such as oil and gas, biotechnology and Islamic finance to focus on in a drive to double Malaysia’s income per capita and propel it into the ranks of “developed nations” by 2020.

Prime Minister Najib Razak’s record on reform is patchy — he shied away from big subsidy cuts and reversed tack on race-based preferential equity ownership rules for the majority ethnic Malay population under pressure from activists.

“Earlier optimism that Najib will be able, and will be committed, to carrying out his plans for reforms has been replaced by resignation that Malaysia will not change course quite so quickly or easily,” said Southeast Asia political risk analyst David Kiu.

Najib took office last year and promised investor forums that on reforms, he would “execute or be executed”, after the National Front coalition that has now ruled this Southeast Asian country for 53 years stumbled to its worst ever election results in 2008.

In the past decade Malaysia has seen its dominant position as an investment destination in Southeast Asia crumble, its productivity gains lag and a worsening of its education rankings which mean it is less well equipped to meet its growth goals.

A survey last week by the World Economic Forum showed Malaysia slipped two places in its global competitiveness rankings to 26th spot out of 139 countries while neighbouring Indonesia surged 10 places to 44th spot. The quality of Malaysia’s institutions, ranked 17th by the WEF five years ago, has plunged to 42nd place since then.

Under its “Economic Transformation Plan” to be unveiled this month, Malaysia’s government wants to galvanise 2.2 trillion ringgit ($706.7 billion) in investments over the 10 years to 2020 of which 92 percent will come from the private sector.

That would be a big leap from the 535 billion the private sector has invested over the past decade, and few analysts expect detailed plans to be unveiled on how to boost investment.

Although hot money has flowed into the Malaysian bond market this year, reversing outflows in 2008 and 2009 and pushing the ringgit currency to 13 year highs against the dollar, Malaysia has slid off the investment map for many.

Foreign ownership of the stock exchange stands at just 21.2 percent of market capitalisation, down from 26.2 percent in 2007.

Many Malaysian companies like leading bank CIMB and telco Axiata are being wowed by the prospects of faster growth in countries like Indonesia and want to become major regional players, so they are exporting capital.

That means government-linked companies (GLCs) will lead the charge to invest more at home, said Wan Saiful Wan Jan of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs think tank:

“They cannot talk about opening up our markets and at the same time give more for GLCs to do to meddle in our economy.”

MORE VOCAL RESISTANCE TO REFORMS?

Although Najib has only been in power since April 2009, he may soon have to shift to policies that will shore up his political base. Elections are due by 2013 and are likely to be called earlier.

His coalition of 12 parties, constructed along racial lines to reflect the Malay, Chinese and Indian populations as well as the indigenous people on Borneo island, is still fraying.

Najib is under pressure from Malay activists in his own party who fear reforms will erode their privileges as well as from ethnic Chinese coalition leaders whose only hope to win back voters is to be more vocal in promoting their own community.

A Malay pressure group called Perkasa which claims 300,000 members recently lodged a police report against the leader of the coalition’s ethnic Chinese party after he called for the removal of laws guaranteeing Malays and indigenous people 30 percent equity rights in public companies.

There has also been a steady drip of racial posturing in the media during the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan with an opposition ethnic Chinese politician being attacked for visiting a mosque and a Ramadan ad campaign being pulled for having Christmas overtones.

“The incitement of ultra-nationalist feelings is mainly conducted in the Malay media and hence is not so visible to foreign observers but it is a really worrying trend that is taking place under a so-called reformist government,” said Lim Teck Ghee, director of the Centre for Policy Initiatives.

Najib has sought to sidestep some of the blockages to reform by outsourcing the process to advisory bodies, but when it comes to implementation, he will still have to rely on the 1.2 million strong mainly Malay civil service.

The civil service employs one in every 20 Malaysians and Wan Saiful notes many of them are drawn from the constituency that has most to lose from any meaningful reforms:

“They are a force of their own, and they are far too big for the government to ignore.”

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 14 September 2010, 4:26 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Economics
,
Najib Razak
,
NEM
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Utusan champions Dr M’s views in campaign for Perkasa

The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 14 — Umno’s Utusan Malaysia continued its campaign backing Perkasa today, and appears to throw its weight behind Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad by citing the former leader’s arguments for the Malay rights group.

In what appears an attempt to show detractors that the Malay rights group has widespread public support, the Malay daily carried opinions, features and stories directly backing Dr Mahathir and Perkasa.

Dr Mahathir recently said that Umno risks losing the next general elections — if it snubbed Perkasa as the party is according to him, weak.

Perkasa leaders have joined that chorus and warned Umno that it could lose the backing from a majority of Malays if it continues plans to distance itself.

Utusan’s support for Perkasa in an editorial on Sunday had already raised questions about whether it was still backing party president Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

But today’s edition of the conservative Umno newspaper contained even more strident views in support of Perkasa and Dr Mahathir.

A prominent feature in the daily’s Op-Ed section lamented how Malays could no longer speak of their rights anymore or else they would be classed as racist.

The opinion piece also argued against using Perkasa as a scapegoat for the inability of Barisan Nasional (BN) in getting non-Malay votes.

But much of the arguments put forward appeared to echo the views of Perkasa leaders as well as that of Dr Mahathir.

The Najib administration continues to struggle in its bid to sell its economic reforms to a sceptical public, and this process continues to be made complicated by political curve balls thrown by Perkasa and Dr Mahathir which are being articulated in Utusan.

Since last week, leaders aligned to Najib had begun the process of distancing the party from Perkasa because of the group’s controversial and strident views on economic reforms.

Using the Malay rights platform, Perkasa has been a major obstacle in the way of Najib’s economic reforms which he has assured would not be at the expense of Bumiputeras.

But Perkasa, backed by Dr Mahathir, is against any attempt to roll back the quotas associated with Malaysia’s affirmative action policies.

Last Saturday, Najib spoke on regional satellite station CNBC arguing that “if we don’t make change, we don’t make reforms, Malaysia will slide backwards.”

But the noise surrounding Malay special rights and Perkasa’s role in fighting for the Malays is beginning to drown out Najib’s reforms.

Today, Utusan Malaysia published a series of quotes from ordinary Malays backing Perkasa.

The 16 quotes accompanied by photographs of those interviewed were given prominent play and appeared under the headline “Majority of Malays support Perkasa.”

There were also a number of other stories attacking the senior Umno leaders who had criticised Perkasa.

Many of those interviewed backed Dr Mahathir.

Leading the fray against Perkasa has been Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who told The Malaysian Insider that it was “about time” that Umno made a strong stand against Ibrahim and Perkasa.

Nazri, who has been the most vocal of all Umno leaders on the topic of Perkasa, even went a step further to assert that all of Perkasa’s members from Umno and its patron, former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, were political “has-beens”.

Also joining in was Umno secretary-general Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor, who told his BN component party counterparts that Umno will not back Perkasa or Ibrahim in the next general election as such a move will only erode non-Malay support for the ruling coalition.

In this battle of wills in Umno, Utusan Malaysia appears to be firmly in Dr Mahathir’s side.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 14 September 2010, 12:32 pm and is filed under
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will PM Najib Razak push through an effective NEM to transform a failed problem ridden Malaysia?

by
Dr Chen Man Hin
, life adviser DAP

IT WILL TAKE A LIBERAL NEW ECONOMIC MODEL AND A STRONG PRIME MINISTER TO PUSH MUCH NEEDED REFORMS TO TRANSFORM MALAYSIA INTO A HIGH INCOME COUNTRY WITH DEMOCRACY, JUSTICE AND PROSPERITY FOR ALL REGARDLESS OF RACE OR RELIGION.

The political and economic outlook for the country is critical. We are riddled with multiple problems of corruption, lack of judicial independence, racialism, brain drain, with 40% of households living below the poverty level of RM1,500, and four out of five poor households are bumiputras.

All these things are happening even after two years of PM Najib rule since April 2008. His 1 Malaysia and mediocre attempts at reforms have failed.

WORLD RANKINGS OF MALAYSIA

The sorry state of political and economic development is reflected in the world ranking status of Malaysia on areas which indicate whether a society is honest, democratic, transparent,and just.

CORRUPTION
. Transparent International Corruption perception malaysia is ranked 56 among countries in 2009 having dropped from 47 of 2008 and from 23 in 1995. It indicates that corruption has deteriorated during Najib’s watch, whereas Singapore and Hong Kong are almost corruption free.

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
. Malaysia’s world ranking for year 2009-2010 was 52 compared with Thailand 54, Taiwan 49, Singapore 19, Australia 5, Finland 4, Denmark 3, Sweden 2, and New Zealand 1. Low ranking for Malaysia is not surprising, especially as the Sodomy 2 case against Anwar Ibrahim has raised international concern about the integrity of the judiciay in Malaysia.

UNIVERSITY RANKING
. This year no university from Malaysia made it to the top 200 world universities list of QS World University Ranking 2010. Last year one Malaysian university, Universiti Malaya was ranked 180. This year Universit Malaya was ranked 207.

ACADEMIC RANKING OF WORLD UNIVERSITIES BY SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY
. No university from Malaysia was in the list, which indicates that the academic standards questionable.

POLICE STATE
. It is a fact that the government uses all the institutions – police, judicial, attorney general, and media to exercise rigid and a repressive controls on the social, economic and political life of the people. The ISA is used to oppress the opposition. Press freedom is muzzled, as seen by the ranking for Malaysia which was 141 out of 196 countries. Which is not unexpected as the government has imposed a tight censor ship of all opposition news. The government plans to impose censorship of the Internet, which is gaining popularity with the people.

FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENTS (FDI) The world bank has released figures which showed that for 2009 there was an 81% fall of FDI into Malaysia from US$7.32 billion to 1.38 billion. FDI into Thailand and Indonesia have overtaken FDI into Malaysia, which has now joined the ranks of countries like Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos and Timor Leste. These are figures which indicate that investors, both local and foreign, have lost confidence and prefer to put their money in Indonesia and Thailand.

Poor global rankings of Malaysia are an indictment of the PM Najib Razak regime, which under the cloak of 1 Malaysia is actually practising the politics of race, corruption, cronyism and rent seeking. If the same policies are continued, then inexeorably, Malaysia will join the ranks of failed states like banana republics – Myanmar and Zimbabwe.

THE ONE HOPE

Follow the advice and recommendations of the World Bank and IMF who have recommended Najib to follow free and liberal market policies. There has to be a structural reform, which means no NEP regulations like 30% bumiputera equity and cronyism or rent seeking. A culture of competitiveness and meritocracy must be practised.

At the same time, the reforms must be inclusive to look after the interest of the poor – bumiputras and others. A new type of affirmative policy must be practised where help is given according to needs and merit. This affirmation action should not interfere with the mainstream liberal free market economy, or the main economy will stagnate or collapse as it did the 40 years of NEP rule from 1971 to 2010.

The fate of Malaysia is now in the hands of the Prime Minister. The whole country is now watching the next move of the Prime Minister. Will he follow the NEM polcies as endorsed by World Bank and IMF? Or will he wilt under the pressure of Perkasa?

‘To be or not to be, that is the question.’ – Hamlet. The whole country awaits.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 14 September 2010, 3:51 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Dr. Chen Man Hin
,
Economics
,
Najib Razak
,
NEM
,
NEP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should not come empty-handed to Sabah for first Malaysia Day celebrations as national public holiday but should address problem of “Sabahans losing patience over 20 Points” as articulated by UPKO Senator

Malaysia Day on September 16 tomorrow will be celebrated as a national public holiday for the first time in the nation’s history.

The very fact that it has taken 47 years for Malaysia Day to be recognized officially as a national public holiday is testimony of why Sabahans and Sarawakians feel so aggrieved at not being accorded full and proper treatment as an integral part of Malaysia.

This prevailing sense of  alienation, discrimination and even marginalization is best illustrated by a newspaper headline in the Sabah press today, viz: “
Sabahans losing patience over 20 Points – Maijol
”.

United Pasokmomogun Kadazan Dusun Murut Organisation (UPKO) vice president Senator Datuk Maijol Mahap was quoted as declaring that “Sabahans are fed up with the Federal Government’s failure to fulfill what have been promised in the 20 Points Agreement”.

Maijol said: “Even after 47 years of being part of Malaysia, they are still waiting for the time when the 20 Points Agreement will be fully fulfilled.”

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak is coming to Sabah with a high-level Federal Government delegation to celebrate Malaysia Day as the first national public holiday.

Declaring Malaysia Day as a national public holiday is just not good enough to address the 47 years of grievances of Sabahans articulated by Senator Maijol.

Najib should not come emtpty-handed to Sabah for the Malaysia Day celebrations but should use the  occasion to announce policy decisions and measures to instill the spirit behind the declaration of Malaysia Day as a national public holiday into all aspects nation-building policies to give to Sabahans and Sarawakians their rightful dues as equal citizens of Malaysia.

This is the best and opportune occasion for Najib to announce a Royal Commission of Inquiry to assess the  success or shortfalls into the 20 Points Agreement to address the root causes of grievances of the people of Sabah and Sarawak in the past five decades.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 15 September 2010, 6:45 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s words, words and more words!

Fight extremism, says PM
 | Bernama

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 15 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak today expressed strong opposition to the actions of extremist groups or individuals who believe in their radical views and actions against others.

“It saddens me that despite living in an independent multi-cultural nation for over 50 years, there are still those among us who cannot tolerate, much less accept the benefits of a [peaceful] society,” he said.

He said this in his latest entry entitled “Our Fight Against Extremism” in his blog, www.1malaysia.com.my here.

Najib said he was sad because by rejecting Malaysians’ way of life, these groups were rejecting the 1 Malaysia concept.

He said as Malaysia celebrated a landmark in its history tomorrow, there was much to be proud of because Malaysia was a developing nation that had excelled in many sectors such as tourism, banking and finance, halal sector, medicine and many more.

“We are blessed to be able to experience different cultures, food and religions without travelling far and abroad.

“While we have achieved so much, it troubles me to see a rise in issues rooted in extremism in the nation.

“This is not limited to racism. Extremists are groups or individuals who subscribe to radical views and actions against others.

“They treat anyone who is different as an enemy and engineer fear in people who don’t conform to their thoughts or ideologies and, in some cases in people who simply look different,” Najib said.

Hence, extremism here applied to a gamut of factors, including racism, arts, culture, way of life, and more, the prime minister said.

While these groups were often small in number, their presence was amplified through their extreme sentiments and acts.

Nonetheless, the government continued to keep a watchful eye on such groups.

“We have dealt effectively with a number of extreme cases in Malaysia, such as militant groups that have instigated conflicts and posed a genuine threat to national security.

“We will continue to protect the Rakyat and the nation from threats from outside or within, through land, sea, air or cyberspace.

“We have been exposed to examples of extremist behaviour, regionally and globally. I am glad that we have abstained from such acts, and instead displayed maturity as a people, as 1 Malaysia.

“I urge all Malaysians to be calm and rational in the face of such extremism. To respond like with like only serves to escalate tensions between our countries and becomes a hindrance to our own progress.

“Economies have faltered because of acts of extremism, and the road to recovery is often long and hard,” Najib added. — Bernama

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 15 September 2010, 6:24 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.