The politics of accommodation in PAS

Bridget Welsh

Malaysiakini

Nov 20, 2012

COMMENT

Islamist parties throughout the world are grappling with new roles and responsibilities. PAS is no exception.

The discussions at the party’s muktamar held in Kota Bharu last weekend highlight that PAS is adapting to new conditions globally and nationally, and in fact embracing reform.

Perhaps more than any party in Malaysia, PAS is engaging in accommodation.

Despite news reports focusing on the comments of one or two individuals – a common feature, especially in the reporting of Malaysia’s Islamic party – PAS is moving towards a more nationally-oriented position in which it can play a prominent role as a partner in an alternative government.

In fact, judging by its actions and the meeting taken as a whole rather than the words reported, the muktamar highlights that PAS is continuing to embrace more progressive positions, especially among its leadership.

Its challenges, however, have more to do with winning over its more parochial and conservative membership that is reluctant to change and struggling to adapt and understand a more complex and demanding political environment.

We are for Pakatan

One message that resounded at the muktamar was PAS’ commitment to Pakatan Rakyat. Every component of the party – from the ulama and the spiritual leader to the women’s wing – stated categorically that PAS was an integral part of the alternative coalition.

In fact, those linked to the alternative position of ‘unity’ with Umno were conspicuously absent. The unity group has been marginalised in PAS, and even faced open criticism for taking positions in public that conflict with the consensus of the leadership.

The surprising person leading the charge in this criticism was no other than one of the most conservative ulama, Harun Din. Definitively, PAS has taken a stand: we are for Pakatan.

This message was apparent in other ways as well. Rather than present its own alternative vision of governance – as has happened in the past with the welfare state concept, for example – the thrust was on reaffirming connections to the common platform, notably the Buku Jingga.

This sense of collaboration was repeatedly echoed in the inclusion of non-Malays (whose support is essential for the party to hold onto its current seats and make electoral gains in states like Negeri Sembilan and Johor) and in engagement with the artistic and cultural communities.

Importantly, discussion on the decisive, dividing issue of hudud was muted as its leaders aimed to show that, in the spirit of consensus, they would seek common ground. Repeatedly, the call for political consensus, tahaluf siyasi, was made – a consensus that its Pakatan partners will find essential.

The PAS at this muktamar was not wedded to the past, but engaged in outreach for the future. The image of PAS as a group of mullah defending narrow conceptualisations of tradition and religion, banning social activities and limiting freedoms is no longer fair. The identity of PAS as a political party is changing.

While some in the old guard and their protégées in the Youth wing are uncomfortable with PAS’ more modern open approach, the leadership as a whole, presided by Abdul Hadi Awang and reinforced by an overwhelming majority of progressives in the central committee and as members of parliament, embraced collaboration and greater tolerance.

The repeated attacks on Umno and Najib Abdul Razak’s tenure further illustrated that their sights are focused in its partnership in Pakatan. Closing the meeting on the last day with a prayer for Umno’s defeat in elections was a powerful signal.

The affirmation of a Pakatan commitment has been overshadowed by questions arising from mainstream media reports on the muktamar, namely the issue of whether Hadi Awang wants to be premier and whether he supports Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim in that position.

Attention continues to centre on possible points of division, with the hope of driving a wedge among parties that have worked and governed together for four years.

Hadi Awang repeated that he does not want the premiership. Many people, however, refuse to accept his response.

Tackling trust deficits

Globally, Islamist parties face trust deficits. PAS faces this on multiple fronts – from whether the party is truly loyal to the opposition to their goals in office. PAS is also hounded by its past, when it joined Umno in the 1970s, only to lose its credibility, and its soul. Memories of PAS’ betrayal of the trust of voters run deep, especially among older voters.

Even more suspicion exists among liberals and/or non-Muslims who believe that PAS is the driver of religious intolerance, curbs on religious freedom and limits on women’s rights.

Years of media socialisation and PAS’s own record in places like Terengganu underscore this anxiety and it only takes a few trigger words such as “hudud” or “ulama leadership” to open the floodgates of possible additional trauma.

The fact is that trust once broken is very hard to rebuild. In this muktamar, PAS’ challenge of building trust manifested itself clearly as focus continued to be on the triggers of division rather than on cohesion. A question that arises from this muktamar is whether PAS can overcome this trust deficit with those who are inclined toward suspicion. Are doubts so embedded that views cannot change?

What is not always clearly understood is that PAS’s current young leadership is also facing a trust deficit from the old guard in the party. The proponents of internal distrust come from the protégées of the old guard ulama in the Youth wing.

While the rank-and-file are committed to Pakatan, some of the PAS’ delegates at the muktamar are uncertain about the progressive path adopted by the current leaders. This was evident in the attack on party organ Harakah for its open coverage of news. It was also evident in personal attacks on progressive PAS leaders who espouse tolerance.

The source of this distrust is multiple – many in the old guard are staunchly conservative and resist reform. PAS is not the only party with old fashioned outlooks, but disproportionally the party has many of them. The more cutting element of distrust comes from the fact that some of the progressives have openly called for an end to the ulama leadership of the party.

Some of the ulama feel under attack and this reinforces their defensiveness and, in some cases, reactionary responses. The ulama are uncomfortable with displacement and accepting accommodation as they feel this leads to their marginalisation. They are uneasy with the dissolution of their influence and this feeds into the distrust from within.

Political tests and risks

Bringing a party toward reform is never easy, especially when old mindsets persist. It is compounded when there are interests involved. It was thus clear that the progressive PAS leadership is facing its biggest test in the next election battle. They have to show with electoral victories that their approach is earning support.

It is not enough for the progressives to point to coalitions between Islamists and other groups in countries like Tunisia and Turkey, for the PAS progressive leadership has to deliver at home. A failure to win seats will allow the traditional, conservative old guard to return to the leadership.

This election is as much about Pakatan as it is about the future of Islamism in Malaysia. Voters will decide whether PAS is more tolerant, more democratic and inclusive, or whether it returns to the dark ages and pushes Malaysia away from a modern future.

Make no bones about it, the dark forces in PAS are waiting for the chance to come back to power at any sign of weakness of the current progressive leaders in the party.

On some fronts, they have interests in the failure of the PAS progressives. The old guards and their protégées want a return of stronger conservative ulama leadership, and are uncomfortable with the spiritual role that the ulama currently hold. They know that if PAS does well electorally, it will minimise the possibility of ulama taking on more positions in the helm of the party.

They also fear further displacement with greater electoral gains and winning government. Many ulama lack the skills to take on technocratic governing positions, and those with old guard mindsets are often too closed in outlook to win over the support needed for electoral victory. Insecurity among some inside the party fuels the internal distrust.

PAS delegates are also frustrated that they are on the firing line electorally. Many feel that PAS is competing in the most difficult seats, in Felda areas for example, and has uphill battles to win seats.

As the pouring of goodies continues in the Malay heartland in the rural constituencies dominated by state-owned media, PAS faces a serious struggle to win over voters.

Many delegates felt that the obstacles they face electorally in winning Malay votes was not appreciated within Pakatan and some even worried that the coming general election could lead to their marginalisation in the governing coalition.

The new role in Pakatan is not just about commitment to the coalition, but confidence that the party will continue to have a place and prominent position. Many delegates expressed the desire to be better treated in Pakatan, as an asset and partner.

Three-pronged approach

While seats are competitive for all the parties, disproportionally PAS as a party does have serious obstacles in making electoral gains. The party is locked in a battle with Umno for Malay votes, and grappling with effective approaches to woo and reach non-Malay voters. What is telling is that advocating for hudud is not prominent among these approaches.

Instead there are three prongs in PAS’ contemporary engagement.

Foremost, PAS centres on the issue of corruption. This is the moral core of its campaign, the call for voters to reject abuses of power. The steps taken to declare assets within the party at the muktamar reveals that it is building safeguard procedures within the party.

Second, PAS has emphasised greater representativeness in its slate of candidates. It is bringing in more technocrats, former civil servants, entrepreneurs and security personal, and women. PAS is extending its umbrella to include more pluralism is its prospective candidates.

Finally, PAS has reaffirmed its adherence to democratic principles. When speaking to the delegates in his closing speech, Hadi Awang emphasised a premiership based on electoral performance, consensus and representativeness. Motions from the floor supported electoral reform movement Bersih and continued the commitment to electoral reform.

What was perhaps more telling in democratic governance was the willingness to allow open views from delegates to be expressed. This muktamar was not a controlled event as delegates were allowed to raise concerns, and some of the points from the floor bordered on the bizarre.

Unlike Umno, PAS has held party elections in the last few years and its leaders do have a party mandate. The leaders within the party faced criticism openly, a sign of strength not weakness.

One of the most striking elements in this muktamar within PAS was the appreciation of difference. The reality is that the delegates know there are different views, but these differences were acceptable. The tolerance of difference within PAS has grown in its evolution in Pakatan.

To judge a party based on its party congress is ultimately a flawed exercise. At best, the muktamar is a venue to assess trends and directions. Pakatan loyalty, progressive leadership and strengthening democracy stood out. This said, there are differences within PAS over many issues, from hudud and ulama leadership to electoral strategies.

But differences are normal. What is important is the way differences are addressed – through debate, engagement and adherence to principles. The 58th muktamar showed that the PAS is not shying away from these tough issues, an important evolution for any party hoping to win support to govern nationally.

——————————————————————————–

DR BRIDGET WELSH is associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University and she can be reached at
[email protected]
. She was an observer at the 58th PAS Muktamar in Kota Baru.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 21 November 2012, 12:19 am and is filed under
Islamic state
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tunisia’s Hamadi Jebali: The face of moderate Islam?

Al Arabiya News

AFP

19 November 2011

TUNIS – With deep roots in the fight against anti-Muslim oppression, Hamadi Jebali emerged from years in jail under a repressive regime as a man of compromise and the moderate face of Tunisia’s Ennahda Islamist party.

The 63-year-old Ennahda secretary general is set to become the north African country’s prime minister under a deal reached by the three main parties, to be approved Tuesday by the newly elected constituent assembly.

 With his neatly trimmed white beard, thin-framed glasses and the prayer mark of the pious Muslim on his forehead, Jebali “has been one of the main players on the Islamic scene” in Tunisia, Sofiene Ben Fahrat, editor of Tunisia’s La Presse daily told AFP.

“He notably led the confrontation against the regime of (Habib) Bourguiba,” the father of independent Tunisia who launched a repressive campaign against Islamists and had several of its leaders sentenced to death, he said.

Jebali, a native of the eastern town of Sousse, known as the “Pearl of the Tunisian Sahel,” is a solar engineer and former journalist who co-founded in 1981 the Islamic Tendency Movement that became Ennahda (Renaissance in Arabic) eight years later.

 The party came out on top in Tunisia’s first free elections on October 23.

A former editor of Ennahda’s Al Fajr newspaper, Jebali was sentenced in 1991 to a year in prison for defamation. A year later, as the anti-Islamist repression under Zine el Abidine Ben Ali gathered steam, he was sentenced to another 16 years behind bars.

 He served a large part of his sentence in an isolation cell before being pardoned in 2006.

 Described as relaxed and quick to smile, well dressed and a fluent French speaker, Jebali “has always had good press, is well connected, and has a fat contact book,” Fahrat said.

 “He has positioned himself in the reformist camp of Ennahda, a party held back by several (conservative) tendencies,” he added.

 “In putting him forward as prime minister, Ennahda is sending a strong message both to the outside world and its own supporters.”

 After the uprising that ousted Ben Ali in January, Jebali travelled to Washington with two other “modernist” party members, holding high-level talks with U.S. representatives in a bid to calm fears, according to Tunisian media.

 “He is well known to the Americans,” a diplomatic source in Tunis confirmed, adding he had been “greatly impressed” by Jebali.

 “He is very calm, self-assured, and expresses himself in a measured fashion,” said the source. “But he is not soft; his years in prison forged a character of steel.”

 In an interview with France’s Le Monde newspaper ahead of the election, Jebali sought to deliver a reassuring message: “If we win the elections, Tunisia will not become an Islamic country, it will be a democratic country,” he said and stressed Ennahda was not a “theocratic” party.

Questioned about fears of a ban on alcohol sales and abolition of the right of people not to fast during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, he said: “We do not have the right to interfere in people’s personal affairs, but everybody must respect the consensus and the national identity.”

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 21 November 2012, 8:11 pm and is filed under
Islamic state
,
Middle East/Africa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Umno is ‘rakyat’, not wrong to acquire public land, says Kuang rep

By Zurairi AR

The Malaysian Insider

Nov 21, 2012

SHAH ALAM, Nov 21 — A Selangor assemblyman denied today that Umno had abused its political ties to grab state land meant for the public, as the party represented the people.

All 24 plots of land in Selangor — alleged to have been acquired by Barisan Nasional (BN) component parties and former MIC President Datuk Seri Samy Vellu (picture) while they were in the ruling coalition — were meant for public amenities like multi-purpose halls and kindergartens, said Umno state lawmaker for Kuang, Abdul Shukur Idrus.

“Umno is ‘rakyat’… Umno represents 400,000 ‘rakyat’ in Selangor. (The land plots) were not for an individual. They’re for an organisation with many members.

“Can’t Umno receive land for the use of the people?” he asked, in response to backbenchers from the ruling Pakatan Rakyat (PR) pact in the Selangor legislative assembly who had yesterday accused BN parties of being involved in a land grab when still in power.

The allegation was said to involve 24 plots of public land in seven out of nine districts in the country’s wealthiest state, which were acquired by the branches and divisions of Umno, MCA, MIC and Gerakan between 2000 and 2008.

Each plot of land measures up to seven acres and has a collective total area of around 33.5 acres, mostly in commercial areas.

Of the 24 plots, 15 are now owned by Umno branches or divisions, with six of them going to Umno Sungai Besar division, which was led by former Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Khir Toyo.

MCA holds five plots, MIC three and Gerakan one.

Datuk Seri Samy Vellu , together with an S Subramaniam and the late Tan Sri SOK Ubaidullah, who was one of MIC’s founders, are named as the trustees for a 2,832 square metre plot in Kuala Selangor.

The biggest plot in the list is a seven-acre piece of land in Klang, which is owned by the Umno Kota Raja division, followed by a 6.5-acre plot in Batu 14, Puchong, which is owned by the Umno Puchong division.

Sekinchan assemblyman Ng Suee Lim had challenged the BN component parties to return the land to the public to prove that they really have the interests of the people at heart.

“They have to prove that they are true fighters who are sincere to the people … not give empty talk … fighting for the people, but then grab their land,” he said yesterday.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 21 November 2012, 6:17 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Selangor
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A disappointment to all young Malaysians

 — Ong Kian Ming

The Malaysian Insider

Nov 22, 2012

NOV 22 — I had the opportunity to have lunch with Chua Tee Yong (CTY, hereafter) before I joined the DAP. I was grateful for this opportunity given that I had already written a few less-than-complementary articles about his father, Dr Chua Soi Lek, in his capacity as MCA president. I wanted to meet up with him because I had been somewhat impressed by the manner in which he handled himself in Parliament. He was articulate in his parliamentary replies and he responded coolly and calmly to the supplementary questions thrown his way. I thought that this MCA leader, in his capacity as the chairman of his party’s Young Professionals Bureau, could raise the overall level of political discourse by attracting more qualified young people to be engaged in the political landscape. I never thought that less than a year later he would instead drown in a puddle of his own making, snuffing out whatever little hope his party had of rejuvenation and regeneration.

The cause of CTY’s massive loss of what credibility he may have had is well known — the so-called RM1 billion Talam “scandal”. When he first announced this “scandal”, many of us in the opposition were worried that he had actually uncovered an issue that could potentially sink the Pakatan government in Selangor. He displayed tremendous confidence which we now know was actually ignorance masked by cockiness. The utter baselessness of his accusations has been exposed by my colleagues in Pakatan. I don’t need to go into the details here except to say that he has been faulting the Selangor Pakatan state government for trying to retrieve debts owed to the state, something which the BN federal government has failed to do time and again because of “obligations” to cronies such as those behind the PKFZ scandal, the NFC scandal, the MAS bailout, and a long list of other real scandals. The public at large, with access to alternative sources of information, have also figured out that CTY is barking and continues to bark up the wrong tree, especially after the recent release by the Selangor state government of the Talam White Paper.

What I will highlight is the utter disappointment that CTY has been to the young people of Malaysia.
The political landscape post-GE2008 had been thrown wide open. Given his privileged position as a new MP who had inherited his father’s seat in Labis, Johor, his rapid promotion to the position of a deputy minister and the access to the resources of the MCA and indirectly, the Star, CTY could have been a noteworthy young leader in influencing the political landscape especially among young Malaysians.

A small but growing number of young Malaysians were awakened politically post-GE2008. Many of them were looking for direction, for avenues to be more politically engaged and for young political leaders who could inspire and perhaps even lead them. CTY could have positioned himself as one of the key young BN leaders to watch by engaging in thought leadership on the important issues of the day including political reform and economic transformation, by taking on Pakatan on substantive issues (read: NOT TALAM!), by building a team of young aspiring leaders to renew his flagging party, by having meaningful engagements and reaching out to the younger generation through the strategic use of social media, by taking strategic contrarian positions to set himself and his party apart from the larger BN infrastructure, just to mention a few. I’m sure there are (hopefully!) many experienced and politically savvy MCA leaders whose advice he could have followed in order to take full advantage of the changed and changing political landscape.

Disappointingly, instead of taking the bull by the horns and charting out a new progressive direction of leadership, he has squander his privileged position in the manner in which he handled the one issue that will define him for many years to come — the non-scandal of “Talamgate”.

The Talam issue is a financially complicated deal with many moving parts. Even though I think there was no basis for CTY to use this issue to attack the Selangor state government, he could have potentially salvaged some pride and his reputation by at least agreeing to have a debate with any one of the Pakatan MPs from Selangor who were more than willing to take him on. If he was that convinced of his case and if he was confident that he could convince the larger public, he should have taken up one of the many offers made to him to have a public debate with — Tony Pua, Teresa Kok, Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad and William Leong. By doing so, he would have put himself in the firing line and perhaps come away with some “street cred” for daring to take on some of these Pakatan heavyweights. Instead, he chickened out. Worse yet, he failed to allow a single Pakatan MP to be heard when the MCA organised a discussion/debate on Talam because he insisted on debating with the Selangor MB, Khalid Ibrahim (this is akin to Tony Pua wanting to debate with the PM), who instead sent four able and willing representatives (three Pakatan MPs and his political secretary) to answer CTY’s allegations.

Perhaps he should have followed the example of some of his BN colleagues who have responded to the changing political times. Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin does not seem to have an issue with debating PKR’s director of strategy, Rafizi Ramli, not once but twice, even though Rafizi does not hold any elected position within his party. And Khairy regularly shares the same platform in panels and dialogue sessions with younger Pakatan leaders such as Nurul Izzah, Tony Pua and Anthony Loke.

Does CTY perceive his political stature to be above that of Khairy so much so that these sorts of political engagements are beneath his office? Or perhaps he thinks that such debates and dialogues are not part of Malaysian culture? If so, he should take the lead of a fellow BN deputy minister, Saifuddin Abdullah, currently deputy minister for higher education. Saifuddin regularly engages not just with Pakatan politicians but also many NGOs including youth groups from a wide spectrum of society and political leanings. It is worth highlighting that Khairy and Saifuddin have been working with MCA Senator Gan Peng Sieu, who is also the deputy minister for youth and sports, rather than CTY on making stands against certain government positions including urging the government not to appeal the decision by the Court of Appeal that section 15 of the Universities and Universities Colleges Act (UUCA) is unconstitutional as well as making a stand against the controversial amendment to section 114A of the Evidence Act.

CTY’s Talamgate attacks have negative political repercussions not just for him but also for his party and the BN. The fact that an MCA politician from Johor had to be “catapulted” to Selangor to lead the charge against the Selangor government speaks volumes about the confidence which Chua Soi Lek has in Selangor MCA chairman Donald Lim Siang Chai. The fact that Chua Soi Lek has to use this channel to promote his son also speaks volume about the leadership dynamics within the MCA, especially with regard to the availability of young and articulate leaders. Sadly, this is a reflection of a larger systemic problem within the BN component parties, namely the lack of young, inspiring thought leaders which has led to the ceding of more and more political ground to the ever-dominant Umno.

Not that I should be complaining. CTY’s antics are definitely helping convince the voting public that BN, especially the MCA, is a lost cause. But from a perspective of someone who thinks that raising the level of political discourse and increasing meaningful youth participation in politics on both sides of the political divide is a positive and necessary step for the country, CTY’s inability to take advantage of his privileged position is very disappointing indeed.

* Ong Kian Ming is the DAP’s election strategist.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 22 November 2012, 2:37 pm and is filed under
MCA
,
Ong Kian Ming
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Dua prasyarat untuk PR menewaskan Umno/BN dalam pertembungan merebut Putrajaya pada PRU13

 Presiden PAS, Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang menyatakan dalam ucapan beliau ketika pembukaan Muktamar PAS ke-58 pagi ini bahawa PAS bersedia untuk mengambil alih kuasa persekutuan dengan teman-teman lain dalam Pakatan Rakyat.

Rakyat Malaysia kini dalam dilema pada Pilihan Raya Umum ke-13, untuk membuat keputusan sama ada Malaysia patut mempunyai sebuah permulaan baru dengan memilih Pakatan Rakyat sebagai kerajaan persekutuan yang baru di Putrajaya, atau sama ada rasuah, salahguna kuasa, ketidakadilan dan ketidaksamarataan Umno/Barisan Nasional perlu terus menggelapkan masa depan, harapan dan kehendak rakyat.

Terdapat dua prasyarat untuk Pakatan Rakyat menewaskan Umno/Barisan Nasional dalam pertembungan merebut Putrajaya pada Pilihan Raya Umum ke-13.

Perkiatan Pakatan Rakyat yang terdiri daripada PAS, PKR dan DAP mestilah mampu meyakinkan rakyat Malaysia kepada dua perbezaan penting antara Pakatan Rakyat dengan perikatan Umno/Barisan Nasional.

Pertama, bahawa Pakatan Rakyat mengamalkan politik “Bersatu dan Perintah” yang membezakan dengan pendekatan tradisional dan memecahbelahkan “Pecah dan Perintah” UMNO/BN, yang memisahkan rakyat Malaysia mengikut garis kaum dan agama bukannya menyatupadukan.

Melalui politik pembohongan, penipuan dan menakut-nakutkan, UMNO/Barisan Nasional menyebarkan mesej berbeza dan bercanggah di kalangan kelompok kaum dan agama yang berbeza, menyemai benih-benih keraguan malahan kebencian, yang tentu sekali bertentangan dengan tugas membina bangsa Malaysia.

Di kalangan orang Melayu, UMNO menyebarkan menyebarkan pembohongan dan penipuan dalam bentuk amaran bahawa DAP sebenarnya yang akan berkuasa sekiranya Pakatan Rakyat membentuk kerajaan persekutuan pada PRU13, Melayu akan kehilangan hak dan menjadi “pengemis di tanah sendiri” Islam akan dipinggirkan dan Malaysia akan menjadi negara Kristian, sistem Raja-Raja akan dimansuhkan dan Malaysia menjadi Republik. Dalam erti kata lain, DAP akan mengkhianati ikrar di dalam Dasar Bersama Pakatan Rakyat dan Buku Jingga.

Di kalangan kaum Cina, MCA akan menyebarkan pembohongan dan penipuan dalam bentuk amaran bahawa PAS sebenarnya yang akan berkuasa sekiranya Pakatan Rakyat menang mengakibatkan korbannya hak-hak politik, ekonomi, pendidikan, sosial, budaya dan agama bukan-Melayu dan bukan-Islam. Disebalik pembohongan dan penipuan itu adalah mesej bahawa PAS akan mengkhianati ikrar di dalam Dasar Bersama Pakatan Rakyat dan Buku Jingga.

Ini merupakan amalan politik yang sangat tidak bertanggung jawab, tidak menghiraukan akibat buruk daripada taktik “Pecah dan perintah” sedemikian rupa kepada proses pembinaan negara Malaysia.

Sebaliknya, parti-parti Pakatan Rakyat yang terdiri daripada PAS, PKR dan DAP mahu menyatukan rakyat Malaysia tanpa mengira kaum, agama atau kawasan, dengan visi dan objektif yang sama – untuk memulihkan keadilan, kebebasan, demokrasi dan tadbir urus yang baik di dalam negara.

Juga tidak seperti Barisan Nasional di bawah pengaruh dan dominasi UMNO, Pakatan Rakyat adalah perikatan yang sama rata dan bergerak atas dasar muafakat. Tiada penguasaan dan dominasi parti-parti tertentu di dalam Pakatan Rakyat.

Kedua, kita mestilah menyakinkan rakyat Malaysia bahawa perbezaan besar Pakatan Rakyat dengan UMNO/BN adalah perikatan Pakatan Rakyat mengamalkan politik yang ikhlas, jujur dan amanah, yang mana janji dipegang erat dan tiada satu pun daripada tiga parti di dalam Pakatan Rakyat baik PAS, PKR atau DAP akan mengkhianati ikrar dan komitment yang telah dibuat di dalam PR, sama ada di dalam Dasar Bersama atau Buku Jingga.

Saya menyeru semua pemimpin-pemimpin, ahli-ahli dan penyokong-penyokong Pakatan Rakyat, sama ada PAS, PKR atau DAP untuk menyokong sepenuhnya perjuangan bagi membawa perubahan dalam PRU13 memandangkan ini sajalah caranya untuk menamatkan korupsi, penyalahgunaan kuasa, ketidakadilan dan ketidaksamarataan di bawah pemerintahan UMNO/BN.

This article is also available in English at:
https://blog.limkitsiang.com/2012/11/17/two-pre-conditions-for-pakatan-rakyat-to-beat-umnobarisan-nasional-in-the-battle-for-putrajaya-in-the-13ge/

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 22 November 2012, 5:18 pm and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


From Kuantan to Dataran Merdeka: The emancipatory journey for a green Malaysia

— Boon Kia Meng

The Malaysian Insider

Nov 22, 2012

NOV 22 — Humans make history; but never in circumstances and situations of their own choosing. This insightful observation by Marx, as he watched over the social upheavals unfolding in Europe in the middle of the 19th century, is a timely expression on what is happening in Malaysia today.

Have Malaysians ever heard of a group of ordinary, fellow Malaysians — our fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, our children — marching slowly but surely, on foot, all 300 kilometres of it, rain or shine, from Kuantan to Dataran Merdeka? All united in a common cause: to stop any further environmental degradation in Peninsular Malaysia and Sabah and Sarawak, where stopping the Lynas rare earth refinery in Gebeng, and the Murum and Baram dams in Sarawak, constitutes a fundamental demand.

These Malaysian citizens chose to embark on this journey (dubbed “Langkah Lestari”) because for far too long we have collectively as a nation allowed indiscriminate “development” and rapacious capitalistic resource extraction to go on, all in the name of economic growth and wealth creation.

Just witness the rapid decimation of our natural forestry and the displacement of our fellow indigenous Malaysian communities in Sabah/Sarawak and the peninsula. These have become common phenomena and Malaysians know deep inside that the present state of affairs cannot go on indefinitely without irreversible consequences to our common habitat.

It was their spirit and determination that drew me and my friends to join them in their walk for environmental justice. Donning green shirts and a peasant farmer’s hat, we experienced first-hand what ordinary Malaysians can achieve when they organise themselves, a trend that typifies the sea change in people’s attitude and participation in citizenship activism since 2008.

Ordinary mothers arrange lodgings and food distribution, grandpas and grandmas providing moral support with their feet and encouraging words, fathers managing logistic details, while the young, even little children, learn to take their first baby steps in authentic environmentalism and love for the country.

In other words, “Langkah Lestari” epitomises what has been truly essential in any democratic movement for bringing real social change: the twin values of self-organisation and mutual aid. Against these values, no authoritarian state or oppressive regime can stand a chance. Ordinary citizens, learning to organise themselves, little by little, will win the hearts and minds of the majority of the populace.

Make no mistake. The detractors and spokespersons for corporate and vested interests, such as Lynas Corp, will try to justify the viability of their operations on the grounds of economic development and job creation. Malaysian citizens have to judge for themselves whether this “win-win” deal is really beneficial for the country, especially for the residents in Gebeng/Kuantan.

What are Malaysians getting in exchange for the 12-year tax holiday given to Lynas, estimated at RM1.8 billion per annum, not to mention the billions of ringgit of revenue Lynas will generate from these operations? In reality, this is a classic case of neoliberal capitalism in action: the privatisation of profits, whilst socialising the costs, both human and environmental.

In the Lynas case, it is even more farcical, where we have a case of a foreign mining corporation, which is reaping stratospheric profits as a result of the Western Australian mining boom, deciding to externalise its social costs to another country. Instead of acting as protector and guardian of her citizens’ security and well-being, the Malaysian government has abdicated that role for the sake of endless capital accumulation.

It is no wonder that people from all walks of life are seeing through the lies of neoliberal ideology and deciding to leave the sidelines and join this struggle. The patronising dogma of big business that preaches wealth trickling down to the masses is increasingly hollow and losing its ideological hold on the people.

Try telling the Orang Asal brothers and sisters from Sarawak, who are marching daily with their Semenanjung compatriots, on the merits of an unfettered, free market economy that promises prosperity for all. Our indigenous brothers and sisters will tell you about the true face of “economic development”, where countless thousands of them have experienced forced displacement, land grabbing and environmental destruction.

Politicians from both sides wax lyrical about the need for more development and allocation funds for Sabah and Sarawak. They fail to see that uneven development and destruction of traditional forms of living have led to increasing proletarianisation (making them wage-earners, instead of their traditional self-sufficient farming existence) of our indigenous peoples, precisely what a capitalist economy cannot fail but generate.

These are the hard truths made visible by this 300km walk. It forces us to confront the dark, hidden side of our exploitative economy and its unsustainable ecological trajectory.

This brings us back to the significance of this Sunday, November 25, in the history of this nation. The marchers have decided to occupy Dataran Merdeka once they reach there, awaiting the presence of the prime minister and Members of Parliament from both sides of the political divide the very next morning.

Again ordinary Malaysians like them face the arbitrary exercise of state power in the hands of City Hall and the police when the mayor of KL said that no gathering in Dataran is allowed without an application for permit. We know that the upsurge of participation of Malaysians in public protests since Bersih 3.0 is no historical accident. The momentum of people’s movements will only grow stronger and stronger by the day and “Himpunan Hijau 2.0: Langkah Lestari” in Dataran Merdeka this Sunday will be no different. Thousands upon thousands of Malaysians will be there, come what may.

As I sat in the room with our fellow marchers, listening to the children of Bentong sing a song dedicated to their struggle, I felt strangely emotional. It was as if their voices helped us peer into a future of a new Malaysia that is taking shape right before our eyes. Of its shape and detail, no one could tell with any certainty. But one thing is for sure. It will be a Malaysia very different from the present one, burdened by her heavy history of class and environmental exploitation, and ethnic-based political ideologies.

“Those who do not move, do not notice their chains,” the radical democrat Rosa Luxemburg once said. Thank you, participants of Langkah Lestari, for walking and making Malaysians conscious of the shackles that are enslaving us. Thank you, Saudara Wong Tack (the organising chairperson), for reminding all Malaysians that true emancipation lies in our very own hands: “Pilihan di tangan kita!”

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 22 November 2012, 12:24 pm and is filed under
civil society/NGOs
,
environment
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


It’s Palestinians who have the right to defend themselves

Seumas Milne

The Guardian

20 November 2012

The US and Britain stand behind Israel’s onslaught on Gaza. Justice requires a change in the balance of forces on the ground

The way western politicians and media have pontificated about Israel’s onslaught on Gaza, you’d think it was facing an unprovoked attack from a well-armed foreign power. Israel had every “right to defend itself”, Barack Obama declared. “No country on earth would tolerate missiles raining down on its citizens from outside its borders.”

He was echoed by Britain’s foreign secretary, William Hague, who declared that the Palestinian Islamists of Hamas bore “principal responsibility” for Israel’s bombardment of the open-air prison that is the Gaza Strip. Meanwhile, most western media have echoed Israel’s claim that its assault is in retaliation for Hamas rocket attacks; the BBC speaks wearisomely of a conflict of “ancient hatreds”.

In fact, an examination of the sequence of events over the last month shows that Israel played the decisive role in the military escalation: from its attack on a Khartoum arms factory reportedly supplying arms to Hamas and the killing of 15 Palestinian fighters in late October, to the shooting of a mentally disabled Palestinian in early November, the killing of a 13 year-old in an Israeli incursion and, crucially, the assassination of the Hamas commander Ahmed Jabari last Wednesday during negotiations over a temporary truce.

Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, had plenty of motivation to unleash a new round of bloodletting. There was the imminence of Israeli elections (military attacks on the Palestinians are par for the course before Israeli polls); the need to test Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood president, Mohamed Morsi, and pressure Hamas to bring other Palestinian guerrilla groups to heel; and the chance to destroy missile caches before any confrontation with Iran, and test Israel’s new Iron Dome anti-missile system.

So after six days of sustained assault by the world’s fourth largest military power on one of its most wretched and overcrowded territories, at least 130 Palestinians had been killed, an estimated half of them civilians, along with five Israelis. The goal, Israel’s interior minister, Eli Yeshai, insisted, had been to “send Gaza back to the middle ages”.

True, the bloodshed hasn’t so far been on the scale of Operation Cast Lead in 2008-9, which left 1,400 Palestinians dead in three weeks. But the issue isn’t just who started and escalated it, or even the grinding “disproportionality” of yet another Israeli military battering (even before last month’s flareups, 314 Palestinians had been killed since 2009, as against 20 Israelis).

It’s that to portray Israel as some kind of victim with every right to “defend itself” from attack from “outside its borders” is a grotesque inversion of reality. Israel has after all been in illegal occupation of both the West Bank and Gaza, where most of the population are the families of refugees who were driven out of what is now Israel in 1948, for the past 45 years.

Despite Israel’s withdrawal of settlements and bases in 2005, the Gaza Strip remains occupied, both effectively and legally – and is recognised as such by the UN. Israel is in control of Gaza’s land and sea borders, territorial waters and natural resources, airspace, power supply and telecommunications. It has blockaded the strip since Hamas took over in 2006-7, preventing the movement of people, materials, and food supplies in and out of the territory – even calculating the 2,279 calories per person that would keep Gazans on an exemplary “diet”. And it continues to invade the strip at will.

So Gazans are an occupied people and have the right to resist, including by armed force (though not to target civilians), while Israel is an occupying power that has an obligation to withdraw – not a right to defend territories it controls or is colonising by dint of military power.

Even if Israel had genuinely ended its occupation in 2005, Gaza’s people are Palestinians, and their territory part of the 22% of historic Palestine earmarked for a Palestinian state that depends on Israeli withdrawal from the occupied West Bank and east Jerusalem. Across their land, Palestinians have the right to defend and arm themselves, whether they choose to exercise it or not.

But instead the US, Britain and other European powers finance, arm and back to the hilt Israel’s occupation, including the siege of Gaza – precisely to prevent Palestinians obtaining the arms that would allow them to protect themselves against Israeli military might.

It’s hardly surprising of course that powers which have themselves invaded, occupied and intervened across the Arab and Muslim world over the last decade should throw their weight behind Israel doing the same thing on its own doorstep. But it isn’t Palestinian rockets that stop Israel lifting the blockade, dismantling its illegal settlements or withdrawing from the West Bank and Gaza – it’s unconditional US and western support that gives Israel impunity.

Whatever the Israeli government’s mix of motivations for winding up the past week’s conflict, it seems to have backfired. For the first time since the start of the Arab uprisings, the cause of Palestine is again centre stage.

Emboldened by the wave of change and growing support across the region, Hamas has also regained credibility as a resistance force, which had faded since 2009, and strengthened its hand against an increasingly discredited Palestinian Authority leadership in Ramallah. The deployment of longer-range rockets that have now been shown to reach Tel Aviv and Jerusalem is also beginning to shift what has been an overwhelmingly one-sided balance of deterrence.

The truce being negotiated on Tuesday would reportedly enforce Hamas responsibility for policing the strip and crucially break the blockade, opening the Rafah crossing with Egypt for goods as well as people. It doesn’t, however, look like the long-term security deal with Hamas Israel was looking for, which would risk deepening the disastrous Palestinian split between Gaza and the West Bank.

Any relief from the bombardment, death and suffering of the past week has got to be welcome. But no ceasefire is going to prevent another eruption of violence. Whatever is finally agreed won’t end Israel’s occupation and colonisation of Palestinian land or halt its war of dispossession against the Palestinian people. That demands unrelenting pressure on the western powers that underwrite it to change course. But most of all, it needs a change in the balance of forces on the ground.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 22 November 2012, 12:04 pm and is filed under
Middle East/Africa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib tidak boleh samakan buah epal dengan bacang

Aspan Alias

21 November 2012

Najib masih menyanyikan lagu lama dengan dendangan yang lama. Najib seorang yang sangat terdesak dan kata-kata nya pun sangat tidak bernilai sebagai satu ucapan pemimpin yang setimpal sebagai kata-kata dan ucapan seorang pemimpin kepada rakyat yang sedang dalam pencarian ini. Najib terpaksa menggunakan ‘testimonial’ orang lain untuk mendapat kepujian dan pengiktirafan dan tidak mampu menunjukkan ‘testimonial’ sendiri bagi meyakinkan rakyat.

Najib masih meminta rakyat memberikan sokongan kepada UMNO dan BN kerana memberikan sokongan kepada UMNO khususnya kepada beliau itu tidak akan menjejaskan pelan transformasi beliau yang telah beliau umumkan setiap bulan dan minggu itu. Jika memberikan sokongan kepada pihak lain ia akan menjejaskan pelan pembangunan dan kemajuan negara dan akan membantutkan usaha kerajaan pimpinan beliau untuk menjadikan negara ini sebagai negara yang berpendapatan tinggi dan sebuah negara maju menjelangnya tahun 2020 nanti.

Najib mengambil Amerika Syarikat (AS) sebagai contoh pandangannya itu. Rakyat AS telah memberikan ‘continuity’ kepada pentadbiran Barack Obama dari Demokrat dalam pilihanraya Presiden baru-baru ini dan rakyat Malaysia perlu mengikut contoh itu dan memberikan sambungan pentadbiran kepada Barisan Nasional. Mendengar ucapan beliau itu, ramai termasuk diri saya hampir jatuh dari kerusi kerana hendak menyamakan beliau sebagai Barack Obama dan beliau tidak nampak bagaimana AS telah melakukan perubahan acapkali dalam pilihanraya Presiden di negara itu.

Di antara Parti Republican dan Demokrat, mereka ini telah bertukar-tukar dan bergilir gilir mentadbir negara kuasa dunia itu sejak negara itu merdeka 200 tahun dahulu. Najib sepatutnya tahu yang Presiden Jimmy Carter adalah dari parti Demokrat dan Presiden  George W Bush dan George Bush (senior) adalah dari Republican. Tidak tahu kah Najib yang Presiden Bill Clinton dan Obama adalah dari Demokrat?. Rakyat AS telah menukar parti-parti memerintah negara itu bergilir-gilir puluhan kali sejak kemerdekaannya dahulu.

Sebaliknya di negara kita, Tunku Abd Rahman, Tun Razak, Hussein Onn, our great Dr Mahathir, Abdullah Badawi dan sekarang Najib semuanya dari Barisan Nasional. Rakyat Malaysia belum pernah melakukan perubahan ini. Jika benar-benar hendak jadikan rakyat AS sebagai contoh kita mesti lakukan perubahan sekarang sebagaimana yang selama ini dilakukan oleh rakyat negara ‘Uncle Sam itu’.

Rakyat AS ada sebab untuk mengekalkan pentadbiran Obama kali ini seperti mana kita ada sebab untuk mengubah pentadbiran kita di Malaysia ini. Malahan Obama hanyalah merupakan Presiden dari parti Demokrat yang kedua selepas Clinton dalam beberapa dekad ini yang berjaya mengekalkan pentadbiran mereka buat kali kedua berturut-turut. Selain dari itu setiap Presiden dari parti Demokrat hanya mentadbir satu penggal sahaja.

Oleh itu Najib tidak perlu untuk menempel kejayaan orang lain untuk mencapai kejayaan sendiri. Pimpinan kerajaan sekarang elok elakan dari melihat AS dalam situasi ‘double Standard’ kerana UMNO selalunya melihat AS sebagai sebuah negara yang tidak bermoral dan sebagai sebuah negara demokrasi yang tidak boleh kita ikuti. Mahathir berkata kita tidak boleh mengikut jejak AS kerana kita mempunyai demokrasi acuan sendiri. Kenapa kali ini pula dipuji rakyat AS kerana mengekalkan Obama sebagai Presiden buat penggal kedua?

Najib patut bergantug kepada kewibawaan sendiri. Tidak payah menumpang kewibawaan Obama. Bagi Najib untuk menjadikan Obama sebagai ‘equation’ dalam politik beliau ia merupakan satu perkara yang agak terlalu jauh dari yang sepatutnya. Jangan kita hendak samakan buah epal dengan bacang.

Di antara buah epal dengan buah bacang amat jauh perbezaannya. Buah bacang ini sangat kuat baunya dan boleh di hidu dari jauh. Baunya itu memeningkan kepala kita.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 22 November 2012, 6:49 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Nation-building or undermining? – Open Letter to PM

By P Ramakrishnan

Aliran

21 November 2012

My dear PM,

You sounded like a great statesman when you urged Malaysians “to disregard political difference and work toward nation-building”.

That was simply fantastic!

It was very heart-warming to hear you say, “We must build the nation together. Irrespective of the political differences that we have, at the end of the day this country is ours.”

That was simply unbelievable!

How we wish that you really meant what you said. If that was your philosophy, by now you would have been proclaimed as the greatest Prime Minister this country has ever had. If that had happened, you need not now scramble around the country desperately trying to get the Barisan Nasional returned to power.

If you had put this rhetoric into practice, this country would have moved forward in leaps and bounds, astounding the rest of the world. We would have achieved so much during your three and a half years of premiership that would have helped you to walk through the coming 13th General Election without a sweat.

But when we assess you and try to match you with what you said at the launch of the Genovasi Challenge in Kuala Lumpur on 14 October 2012, we are gravely disappointed. You come across as a hollow politician who is not capable of living up to your words.

If you truly meant that “at the end of the day this country is ours” why is it that a vast majority of citizens are not made to feel that way? Why do you tolerate and refuse to take to task those narrow-minded Umno petty politicians and Perkasa poison-spewing ultras who refer to the rest of the citizens as ‘pendatang’? This is as much the country of the ordinary citizens and they have as much right as these name-calling despicable and loud-mouthed politicians who claim sole ownership to this right.

If you truly meant that “we must build the nation together”, why is it others are not given their chance to contribute as well? Why is it that those outside the Barisan Nasional circle are excluded and denied their legitimate right to voice their opinions and articulate their policies and promises?

Why do you punish those had voted for the Opposition by denying their MPs and state assembly members the allocations that you lavishly make available to your BN MPs and assembly members? Aren’t these elected opposition representatives also citizens of this country? Don’t the voters who elected these opposition representative have the same voting rights to choose whoever they prefer – just like those who elected the BN MPs and assembly members – without being punished for their choice? Why then this discrimination? What has party affiliation to do with the democratic process and the benefits that are due to the citizens?

And yet, hypocritically you declare, “We must build the nation together.” How do we do that when you don’t reach out to the others; when you completely shut them off and punish them?

You don’t even bother to consult the Leader of the Opposition before introducing new Bills to parliament as is done in mature democracies. You don’t give sufficient time for citizens to comment on these policies that are bound to impact them in various ways. Very often you rush through these Bills with super speed and with very little debate. How do we build this nation together? It has always been only your way and no other way! If there is no room for inclusion or co-operation, how then do we work together?

“Irrespective of the political differences that we have, at the end of the day this country is ours,” you say. But how is it that others are not allowed to work together with you for the common good of the nation? Why are you so divisive in your policy and approach?

You have done nothing to stop Utusan from spreading its venom and lies. You have never reprimanded them or replaced the editorial staff responsible for creating discord and hatred. They seem to have a field day. How do we “disregard political differences and work toward nation-building” when we are constantly bombarded with vile and vicious and divisive commentaries without any let up?

How is that those who disagree with or who have different views from you are hardly given the space to operate democratically? They have to contend with the police and the hooligans who turn up to disrupt Opposition events and activities. How do we “build the nation together…. Irrespective of the political differences that we have”?

How do we bring the various communities together and strengthen our national unity for the good of the country when the entire fabric of BN policy is racial? It is never based on justice irrespective of ethnicity – it is always based on racial quotas and racial handouts. It is a policy designed to keep the poor and the helpless dependent on the BN charity and not to rescue them from their poverty to lead a life of dignity. That is how the BN has thrived as a saviour of the rakyat for more than half a century, deluding the people that they don’t have a life and hope beyond the BN.

But you are not partial even to all the Malays even though you claim to represent the Malays. You only look after the cronies and the elites in Umno. When the Malays don’t belong to these groupings, they don’t get any benefits. But Umno will always speak in the name of the Malay community as if it is the benefactor of all Malays. The reality is that the Malays in Pas are almost completely ignored when it comes to receiving benefits; the Malays in Parti Keadilan Rakyat are treated as enemies. They get hardly any goodies.

How do we work together? How do we believe you when you say “at the end of the day this country is ours”? Do we all equally have a share in the wealth of this nation?

In spite of the much touted BR1M magic that you introduced, in spite of the greatly proclaimed 1Malaysia delusion that you created, Malaysians are not brimming with joy!

If after more than half a century of nationhood, we can’t rise above our racial identities and political differences and work together as citizens of this country then we have failed ourselves miserably. For this the BN must be solely held responsible. It is their divisive policies that have kept us apart and never brought us together.

The BN policy has failed this country and its people. They are not capable of any alternative policy that will benefit every citizen. The wealth of the nation really has not been equally distributed among the people – only cronies and certain leaders at the top have harvested benefits beyond the wildest dreams of the ordinary, common man.

The BN’s so-called nation-building efforts have not yielded the results this country deserves. We have to turn to an alternative policy to achieve this and this opportunity will be available at the 13th General Election.

P Ramakrishnan is the immediate past president of Aliran

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 22 November 2012, 9:04 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pemimpin-pemimpin PR sepatutnya memberikan sepenuh fokus kepada memenangi sokongan majoriti rakyat Malaysia terhadap Dasar Bersama PR

Dalam pusingan akhir menuju PRU13, pemimpin-pemimpin PR sepatutnya memberikan sepenuh fokus kepada memenangi sokongan majoriti rakyat Malaysia terhadap Dasar Bersama Pakatan Rakyat dan tidak jatuh ke dalam perangkap ‘Pecah dan Perintah’ Umno/Barisan Nasional.

Biarlah kita dipandu oleh Kenyataan Bersama pemimpin-pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat sewaktu Pakatan Rakyat ditubuhkan pada 2008 yang menegaskan semula landasan perpaduan, komitmen dan persetujuan PR untuk melaksanakan sebuah agenda bagi membangunkan negara dan mewujudkan masyarakat yang makmur berdasarkan keadilan, kebebasan, demokrasi dan tadbir urus yang baik, tanpa mengira kaum, agama dan budaya.

Kenyataan Bersama pemimpin-pemimpin PR bertarikh 12 April 2008, yang terpahat padanya tandatangan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Datin Seri Dr. Wan Azizah Ismail, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang dan saya sendiri, menyatakan:

“Dasar-dasar Pakatan adalah berpaksikan kepada perkara-perkara yang telah dipersetujui dan disepakati oleh semua pemimpin tiga parti iaitu, KeADILan, DAP dan PAS. Antaranya ialah membina negara ini atas landasan keadilan, membuka peluang untuk semua rakyat menikmati kemakmuran negara dengan memberi keutamaan kepada mereka yang miskin dan terpinggir.”

“Pakatan bukanlah medan bagi mana-mana pihak untuk memperjuang ideologi persendirian atau parti masing-masing. Walaupun ada pihak-pihak yang memberi pandangan berbeza dari yang telah dipersetujui oleh pemimpin-pemimpin utama tiga parti dalam Pakatan, pandangan itu adalah pandangan peribadi yang tidak sama sekali mewakili mana-mana parti dalam Pakatan. Oleh demikian, semua pemimpin dan ahli dalam Pakatan telah diarahkan menghentikan pandangan yang lain daripada muafakat bersama ini.”

“Tidak ada parti yang menjadi tunjang Pakatan. Bahkan tunjang kekuatan Pakatan berpaksikan prinsip sama taraf dan berasaskan semangat pemuafakatan pimpinan Pakatan berteraskan mandat yang diberikan oleh rakyat dalam Pilihanraya Ke-12 yang lalu.”

Setelah lebih dua tahun, negara ternanti-nanti akan PRU ke-13 tetapi sifat tidak dapat membuat keputusan dan kebimbangan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Razak kerana kurang berkeyakinan terhadap hasil pilihan raya itu nanti telah menghilangkan keyakinan ekonomi untuk masa hadapan negara.

Masa kian suntuk untuk Najib memandangkan ruang untuk beliau memilih tarikh terbaik bagi membubarkan Parlimen kini semakin sempit apabila tinggal cuma lima bulan lagi menjelang 27 April, 2013, yang mana Parlimen akan terbubar dengan sendirinya sekalipun Najib tidak dapat buat keputusan bila untuk memanggil pilihan raya.

Bagaimanapun, saya tidak percaya Najib mahu mencipta sejarah dengan menjadi pemimpin kerajaan yang tidak mampu membuat keputusan bilakah pilihan raya akan diadakan dan terpaksa bertahan sehinggalah Parlimen terbubar dengan sendirinya mengikut Perlembagaan.

Saya menjangkakan Pilihan Raya ke-13 akan diadakan pada bulan Febuari atau Mac tahun depan. Dengan tiga atau empat bulan lagi menuju PRU13, inilah masanya buat semua pemimpin-pemimpin, ahli-ahli dan penyokong-penyokong Pakatan Rakyat memberikan usaha terbaik untuk menggerakkan pengundi seluruh negara agar berdiri di belakang Dasar Bersama Pakatan Rakyat dan tidak memberikan ruang Umno/BN dan media-media mereka, sama ada media cetak atau eletronik, untuk menimbulkan perpecahan dan perselisihan di kalangan parti-parti Pakatan Rakyat.

Berhubung dengan itu, perlu untuk dijelaskan bahawa laporan terkini kononnya DAP telah bersetuju terhadap perlaksanaan hudud sekiranya Pakatan Rakyat menawan Putrajaya pada PRU 13 adalah sangat tidak benar dan tidak berasas.

Pendirian DAP bahawa hudud tidak sesuai atau wajar untuk Malaysia kerana bercanggah dengan Perlembagaan dan Malaysia yang majmuk merupakan pendirian DAP yang terbuka, berterusan dan konsisten dalam 46 tahun sejarah parti ini.

DAP telah menjelaskan pendirian kami dan inilah sebabnya mengapa perkara itu tiada di dalam Dasar Bersama PR, yang hanya boleh dipinda sekiranya terdapat persetujuan daripada ketiga-tiga perti PR.

This article is also available in English at:
https://blog.limkitsiang.com/2012/11/18/in-the-final-lap-to-13ge-pr-leaders-should-focus-single-mindedly-to-win-support-of-majority-of-malaysians-for-pr-common-policy-programmme-and-not-fall-into-umnobn-divide-and-rule-trap/

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 22 November 2012, 5:11 pm and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will PR become the proverbial rabbit?

Dr. Hsu Dar Ren

The Malaysian Insider

Nov 23, 2012

NOV 23 — As the end of the year approaches, there is still no sign of any election being called. Now it looks like the general election (GE) will only be held after  the automatic dissolution of our Parliament in late April 2013. Another possible date is perhaps March 2013.

Malaysia’s political landscape cannot be more different from that of the United States. Yet the recent presidential election there reinforces one important fact. That even if a person or a party cannot win the majority of the biggest ethnic group, the person or the party can still win the election by winning an overwhelming majority of the minorities.

President Barack Obama won because of the votes of the minorities. He carried almost 93 per cent of the African-American votes, over 70 per cent of the Asian and Hispanic votes, but got only 39 per cent of the votes of the White majority. In contrast, his opponent won the majority of the white votes at around 59 per cent but still lost the election.

Based on this, I think it is possible for Pakatan Rakyat to win the next general election in Malaysia, given that majority of the Chinese will vote for the opposition. What is needed is to make certain that the majority of Indian votes go to PR. Most of the Malay votes (my estimate is over 60 per cent) — the Malays form the biggest ethnic group in the country — will be for BN.

Bearing this in mind, I think it is politically unwise for PAS members to publicly suggest that should PR win their party president should be made the prime minister.

The support among the Chinese and Indian Malaysians for PR should not be taken for granted. One of the reasons for the level of support shown is that many of these people believe that even if PR comes into power with little government experience, it has at least a very experienced leader in Anwar Ibrahim and he can be accepted by all the ethnic groups.

While many Chinese had no qualms about voting for PAS candidates in the last election, it was because they supported a coalition in which PAS is only an equal partner and not the dominant one that would head the group. If the PAS president is to be the next PM, PAS would be perceived to be the dominant force inside the coalition, a prospect which may not be unlike that of BN having Umno as the dominant force. If that is the case, expect fewer of these people to support PAS in the next election, thus weakening the prospect of PR forming the next government.

PKR, on the other hand, is seen to be more moderate and multiracial. As such, its leader Anwar would have much more appeal and would be better accepted by all groups.

Those PAS members reminded me of the Taiping Rebellion of China in which a rebellious group which started as a reform group against the Qing Dynasty degenerated into a group of leaders fighting more for the spoils of war rather than the cause, when that war was not even half won.

I suggest that PAS members put more effort into winning the votes rather than harping on about who should be the PM. By doing so, they are actually doing a favour for BN; a situation akin to shooting one’s own foot.

I think generally PR should not be too complacent at this stage. By all indications, they have a chance to win, but the prospect is still an uphill battle, even though the uphill slope now is not as steep as before.

Remember the story of the tortoise and the rabbit. The rabbit, while on the way to victory, became too complacent and thus lost the race to the humble tortoise.

This is a lesson which PAS members as well as their president should take to their hearts if they do not want PR to become the proverbial rabbit.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 23 November 2012, 4:10 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tweets on 20,000 patriotic Malaysians at Dataran Merdeka protesting against Lynas

Tweets by Lim Kit Siang today

From Himpunan Kebangkitan Rakyat Sabah KK 2Himpunan Hijau Dataran Merdeka KL – quickening of awakening of Malaysians all races religions regions

3hrs ago

Final day of 13-day 300km trek from Kuantan to Kuala Lumpur to protest against Lynas rare earth refinery in Gebeng Pahang culminates in 20,000-ppl massive demo

3hrs ago

Most humbling/inspiring sea of confident hopeful patriotic Malaysian faces particularly young generation prepared to stand up for clean/green country

3hrs ago

I told Wong Tack as I joined 20k patriotic Malaysians who loved/cared 4Msia in last lap of 300km Kuantan/KL trek @ Sogo KL, he has made history

3hrs ago

28 Greenwalkers who completed 300km anti-Lynas trek have made history as with massive support of 20k people today, they have sent a powerful messsage.

3hrs ago

The word has gone out 2country and world “era the government knows best” is really gone/past and Msians who want clean green safe future must be heard

2hrs ago

PM Najib should respond positively to Kuantan/KL trek by leading a Cabinet team to dialogue with anti-Lynas activists @ Dataran Merdeka 9 am tomorrow

2hrs ago

PR fully support anti-Lynas campaign. Among PR leaders @ DataranMerdeka include PKR Chmn Azizah PR MPs FongKuiLun TeresaKok WongHoLeng ChongChiengJen ErTeckHwa etc

2hours ago

20,000 join green march against Lynas – by Lee Long Hui (Mkini) http://goo.gl/RBYzp

2 hours ago

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 25 November 2012, 9:58 pm and is filed under
environment
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Nurul Izzah’s statement in the Kaum Muda-Kaum Tua context

by AB Sulaiman

CPI

26 November 2012

The case of Nurul Izzah Anwar, the PKR vice president, making the statement that there is no compulsion in religion and that this should apply not only to non-Malays but to Malays as well is now commanding the public domain.

Thanks to Utusan Malaysia and the Internet, the speed at which Nurul’s statement spread was staggering. The very next day, it appeared as a front-page headline in the Malay daily but with a twist: it was reported that she had been ‘suggesting’ Malays could commit apostasy; or showing the way to do so. (Apostasy is considered the greatest sin in Malay reckoning.)

To the Malay-Muslim, she has committed a grave offence for which she must be taken to task.

I will try to identify what really is at issue by way of asking some pertinent and relevant questions.

Cutting through the confusion

First question: Nurul quoted the Quranic edict that “there is no compulsion in religion”. Is she right? The answer is yes, she is, as in Surah 2.256.

Following question: Did she state that this edict should apply to Malays as well? Her words spoken at the Nov 3 forum held at the Full Gospel Tabernacle church in Subang Jaya, according to the transcript provided by Malaysiakini, were:

“How can anyone really say, ‘sorry, this only applies to non-Malays.’ It has to apply equally.”

Her statement can be understood as meaning that the Article 11 constitutional provision on the freedom of religion must apply for Malays as well. Since nowhere in the Quran does it mention the Malay ethnicity, we should logically infer that Nurul’s remark was a comment on Malaysian law rather than on Islamic jurisprudence.

Next: why then did former PAS deputy president Nasharudin Mat Isa reportedly say that the Surah was not applicable to Malays? I do not wish to answer for him, but according to the reports it is because as a religious scholar he feels qualified to comment on such things while others are not.

Sri Gading Member of Parliament Mohamad Aziz raised the Nurul issue in the House on Nov 7 saying

“Apa hukum dari segi syariat Islam atas kenyataan Ahli Parlimen Lembah Pantai yang menyatakan orang Melayu Islam bebas memilih agama yang diminati? Dalam erti kata lain, boleh keluar daripada agama Islam yakni murtad. Kenyataan ini seolah-olah meraikan orang Islam menjadi murtad.”

Translated into English, the MP had described Nurul’s remark as more or less as a statement to celebrate Malay conversion because apostasy will now be permitted among Muslims.

You might ask: Did she actually encourage apostasy for Muslims? The answer is no.

Syariah augmented by civil laws

In her reply to Mohamad Aziz, Mashitah Ibrahim – the Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Islamic affairs – said that under the law, anyone found guilty of mocking or maligning Islam could be sentenced to prison not exceeding two years, fined RM3,000 or both.

If wielded, this piece of prohibitive legislation portends a conflict and tussle pitting a reformist and progressive Malay-Muslim mind such as Nurul Izzah’s on the one hand, and the orthodox and conservative mind represented by Mashitah, Nasharudin, Mohamad Aziz and the rest of them on the other.

This conflict is common enough in any religion and Islam is not spared. In Islam, this conflict stemmed from the tussle between Revelation and Reason, which I shall delve into immediately.

For this discourse, I will refer to a scholarly work Crisis in the Muslim Mind by Dr Abdul Hamid Ahmad AbuSulayman who was a Rector of the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). In his 1993 book, the author explained the relationship between Revelation and Reason.

Which takes precedence?

Revelation in Islam decrees that all knowledge comes from God via His Revelations found in the Quran which is ‘God’s word’. Reason is Man’s ability to rationalise by using his God-given intelligence and memory. Reason is God’s way of making mankind understand Revelation.

As Revelation is ‘stored’ in the Quran, mankind must use his reasoning ability to adhere to all of the edicts, rules and regulations inherent in this holy book. It is at this point that there appears a split in understanding between the orthodox and the progressive.

To the orthodox, as the Quran is God’s Words, its entire contents are to be the ultimate Truth. The Quran has to be adhered to without any hesitation, doubt, scepticism.

 To progressives the Quran might indeed be God’s Words but mankind has been given intelligence by God. The Muslim can and should employ thought and rationality to everything, even to the Quran.

Bow and obey

An illustration taken from Islamic history might help you to understand the point. For this I will refer to the writing of Pervez Hoodbhoy’s work, Islam and Science (1992) from where I take the case of Abu Yusuf Yaqub ibn Ishaq al-Kindi or better known as al-Kindi (801-873 CE) – a philosopher, mathematician, and musician during the Caliphate of Al-Mutawwakil in Baghdad.

Al-Kindi pointed out that Surah 55.5 of the Quran states that the sun, moon, stars, mountains, trees and beasts ‘bow themselves’ before God. For the unsophisticated, this invokes an idea wherein all creation literally bends in prayer – a bowing tree, a bowing mountain (for example) bending in prayer.

He had some doubt over this term in its literal sense. After a long mental search, al-Kindi interpreted that ‘bow’ could mean ‘obey’ – the mountains and trees and all other creations obeyed God’s Words but did not bow in doing so.

A point to note is that al-Kindi lived during the period when human civilisation was rudimentary and the literacy rate was low. The aristocratic class was all-powerful and feudalism was the norm. There was also an emergent clergy or ulama class of citizens, usually aligned with the aristocracy. In the event, al-Kindi’s radical views had to be acceptable to the rulers and the ulama class.

Apparently in this specific ‘bowing’ case, they did not agree and deemed his opinion a heresy.

The reaction was swift to his heretic and dangerous beliefs. The Caliph had al-Kindi flogged in public and confiscated his library the ‘Al-Kindiyah’. The old philosopher fell into depression and silence, and died a broken man.

Revelation had won over Reason. God’s Words (and by extension the Syariah) are an immutable set of rules which cannot be modified according to the times.

 Sure enough when the four Imams – Maliki (d.795 CE), Hanafi (d.767 CE), Shafii (d.820 CE), and Hanbali (d. 855 CE) – codified the Islamic jurisprudence that is applied right up to today, they were all under the influence of Revelation over Reason.

“There were slight differences in weight they attached to various Quranic verses and degree of validity they assigned to various Prophetic traditions”, says Hoodbhoy. Nonetheless their philosophies were otherwise uniform: Revelation over Reason.

The orthodoxy and conservatism of Islam was later strengthened by the immensely influential Al-Ghazzali (d.1111 CE).

Islamic commentators claim that by the end of the 11th century, all major problems of Islamic jurisprudence had been resolved between these Islamic schools. After that, all the doors for discourse or Ijtihad were slammed shut.

Bolting the Gates ofIjtihad

Let’s pause a little over the points made in the last paragraph. Before the closing of Ijtihad, the flame of learning had burnt bright in Islamic civilisation. Scholars like al-Kindi, Ibn Sina, Omar Khayyam and many others were leading the known world in intellectual development and study. Modern day scholars and adherents of Islam will not miss the opportunity to remind the non-Muslim world of Muslim contributions to human knowledge and science.

But after this glorious era, there was the ascendency of an ossified religiosity making it harder for secular pursuits to exist. It appeared that the closing of Ijtihad had also closed the minds of the Islamic civilisation.

Partly because of this closed mind, the Muslim civilisation missed out in the subsequent human intellectual developments: the thoughts of Copernicus, Galileo, and Newton and a long list of illustrious names that had led to the explosion of science and scientific thinking; the growth of democracy, capitalism, the Industrial Revolution. It missed out from the burgeoning economic, social, political, intellectual and technological opportunities and advancements faced and undertaken by the universal human civilisation.

When Islam was brought into this country (circa 1403 CE), it was this orthodox and conservative version that arrived. I have not come across of any record of any meaningful intellectual development from the Malay civilisation from this date.

Kaum Tua, Kaum Muda

Malay intellectual discourse began in the early 20th century, as shown by recent Malay social history. During this time there appeared the tussle between the Kaum Tua and Kaum Muda. Farish Noor has written a concise and fairly authoritative account of these factions under an article titled Pre-Net Reformists in Malaysiakini (22 March 2001).

According to Farish who is presently a senior fellow at the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, the Kaum Tua comprised mainly the traditional ruling elite led by the royals and aristocrats of the Malay sultanates on the peninsula while the Kaum Mudawere the modernist reformist Malay and Peranakan intelligentsia based in the more cosmopolitan centres on the West coast.

Both groups were worried about the future development of the country and their collective fate under British rule.

The royal families and aristocrats, Farish writes further, launched a number of initiatives that were aimed at protecting the interests of the local communities against the onslaught of British political and economic hegemony. One such effort was the Majlis Agama Kelantan (Kelantan Religious Council) that was formed in 1915. But the Majlis and many other bodies like it soon came under the leadership and patronage of Malay rulers who were more interested in protecting the interests of the traditional ruling elite than the Malay masses.

Another source quoted the conflict between Kaum Muda and Kaum Tua as centring on the validity of Reason to verify religious matters (or Ijtihad) versus those who blindly followed the teachings of early scholars (or Taqlid), see Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 7 (special issue of ‘Diversity of Knowledge on Middle East’: 07-13, 2011 © IDOSI Publications, 2011).

The advocators of taqlid, Kaum Tua, rejected the use of reason in religion as they claimed that the practice conflicted with the Quran. The task of genuine social reform and political organisation therefore devolved instead to the new generation of Malay reformers and modernists who came to be known as Kaum Muda, writes Farish Noor.

Kaum Muda had this modernist opposition towards blind imitation (taqlid) and their emphasis was on the dire need to use Reason. To them, instead of simply accepting the words and opinions of the religious scholars, Man is required to make use of Reason to distinguish between the valid and invalid opinions, or to reinterpret them.

Those arguments are strikingly familiar and from this I can safely deduce that they refer to the tussle of Revelation over Reason in the Malay social context.

 In that pre-Internet era, the Kaum Muda was trying to disseminate the new mental order via newspapers, journals and magazines. One prominent personality, Syed Sheikh al-Hadi who hailed from Penang went over to Singapore and Malacca to open madrasahs or religious schools hoping to spread progressive Islam.

The win goes to Kaum Tua

From what I can gather, the inter-generational tussle was ‘won’ by the orthodox Kaum Tua, replicating the win by the clergy over al-Kindi in the early years of Islam as mentioned earlier.

What could have caused this loss by the Kaum Muda? Again I would attribute it to the social environment surrounding the Malay community during the material time or to borrow Farish’s label, the ‘pre-Net’ period.

During that era, the country was under colonial British rule and the rural Malays were an agrarian society. Coupled with this were a low literacy level and the great influence of informal education which centred religion, Malay customs and local traditions.

I remember Malay schools teaching students just the rudiments of reading and writing, basic arithmetic and some history and geography. There was this glaring absence of imparting to the students the ability to think and intellectualise – an endeavour which requires the ability to look for alternatives in the search for truth. There was no teaching them to be critical, innovative, creative, and imaginative.

Without these abilities they had very little capacity to accept change.

Post-Net and info-have era

 All this brings us back to the present ‘post-Net’ also known as the ‘info-have’ era. What do we have and where are we today?

We have an independent Malaysia, a higher level of formal education and literacy, knowledge, the ability to analyse and an open mind that can roam far and wide. We have economic progress and a huge middle class.

We are living in the ‘info-have’ era of the second decade of the 21st century.

We have the potential and opportunity to give Reason precedence over Revelation. We have the opportunity to join the Reason-based post-modern universal human civilisation. And within this context, I feel that in addition to Nurul’s answer to the question being spot-on, she is also a true champion of the progressive Kaum Muda of today.

Her Kaum Tua detractors appeared inadequate in clear and independent thinking. Utusan Malaysia had to use the power of suggestion to smear the truth. Nasharudin had to add his own prejudice to corner Nurul by claiming that Surah 2.256 was not meant for Malays. Mashitah had to admit that Malaysian legislation prohibited missionaries to proselytize other religions to Muslims but our law failed to cover Nurul’s situation.

In their ‘Revelationist’ enthusiasm (or blindness) to ‘protect’ Islam, they had all been intellectually dishonest.

Nurul Izzah seems to me to be a victim of the type of criticism levelled by the Kaum Tua mentality that overtly and habitually champions Revelation over Reason in any religious dispute.

Capitalizing on the orthodox and conservative Kaum Tua mindset, it is no surprise that her political enemies seem to be seizing the opportunity to dampen and destroy her promising political career.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 26 November 2012, 12:29 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Malaysian government is “broken” and that’s why it must be “fixed” in 13th GE

Over the weekend, in his speech to the state-sponsored NGO gathering “Himpunan Barisan 1Malaysia” at the Putra World Trade Centre, the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak said:

“Why fix it (the government) if it’s not broken? It’s not broken, far from it. Our country is the envy of many other nations.”

Both at the thousand-people Himpunan Kebangkitan Rakyat dinner in Kota Kinabalu on Saturday night and the People’s Green Assembly at Dataran Merdeka this morning at the conclusion of the historic 14-day 300-km Kuantan-Kuala Lumpur trek, I had posed the same question whether the “Malaysian government is broken and needs to be fixed?”, and the answer is a thunderous, powerful and united affirmative!

Fortunately, the Malaysian government has not broken down completely, all the more why  it must be “fixed” immediately before it reaches a point of no return.

There is a long list why the Malaysian government is “broken” after 55 years of UMNO/BN rule  and needs to be “fixed”, but I will only refer to the  following instances:

1.	Truly independent judiciary and just rule of law.

Malaysia has yet to regain its international reputation as a land where there is truly independent judiciary and just rule of law.

Twenty-four years after the initial and most heinous  assault on the judiciary in 1988, resulting in the sacking of the Lord President Tun Salleh Abas and two Supreme Court judges, Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman and Datuk George Seah and the cowing of more than a generation of judges, public confidence in the professionalism, independence, impartiality and integrity of Malaysian judiciary has yet to be restored.

2.	Subordination/subversion of key national institutions.

A major example of a “broken” government that needs to be “fixed” is the subordination/subversion of the independence, impartiality and professionalism of key national institutions, whether the public service, Attorney-General’s Chambers, the Police, the Election Commission or the Anti-Corruption Commission.

3.	World’s best education system.

Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin is now talking about having the world’s best education system. But this was promised by the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak 17 years ago when he was Education Minister and introduced the Education Act 1996 to replace the Education Act 1961.

The Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025 has however admitted the failure of the Education Act 1996 to ensure that Malaysia has the world’s best education system, with the  growing gap between Malaysia’s education system with those of other countries in student performance and attainments.

When Malaysia first participated in Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in 1999, its average student score was higher than the international average in both Mathematics and Science.  By 2007, the last published cycle of results, the Malaysian system’s performance had slipped to below the international average in both Mathematics and Science with a commensurate drop in ranking.  Critically, 18% and 20% of Malaysia’s students failed to meet the minimum proficiency levels in Mathematics and Science in 2007, a two to fourfold increase from 7% and 5% respectively in 2003.

The results of Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2009+ were also discouraging, with Malaysia ranking in the bottom third of 74 participating countries, below the international and OECD average.

A comparison of scores shows that 15-year-olds in Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong and Shanghai are performing as though they have had three or more years of schooling than 15-year-olds in Malaysia.

4.	Among World’s top universities.

In the sixties, University of Malaya was recognised as one of the world’s top universities. Today, we are struggling to get at least one Malaysian  university accorded recognition as one of the world’s top universities to rectify the perception and reality that “the best education is only available abroad”.

5.	Economic Performance and Competitiveness

Malaysia fell four places from 21st to 25th spot out of 144 countries in the latest Global Competitiveness Report 2012-2013 of the World Economic Forum. But even more ominous is the country’s losing out to more and more countries although the country was the most developed in Asia after Japan when we achieved independence in 1957, ahead of others like South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong but  now at risk of being overtaken by other countries like Thailand, Vietnam and even Indonesia.

6.	Worsening crime and Safety of Person and Property

Despite claims that Malaysia is the safest country in the region and that the fear of crime is a problem of public perception, the fact is that the increasing incidence of  crime, the lack of  personal safety and security of property have become major problems affecting not only Malaysians but also investors and tourists.

As a result, crime and the fear of crime have become major problems in the country which have yet to be seriously addressed by the authorities.

7.	Worst corruption problem than under any previous Prime Minister

Despite the GTP and NKRA priority to fight corruption, corruption today under Datuk Seri Najib Razak is in a worse condition  than under any previous Prime Minister, as testified by  the 17  annual Transparency International Corruption Perception Index since 1995.

Malaysia was ranked No. 23 out of 41 countries in 1995, but it has fallen to the worst 60th placing out of 183 countries in 2011 with the lowest-ever score of 4.3 – in sharp contrast both to improved rankings and scores of other countries whether in South-East Asia, Asia-Pacific or other Islamic countries in Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC).

8.	Flight of two million of the best and brightest Malaysians abroad in the past four decades.

“Chronic and sustained human flight” is one of the indices of a “failed state”.  There will be a renewed exodus of the best and brightest Malaysians abroad if Malaysians prove to be incapable of “fixing” a “broken” government in the 13GE.

9.	Respect for human rights and environmental/ecological heritage.

The refusal of the Prime Minister or anyone of the Barisan Nasional Ministers and MPs to engage with Himpunan Hijau at the People’s Assembly at Dataran Merdeka this morning at the conclusion of the 14-day 300-km Kuantan-Kuala Lumpur trek to oppose Lynas, affirm sustainable development and  halt/review hazardous projects like the gold mine in Bukit Koman, Pahang, the high-tension electrical tower in Rawang, Selangor, refinery and petrochemical integrated development project (RAPID) in Pengerang, Johore is powerful proof that the government is “broken” and needs to be “fixed”.

10.	Clean, free and fair elections.

Are the Umno/BN leaders prepared to foreswear conducting the dirtiest election campaign in the forthcoming 13GE?

Najib said Malaysia is the “envy of many other nations”!

What is there for Malaysia to be proud that we are the  “envy” of nationals in  “failed states” like Somalia, Congo, Sudan, Chad, Zimbabwe, Afghanistan or Haiti.

Malaysians can only hold their heads high if they are the “envy” of successful developed nations like Scandinavian countries, the advanced European countries or  others like Australia, New Zealand, United States, Canada.

Najib said that a change of government is not necessary for the country as the ruling BN government is ready to change.

Let Najib prove that the Umno/BN government is still capable of “big change” by meeting three challenges in his UMNO presidential speech later this week, to set forth the case that the government is not so “broken” that it needs to be “fixed”, viz:

•	Firstly, declare that corruption is the No. 1 problem in UMNO and the country and introduce an Automatic Enforcement System (AEA) to fight grand corruption with unaccountable and extraordinary wealth of political leaders deemed in law as corruption with the ill-gotten wealth to be confiscated by the state unless the accused could prove their lawful origins in a court of law;

•	Secondly, establish the Prime Minister’s sincerity in his 1Malaysia concept and slogan where every Malaysian regards himself as Malaysian first and race, religion, socio-economic status or region second by declaring that Ketuanan Rakyat Malaysia is the overarching UMNO objective and not Ketuanan Melayu; and

•	Thirdly, demonstrate full democratic credentials and loyalty to the objective to make Malaysia “world’s best democracy” by declaring UMNO’s respect of the right of voters to choose the government they want and  full commitment to transfer power peacefully to Pakatan Rakyat if this is the voters’ verdict in the 13th General Elections.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 26 November 2012, 3:46 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Brain drain
,
Corruption
,
Education
,
Elections
,
environment
,
Judiciary
,
Najib Razak
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Can MCA deliver for Najib?

Mohd Ariff Sabri Aziz |	 November 27, 2012

Free Malaysia Today

Is Najib lashing out at DAP because he’s frustrated with MCA’s inability to sustain Chinese support?

COMMENT

Why should any self-respecting Malay support Umno which stands idly by and endorses a party like the MCA?

MCA can no longer sustain Chinese support and Umno is absolutely disabled to help.

So it has come to this because all this while Umno has turned MCA into a party of honorary Malays. Now Umno reaps what it has sown.

The prospect of DAP supplanting and eliminating MCA altogether is the main reason why Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is attempting meek scare-mongering tactic.

But people are not buying whatever you say now, Mr PM.

Najib says Malays are fed up with DAP. Well, let me tell you this. Those who know Najib well, knows he is playing to the gallery.

He is acutely aware that he is speaking among political rejects. MCA’s influence over its ethnic group is fast diminishing.

Its claim that it’s regaining legitimacy among the Chinese sounds so phony and laughable.

MCA knows it can only deliver at best three parliamentary seats in the coming general election. The party has been reduced to the status of a neutered Chihuahua.

Doing the unthinkable

We will humour both Najib and his sleeping partner, MCA.

Now why should the Malays be fed up? DAP, after all, has always contested in areas where MCA candidates stand.

In which case DAP poses no threat to Umno. So, could it be that Najib is really and actually fed up with MCA for being completely impotent at winning over the Chinese?

MCA bends over and does the unthinkable – it articulates issues that alienate them further from Malay votes while at the same time, places Malaysian Chinese as seemingly natural enemies to Malays.

That is a position which all right-thinking Malaysian Chinese must refuse. They cannot ride on the irresponsible and xenophobic new approach of MCA.

MCA’s direct and scornful diatribes against Islam are tolerable while less intense technical opposition from DAP is taken as virulent and insidious assault on Muslims.

When the MCA says that hudud, which is currently a non-issue, could have been implemented a long time ago had Umno wished to but has not – that means that Umno, a Muslim party does not support Islamic laws.

The fact is Umno and its leaders mock Islam. They know if hudud is implemented, this country will be in a mess.

We wouldn’t have enough stone pebbles to stone offenders.

The writer is a former Umno state assemblyman who has now joined DAP. He is a FMT columnist.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 27 November 2012, 8:46 am and is filed under
Elections
,
MCA
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.