The Leadership Malaysia Needs But Is Not Getting

M. Bakri Musa

www.bakrimusa.com

16th December 2015

The leadership qualities needed in a society during times of great changes and uncertainties are very different from those required in one that is static.  Malaysia today faces many great challenges but is blighted with a leadership more suited for a static feudal society.

     Today’s Malaysia is a complex, plural society. The unwary could easily be misled by official figures and general consensus that may apply to or describe one segment of society but may well be the very opposite for the others.

     There are at least two Malaysias. One is exclusively Malay, dominated by UMNO and PAS; the other, predominantly but not exclusively non-Malay. The differences between the two extend beyond cultural values, socioeconomic status, and general worldview. The former is feudal, xenophobic, and servile towards authority; the latter is modern, aligned with the global mainstream, and views government more as the problem than the solution.

      Thus statements like deteriorating local schools apply only to government ones and attended by the first group. International schools are doing very well. As for Chinese schools, the increasing number of Malay parents enrolling their children there speaks of the quality. Both schools are the preferred choice for the second Malaysia.

     The Malaysia of Onn and Razak may have been much less complicated but no less divided, nonetheless both leaders exhibited qualities of what James McGregor Burns called “transforming leadership.” Both were great not only because of their exceptional personal and leadership qualities but because they appeared at a time when those qualities were most needed – Datuk Onn following the adoption of the Malayan Union Treaty, Tun Razak in the aftermath of the tragic 1969 riots.

     It is said that what makes a great leader great is circumstance. That was certainly true with Onn and Razak. Malaysians were lucky that the sterling attributes of the two shone through at those particular junctures in our history.

     During times of stability (or stagnation) it does not really matter who is the leader as things are essentially on automatic pilot. For a while Malay society, like all feudal societies, remained unchanged for generations. So it did not matter who was the sultan; the peasants’ lives would remain the same regardless. You could put a monkey in the palace, and life in the kampongs would remain unaffected.

     Leaders’ decisions during those times have minimal impact on the governed. In fact during feudal times it would have been better to have a monkey in the palace as then it would not bother the natives to extract expensive tributes. Besides, monkeys’ demands could easily be satisfied with bananas, not so sultans’.

     It is only during times of great change that leadership is most crucial. It is also during such times that the strengths of a culture would shine or its weaknesses be exposed, as with the Japanese reaction to the tsunami of 2011 and the Americans’ to Katrina of 2005 as discussed in an earlier essay.

     The genius of both Onn and Razak was precisely their ability to leverage the very elements of our culture that had imprisoned us (or so we thought) to instead liberate us mentally. They did not stand on the podium and berate us for the presumed weaknesses of our ways and nature. Instead they utilized to maximum effectiveness those very same qualities of our culture that others deemed wanting to bring about profound, positive and permanent changes in us.

     Consider the Malay cultural attribute of unquestioned obedience to rulers. Onn leveraged that to maximal effect in mobilizing the Malay masses in a very public display of loyalty that effectively prevented those sultans from leaving the palace in Kota Baru to partake in the installation ceremony of the first Malayan Union Governor. Those sultans were essentially “CB-ed,” confined to barracks, or in this case, the palace.

     Likewise Tun Razak made full use of our cultural trait of obedience to authority to make his decisive moves. He did not consult anyone or hold public forums before imposing martial law and suspending parliament. He did what he had to do, and did it decisively. Order and peace soon followed.

     Even in a stable society with no external forces or natural calamities to disrupt its equilibrium, substantive change can still be achieved if it is lucky enough to be endowed with an exceptionally enlightened leader. Meaning, a gifted leader can transform even a placid society, although the need for effective leadership is never more critical than when a society is in disequilibrium or facing major challenges.

     Consider the first scenario where the society is stable and has the cultural trait of excessive deference and unquestioning loyalty to its leaders. If perchance it were to be miraculously endowed with an enlightened leader, someone who accepts and indeed encourages criticism of his leadership, then the masses would readily emulate him and that society would be transformed in short order.

    Take China; it long endured the stifling rule of communism under Chairman Mao who led that huge nation from one giant leap to another straight into the abyss. The Chinese too have a long cultural tradition of unquestioned loyalty to a central figure. Before Mao there was the long line of emperors.

     Thus even when the unimposing, uncharismatic and uninspiring Deng Xiaoping took over, he was able to radically change direction for the whole nation. He did it not through his personal qualities (being unimposing, uncharismatic and uninspiring would not get you far in any society) but by leveraging to maximal effect the Confucian tradition of “follow the leader.” In one generation Deng transformed China.

     This tradition of unquestioned loyalty to a leader is typical not just of China but all developing (particularly Asian) societies. I go further and posit that it is this mindset that keeps those societies behind. On the bright side, it is precisely in those societies where the role of a leader is crucial in emancipating the people, as dramatically demonstrated by Deng’s China.

     It is within us, individually as well as a society, to topple our coconut shell. The Arab spring of 2011 erupted without any help from the outside, nor did it have any recognizable leadership. It was spontaneous. Wael Ghonim, a Google executive, a geek effectively, would be the closest individual who could be identified as the leader in the Egyptian uprising. In Tunisia, it was the unemployed hawker Mohamed Bouaziz, may his soul rest in peace, who triggered the revolution.

     Of course with proper leadership the process of toppling the shell would be greatly facilitated and the collateral damages minimized. Also with identifiable leadership, the movement would not risk being subsequently subverted. The transition would also be faster, smoother, and less traumatic, as with the “Quiet Revolution” in Ireland and Quebec of the 1960s and 70s respectively.

     With the possible exception of Tunisia, the Arab Spring failed precisely because there were no identifiable strong and enlightened leaders emerging to lead and channel the rising aspirations of the people. To be sure, there were many strong leaders appearing but they exhibited the bad old tendencies of their predecessors. They were consumed less with fulfilling the demands of their followers, more on tightening their grip on power and on avenging the wrongs of their predecessors.

     Instead of exploiting the soft values of their faith Islam, where being forgiving and to forgive are highly valued, those new Arab leaders resorted to and expanded on their primitive cultural ethos of the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend, except this time degenerating to a more lethal and protracted friend-of-my-enemy-is-now my-enemy. At least with the former you could potentially create new friends; with the latter, only more new enemies.

     Like his late father Tun Razak, Najib too is very much aware of the Malay cultural propensity of blind loyalty to their leaders. Unlike the Tun who leveraged that quality to good purpose to end the May 1969 race riots quickly, his son exploited that very same communal trait to extract support and indeed blessing for his corrupt and chauvinistic ways!

     To Najib’s brand of leadership, loyalty is to be exploited to insulate, if not excuse, his incompetence and corruption. Honest enlightened leaders on the other hand would never even contemplate betraying their followers’ trust and loyalty

     Razak the father solved a major crisis; Najib the son will trigger one, if Malaysians do not stop him.

Adapted from the author’s latest book, Liberating The Malay Mind, ZI Publications Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia , 2013.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 17 December 2015, 9:33 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Two political bombshells went off  today which have seismic effects on the Malaysian political scene in the weeks and months to come

The Selayang  parliamentary constituency is the 47th parliamentary seat I am visiting since my six-month suspension from Parliament on Oct. 22 in pursuit of the question “Mana RM2.6 billion?” in Parliament.

I have set out on a nation-wide tour of the parliamentary constituencies in these six months to  witness the rising crescendo of the people’s demand for answer to the question to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak “Mana RM2.6 billion?” as well as for answer to  another of Najib’s twin mega scandals – the RM55 billion 1MDB scandal.

Najib and his Ministers went to great lengths both at the 25-day budget meeting of the Dewan Rakyat and the five-day 69th UMNO General Assemblies to suppress all disclosures and discussion about the twin mega scandals, but apart from causing Najib’s credibility to plumb to ever-lower depths, it could not succeed to  bury both mega scandals for the simple reason that events and developments are no more within Najib’s full control.

This is why a political bombshell related to the 1MDB scandal exploded today, not in Malaysia, but far away in the United States where the Wall Street Journal published another 1MDB shocker, claiming that 1MDB sent at least US$850 million (RM3.7 billion) last year to an offshore entity formed to appear as if it was owned by an Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund.

On top of Najib’s RM2.6 billion “donation” scandal, we now have another  RM3.7 billion mysterious offshore account scandal.

According to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), this is based on documents reviewed by the publication and those familiar with the matter.

WSJ said: “A 1MDB unit transferred at least US$850 million via three transactions last year to a British Virgin Islands-registered company with a name that made it look like it was controlled by IPIC (International Petroleum Investment Co), according to wire transfer documents viewed by the Journal (WSJ) and two people familiar with the matter.

“The 1MDB fund sent the money to ‘Aabar Investments PJS Ltd’ which closely resembles the name of IPIC’s wholly-owned subsidiary Aabar Investments PJS, the wire documents show”.

Quoting those familiar with the matter, WSJ said executives at IPIC and Aabar investigating the transfers concluded neither of the two Abu Dhabi funds ever owned or controlled the British Virgin Islands company.

“Records in the British Virgin Islands don’t give any details on the owners or directors of the company.

“The records show the British Virgin Islands firm was incorporated on March 14, 2012, and liquidated on June 23 this year, a time of growing criticism of 1MDB from opposition politicians and within Mr Najib’s (Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak) ruling party,” WSJ added.

The CEC of 1MDB, Arul Kanda Kandasamy will be making his second appearance before the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) tomorrow.

Will Arul be able to throw light on this latest WSJ expose and will the PAC under the new Chairman Datuk Hasan Arifin, who has made  a name for himself for his “cari makan” philosophy, transform the PAC into a “cari makan” committee by not asking too many questions about the latest WSJ revelation?

This will be a PAC bombshell for the PAC would have become a different creature from the one when it was chaired by Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamad.

But the WSJ 1MDB expose was not the only bombshell in Malaysian politics, as there was another political bombshell –  Najib’s continued courtship of the PAS leadership, especially as the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang has become the foremost champion of Najib who has come under intense and sustained  attack for his twin mega scandals –  putting to shame all the other  UMNO Ministers and leaders.

In May this year,  Hadi publicly advised Najib to continue as Prime Minister  and that he should not succumb to pressures like the 1MDB scandal and in July, after the Wall Street Journal expose of the scandal of the  RM2.6 billion “donation” in Najib’s personal banking accounts, Hadi rejected the report on the ground that Wall Street Journal did not have four trustworthy witnesses to back its graft allegations against the Prime Minister.

With such a sturdy defender in the person of  the PAS President, Najib does not even need UMNO leaders and Ministers to defend him.

These two political bombshells which went off today will have seismic effects on the Malaysian political scene in the weeks and months to come.

(Speech at the Taman Templer DAP Branch “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang & Mana RM2.6 billion?” dinner at Prima (Selayang on Thursday, 17th December 2015 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 17 December 2015, 8:48 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Umno’s regressive, harmful discourse

Netusha Naidu

The Malaysian Insider

17 December 2015

A lot has been said about the recent Umno general assembly, especially the president’s speech as presented by Datuk Seri Najib Razak. Instead of making the usual commentary of my own opinions about its contents, I felt that a discourse analysis would have been more appropriate to shed some light on the matters that drew my attention.

A discourse analysis is when we look at the usage of language by particular parties and how the messages are being conveyed to intended audiences. Most of time, such methods are used to display the variety of approaches that authors take to portray certain ideologies. As a result, we learn that some ideas become more dominant than others. All because of how it is being articulated and who is the proponent of those ideas.

What appeared most central of all my observations in the speech was the wordplay of Islamism that has ultimately dominated the entire text. This should come as no surprise to most of us. After all, religion has been something that we have been obsessing over lately. Not just within the country, but globally as well, in the light of the escalating violence of Isis, the preposterous call for banning Muslims by Donald Trump and a severe refugee crisis in Europe.

All of this being a wake-up call for moderation, or the more scandalised word liberalism, to be greater promoted as a counter measure against religious radicalism.

It is important to highlight that the religious-political rhetoric that the prime minister has used in the span of his leadership has taken several U-turns – be it the backed out promise of abolishing the Sedition Act to rebranding of the internal security act (ISA) and now the National Security Council Bill. Most of all, we can see the clear deviation from his campaign of moderation individually, as well as within Umno.

Due to this, we are currently faced with quite a dangerous issue that is being reflected in the Prime Minister’s speech. The issue being a problematic “play-up” of politicised religion which suggests a reinforcement of extremist apologetics, denial of democracy and the anxious struggle of status quo preservation.

The tone of moderation in Najib’s speech still prevails when not heard and read in its entirety. In selecting only the crucial statements, mostly in connection with the economic crisis and popularity battle with the opposition, the religious vocation appears to be somewhat toned down.

Religious rhetoric is being placed on a pedestal and implies that such piousness is a testament to excellent leadership. In his speech, Najib emphasises the consultation of the Quran and to justify the value of certain attitudes such as uncompromising loyalty and spiritual vigour that are vital for the preservation of Umno.

With that, being based on the guidance of the ulama rather than his fellow counterparts. This might signify that the prime minister is not only experiencing a trust deficit with the public but also his own Cabinet (explaining the reshuffle).

“21. Thus, in the last few weeks, for my speech as president for the seventh time, I held meetings with various parties, especially the ulama (religious scholars), to gain insights, and advice.”

There has been an interestingly increased shift from Malay nationalism to the “Islamic struggle” in this particular speech. As much as the “pahlawan Bugis” championed his brute strength to battle out with the opposition – it remains as the final remnants of what used to be Umno’s symbolic stand for defending their exclusive concept of Malay, as Islam has become the new conquest.

“28.  Coinciding with this responsibility, each time the general assembly comes, oftentimes two other questions are asked, whether the Umno president should be an ultra or pro-Malay only, and must be Islamic or not?”

Surprisingly, the answer to the question asked is still unsatisfactory, in fact – just too ambiguous. Instead, he made a peculiar, sudden shift to the fact he is leading a “plural society” but in such a concept, there is the estranged “other” for the non-Muslims of this country and the slight indication that it poses a challenge – the complexities that muddle up the ideological aspirations for an “Islamic state”, Malay interests and a plural society. Whether it can work together or not, remains a mystery as no solution was provided.

Moreover, a great contradiction lies with still proclaiming that Malaysia is still a democracy. Umno under Najib’s leadership retains a confused idea of what constitutes of democracy, when what they say speaks the complete opposite. This is displayed by the strangeness of loyalty being the most vital trait that tangles with the ideals of democratic leadership. In this, he makes a rather hard, concrete stand, almost with a sense of finality that most definitely makes assaults any attempt to question authority.

“57. Even in old Malay History, there was mention of loyalty, to the top leadership.

“58. It states that when called, we come, when asked to leave, we go. Such is the principle of loyalty.

“59. Therefore, Islam states that it is compulsory for us to obey the leaders.”

Everything that is being illustrated in Najib’s speech being within the framework of Islam. However, this brand of Islam remains unexplained and this is where the vile threat of this ambiguity lies. We are not made aware of what is meant by extremism or perhaps we should ask ourselves – is the lack of answer a sign of acceptance?

In the 2015 Orwell lecture, Dr Rowan Williams cites the distortion of language for the internalization of fascist authority as brought forward by George Orwell’s 1946 essay “Politics and the English Language”:

““Consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any one meaning.” This is really just a symptom of a deeper malaise. Vagueness, mixed metaphor, ready-made phrases, “gumming together long strips of words”, pseudo‑technical language are ways of avoiding communication. And those whose interest is in avoiding communication are those who do not want to be replied to or argued with.”

Similarly, when examining the sentiments of the “non-confrontational” Umno president and his ways of a “gentleman”, we can see the thriving authoritarianism masked by a misunderstood flashing of the word “democracy”. As well as Islam that was once preached being “moderate” but does not appear to be so.

While the confusion prevails, it is this is very attitude whereby politics becomes the element to govern the greatest amount of dominance in the discourse of religion. Worst of all, is how the anti-intellectualism makes most of its influence by forcing the silence of other school of thoughts to be “deviant”.

Morbidly, it makes religious institution perpetuate anxiety in the identities of people and hence, to create a climate of fear. In which, the very same one that has created the fundamentalists the world is fighting hard against. – December 17, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 17 December 2015, 2:41 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Political Islam
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Abdul Rahman can only play with tweets as he has no input on  the two seismic developments in the country – Najib’s galloping twin mega scandals and his courtship of Hadi and PAS leadership

My commiseration with Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan.

He is feeling so lonely and forlorn after he thought he has clambered up the mountain to deserve a special place next to the “The Chosen One”.

What a disappointment for him to find that  he had been replaced or overtaken by others, even by a “political junior” from his home state, who have gone ahead to become the Minister for Communications and Multimedia, a position  which is more important and higher on the political protocol than  his recent sinecure as the Barisan Nasional Director of Strategic Communications (whatever that means).

I stand by what I said about him on July 24, 2015:

“Minister for Urban Well-being, Housing and Local Government, Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan will be guilty of the greatest national disservice if the sole agenda of his appointment as Barisan Nasional Strategic Communications Director is to distract attention from Wall Street Journal’s (WSJ) July 2 report that Malaysian government investigators have found US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) deposited into the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal accounts in AmBank in 2013 just before the 13th General Election instead of helping to establish the facts of the Prime Minister’s alleged RM2.6 billion personal accounts.

“Since his sudden appearance as BN Strategic Communications Director the previous Wednesday, Rahman had got so much eggs on his face, and on a daily basis, that it is virtually impossible to find a centimeter on his face which is not egg-splattered – whether because of Rahman’s “God-send” Lester Melyani; Lester’s utterly discredited video confession even before all the parts had been aired publicly; the crazy and counter-productive notion for Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) to block access to Sarawak Report (forcing Malaysians to undergo an instant education of how to circumvent official Internet blocks) or the hyping of patriotic and valiant efforts to pry open the RM42 billion 1MDB financial scandal whether by journalists in the Edge or by MPs like Tony Pua and Rafizi Ramli as offences like ‘activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy’, sabotage, ‘toppling the elected government’ or even treason!”

It is really pathetic that the Urban Well-Being, Housing and Local Government is so far from feeling any “well-being” that he had to  seek solace browsing the Internet to fire off missiles to ease his sense of misery, when he should be diligently working on his three portfolios of “urban well-being, housing and local government” for the welfare of Malaysians.

Hence the Malaysiakini report of “3 portals, 3 DAP articles, 3 tweets from Rahman Dahlan”, as if such “missile-firing” into the Internet  can give him some relief as well as a sense of importance in the UMNO./BN hierarchy.

Except Rahman has chosen the wrong targets.

He first objected to an article in The Malaysian Insider  by Penang DAP assistant  publicity secretary Syerleena Abdul Rashid entitled  which appeared on my blog.

Syerleena was addressing one of the issues plaguing Malaysian nation-building, the growing propensity of national leaders to spread hate and lies and to inseminate the seeds of suspicion to protect their political turfs.

Syerleena spoke of the need for Malaysians to break away from the politics of hate and find a middle ground that can appreciate discussions and debates in a more respectful, constructive and intelligent manner.

She wrote: “There is no denying that there is a dire need to respond to religious, cultural and ethnic pluralism in line with modern democratic practices, one that endorses assurances to civility, decency and tolerance…

“Our responsibility now is to encourage the politics of mutual respect. We need to find a way to make politics interesting, insightful and worthwhile to the next generation of leaders and not let the haters get the best of us when they spew bigoted views.”

Does Rahman understand what Syerleena is saying and proposing?

Apparently not, as all Rahman could do is the stupid one-liner tweet:

“Can we start with your red beans first?”

I still remember that I led a troupe of DAP MPs to raid the Concorde Hotel in Kuala Lumpur in July 2013, as UMNO cybertroopers were alleging that DAP funded a “Red Bean Army” of 3,000 cybertroopers with a budget of RM100 million to RM1 billion in previous six years operating, of all places, from Concorde Hotel.

We did not find a single “Red Bean” in Concorde Hotel but we found it crawling with UMNO leaders.

Yet more than two years after the DAP’s  fruitless raid of Concorde Hotel, there are UMNO Ministers like Rahman who still believe that the DAP had infiltrated into the very heart of UMNO Communications Headquarters with “Red Bean” cybertroopers.

Have Rahman succeeded in  cleansing  the UMNO/BN psy-war communications centre of DAP “infiltrators”, whether Red Bean or Green Bean?

Rahman’s second cyber foray was an article published in FMT, titled ‘Kit Siang: So long as Najib is PM, he won’t be found guilty’ – my response to Sarawak Chief Minister Adenan Satem’s statement that the state BN will reconsider its loyalty to Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak if he is found guilty of any wrongdoing in relation to 1MDB.

To counter this, Abdul Rahman tweeted: “Going by his twisted logic, his son in Penang will never be exposed.”

This is no compliment to Rahman’s intellectual prowess – whether political or just common sense.

This is because any ordinary person could tell Rahman that he  was talking rubbish, as the Penang Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng, or any DAP or Pakatan Harapan politician is most likely to  be the first to be prosecuted and persecuted  for any wrongdoing by the UMNO/BN apparatus  – and in fact, they are being selectively prosecuted and persecuted even for no wrongdoing!

Rahman’s third foray was in regard to Malaysiakini’s report “Kit Siang queries Adenan’s wavering support for Najib” and my comment that Adenan is no more giving unqualified endorsement to Najib but wavering in his support.

Countering it,  Rahman touched on the upcoming Sarawak state election and claimed that  Adenan would score a huge win, tweeting: “Expected quivering response to inevitable BN victory in Sarawak”.

Political leaders  who should now be “quivering” are the UMNO leaders, who are living on borrowed time and face the prospect of being rejected not only by Malay voters but even by UMNO members in the 14th General Election.

This is why UMNO President Datuk Seri Najib Razak had been intensifying his courtship of the Pas President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang.

Yesterday, we saw the explosion of two political bombshells with far reaching consequences on Malaysians politics: one in faraway United States where the Wall Street Journal published another 1MDB shocker, claiming that 1MDB sent at least US$850 million (RM3.7 billion) last year to an offshore entity formed to appear as if it was owned by an Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund.

The second political bombshell was the advanced courtship of the PAS leadership, especially  the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang,  by Najib in Kuala Lumpur, especially as Hadi has become Najib’s foremost champion in the face of the Prime Minister’s RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals.

What has Rahman got to say or contribute in these two developments which will have seismic effects on the Malaysian political scene in the weeks and months to come.

It would appear none at all, which is why he is reduced to playing   with tweets and firing off blanks into the cyberspace.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 December 2015, 4:56 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
PAS
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Bigotry wrapped in prayer is still bigotry

Azrul Mohd Khalib

The Malay Mail Online

December 18, 2015

DECEMBER 18 ― When I first heard of last week’s seminar “Ancaman gerakan pemurtadan Kristianisasi” (Threat of the Christianisation movement), my first reaction wasn’t to sigh in exasperation at the wanton abuse by the administrators of the Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) Lendu campus of the trust and mandate to educate young minds.

It wasn’t my outrage that this is yet another example of how ignorant and misinformed dogma and bigotry have somehow percolated and seeped into the minds of our educators at one of our institutions of higher learning.

I was dismayed that the Police DiRaja Malaysia (PDRM) saw fit to attend and present at this seminar. Our women and men in dark blue are supposed to enforce the law, keep the peace and protect the lives and property of all Malaysians.

PDRM’s presence and participation at such an event, while not ― as the IGP rightly points out ― unlawful, sends the wrong message and provides legitimacy and credibility to something that is more suited to the fringe, paranoid and crazy-eyed crowd.

PDRM’s participation in this kind of seminar by virtue of its presence, provides support and endorsement to the idea that Christians, their faith and their actions could, or in this case, should be considered and viewed as national security threats.

I cannot emphasise enough that this viewpoint is not only wrong and malicious, but also that this is actually religious bigotry disguised as righteousness.

Religious bigotry is a virus that is immune to rationality, reason, logic and sense. Indeed, the cornerstone of those who preach such attitudes is that they demand unquestioning compliance and obedience. They tolerate no dissenting or contrarian opinions. They tell you that you are not allowed to use your mind or akal to reason or rationalise issues related to religion. If that sounds wrong to you, that’s because it is wrong.

A whole book of Quranic text is rendered meaningless if it is misused and abused to justify such views. Bigotry wrapped in prayer is still bigotry.

When you believe that it is necessary to deliberately belittle, instil fear or threaten the religion of others in the belief that it would strengthen your own, then your iman or faith must be very weak indeed. What does it then say about us Muslims?

It is unfortunate that UiTM seems to have a particular obsession and zealousness when it comes to this supposed threat of Christian proselytisation. This is the second time in two years that it has organised such an event.

Let’s not forget that this is a university that stands to receive an allocation of almost RM2 billion under next year’s federal budget. The largest allocation for a public university by a massive margin. Most of the other 19 public institutions of higher learning are only receiving between RM100–550 million.  Mind you, this is money from taxpayers who are both Muslims and non-Muslim. Why are they using our money to provoke religious hatred, suspicion and fear of other Malaysians?

Nevertheless, I am heartened by the many responses of rejection and revulsion from decent, right-minded religious Muslims who have been appalled at the abuses represented by this UiTM seminar. Some of the students who attended the event reportedly left with expressions of disgust and condemnation similar to the recent statements of Council of Churches Malaysia general secretary Reverend Dr Hermen Shastri and DAP’s Dyana Sofya.

How can we tolerate people educating our children to point their fingers at a group of people of a different faith and say that, because of who they are and based on often wild and unsubstantiated accusations of proselytization and conversations, they are a threat?

Under the aegis of academic discourse and debate, it might actually be good to have an honest-to-god discussion about these issues to address realities, misconceptions and provide clarity to where there are only assumptions, suspicions and fear.

But I notice that rarely do organisers of such discussions invite representatives from those they are busy vilifying. It’s a cowardly approach and it is a form of oppression, especially when it is state sanctioned.

Conservative Muslim group Isma recently pointed to the existence of Christmas trees in shopping malls as proof positive that Christians in Malaysia are not oppressed. This is the kind of shallow, insipid and jaw-dropping banality that we have come to expect from this group.

But you know what? For once, I found myself agreeing with them. Ya lah, it could be worse.

We could be like Brunei, where the Grinch successfully robbed Christmas on the basis that it would lead Muslims astray. Where public celebration of this day such as wearing a Santa hat, reindeer headbands and having Christmas trees openly displayed could get you fined BND20,000, a five-year imprisonment or both. Imagine people dressed up and walking about as old St. Nick in the distinctive red and white fur-trim getting arrested, thrown facedown onto a patrol car, hands twisted behind and put into handcuffs by religious authorities. The top song on Brunei’s Christmas playlist this year? Silent Night.

As usual, we pride ourselves in measuring against the lowest possible denominator. Syabas dan bersyukurlah.

Once again, we hear nothing from our religious authorities who seem to condone and even encourage such thinking and excesses related to Christianity in Malaysia. There are so many who speak of the practices of the Prophet but very few seem to believe in them when it comes to inter-religious dialogue and co-existence.

I know that it all sounds like a broken record. That we have said it all before. I have since realised that there is often just no reasoning with such people. If individual Muslims persist to wallow and revel in their ignorance and support of events such as the one organised by UiTM, there seems to be no way of stopping them.

What we can start doing is to hold such organisations and institutions accountable for promoting religious bigotry and hate, especially when they use public money to do so.

We cannot ignore this bigotry nor pretend that it does not exist. We have done that for far too long believing that by doing so, we would not inflame the situation further. Tolerating this prejudice risks inuring us to its presence. We must speak out and reject such bigotry. Our tolerance simply enables it, while our silence allows it to grow.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 December 2015, 9:46 am and is filed under
nation building
,
Police
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


If NSC Bill is aimed primarily at fighting terrorism, the National Security Council should be parked under  POTA and not be created by another statute which empowers the PM  to usurp the constitutional powers  of the YDPA, the Cabinet and the 13 State Governments

The Deputy Home Minister Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed has defended the National Security Council (NSC) Bill on the ground that it is  part of Putrajaya’s bid to act more proactively in the fight against terrorism and not intended to usurp the constitutional powers of the Yang di Pertuan Agong in declaring a state of emergency for the country.

Nobody is really convinced by Nur Jazlan’s claim, but giving the Deputy Home Minister all  the benefit of the doubt that the NSC Bill is not a dangerous grap for power  by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak which will pave the way for a dictatorial regime, let Nur Jazlan explain why the National Security Council is not parked under  the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) instead of being created by another statute with such far-reaching powers, including the usurpation of  the constitutional powers of the Yang di Pertuan Agong, the Cabinet and the 13 State Governments?

Furthermore, if terrorism is  the real target of the NSC Bill, can Nur Jazlan explain why there was not a single reference to the threat of terrorism or  terrorist attacks in the monstrous NSC Bill passed by the Dewan Rakyat which defined “national security” in so wide and catch-all a  fashion that it could be interpreted to cover all situations, even those which would not normally be associated with national security issues arising from political, economic and nation-building factors and circumstances?

Nur Jazlan should also explain why the Wanita UMNO leader, Datuk Sharizat Jalil had a different understanding of the NSC Bill as  she made it clear in her speech at the Wanita UMNO Assembly that the Bill was aimed not just terrorists but with anti-government elements who want to topple the government by peaceful and democratic means.

Under the circumstances, is the government prepared to withdraw the NSC Bill from the Senate, which is scheduled to ram through the Bill next Tuesday, to amend it so that it specifically deals with threats from terrorist attacks or armed insurrection, and park the National Security Council under Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) and not to create the monstrously powerful National Security Council by statute with such far-reaching powers as to empower it to usurp  the constitutional  powers of the Yang di Pertuan Agong, the Cabinet and the 13 State Governments?

The amended legislation after its presentation and passage in the Senate can then   be brought back to Dewan Rakyat for confirmation and adoption.

My challenge to the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi to a public debate still stands if he sticks to his claim that the NSC Bill does not provide full executive powers to the Prime Minister, when in actual fact the NSC Bill vests such untrammeled and even unconstitutional powers on the Prime Minister as to pave the way for a Prime Ministerial dictatorship bud-grafted onto the present system of constitutional monarchy.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 December 2015, 2:56 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Law & Order
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Let’s kill hate now

Syerleena Abdul Rashid

The Malaysian Insider

18 December 2015

Those in the corridors of power know that our country is not under any kind of threat.

They also know that a large majority of Malaysians regardless of ethnicity, religion and gender support the liberties bestowed upon us by our great Federal Constitution – even if it has undergone numerous amendments and omitted certain important details which made it rather different than its original intention.

In the midst of calls to foster greater union and camaraderie among citizens of this federation, there are those in high positions who continue to contradict calls for “social unification”.

We have established that spreading hate, lies and inseminating the seeds of suspicion has always been their forte. However, injecting an ever-so banal inflammatory rhetoric of chaotic and uncouth cultural traditions into society hits below the belt.

The recurring use of hate-filled commentaries and need to instil fear in society is a calculated move aimed at distracting and dividing Malaysians by suggesting that law-abiding citizens are “freedom-hating dissidents” threatening our values and destroying our peace.

Hence, conjuring up a phantom menace and implying that minorities will one day reign over this federation with their “communist” ideologies or that “liberals” will pave the way to decadent debauchery or God forbid – the rights of certain ethnic groups in this country will be taken away.

Such exaggerations exist only because those in power hope to pit Malaysians against one another and may have succeeded (for now) through decades of misinformation intended to keep us ignorant.

It is a clever manoeuvre, one that has survived the test of time – let people unite under a common enemy and in this context, the opposition, activists, academics, feminists, liberals and minorities are seen as the state enemy.

There is no denying that all forms of hatred are unacceptable and repulsive. However, when intertwined with politics, these messages have a far greater impact on a nation.

Such messages strike at the core of our democracy and are nothing more than a sophisticated form of malicious propaganda.

Rather than identify real problems leading to regression or why corruption is rampant,  the continuous invocation of unrest is meant to invent fear and anxiety with almost no regard of pressing issues faced by the average Malaysian.

Tolerance and respect do not require that one endorse or pursue the cultural traditions or religious practices of others, but demand that we withhold from insulting those with whom we disagree or those a little “different” from us.

Malaysians need to break away from the politics of hate and find a middle ground that can appreciate discussions and debates in a more respectful, constructive and intelligent manner. There is no denying that there is a dire need to respond to religious, cultural and ethnic pluralism in line with modern democratic practices, one that endorses assurances to civility, decency and tolerance.

A majority of Malaysians understand that local politics is and always have been about playing the race and religion card, which subsequently is about the elections – who the masses vote for and the coalition Malaysians trust the most.

But the unhealthy mindset exhibited by certain groups to “win control at all costs” will have a great impact on the younger generation of voters.

Our responsibility now is to encourage the politics of mutual respect. We need to find a way to make politics interesting, insightful and worthwhile to the next generation of leaders and not let the haters get the best of us when they spew bigoted views.

No matter how ridiculously banal such rhetoric can be. – December 18, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 December 2015, 8:30 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia: Clear and present danger from the Islamic State

James Chin

Brookings

December 16, 2015

Two weeks ago, an internal Malaysian police memo was leaked to the media. The leak came after Malaysian Defense Minister Hishammuddin Hussein said he and several other Malaysian leaders were on the IS hit list. The memo gave details of a November 15th meeting between the militant groups Abu Sayyaf, the Islamic State (IS), and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), in Sulu, the southern Muslim-majority part of the Philippines. Attendees passed several resolutions at the meeting, including regarding mounting attacks in Malaysia, in particular Kuala Lumpur and Sabah in eastern Malaysia. The report mentioned that eight Abu Sayyaf and IS suicide bombers were already on the ground in Sabah, while another ten were in Kuala Lumpur.

While the news shocked many Malaysians and foreigners living in Malaysia, for Malaysia watchers, it was nothing new. There is general consensus in Malaysian security and intelligence circles that IS and home-grown Islamic radicals are planning a terrorist attack in Malaysia. For the past two years, in fact, Malaysia’s security services managed to disrupt at least four major bombing attempts. Their targets are mainly symbolic, such as beer factories and government buildings. Others were senior political figures and tycoons to be held for ransom and propaganda. IS regards the Malaysian government (and neighboring Indonesia) as un-Islamic and a pawn of the West.

While the Malaysian government is lucky that its intelligence services are on top of the situation, there are recent signs that they may be overwhelmed by the scale of the threat and the number of operatives involved.

Malaysia has a population of about 31 million, and 60 percent are Sunni Muslims. There are approximately 200-250 IS fighters from Malaysia in the Middle East. Contrast this with Indonesia, with a Muslim population of 300 million, and yet there are less than 400 IS fighters from Indonesia. This imbalance alone gives a clear indication of the scale of the problem Malaysia faces.

Even so, at the top of the Malaysian government, other than occasional statements condemning IS terrorism, officials do not seem to be able or willing to confront the root causes of the rise of IS in Malaysia.

In an influential essay published in April this year, Brookings scholar Joseph Liow laid out clearly the reasons for the rise of IS in Malaysia: the politicization of Islam by the state. In particular, both the ruling UMNO (United Malays National Organisation) party and its main opponent, PAS (Parti Islam Se-Malaysia) use political Islam as their weapon of choice.

The use of political Islam is a deliberate move by a group of committed Islamists hidden in the highest level of the Malaysian state and bureaucracy to create a Malay-Islamic state, not a mere theocratic state. This ideology is unique and separate from the caliphate project pursued by IS.

In the Malaysian version of the Malay-Islamic state, Sunni Islam’s supremacy is indivisible from ethnicity, i.e. the Malay race. In other words, the unique Malaysian brand of Sunni Islamic supremacy is fused with intolerant Malay nationalism. This highly committed group is trying to build the world’s only Islamic state where Islam and one particular ethnic group are one and the same.

Outsiders, including Muslims from other parts of the Sunni world, will find this development hard to understand as orthodox Islam rejects the notion of race or racism. In Malaysia, according to the proponents of ethno-religious nationalism, the Malaysian brand of Sunni Islam is unique. An example of these exclusion tactics is the issue over the usage of ‘Allah’. Despite clear and unequivocal evidence that the word ‘Allah’ can be used freely by all, the Malaysian religious establishment has claimed exclusive copyright over the word ‘Allah’ and codified into law a proscription that only Muslims can use ‘Allah’ and another half-a-dozen words.

Who are members of this group pushing for the Malay-Islamic state? The obvious candidates are JAKIM (Malaysian Islamic Development Department), a department under the prime minister’s office, and its state-level version. JAKIM is a government department tasked with defining, to the minuscule detail, what being a Sunni Muslim means in Malaysia, not only in theological terms but also in practical terms, like how to dress and what types of behavior are halal (permissible) or haram.

JAKIM, established during the era of Mahathir, prime minister from 1981 to 2003, is so powerful now that even senior UMNO leaders do not dare to confront it. Anyone who questions JAKIM is threatened with sedition. JAKIM threatened a former MP from UMNO with sedition. The son of a deputy prime minister, he had called for the departmental group to be disbanded. Police investigated a well-known lawyer for sedition after he tweeted, “Jakim is promoting extremism every Friday. Govt needs to address that if serious about extremism in Malaysia.” JAKIM writes all Friday sermons for delivery nationwide, and in recent years these sermons have tried to demonize Shiites, Christians and Jews.

JAKIM’s annual budget is about RM 1 billion, paid for by Muslim and non-Muslim taxpayers. Yet JAKIM is largely unaccountable to anyone. Progressive Malaysian Muslims fear the label of being branded anti-Islamic for questioning the work of JAKIM. Others shy away from criticizing JAKIM for fear of being charged with sedition.

Another government department promoting ethno-religious hate and intolerance is Biro Tata Negara (National Civics Bureau, or simply BTN). Like JAKIM, BTN is also under the authority of the PM’s office. Officially, BTN is supposed to nurture the spirit of patriotism. While many of its programs do promote patriotism among Malaysian youth, others promote racism toward non-Malays and filter their message to selected groups of Malay participants. The BTN teaches these Malay participants that the Malaysian Chinese (and non-Malays generally) are like “Jews” and that Malays must be politically supreme at all times. A recent exposé of internal BTN documents showed that BTN trainers were told to teach that racism is “good” if it promotes Malay unity. It even suggested that racism originated from the Islamic concept of asabiyyah, a positive idea that centered on brotherhood and formed social solidarity in historical Muslim civilizations.

While it is obvious that JAKIM, BTN, and similar bodies, do not officially support IS’s caliphate project or its murderous ideology, their promotion of a uniquely narrow Malay-Islamic worldview indirectly supports and complements the IS brand of intolerance. Many young Malays at the primary and high school level in the Malaysian school system are steeped in a view of Malay Islam that resonates with the IS worldview that there is an “us-versus-them” world order. Malaysian Muslims find IS’s ideology easy to accept, having grown up with a state-sanctioned view of intolerance towards non-Malay Muslims.

Is it any wonder that in a recent PEW poll, 11 percent of Malaysian Muslims had a “favorable” view of IS? What is even more interesting is that in Southeast Asia, Malaysian Muslims are more likely than Indonesian Muslims to consider suicide bombing justifiable (18 percent versus 7 percent).

If we make inferences from this context, there are two clear conclusions. First, there is going to be an IS attack in Malaysia – not if, but when. The number of IS supporters in Malaysia has reached a critical mass: a Malaysian minister revealed a few days ago there are approximately 50,000 IS supporters in Malaysia. Coupled with returning IS fighters from Syria and Iraq, this broad-based support means that one of their attacks will succeed.

Second, support for IS and intolerant Islam is growing in Malaysia due to the deliberate policies of government bodies such as JAKIM and BTN, whose worldview is increasingly becoming even more influential than that promulgated by elected political leaders. The situation can only get worse until the top UMNO leaders rein in JAKIM and similar bodies. If the government waits for a successful attack before undertaking any serious action, it will simply be too late.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 December 2015, 9:08 am and is filed under
Islam
,
Islamic state
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s ISIS conundrum

Joseph Chinyong Liow

Brookings

April 2015

The recent emergence of an ISIS recruitment video featuring young Malay (possibly also Indonesian) speaking boys attending religious classes and engaging in weapons training in ISIS-held territory has caused a furor in Malaysia. Estimates of the number of Malaysian fighters in ISIS vary from between 60 to almost 150, depending on who you ask. The high end of these figures approximates the number of Indonesian fighters that are also believed to be in Syria and Iraq. Yet the population of Malaysia is barely one-tenth that of Indonesia. In other words, Malaysians seem to be joining ISIS at a higher rate than Indonesians.

This state of affairs is all the more perplexing given how often Malaysia’s prime minister, Najib Tun Razak, waxes lyrical on the international stage about moderation and how Malaysia is the epitome of multi-ethnic and inter-religious harmony, as he continues to press a nebulous “Global Movement of Moderates” agenda.

What accounts for the appeal of ISIS in “moderate” Malaysia?

To answer this question, let us start with the official Malaysian view on the causes of international terrorism, especially religiously-motivated terrorism. Malaysia’s Muslim leaders have frequently pinpointed American foreign policies that affect the Muslim world – particularly the invasion of Iraq, Washington’s unstinting support for Israel, lack of sympathy for the Palestinian cause, and war in Afghanistan – as one of the main causes of terrorism today. To be sure, much can be said about how these factors have inflamed Muslim sentiment worldwide. But my interest here is to look specifically at the challenge that religiously-inspired terrorism in general, and ISIS in particular, poses for Malaysia. To that end, I argue that while “external factors” are important, the main causes for concern may well originate from within Malaysia’s own borders.

Four observations can be drawn from the Malaysian domestic context, which I believe speak to the conditions that exist for virulent ideologies like that of ISIS to potentially find sympathy and following:

First, in a 2013 Pew Global Attitudes Survey, it was noted that “in Malaysia . . . roughly a quarter of Muslims (27 percent) take the view that attacks on civilians are sometimes or often justified.” However, if we add to this number the 12 percent who take the view that violence is “rarely justified” in defense of Islam (as opposed to never justified), essentially 39 percent of the Malaysian Muslims surveyed believed that violence can be justified against enemies of Islam. Significantly, Indonesians polled only 18 percent on the same question (1 percent “often,” 5 percent “sometimes,” and 12 percent “rarely”). In an earlier poll on The World’s Muslims: Religion, Politics, and Society, a mere 8 percent of Malaysians expressed concern about Muslim extremism while 31 percent were concerned about Christian extremism.

Now, I am not a big believer in surveys, which to my mind often raise more questions than answers. But reading this survey, I could not but come away with one thought – 39 percent of the Malaysian Muslims surveyed believed that violence can be justified against enemies of Islam. What is the relevance of the figures in the Malaysian context? I will return to this in a moment.

Second, Islam has unfortunately become heavily politicized in Malaysia. Malaysia’s dominant political party, UMNO, is a Malay-Muslim party that was created with the main objective, at least in theory, of promoting and defending Malay-Muslim supremacy. According to the party’s narrative, this supremacy is coming under siege from various cultural (read: non-Malay vernacular education) and religious (read: non-Muslim) quarters and hence has to be staunchly defended. Given that Malaysia has a Malay-Muslim majority population, it should come as no surprise that UMNO’s chief political opponents are also Malay-Muslim parties who equally brandish religious credentials as a source of legitimacy. To the extent that there is political ideology at play in Malaysia today, it is Islam, and specifically Islamism, that dominates.

Let me be clear: Islam casts a pale shadow over Malaysia today not because it is Islam, or even Islamism, per se, but because its proponents (and “defenders”) are articulating a particularly exclusive brand of Islam that is divorced from the religion’s historically enlightened traditions, and which has no intention to encourage pluralism or compromise. The net effect of this is that non-Muslims Malaysian are marginalized by as Islamist parties try to “out-Islam” each other. As UMNO struggles to cling to power by focusing on its religious credentials above all else, religion has become heavily politicized and is viewed as a zero sum game.

Third, this politicization of Islam is taking place against a backdrop of an exceedingly strong state which has taken upon itself to police Islam and curtail any expression of faith that departs from the mainstream Shafi’i tradition. Yes, the ummah may be universal and Islamic confessional traditions may be diverse, but in Malaysia there is very little room for compromise beyond the “Islam” sanctioned by the state. The Shi’a tradition is legally proscribed, and several smaller Islamic sects are deemed deviant and hence, banned. All this happens despite the existence of constitutional provisions for freedom of worship. Needless to say, attempts by various fringe quarters in Muslim society to move discourse away from an overly exclusivist register have run up against the considerable weight of the state, which defines and polices “right” and “wrong” Islam.

Fourth, rather than extol the virtues and conciliatory features of Islam’s rich tradition, many Malay-Muslim political leaders have instead chosen to use religion to amplify difference, to reinforce extreme interpretations of Malay-Muslim denizen rights, and to condemn the “other” (non-Muslims) as a threat to these rights. For fear of further erosion of legitimacy and political support, the Malay-Muslim leadership of the country have in their public statements circled the wagons, allowing vocal right-wing ethnonationalist and religious groups to preach incendiary messages against Christians and Hindus with impunity. In extreme cases, they have even flippantly referred to fellow Malaysians who are adherents to other religious faiths as “enemies of Islam.” Even state-sanctioned Friday sermons have occasionally taken to referring to non-Muslim Malaysians as “enemies of Islam.” It is against this backdrop that the findings of the Pew surveys cited earlier take on greater, more disconcerting meaning.

Of course, we must acknowledge that not all in the Malay-Muslim leadership engage in this kind of narrow religio-political discourse. I know for a fact that a few of them privately sympathize with non-Muslim consternation about how their rights to freedom of religion are being blatantly undermined. The problem is, they dare not speak out publicly, thus creating the impression that they support the majoritarian narrative of exclusion of non-Muslims.

So how is all this related to ISIS and Malaysia’s concern for the group’s growing influence on its shores? My point is basically this – is it any surprise, given the four observations enumerated above, that the climate of religio-political discourse in Malaysia today would lend itself to the pull of extremist ideas of a group such as ISIS?

To be sure, Malaysia has a very competent internal security apparatus. But security measures alone are insufficient to deal with the threat the country currently faces. Indeed, without changing the way Malaysian society views and articulates Islam to allow for critical engagement of extremist ideas, the utility of security measures is limited at best. Worse still, they might have a contradictory effect of feeding an extremist mindset. While critical engagement will not eradicate the problem, I believe it will go some distance in reducing it. But in order to set a new tone for public discourse on Islam, pluralism, and critical engagement of extremist ideas, it will require political will and leadership at the very top.

It was reported recently in the Malay Mail that Malaysia’s top counter-terrorism official opined that an ISIS attack on Malaysia “was just a matter of time.” If so, Malaysian authorities would be well advised to consider that the appeal of ISIS may not be attributed only to developments in Syria or Iraq, or American foreign policy in the Muslim world. It could well start at home, where the political and social climate that allows exclusivist right-wing groups and politicians to speak and act with impunity is the same one that will provide recruits and sympathizers for insidious organizations such as ISIS.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 December 2015, 5:27 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Islamic state
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Umno, what price loyalty?

Dennis Ignatius

Malaysiakini

17 Dec 2015

COMMENT |
 Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, hounded by scandal and facing open rebellion within his ranks, made an impassioned plea at his party’s general assembly last week for unity and support. He demanded loyalty and obedience from all. He invoked God, race and country to justify his leadership.

But what price loyalty and obedience?

Great leaders appeal for support on the basis of a great cause, in defence of righteous principles or to uphold great ideals. They inspire support by their vision, by their integrity, by their example, by their commitment to great national goals.

Prime Minister Winston Churchill, for example, in his nation’s darkest hour, inspired his countrymen to stand firm against Nazi tyranny despite the odds. Mahatma Gandhi summoned his nation to the great ideals of tolerance and respect for diversity and human dignity.

President John F Kennedy appealed, in his inaugural address, for sacrifice and commitment to make America that shining light upon a hill, an inspiration to the world. Nelson Mandela urged a nation divided by decades of apartheid to reconcile, to build a new nation based on justice and inclusiveness.

They invited their countrymen to join them in a great quest, and millions freely and willingly rallied to them.

Despots, dictators and demagogues, on the other hand, bankrupt of vision, devoid of principle, blinded by avarice and ambition, demand mindless obedience, blind loyalty and passive submission.

They create imaginary threats to cover up their misdeeds and invoke race and religion to justify their oppressive rule. Criticism becomes a crime. Dissent is equated with disloyalty. Opposition is considered sedition. If you are not with them, you are against them.

They boast of popular support, of working for the common good, but depend upon repressive laws to stay in power. The more authoritarian they become, the more laws they need.

And the yearning of every human being for liberty and justice which people throughout history have fought and died to gain and keep, suddenly becomes a sinister and dangerous thing that needs to be eradicated like the plague.

Last week’s general assembly made clear what type of party Umno has become and what it now stands for.

Devoid of moral compass

One would have thought, for example, that at such a crucial time in our nation’s history – when our nation is beset with scandal, corruption and chicanery in high places, when our national institutions have been hollowed out, when corruption and mismanagement is rampant, when our constitutional rights are under threat, when racial and religious extremism is growing, when our citizens are increasingly hard-pressed to make ends meet – that the governing party would be seized by high policy issues and anxious to restore confidence and hope to a beleaguered nation.

Instead, we were treated to meaningless hubris, empty rhetoric and mendacious propaganda. They took pride in all the wrong things. They regurgitated tired old formulas, cheered the absurd, applauded bigotry and ended with feudalistic appeals for fealty and submission to a leader who has become a liability to our nation.

In the light of all that has transpired, particularly over the last several months, party members would have had to abandon their own integrity to answer their leader’s call for obedience and loyalty, to declare him “the chosen one” as one witless delegate gushed.

That so many did so demonstrates once again why the party doesn’t deserve the mantle of leadership that it has claimed as its birthright since independence and why its continued rule is detrimental to the well-being of our nation.

It is a party without vision, without principle, without a clear moral compass. It no longer cares to govern by the rules of parliamentary democracy. It is no longer interested in forging genuine national unity. And it is no longer competent to be entrusted with the management of our economy.

We are adrift and it has no answers, no solutions. It is too stuck in its feudal past, too trapped by its own insecurities, too seduced by its own power to offer the kind of leadership our nation so desperately needs.

Don’t expect reform for this is a party that no longer has the capacity or the will to change. The leaven of its now rebellious former president has worked itself deep into the party, strangling it of its democracy, its decency, its principles. It’s all about self-preservation, self-interest and self-enrichment now.

Don’t look for saviours from its ranks either because there are none to be found.

Former leaders are united only in their dislike for each other. They hem and haw but don’t have the courage of their convictions to slay the monster they helped create. The so-called next generation of leaders, for their part, are already too enmeshed in the culture of privilege and patronage to be any different. If they have not found the conviction to act now, they never will.

Cry, my beloved country, cry!

DENNIS IGNATIUS, a former Malaysian ambassador, firmly believes that we should put our trust not in the leadership of great men but in the sanctity of great institutions – our secular and democratic constitution, a democratically elected parliament, an independent judiciary, a free press and a government fully accountable to the people. He blogs here.

Read more: https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/323624#ixzz3ud1oIGcE

                This entry was posted on Friday, 18 December 2015, 8:44 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Malaysian Dream
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A new political realignment is in the works – where UMNO-PAS co-operation could be more powerful and far-reaching  than UMNO’S coalition with the other 13 BN parties

A new political realignment is in the works in the political demography in Malaysia, driven by Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s overpowering passion to survive as Prime Minister of Malaysia and President of UMNO despite all odds, including his RM2.6 billion “donation” and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals.

This is why the advanced courtship between Najib and the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang has graduated from secret conclaves to the public domain, cemented by Hadi’s role as the pre-eminent defender of Najib in the Prime Minister’s twin mega scandals in the past few months.

In May, Hadi had publicly said that Najib should not bow down to pressures from the 1MDB scandal and should not resign as Prime Minister.

In July, Hadi was quick to come to the defence of Najib after the Wall Street Journal expose of RM2.6 billion deposits into Najib’s personal banking accounts before the May 2013 General Election, demanding for witnesses without which the Wall Street Journal allegation should be ignored.

As a result, the relationship between Najib and Hadi became increasingly warm and friendly in the last few months.

MCA President Datuk Ser Liow Tiong Lai has said that based on the unanimity  principle which had been adopted by Barisan Nasional,  MCA would not allow PAS to join the Barisan Nasional unless PAS renounces hudud.

Even if it is true that MCA can bar PAS from joining the Barisan Nasional because of the unanimity rule of BN, there can be an UMNO-PAS co-operation will be more powerful and far-reaching  than UMNO’S coalition with the other 13 BN parties.

What will MCA and the other 11 Barisan Nasional parties do in such circumstances? Will they break from UMNO and quit from Barisan Nasional altogether?

Such a route is designed to save Najib but it is problematic that it can save UMNO, as it incurs the risk of being rejected not only by the Malay voters (whose support for the UMNO/BN Government has fallen to the unprecedented low of 31%), but even by the three milion UMNO members and one million PAS members.

(Speech at the DAP Chuichak “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang & Mana RM2.6 billion?” dinner in Chuichak new village, Perak on Friday 18th December 2015 at 8 pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 19 December 2015, 2:32 pm and is filed under
MCA
,
Najib Razak
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


National Security Council Bill is a double “national insecurity” move, caused by Najib’s sense of insecurity and would cause insecurity to Malaysians declared as “security areas”

Today is the birthday of one of the great Malaysians in the nation’s history – P. Patto.

DAP and the nation miss Patto for the past 20 years since his premature death in July 1995, for if Patto had been with us in the political struggle for justice, freedom and good governance in Malaysia in the past two decades, the political picture of the day may be very different today – with UMNO/Barisan Nasional toppled from Putrajaya and the Prime Minister today would have been Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and not Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

I have just come from Kopisan in Gopeng, which is the first of five “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang & Mana RM2.6 billion?” whistlestop tour today together with DAP National Assistant Publicity Secretary and MP for Kulai, Teo Nie Ching and DAP Perak leaders.

Kopisan is where Patto stayed for some five years and where his first daughter, Kasthuri Patto, was born. Kasthuri is now the DAP MP for Batu Kawan.

When a band of young Malaysians got together some 50 years ago to form the Democratic Action Party, we did it not because of any thought of becoming MP, State Assembly representative or forming a state or national government, but because of our patriotic convictions and principles to make our country, Malaysia, a better place for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region, to ensure that all Malaysians can enjoy freedom, justice, good governance, development, progress and prosperity.

There is a second reason why today is an important day for DAP, for on this day 50 years ago, the DAP’s founding Chairman Dr. Chen Man Hin contested and won  the Rahang State Assembly by-election in Negri Sembilan as an independent candidate, as DAP’s application for registration had not yet been approved by the Registrar of Societies.

From that small beginning of winning one seat in the Rahang by-election 50 years ago, we have become the second largest political party with parliamentary and state assembly representation – winning 38 Parliamentary and 107 State Assembly seats since 2013.

We must keep always alive the principles nd goals which had kept DAP alive for the past five decades, never for any personal advancement or material gain, but to see the realisation of our principles and ideals and most important of all, the Malaysian Dream.

Malaysia is in the throes of unprecedented political, economic, good governance and nation-building crisis never seen before in the history of the nation.

This year alone, there were five major national crisis: –

(i) The scandal of the RM2.6 billion “donation” in Najib’s personal banking accounts;

(ii) The RM50 billion 1MDB scandal;

(iii) The implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) adding  to the hardships of low-income Malaysians, already sandwiched between rising costs of living and falling incomes;

(iv)  the racist and provocative Sept. 16 “Red Shirts” rally in Kuala Lumpur; and

(v) The National Security Council Bill which usurps the constitutional powers of the Yang di Pertuan Agong, the Cabinet and the 13 State Government empowering the Prime Minister to exercise dictatorial powers.

The National Security Council Bill is a double “national insecurity” move, caused by Najib’s sense of insecurity and would cause insecurity to Malaysians  living in areas declared as “security areas”.

Clearly there is a lot Najib is trying to hide, which is why a retired Air Force officer was instructed by Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) chief Jen Roslan Saad not to speak at a forum  yesterday on the National Security Council (NSC) Bill 2015.

This is most undemocratic and deplorable. What could RMAF’s former policy and legal adviser, Lt. Col (Rtd) Mohamad Daud Sulaiman possibly reveal at the NSC Bill forum as to endanger Malaysia’s security?

It would appear that Najib and his advisers feel such intense  “national insecurity” that they are afraid of their own shadows and are prepared to go all out to undermine the democratic and human rights of Malaysians.

(Speech  at the “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang & Mana RM2.6 billion?” ceramah kopitiam in Bidor on Saturday, Dec. 19, 2015 at 1 pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 19 December 2015, 4:20 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Was Hasan Arifin speaking for PAC or only for himself about being “satisfied” with Arul Kanda’s testimony on 1MDB, and if the former, was a vote taken of the PAC members  whether they are “satisfied” with Arul’s evidence?

On the way to the launch of the Perak State Pakatan Harapan  in Ipoh from a DAP dinner at Chuichak new village, I read that after its meeting today, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) chairman Datuk Hasan Arifin issued a statement saying that he is satisfied with 1MDB president Arul Kanda Kandasamy’s explanation after a three-hour grilling.

I find Hasan’s statement most shocking as it contradicted the earlier statement by Tony Pua, the  PAC member who is most knowledgeable about 1MDB, who had said that Arul Kanda’s answers were “not perfect” and “incomplete” and that the 1MDB president had evaded certain questions.

When Hasan said he was “satisfied” with Arul Kanda’s explanations at the continued PAC investigations into the 1MDB, was this a reflection of his “cari makan” mode of operation or  did he take a vote from the PAC after Arul Kanda’s testimony to determine  whether the PAC was “satisfied” with the 1MDB CEO’s testimony?

If Hasan had not taken a vote of  PAC after Arul Kanda’s testimony, and merely given his own views, he was guilty of misleading Members of Parliament and the Malaysian public who have been following the PAC  proceedings with great interest and anticipation.

The Malaysian public does not want the views of a “cari makan” PAC Chairman but the views of the PAC as determined by a vote as to whether PAC is satisfied with Arul Kanda’s testimony.

Up to now, both the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and 1MDB had been far from sincere, truthful and proactive in revealing the relevant facts about the 1MDB.

For instance, Najib and 1MDB had studiously avoided mentioning and admitting  what are the latest figures about the  total debts of 1MDB.

Najib and 1MDB have claimed that with the sale of Edra to China General Nuclear Power Corp Ltd. (CGN) at the end of November, 1MDB debts have been reduce by RM17 billion.

But what are the total debts of 1MDB before the sale of Edra to CGN late last  month? Was it RM42 billion minus RM17 billion or RM55 billion minus 17 billion, as the latter will still leave 1MDB with RM38 billion debts, or only RM4 billion less than the RM42 billion figure oft mentioned as  1MDB’s total debts.

But the RM42 billion figure is not the latest figure, as it  represents 1MDB’s total debts as at the end of  March 2014 – 1MDB’s last audited accounts.

According to Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin in his last speech as Deputy Prime Minister on July 26, the total 1MDB debts were more than RM50 billion. By late last month, before the sale of Edra to CGN, the total 1MDB debts could  have  reached RM55 billion.

Why is Najib  and 1MDB so shy in revealing 1MDB’s latest total debts before sale of Edra to CGN at the end of November?

Three events have exacerbated the skepticism of Malaysians that the PAC could play a major role to end the procrastination and prevarication by the Prime Minister  and 1MDB in the past few years  to avoid coming clean to give a full and satisfactory explanation about the 1MDB scandal.

One was the delay in the submission of the Auditor-General’s Final Report on its investigations into 1MDB which was supposed to be handed over to the PAC on Thursday, but now deferred to early next year.

The second was the shabby treatment of the media breaking from all past practices which had allowed  media representatives into Parliament House during PAC meetings.

Why is the “cari makan” PAC Chairman treating the press representatives as if they are  rogues, knaves or crooks – a practice never happened  in nearly six decades of parliamentary practice in Malaysia – instead of fully co-operating with them in the common objective to ensure accountability, transparency and good governance in the handling of all public monies?

The third is the latest revelation by Wall Street Journal on Thursday that 1MDB had sent US$850 million (RM3.7 billion) last year to an offshore entity formed to appear as if it was owned by an Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund.

Added to Najib’s RM2.6 billion “donation” scandal, there is now a RM3.7 billion mysterious offshore entity with the country roiling in billions of ringgit scandals!

Was Arul Kanda asked about the latest WSJ expose at the PAC investigation today and was the PAC “satisfied” with Arul Kanda’s explanation?

Instead of remaining as one of the last hopes of the country which could throw light on the 1MDB scandal, a darkness have descended on PAC under its new “cari makan” Chairman and Malaysians and MPs are asking whether PAC would be another victim in a crackdown to suppress all information about the 1MDB scandal.

(Speech at the launching of Perak State Pakatan Harapan in Ipoh on Friday, 18th December 2015 at 10.30 pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 19 December 2015, 6:29 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Media
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


An Umno-PAS coalition and its impact on all of us

— Liew Ching Tong

The Malay Mail Online

December 19, 2015

DECEMBER 19 — A coalition between Umno and PAS is very likely to take shape following Prime Minister Najib Razak’s speech at Umno General Assembly recently, as well as Najib and Hadi Awang’s joint appearance in pink Baju Melayu at the Regional Conference (Multaqa Serantau) for Al-Azhar Graduates yesterday.

The Umno-PAS merger is part of a series of “once-in-a-generation” political earthquakes, aftershocks and realignments in 2015 and beyond.

On the one hand, in the aftermath of clean sweep of the conservative faction at the PAS Muktamar elections on 6 June, the progressives formed Parti Amanah Negara on 16 September. Pakatan Rakyat ceased to exist and a new coalition Pakatan Harapan was formed on 22 September.

Before the actual split, internal debate within PAS was focused on two issues:

1) Whether Islam is for the well-being of all or merely for Muslims; and 2) Whether to work with a corrupt Umno or to work with other progressive parties opposing Umno’s rule.

On the other hand, Najib suffered irreparable loss of credibility as a result of the series of scandals involving the RM2.6 billion donation, 1MDB, poor management of the economy and the GST fiasco. An Umno-led by Najib is a Titanic on the way to doom.

In the course of that journey, Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin was sacked for sticking his neck out to question the integrity of Najib. And the chairs on the deck of the Titanic were reshuffled.

More realignment is expected to happen.

First, despite Najib’s hold on Umno leaders, the same cannot be said about Umno grassroots. For Muhyiddin and others who were sidelined by Najib, it’s the end of the road within Umno but there is a huge space outside Umno as millions of Malaysians, especially Malay voters, are upset with Najib and the party he led over corruption and poor management of the economy.

Second, many in PAS joined PAS because they were opposed to Umno, especially those who joined PAS in the aftermath of Anwar’s sacking in 1998. They won’t be part of a PAS that is aligned to Najib’s Umno when Umno is devoid of any public trust and integrity at all. To many PAS members, Umno is still lacking in its Islamic credentials. Therefore, there is a likelihood of a second split in PAS.

The only weapon in the arsenal of Najib’s Umno and Hadi’s PAS is their narrowly defined race and religion sentiments. Everyone else — Muhyiddin’s camp, those among the second exodus of PAS, PKR, Amanah and DAP – would have to build a platform offering hope, unity and a new economic deal.

And that new economic deal has to convince Malaysians, especially ordinary Malays, that Umno is holding on to power in the name of Malays but for the interests of its cronies only, and that Umno cronies are indeed hurting the economic interests of ordinary Malays.

With the falling ringgit, oil prices, palm oil prices, and endless scandals involving the Prime Minister, the anger on the ground is building up. The Titanic called Umno will soon hit the proverbial iceberg, taking Passenger PAS along with it. Even Umno and PAS members realise this potential disaster.

As for MCA’s Liow Tiong Lai and Wee Ka Seong — who are trying hard to make themselves sound relevant — they should know that in the eyes of Malaysians, they are just a bunch of jokers caught in the big wave. Soon, they will be submerged in the waters as they had no clue of what’s going on in the larger scheme of things.

This is not the time to show off political rhetoric. It’s time to face the great challenge of getting Malaysia out of this horrible political quagmire.

* Liew Chin Tong is DAP’s National Political Education Director and Johor Chairman Liew Chin Tong on 19th December 2015 in Johor

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 20 December 2015, 11:02 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is Indonesia winning its fight against Islamic extremism?

By Mike Thomson

BBC News, Jakarta

19 December 2015

Indonesia is the world’s most populous Muslim nation, but are its local Islamic traditions in danger of being overtaken by fundamentalism?

As I thread my way through crowds of worshippers at central Jakarta’s grand Istiqlal Mosque, traditionally dressed religious students grab my arms and pull me towards them.

“Take your photo with me!” shouts one. “No, first with me!” shouts another. Several small cameras appear as I am propelled to the centre of their smiling, boisterous group. All raise their thumbs in the air as the cameras start clicking.

I have visited many mosques around the world and I cannot remember ever getting such a warm and friendly reception. Though when I relate this experience to Yenny Wahid, founder of a Jakarta-based research centre on religion and daughter of the late Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid, she is not surprised.

This, she says, is an example of a particularly Indonesian approach to Islam, known as Archipelago Islam.

“It really puts an emphasis on moderation, on tolerance, on protecting minority rights and basically has a big emphasis on a life of harmony,” she says. “So, it’s not strange when you see a woman in a headscarf walking hand in hand with a nun here.”

Archipelago Islam, or Islam Nusantara as it’s known locally, was built over the centuries on Islam that arrived from several other parts of the world and was initially intertwined with Hinduism and ancient Japanese religions. In a large and diverse country stretching over 3,000 miles from east to west and composed of more than 17,000 islands, a less tolerant and inclusive interpretation of the Muslim faith may have struggled to survive. It came to be based on five principles – social justice; a just and civilised humanity; belief in one God; Indonesian unity; government by the will and consent of the people.

Such values evidently weren’t shared by those behind the Bali bombings of 2002 which killed more than 200 people, many of them foreign tourists. But since then the country has been relatively successful in curbing extremism.

Indonesian Muslims hold prayers on the first night of the holy month of Ramadan at the Istiqlal mosque in Jakarta on July 9, 2013.Image copyrightGetty Images

“We’re not just coming up with a counter narrative we coming up with a counter identity, and that’s what AI is all about,” says Yenny Wahid. “We believe we’re good Muslims but to be a good Muslim we don’t have to accept the recipes that are handed out by some radicals from the Middle East.”

An estimated 500 people in Indonesia have gone to fight for Islamic State in Syria. That sounds a lot until you compare it with the estimated 700 from the UK who are thought to have done the same. Britain is home to less than three million Muslims, while Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim nation, has 70 times that number.

But times do seem to be changing. When I first came to Indonesia 20 years ago there was little obvious sign of Islam in the streets. Now more men are wearing traditional dress, and women hijabs and headscarves. Sidney Jones, an American woman who has lived in the country for several decades, says public displays of faith and religious conservatism have grown year by year.

“When I first came here they used to have transvestite beauty contests, you couldn’t get away with that in a million years now in Indonesia,” says Jones. “There’s an increasing attempt by some groups to try to enforce morality by the state which is something we haven’t seen before in Indonesia.”

Driving through bustling central Jakarta the shrieks of a protesting crowd grow louder as my taxi passes the presidential palace. To my left a passionate crowd chanting “God is Great!” wave large black banners demanding the expulsion of an American mining company.

They belong to the hardline group Hizb ut-Tahrir, which campaigns for the creation of a caliphate ruled by Sharia law. Its campaign literature claims that allowing Western firms to extract Indonesian minerals breaches Sharia – and the group’s local spokesman, Ismail Yusanto, tells me that 73% of respondents in one recent poll supported the introduction of Sharia, while 81% favoured the country becoming a caliphate.

The country’s Minister of Religious Affairs, Lukman Hakim Saifuddin admits that there is growing support for some elements of Sharia law – and says the government is preparing legislation to reflect this.

“We are now considering introducing a ban on drinking alcohol, gambling and prostitution. We will then put these proposals to the people and they will be made law if there is democratic agreement,” he says.

The minister insists that moves like this do not signify a drift towards Islamic fundamentalism, but merely reflect the growing sense of pride people here feel for their religion. However, recent actions by a vociferous minority of extremists have led many to question this.

In February last year a group of students at an Islamic university on the outskirts of Jakarta declared allegiance to IS. Since then the country has also seen open parades and demonstrations by uniformed IS supporters. But over the past year the country’s security services, who’ve long been working closely with reformed extremists, have been clamping down.

At a court in central Jakarta a young man accused of terrorist offences sits head down as the judge reviews his case. Dressed in a bright orange jumpsuit he’s just one of eight men facing similar charges here. None have been charged with membership of so-called Islamic State, raising funds for them or fighting for them in Syria. That is because none of these things are actually illegal in Indonesia, so all are being tried on looser charges of supporting terrorism.

Support for extremist groups like IS, though, is not the biggest worry for human rights groups in Indonesia. What most concerns them are the widespread attacks on religious minorities over recent years as well as the government-backed demolition of many churches, temples and other places of worship.

Elson Lingga, a priest from the northern province of Aceh – the only part of the country currently governed by Sharia law – says Christians are feeling increasingly threatened.

“We are so afraid now that nobody goes to work any more,” he told me. “And I even got letters this morning from people in my community suggesting that perhaps it is time for us all to flee the area and become refugees because it’s no longer safe for us here.”

Andreas Harsono of the campaign group, Human Rights Watch, insists that unless incidents like these along with the growing use of draconian blasphemy laws are stopped, this once tolerant nation could well become a failed state.

“Some writers use the word ‘Pakistanisation’ of Indonesia. Pakistan is a failing state, the amount of violence against minorities in Pakistan is gruesome. Here in Indonesia some people are killed but in Pakistan hundreds die every year,” he says.

“Plus we’re talking about thousands of blasphemy cases too. Before it is too late Indonesia has to stop this process. If not we are going to have a failing state on the Straits of Malacca and it is going to be a disaster for the world.”

Yenny Wahid agrees that such worries, along with the hatred and intolerance spread by Islamic extremists, pose a serious threat.

But she insists that the vast majority of Indonesians here, including the Muslim group, Nahdlatul Ulama which boasts more than 40 million members, support the tolerant principles of Archipelago Islam.

This, Wahid hopes, will help win the battle against groups like IS, not just in her own country, but elsewhere too.

“Archipelago Islam will always be practiced in Indonesia no matter what,” she says.

“And I believe we can inspire other Muslims throughout the world to also practice Islam the way it’s intended to be, which is as a religion of peace.”

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 20 December 2015, 12:26 pm and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


May the farce be with you

Mariam Mokhtar | December 20, 2015

Free Malaysia Today

Why the Umno general assembly failed to be a bore buster.

Several thousand Umno-Baru fans rolled-out the red carpet for the premiere of the “The Farce Awakens,” which was held at the Putra World Trade Center (PWTC) on December 11.

Four days later, in Los Angeles,  Star Wars fans queued for days for the premiere of the much awaited Disney blockbuster, “The Force Awakens.” Critics praised it as the best Star Wars film ever made.

To compensate for the long queues, the Star Wars producers should have taken the lead from Umno-Baru leaders, who bussed in thousands of its supporters and decked them in shades of red. The elite among them were dropped off in the latest Porsches, Maybachs, Hummers, Ferraris and Lamborghinis, making it look as though all the stars of Star Wars had driven to the PWTC.

Whilst the Star Wars films are classic tales of the fight between Good and Evil, and of heroes, heroines, loyal troops, action, drama and romance, the Malaysian “The Farce Awakens” is a repeat of the same old drivel perpetuated by Umno-Baru since its formation in 1988.

The creator of the Umno series, former PM Mahathir Mohamad, must feel like the original Star Wars creator, George Lucas, who sold all rights to Disney films for a paltry £2.6 billion. Lucas may have been the mastermind, but all he could do was to quietly fume whilst Disney ignored his ideas for future films.

Mahathir is seething because no one asked for his permission to modify his creation.

Disney’s “The Force Awakens” is a story of a young man who lives on a desert planet and dreams of a better future. The plot is filled with drama, adventure, humour and intrigue.

Malaysia’s “The Farce Awakens” fails to incorporate any of the techniques which make the Star Wars series a classic.  It is a continuation of the grim tale about maintaining the stranglehold of Umno-Baru on the lives of 30 million people.

Whilst cinema goers had nothing but praise for “The Force Awakens,” Malaysians complained about the stupefying boredom of “The Farce Awakens.” Many said it put them to sleep. It failed to be a bore buster.

The only excitement was on the media benches, where journalists laid bets to see which alternative newspaper would be kicked off the premises for alleged spinning.

Critics panned “The Farce Awakens” because few delegates dared to make humorous speeches, unlike in previous general assemblies.

This year, the only bit of comedy came from the Jerlun MP, Othman Said, who praised Najib Abdul Razak, calling  the party president “The Chosen One.” Othman claimed that God had chosen Malaysia’s 6th PM to lead the nation to greater heights. The audience must have liked this, because there was uncontrollable laughter from them.

Both The Times and The Daily Telegraph awarded five stars to the Star Wars production. Malaysians gave a zero to “The Farce Awakens.”

The Daily Mail’s film critic called the Star Wars film the magnificent seventh (in the series), “a triumph of escapism and exhilaration.”

Umno-Baru’s “The Farce Awakens” was excruciatingly boring. Only its president was permitted to present the closing remarks. In previous years, the deputy president and the vice-presidents were allowed onto the podium.

Daisy Ridley, who plays Rey in “The Force Awakens,” was without doubt the star who shone brightest in a galaxy of stars, whereas only Najib was given star billing in “The Farce Awakens.”

Surprisingly enough, there were some similarities between “The Force Awakens” and “The Farce Awakens.” The battle scenes and the psychological showdown between the heroine Rey and Ren, the villain and heir of Darth Vader, were not unlike the posturing and lies of the general assembly.

The battle scenes in “The Force Awakens” are computer generated, whilst those in “The Farce Awakens” are not, and the Darth Vader in the Umno-Baru production has no heir. He is the supreme commander, politically immortal.

“The Force Awakens” is “the best ever Star Wars film,” but Malaysians complain that this year’s, “The Farce Awakens” has bombed as the worst ever general assembly in Umno-Baru’s history.

One is fiction and the other is real, but we know which one is more entertaining.

Mariam Mokhtar is an FMT columnist

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 20 December 2015, 7:36 am and is filed under
Mariam Mokhtar
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.