Pro-Malay policy stirs race-relations debate

Pro-Malay policy stirs race-relations debate ?

"Nineteen or 45 per cent?" The recent controversy over bumiputera (ethnic Malay) equity has had UMNO (Malaysia's ruling coalition party) all stirred up, and the party did not hesitate to air its views about the issue in the public forum.

In the aftermath, Mirzan Mahathir chose to retract the report that sparked the controversy, a retraction which in turn caused Professor Lim Teck Ghee to resign in protest.

Mirzan is president of the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (Asli), while Lim is the Director of Asli's Centre of Public Policy Studies (CPPS).

Mirzan is the boss, and if the boss chooses to compromise, he must have his own reasons. Lim isn't just a normal employee but an academic with a resolute and independent spirit, and he has the right to defend the results of his research.

Lim could not accept Mirzan's decision, neither could he be cowed by the vicious attacks on his research that were made by various politicians. He remained true to his standpoint, choosing to resign rather than to sacrifice his integrity and dignity.

It is unfortunate that rational academic research and public debate with the potential to bring about social reform has been quashed in this manner. Deliberately avoiding the topic does nothing towards finding a solution for our society's ills.

The controversial report, titled "Corporate Equity Distribution: Past Trends and Future Policy" was originally conducted at the request of the government. It was meant to be used as a reference for drafting the 9th Malaysian Plan.

The report's conclusion is that bumiputera equity isn't 18.9 per cent, but rather it has already reached as high as 45 per cent. In addition, it advised the government to place less emphasis on the division of equity, as such a practice would not only hurt the economy, but also the development of the bumiputeras.

Frankly, this is nothing new. In the past, the Malaysian Chinese Association had conducted its own studies which showed that bumiputera equity had surpassed 30 per cent. These findings had been submitted to the Barisan Nasional government but were ignored.

The idea that the New Economic Policy (NEP) might do more harm than good is also old hat. Mahathir has said so and Anwar recently repeated those sentiments. Even Pak Lah has criticised the NEP in the past.

Professor Lim's research approached this important issue that directly affects Malaysia'sdevelopment from a scholarly perspective. This independent, non-partisan research effort was conducted with the interests of our nation and people at heart. Its findings should not be casually dismissed and it should be considered an important asset to society.

If the authorities were more liberal, then this research could have been the beginning of a combined effort between the government and the public to address problems with government policy and administrative methods. It could have been an opportunity to address and solve the country's economic malaise.

At the very least, the research findings ought to have been debated publicly and fairly. Even if the research was flawed, critics would have been able to state their arguments and corrections.

However, once the report was made public, it quickly became politicised and even became a racist issue.

Some said the report was malicious and promoted discontent. Others said the report was biased because it was conducted by a particular race. There were also those who said the report was rubbish, that should be retracted, or "stern" measures would be taken against those involved.

Asli suddenly became a rebel organisation instead of a think tank, while Professor Lim (an international academic who was highly thought of in universities and the UN) was portrayed as a dastardly villain plotting to destroy our nation.

If we disregard the political benefits, then the question of equity becomes a purely economic concern. If we do not examine current policy based on accurate figures and statistics, how can we discover the problems and come up with solutions to solve them?

The country is currently experiencing problems such as sluggish economic growth, a wide disparity between the rich and the poor, as well as weak production and competitive ability. These are warning signs informing us that the policy is flawed.

If the authorities continue to deny the existence of these flaws and reject constructive criticism, then they are only compounding the problems.

Lim's resignation doesn't mean that anything has been resolved. The problems have only been covered up, and everyone is just pretending that everything is fine.

The report and Professor Lim will become yesterday's news and soon be forgotten, until one day the problems can no longer be hidden and everything falls apart. By then it will be too late to do anything.


It all began with simple request to Mahathir's son

But some are not hopeful about outcome of the meeting, which may take place this weekend

A CHANCE encounter up north in Kedah a month ago led to the planned meeting between the Prime Minister and his predecessor.

After a long war of words in public, Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad are now expected to sit down for private talks as early as this weekend.

It all began when Datuk Mokhzani, the second son of Tun Dr Mahathir, bumped into a member of his Merbok constituency and of Mubarak, an association of former elected representatives.

'It was just a coincidental meeting,' Datuk Mokhzani told The Straits Times. 'He asked if there was a chance for a meeting between Tun and the Prime Minister as it would benefit everyone.'

Datuk Mokhzani conveyed the request to his father.

Tun Dr Mahathir then met Mubarak members for a breaking of the fast to hear more, and agreed to the proposal.

'It is now just a matter of finding a suitable time,' said Datuk Mokhzani who, of the five Mahathir children, is the closest to the Prime Minister's camp.

It was a remarkable turn of events, and has become the talk of the town.

A reconciliation between the two men had seemed impossible. The verbal attacks on PM Abdullah by Tun Dr Mahathir looked like they had crossed the point of no return.

But in politics, anything is possible, it seems.

The upcoming meeting would be their first since June when they sat at the same table at the wedding of Information Minister Zainuddin Maidin's son.

Nothing of significance took place there. In fact, since Datuk Seri Abdullah succeeded Tun Dr Mahathir in November 2003, they have met only a handful of times.

Both men want the peace talk to be held before Hari Raya, which will be celebrated next Tuesday.

'This is a good time as everyone is in a forgiving mood,' said political analyst Razak Baginda.

He said Tun Dr Mahathir's options have become extremely limited because he had failed to galvanise support from the public, non-governmental organisations, party members and government circles.

Even more crucial though is that the Umno general assembly is less than four weeks away. To many Umno leaders, it is imperative that the quarrel be resolved before then.

Although he failed to win a delegate's post to the assembly, Tun Dr Mahathir will be attending as a guest. And it could be an excruciating embarrassment for him to meet PM Abdullah there.

This weekend appears to be the likeliest time for the meeting, and it will probably take place during the breaking of the fast.

Datuk Mokhzani said it will be a private meeting.

'There are no pre-conditions,' he said. 'Tun said it does not matter if there are no witnesses, as long as he can present his views.'

The burning question now is whether a meeting can bridge their differences.

Tun Dr Mahathir has slammed PM Abdullah over his policies, and accused him of turning his administration into a 'family government'.

He has also said that a meeting without measures to 'right the wrongs' would be pointless.

In a sense, the success of the meeting hinges on Tun Dr Mahathir. If he is satisfied, it would be a success.

Some observers are pessimistic that the meeting will amount to much.

'The outcome of the meeting? Could be nothing at all,' said Johor Baru MP Shahrir Samad. 'Seeing the bitterness in Dr Mahathir's comments, I don't see how he can be appeased.'

But there is also the feeling that Tun Dr Mahathir is serious about seeking a solution.

His youngest son, Datuk Mukhriz, is hopeful, although he believes that there may not be room for compromise on many issues.

'The issues that my father had raised are very important to him. On the issue of sovereignty (in relation to building the bridge to Singapore), how does one compromise?' he asked.

'Still, that's really not for me to say. It is up to them.'

**********

Bush: I Won't Change Strategy in Iraq

President Bush conceded Friday that "right now it's tough" for American forces in Iraq, but the White House said he would not change U.S. strategy in the face of pre-election polls that show voters are upset.

With Republicans anxious about the potential loss of Congress — and with conditions seemingly deteriorating in Iraq — Bush addressed the question of whether he would alter his policies.

"We are constantly adjusting our tactics so that we achieve the objective, and right now it's tough, it's tough," Bush said in an Associated Press interview.

Bush met with Gen. John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, at the White House for a half-hour Friday afternoon. The White House said Abizaid already was in town and Bush asked him over. The president also will consult by video conference on Saturday with Abizaid at U.S. Central Command in Tampa, Fla., and with Gen. George Casey, who leads the U.S.-led Multinational Forces in Iraq, to determine if a change in tactics is necessary to combat the increasing violence.

Despite calls for change, Bush said, "Our goal has not changed. Our goal is a country that can defend, sustain and govern itself, a country that which will serve as an ally in this war. Our tactics are adjusting."

There were fresh signs of Republican doubts about the war. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, who holds a seat deemed safe for the GOP, said in a campaign debate Thursday she would have voted against the war had she known ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein possessed no weapons of mass destruction.

Democrats also kept up the pressure on Bush. In a letter to the president, a dozen House and Senate Democratic leaders urged him to bring home some U.S. troops and force the Iraqis to take more responsibility for their security. The Democrats said Bush should do more to pressure Iraqi leaders to disarm militias and find a political solution that would curb violence.

"The steadily mounting sectarian violence, growing insurgency and escalating casualty figures in Iraq are unacceptable and unsustainable," the Democrats said. "We urge you to change course, level with the American people and join with us to develop a policy that will work before the situation in Iraq is irretrievable."

Presidential spokesman Tony Snow said that while Bush might change tactics, he would not change his overall strategy.

"He's not somebody who gets jumpy at polls," Snow said of Bush.

Bush, at a political fundraiser in Washington for the National Republican Senatorial Committee, railed against Democrats who criticize the war. Calling the Democrats the party of "cut and run," Bush said voters need to ask: "Which political party has a strategy for victory in this war on terror?' "

As of Friday, the U.S. combat death toll in Iraq during October stood at 75 — possibly heading for the highest for any month in nearly two years. Now in its fourth year, the war has claimed the lives of at least 2,786 Americans. Approval of Bush's handling of Iraq has dipped to 37 percent among likely voters in the AP-Ipsos poll early this month, down slightly from 41 percent last month.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the Iraqi government must become less reliant on the United States to handle security. He also said U.S. officials are working with the Iraqis to develop projections on when that might happen.

"It's their country, they're going to have to govern it, they're going to have to provide security for it, and they're going to have to do it sooner rather than later," Rumsfeld said.

"The biggest mistake would be to not pass things over to the Iraqis, create a dependency on their part, instead of developing strength and capacity and competence," he said.

Doubts about the effectiveness of current tactics have risen, and the U.S. military has said its two-month drive to crush insurgent and militia violence in Baghdad has fallen short. Attacks in Baghdad rose by 22 percent in the first three weeks of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, compared with the three previous weeks.

On Friday, the Shiite militia run by the anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr briefly seized control of the southern Iraqi city of Amarah in one of the most brazen acts of defiance yet by the country's powerful, unofficial armies. Tom Casey, deputy spokesman at the State Department, said the United States was urging the Iraqis to make sure that security in Amarah was returned to the government.

"The flare-up of violence in Amarah points out that our strategy to quell the violence in that country is failing," said Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee.


Israeli violations of Lebanon airspace could provoke French fire

Beirut & Jerusalem - Israel Defense Minister Amir Peretz reported to an Israeli Knesset committee that there is a new threat to Israeli jets operating in Lebanon's airspace

Peretz said that the commanders of the French forces that deployed in southern Lebanon relayed a warning to Israel that the continued Israeli violations of Lebanese airspace might provoke French anti-aircraft fire at the Israeli planes.

Peretz reported that the French delivered this message at a meeting of the joint IDF-UNIFIL-Lebanese army committee.

"They said that IDF planes fly over them and that there was no certainty that they wouldn't open fire on them," revealed Peretz. He said that, even though he anticipates that the disagreement surrounding the Israeli flights in Lebanese airspace was likely to heat up in the near future, this was a critical issue for Israel and the flights would continue, including over the border crossings along the Syrian-Lebanese border, until U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 was fully implemented, including the release of the kidnapped soldiers.

Peretz noted that Syria had renewed the flow of weapons to Hezbollah and that Israel has begun to collect evidence to prove the Syrian activity on this matter.

"We intend to announce by means of the coordinating committee for Israel, the Lebanese army and UNIFIL, that if the transfer of weapons to
Hezbollah becomes systematic, we will have to take care of it ourselves," said Defense Minister Peretz.

The mounting international pressure on Israel includes all surveillance flights over Lebanon, including that of unmanned aerial vehicles that are sent to collect intelligence.

Israel, however, rejected a proposal by the United States and another European country that they would provide intelligence from their own spy satellites in exchange for Israel agreeing to terminate its flights in Lebanese airspace.

The U.N. Secretary-General's Office has criticized Israel a number of times recently for the continued Air Force flights over Lebanon, arguing that this was a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, international law and Lebanese sovereignty. The United Nations has cited at least 15 incidents of Israeli aircraft in Lebanese airspace in the last month alone.

United Nations officials warned that the continued Israeli flights would pose a problem for UNIFIL troops, which are in place to enforce U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, and specifically so for the naval task force that is deployed off the Lebanese coast.

Israel is opposed to ending its flights and has argued that they are not a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701. Israel asserts that in the absence of effective supervision of the Syrian-Lebanese border, IAF flights to collect intelligence of arms smuggling are necessary. Israel rejected the offer that was made by the United States and a European country whose troops are deployed in Lebanon to accept satellite images instead. Senior Israeli political officials said that, until the embargo was enforced, Israel would continue to fly over Lebanon.


Israel must prepare for Iran to push the button

Iranian president said earlier there is no reason for Israel “the greatest insult to human dignity” to exist and it would soon disappear.

Halutz also warned Israel to prepare for possible war with Syria, whose missile threat to Israel's population is similar to that of Hizballah.

Another of his outrageous speeches was delivered Friday to a pro-Palestinian rally marking the Islami Republic’s “al Qods Day” (Jerusalem Liberation Day). In further inflammatory remarks, Ahmadinejad said “the world knows the US and Britain are enemies of the Iranian nation.” He warned European nations not to harm Iran, saying that if anger in the region boiled over, Europe would get hurt because of its support for Israel. “Europe must distance itself from Israel at once. That is Iran’s ultimatum. “He went on to brand the UN Security Council and its decisions “illegitimate.”

These words amounted to an Iranian threat of harm to the European UN forces deployed in Lebanon unless they left forthwith.

His harsh words followed two events: one, the Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert’s statement in Moscow this week after he met with Russian leaders: “They need to fear that something that they do not want to happen will happen. In no case, Olmert stressed, “will we reconcile with nuclear arms in Iranian hands. There is no margin for error here.”

The other event was the arrival in the Persian Gulf of the giant US carrier Iwo Jima with its Expeditionary Strike Group to join the American naval, air and marine might piling up opposite Iran’s shores.

Next week too, the Security Council convenes to discussion a form of sanctions against Iran for refusing to desist from enriching uranium.


Commemorate UN Day

For nearly sixty years, October 24th has been commemorated annually by all UN member states as United Nations Day. Marking the day on which the UN Charter entered into force, UN Day is celebrated in the United States as a time to reflect upon the importance of the United Nations to the furtherance of US national interests and the promotion of American ideals.

Although the United Nations and the entire international system have undergone profound transformations through the years, the organization continues to serve as a uniquely valuable tool for the advancement of US foreign policy - perhaps more now than ever before.

A quick review of the most pressing global issues for the United States finds the United Nations playing a critical and irreplaceable role, including in crises such as North Korea, Iran, Darfur, and Lebanon.

Unfortunately, the United Nations is often taken for granted and ill-appreciated by American leaders, or worse, under-resourced and used as a scapegoat.


Malaysia Mahathir Badawi Mokhzanbumiputera Israel Lebanon Beirut Jerusalem Iraq Bush America UN