Malaysia’s success

Malaysia’s success

By Antonio C. Abaya
(Manila Standard Today)

Our neighbor Malaysia celebrated its 50th anniversary of independence last Aug. 31 and the months-long festivities that marked that event were highlighted by the launch into space of its first cosmonaut, Sheikh Muszaphar Shukor, a 35-year old medical doctor and practicing Muslim.

“Muszaphar was chosen from thousands of hopefuls in a nationwide competition that generated tremendous excitement in Malaysia,” wrote the French news agency, AFP.

He was launched into space on Oct. 11 (while governors and congressmen were being bribed in Malacañang) from Russia’s Star City cosmodrome, with two others: an American woman astronaut and a Russian cosmonaut. The trio spent 11 days in space, including a sojourn in the International Space Station, and returned to Earth on Oct. 22.

A historic moment for Malaysia , said its deputy prime minister, Najib Razak, that made his countrymen “stand a few inches taller.”

“This is a very momentous and historic occasion for Malaysia. It will go down in the annals of our history because this is a first for Malaysia in space and he has returned safely,” gushed the understandably ecstatic Najib.

Now, how come the Philippines’ national leaders never ever thought of sending a Filipino astronaut into space? I know I made such a suggestion to one of President Corazon Aquino’s lieutenants sometime in 1990.

But either the suggestion was not passed on to her, or she did not think the idea was worth the bother. She had just survived Gringo Honasan’s two coup attempts against her, in 1987 and 1989, and she was probably too engrossed in trying to prevent a third coup to think about sending a Pinoy into space.

A pity. I did mention that suggestion to a subsequent US Ambassador, Dick Solomon, and he thought it was a good idea that he would have endorsed to Washington if a request had come from the Philippine government. And he took a small notebook from his vest pocket and made a note of it. But the Philippine government obviously never made such a request, and that was the last I ever heard of it.

About 10 years ago, a Fil-Am woman in her late 20s came here and announced that she was making representations with the Russian government to enlist in Russia’s space program. Obviously she was looking for financial backing from the Philippine government: It would have cost several million dollars

But such backing never materialized, so she went back to the US , her dreams of orbiting in space discarded into her mental trash can.

Perhaps the post-Arroyo government will re-consider my suggestion. A Filipino orbiting in space would be a boost to our sagging national ego. After decades of almost endless defeats and humiliation, a Filipino astronaut in space would be a much needed victory and triumph that we all need to restore our sanity and self-esteem.

It would give Philippine media something worthwhile to focus on, aside from its almost exclusive fascination with scandals, predatory trapos, mercenary coup plotters, showbiz fornicators and tiresome communists.

And it could trigger a paradigm shift in our national psyche. Such as, for example, inspiring more Filipino students to take up science and engineering, rather than law.

I know it did something like that in the US when the Soviets launched their first Sputnik satellite 50 years ago last Oct. 7. I was a student at Northwestern then, and the success of the Soviet launch plunged American leaders, media and the public into much soul-searching and breast-beating, about how they had been overtaken by the Soviets, how their education system was inferior to the Soviets’, even to Western Europe’s and Japan’s, how they were not producing enough scientists and engineers etc.

Americans also became more cosmopolitan. I was enrolled in a Russian language course. When the course started in September, we were only six in class. But after the Sputnik launch in October and the subsequent soul-searching and breast-beating, our class ballooned to more than 60 and had to be divided into several sections.

The soul-searching did much good. The Americans were able to rebound from their collective depression and, prodded on by President John F. Kennedy (who was to be assassinated in 1962), went on to beat the Soviets in landing the first men on the Moon, in 1969.

We Filipinos have undergone years of soul-searching. What we need is a major symbolic triumph to lift us out of our depression. Manny Pacquiao is not adequate: His ill-advised detour into politics and his obvious lack of education do not make him a good role model. A Filipino astronaut in space would be a more compelling symbol of our aspirations.

(OK, OK, Some wise guys will suggest that we send GMA and her husband into space, and leave them there. But to be fair, we have to include some senators and congressmen, as well as some bureaucrats and generals. It would be too expensive, guys.)

But to get back to Malaysia, Boo Chanco e-mailed me a short article titled The Malaysian Miracle, written by Joseph Stiglitz, former chief economist of the World Bank and outspoken critic of free trade and globalization. It can be accessed at www.project-syndicate.org

Stiglitz writes that at independence 50 years ago, Malaysia was “one of the poorest countries in the world.” Its gross domestic product then “was comparable to that of Haiti, Honduras and Egypt and some 5 percent below that of Ghana. Today, Malaysia’s income is 7.8 times that of Ghana, more than five times that of Honduras, and more than 2.5 times that of Egypt. In the global growth league tables, Malaysia is in the top tier, along with China, Taiwan, South Korea and Thailand.

“Moreover, the benefits of growth have been shared. Hard-core poverty is set to be eliminated by 2010, with the overall poverty rate falling to 2.8 percent. Malaysia has succeeded in markedly reducing the income divides that separated various ethnic groups, not by bringing the top down, but by bringing the bottom up.

“Part of the country’s success in reducing poverty reflects strong job creation. While unemployment is a problem in most of the world, Malaysia has been importing labor. In the 50 years since independence, 7.24 million jobs have been created, an increase of 261 percent, which would be equivalent to the creation of 105 million jobs in the US….”

Stiglitz’s short article did not go into some details. In the 1980s, Malaysia followed the examples of South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong and geared its economy to the export of manufactured goods. The Philippines did not, until the presidency of Fidel Ramos in the 1990s.

In 2005, Malaysia’s exports totaled $147.l billion, compared to the Philippines’ $41.3 billion, or $105.8 billion more than the Philippines. Malaysia has been actively selling itself in the global tourist market since the 1990s, as anyone who watches cable TV can see from the ubiquitous “Malaysia Truly Asia” ads in CNN and the BBC. The Philippines had an ineffectual “Wow Philippines” campaign which, mercifully, was withdrawn about three years ago, but not replaced since. In 2006, Malaysia drew in 16 million tourists, the Philippines not even three million, or 13 million more than the Philippines.

If you convert into jobs Malaysia’s surplus over the Philippines of $105.8 billion in exports and 13 million in tourist arrivals, you will come up with millions of jobs that Malaysia generated, and the Philippines did not, in just two sectors alone. This would explain why the Philippines exports its people (eight to nine million) and Malaysia does not.

Another key ingredient in Malaysia’s success, which Stiglitz only briefly touched on, is the effective and total exclusion of Communists from their national life, through the Internal Security Act, which gives the Malaysian (and Singaporean) state the right to put them in jail indefinitely and without trial.

Unlike in the Philippines where Communists are and have been allowed to organize fronts among workers, peasants, fishermen, students, academe, public school teachers, government employees, medical workers, etc; to edit newspapers, write columns, host radio and TV programs; to become presidents of state universities; and even to run for Congress.

Guess which country has more peace and stability, and which country is bogged down in endless conflicts.

Stiglitz also did not mention in his article that much of the entrepreneurial activities in Malaysia came and come from its large Chinese community, estimated at 24 to 30 percent of its population (compared to only about 3 percent of the Philippine population). Without its large Chinese community, it is doubtful if Malaysia would be where it is right now.

Dear Malaysian Readers, what say you ?

Exclusive Interview with Michael Backman

Fellow blogger, from Bolehnation, alerted me the posting of an exclusive interview with Michael Backman, the famous writer-commentator from Australia. Thanks!

"It depresses me that Malaysia hasn’t been more successful than it has and that it is still fighting the old fights of the 1960s." - Michael Backman

1. What was the initial thought that prompted you to write about your "Boleh or Bodoh column"? What was and has been your intention in writing the article?


Malaysia has good people, good resources and a legal system that ought to function. It depresses me that Malaysia hasn’t been more successful than it has and that it is still fighting the old fights of the 1960s.


Malaysia’s Chinese have accepted the NEP and its successor policies. They define themselves as Malaysians first and foremost and are among the proudest Malaysians. They have learned Malay. Essentially, they have done everything that has been required of them and yet still there is this endless preoccupation with race in Malaysia.


Meanwhile the rest of the world is just so unbelievably dynamic now. Malaysia is looking more and more like a sleepy backwater relative to what’s going on elsewhere in the world.


Many Malaysians don’t seem to understand this. Many like to travel overseas – but when they do, too many look but they don’t see. They don’t see how things in Malaysia could be improved. They don’t want to learn from anywhere else. They think Malaysia is a special case. They should be bringing back new ideas to Malaysia. Instead they just want to bring back duty free.


2. Have you ever considered the impact the column might have upon your relationship with Malaysian government and its people? We understand Rafidah Aziz, Malaysia's Minister for Trade and Industry, criticised your column by saying you probably know nothing about Malaysia. Has there been any (positive or negative) impact/response from publishing the column?


I write to be read and I write to have an impact, otherwise there is no point in writing. I criticised the space program for Malaysia’s first astronaut – the making of teh tarik and so on – and the Malaysian Government changed its mind on that and announced that the astronaut would be doing sensible scientific experiments after all. Perhaps I had an impact there.


In any event, more than a thousand Malaysians e-mailed me to say that they agreed with my views. If I am giving a voice to those Malaysians who share the same views but feel that they can’t express them then I’m happy to have been of some help.


But then why should I as a non-Malaysian comment about Malaysia? As far as I am concerned, strict notions of nationality are breaking down. We are all involved in each other’s countries now. Malaysians have a lot of investments in Australia. Australians invest in Asia and so on. We all have stakes in other countries and so all should be able to comment on how they are run. The free flow of ideas and openness are good things. The only people who do not like this are politicians in Malaysia and Singapore. You will never hear Australian or UK politicians complaining about those things. So you should ask yourself, why do Malaysian and Singaporean politicians dislike public debate and openness?


As for Rafidah, I know quite a lot about Malaysia. And I know quite a lot about Rafidah, which is why I wrote about the corruption allegations against her in my second column. Rafidah understands her trade brief very well, but she is dictatorial. Look at how she rules UMNO Wanita.


Sadly, I suspect I know more about Malaysia than many Malaysians. One reason for this is because Malaysia’s media is so poor and many things cannot be discussed openly. Ministers like Rafidah would prefer that Malaysians are not told things. Perhaps they have something to hide.


There is an idea among Malaysians that their country is particularly special and unique and that non-Malaysians simply cannot know much about Malaysia. That simply isn’t true. All countries are complex and have their nuances. You can be expert in a country without being from that country. Indeed, sometimes it helps not to be from that country. If more Malaysians sent more time away from Malaysia, they would gain a far clearer picture of what Malaysia is and what it is not.


I have met many Malaysian politicians and business people, spent time in almost every Malaysian state, sat through sessions of the Malaysian parliament and even attended an UMNO general assembly, stayed in kampongs, visited rubber plantations, and so on - that’s more than most Malaysians. I have stayed with Malaysian friends in Damansara, in Ampang and in Pandan Jaya. But Rafidah only stays in Damansara.


3. We understand you're an expert on Asia's political and economical affairs. But you seem to have taken an extra interest in Malaysia (like having a special column for Malaysia's articles on your webpage

(http://www.michaelbackman.com). Why Malaysia?


I studied at an Australian university. Many of my classmates were Malaysian students – Chinese, Malay and Indians. I became very interested in Malaysia from that time on.


4. After reading the column, one can hardly not to think that Malaysia is a somewhat badly "managed" country. We know it might be a big question, but what do you think has contributed to the "mismanagement"of the country?


It is not all bad news. Malaysia has handled race relations well. The NEP with all its imperfections was good for Malaysia. But Malaysia is rich in resources and there is a lot of squandering of those resources.


Education is big part of the problem. Malaysian schools are not nearly good enough. There are Malaysians who are now very regretful and resentful that they attended school in Malaysia. Some have told me that they have spent a lot of their adult lives trying to undo the damage of rote learning and ‘follow the leader’-type training that they were given in Malaysia.....(more)



5. From the top of your head, what would you rank as the most wasteful projects/policies ever implemented by Malaysia Government in the past 10 years, and why?


Proton – Malaysia should NOT have a national car. You cannot get sufficient economies of scale with a population as small as Malaysia’s when it comes to car manufacturing

Putrajaya – removing civil servants from ordinary society does not make for good government

KLIA – all that infrastructure, very little air traffic and it still takes forever for your luggage to come though – it is ridiculous

Petronas Towers – the lower floors are mostly full of lift shafts – you can’t rent out a lift shaft


6. What is your view towards Malaysia's national car policy?


It is a mess. Australia started out wanting to have a car industry too. And this has been a disaster for Australia too – too many Australians building too many sub-standard cars that can only compete with world class cars if they are protected by tariffs.


I mentioned this to Dr Tun Mahathir on an occasion that I met with him. He said that Proton had been beneficial because many small companies were created which became suppliers to Proton and that as a consequence Malaysia now has more technical expertise. There is some truth to this. But is it right to force every Malaysian to pay much, much more for their cars so that some companies and their owners can develop new expertise?


Proton will only get a strategic partner/investor if the government hands over massive tax holidays and other incentives. It all means that ordinary Malaysians will have to pay even more for their second rate national cars.


7. How would you compare Dr. Tun Mahathir and Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi?


Dr M was one of Asia’s greatest leaders in recent times. But that does not mean that I agree with everything that Dr M did. With Abdullah, Malaysia now has more of an administrator than a leader......(more)

8. It's not uncommon for Malaysian Government ministers to advice (or warn) Malaysian people against criticising the government by labelling such behavior as "culturally wrong" and "not patriotic". How do you, as a foreigner, think about that attitude?


Such an attitude on the part of ministers is self serving, arrogant nonsense. Ministers are not there to rule. They are there to serve. They are the servants of the people and if that doesn’t suit them then they should leave politics as they have no moral right to continue in their positions. Malaysia’s ministers need to spend some time in the UK observing how the UK government is answerable to the Parliament, to the media and ultimately to the people. That might then give them a clue as to why the UK is so rich and dynamic and why Malaysia isn’t. The government needs to be reminded that it and the Malaysian state are two different things.


9. You have written a number of books on doing business in Asia. Are you currently writing any new books?


Yes. I am writing a book about what Asia will be like in the next 20 or so years.


10. Any special words you want to say to Malaysians in general?


Speak up more and shop less. ...(more)

(Thanks Bolehnation)

50 Years of Malaysian Independence: Celebrate or Contemplate?

At any one time, the problems facing a nation are multidimensional. Therefore, attempts at improving things need to start by cutting to the chase and identifying the salient negative aspects and conditions that afflict the country. By default, such a process must necessarily be conducted in a way that the citizenry easily understands, and can relate to.

When an attempt actually succeeds, it is in the nature of things that the points made are often characterised by simplicity, and yes, by how self-evident they seem to be.

On 3 April 2007, Raja Nazrin Shah, the crown prince of the Malaysian state of Perak, made a keynote speech to a roundtable of 150 young and youngish Malaysians gathered to discuss national unity at the Bar Council in Kuala Lumpur. The event was co-organised by the Centre for Public Policy Studies at the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute, and the National Young Lawyers Committee of the Malaysian Bar Council, two of the more vocal bodies in Malaysia at the moment.

What was striking about the prince's words that morning was that the points about nation building were issues Malaysians should have been conscious about all along. What was more significant, once they were said, was that the points raised very obviously required enunciation. The potential power of the prince's elegant presentation lay in the clear-eyed recognition of that need. Raja Nazrin realised that the bricks required for building a nation had been mislaid along the way, and Malaysians could do with some reflection and reminder.

Given the pessimism that many Malaysians feel about the political economy (notwithstanding the "feel good" atmosphere that Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi claims is evident in the country), the lack of confidence in the Prime Minister's ability to reform the country, and the discomfort about the de-secularisation of society - the voice of a non-partisan leader uttering simple truths can have far-reaching consequences.

Raja Nazrin's entry into the discussion promises to generate more participation about the nature and the state of Malaysia's nation-building narrative. He presented some guidelines that included the need for trust in the proclaimed nation building process, openness and tolerance throughout society, an accommodative practical sensibility, a willingness to confront problems, and an appropriate system of rewards and punishment. Albeit often heard perhaps, these are potent points nonetheless.

But what he mentioned first of all is something worth reiterating for the simple reason that it is so often forgotten. It is also what makes the speech so poignant, and that is that "Malaysians of all races, religions, and geographic locations need to believe beyond a shadow of a doubt (my italics) that they have a place under the Malaysian sun."

This insight gains power not through the fact that inter-ethnic relations have been worsening in recent years, but because it bravely directs attention to the worry that the 50-year-old country has been developing a stubbornly multi-tiered citizenry.

This tendency has to be stopped, he added, because "only when each citizen believes that he or she has a common home and is working towards a common destiny, will he or she make the sacrifices needed for the long haul." Should this condition go unmentioned, it cannot but continue unremedied, until something gives way.

The policy that has certainly had the most profound effect on how Malaysians relate to each other, how they perceive each other across ethnic lines, and how they view themselves and their future in the country must be the affirmative action program, the New Economic Policy (NEP). This was implemented in 1970 after racial riots the year before, and was originally meant to end in 1990.

Most were convinced at that time that such a programme was necessary if the multicultural country was to survive as a single entity. However, the addition to its rationale that made it acceptable to most Malaysians was the caveat that redistribution of wealth should occur within a growing economy and never through confiscation.

In the 1973 mid-term review of the second Malaysian Plan, it was proclaimed that the goals of the NEP were to be undertaken "in the context of rapid structural change and expansion of the economy so as to ensure that no particular group experiences any loss or feels any sense of deprivation in the process."

This "no confiscation" principle was in practice a very tall order. The NEP is after all a wide socio-economic programme meant to rectify unhealthy conditions left behind by the colonial system. There was no way that no particular group would in the long run experience loss and a sense of deprivation.

What happened over the last 50 years, when various groups within the country made political compromises, bargained over each other's interests, ranked each other's agendas, and suppressed voices for the higher good as understood by certain leaders, is that Malaysians were left with limited knowledge about their own history. They know little about significant events in their past, have little reliable information about their present and former leaders, and long for viable alternative visions.

The result is a strategic disinterest among the young in the finer points of nation building, and widespread distrust of politicians, the very people who claim to be leading the nation building process.

This is the long-lasting heritage of the NEP. Many do feel a "sense of deprivation". To Raja Nazrin's credit, this is what he now points out. The fact that it comes from someone with no reason to have sensed any deprivation at all makes it all the more compelling.

As long as this "sense of deprivation" remains undiscussed, it will remain unresolved. In time, it is bound to find socially non-beneficial, if not violent, expression.

Seen in a larger context, Raja Nazrin's speech is part of a growing trend in Malaysia becoming more evident on the anniversary of the country's 50th year of Merdeka (a Malay word ubiquitously understood to mean independence). Reasons for celebration beyond the mere remembrance of liberation from colonial rule do not dominate. There is little optimism, and the "feel good" factor is weak. In fact, rumours of early general elections serve as a painful reminder of how segregated the country remains in many important dimensions. Lacking a sense of real unity, spontaneous rejoicing in the Merdeka anniversary remains rare.

Being unsure about what it is they are supposed to be celebrating, Malaysians experience a national anxiety, and are becoming more pensive than before. The good thing about this is that their skepticism may yet evolve into constructive activism. After sound contemplation, some change must come.

- By Ooi Kee Beng

---

Ooi Kee Beng is a Fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. His latest book, The Reluctant Politician: Tun Dr Ismail and His Time (ISEAS, 2006) is available online at the ISEAS bookshop - http://bookshop.iseas.edu.sg

Malaysians put out unwelcome mat

Malaysia - Malaysia's government has laid out the red carpet for the world's tourists for the 50th anniversary of the country's independence. But the message about treating these invited guests cordially apparently hasn't gotten through to some of the country's top tourist destinations. And blame for the poor reception can be laid at the doorstep of the Malaysian government itself.

Aside from microstates Singapore and Brunei, Malaysia is the richest and most developed country in Southeast Asia. In addition to demographic good fortune, Malaysia's progress owes much to pro-business government policies and initiatives that industrialized and expanded its original agricultural and resource export economy. Many of Malaysia's tourist attractions, such as Petronas Towers and last week's Kuala Lumpur International Literary Festival, owe a debt to the nation's relative affluence and advancement.

But skyscrapers and other urban delights are hardly unique to Malaysia. Every major Asian city has the same international designer shops in its malls, flogging its creations at similar prices. If you're looking for nightlife, nearby Bangkok beats Kuala Lumpur hands down. Local music and theater are better in Manila, while Singapore attracts a greater variety and frequency of international shows.

Natural advantage

Malaysia can claim to stand out from the regional tourism competition with its natural endowments. Development has made Malaysia more efficient than neighboring Indonesia and Thailand at denuding its forests and paving its paddies. But development also means surviving natural wonders have adequate infrastructural support for visitors, from Air Asia flights to air-conditioned rooms.

No part of Malaysia has more natural wonders than Sabah, which lives up to its designation in the tourism literature as "Malaysia's solar-powered theme park". Sabah's crown jewel is Southeast Asia's tallest peak, Mount Kinabalu. But East Sabah is packed with the widest variety of attractions, including the world's most popular place to see orangutans in their native habitat, at Sepilok, ancient unspoiled forests at Maliau Basin and Danum Valley, a chance to bathe with elephants along the floodplain of the Kinabatangan River, and what's arguably the world's best dive site at Tun Sakaran Marine Park.

At these locations, and a dozen more, tourism professionals offer guided excursions that will take you seamlessly from the airport to hotels to attractions. Step outside that cocoon, however, and you're likely to find shocking levels of rudeness toward foreign guests. Rather than a helping hand, at times you're likely to encounter the local equivalent of an outstretched middle finger. These incidents were far more common and unmistakable on a recent trip than when this correspondent visited these same parts of Malaysia a decade ago.

Tourism taxes

The episodes went beyond the usual overcharging for transport or insistence on offering the most expensive product or service. In Tawau, a border town that has the closest air connections for diving around Sipidan, clerks in a bookstore avoided me when I entered, then taunted me when I inquired about buying a map of Sabah, an item the store stocked for sale.

In Lahad Datu, gateway to spectacular nature trekking and game viewing in four different directions, waitresses refused to serve me until compelled by managers, and even then had to be goaded to bring each item included in the meal - the rice, the vegetables, the chili sauce - that other customers received on a single tray with their main dish. At a bus-ticket booth, a tout pushed me out of the way in the middle of an inquiry - pretty routine - and a clerk in the booth defended him.

I could rarely pass a night market or open-air warung without a racial remark in the local language being directed my way. In most cases, it was young people who were the most offensive. To be sure, I received a good deal of Malaysian hospitality from a variety of people, rich and poor, young and old. But the unpleasant experiences were so frequent and so similar that they defied coincidence. They also defied the usual explanations offered for them.

The first excuse was that these runaway clerks and wait staff hid out of embarrassment because they didn't speak English. It is true that English was more widely and better spoken a decade ago than now, as the primary-school medium of instruction has changed to Bahasa Melayu. But I spoke Bahasa Melayu's close cousin, Bahasa Indonesia, languages as close as British and American English. Even then, staff still hid when alone or continued their ridicule and abuse in groups.

Blame the immigrants

The second excuse was a global favorite: it's not Malaysian citizens but rather illegal immigrants that are rude and abusive. That's a more interesting argument, since East Sabah has a long land and sea border with Indonesia as well as passenger-boat service and a lively smuggling trade across the Sulu Sea to the Philippines and with historical ties to both. Indonesian migrant workers supply much of the labor at local oil-palm plantations.

However, there are a couple of problems with that explanation. First, the frequent insults that were made in this correspondent's direction were voiced in Bahasa Melayu, not Indonesian slang. During six weeks spent in the neighboring Indonesian portion of Borneo, rarely did I face this type of hostility. People in Kalimantan are generally poorer, less educated and less exposed to foreign visitors, but they managed to be outwardly friendly far more frequently. The difference is no doubt related to the values the Malaysian government espouses.

The official Tourism Malaysia website proudly declares the nation "a bubbling, bustling melting pot of races and religions, where Malays, Indians, Chinese and many other ethnic groups live together in peace and harmony". In reality, over its five decades of independence, Malaysian government policies have enshrined race as a key factor in the national character.

Amazing Race Asia

Malaysia's institutionalized racism in the form of preferences for Malays and restrictions on Chinese and others in government employment, university places and other benefits teaches that there are real differences between races, and all races are unequal, whether it's by natural endowment or national legislation.

Malaysia's Islamization over the past decade has arguably made matters worse and likely contributed to the hostility. Even though Muslim Malays just barely constitute a majority of the population, the government has proudly proclaimed Malaysia an Islamic state. It's strictly political Islam: the ruling United National Malays Organization invokes religion to counter Islamic-party challenges.

Islamization also serves as convenient shorthand for generic, amorphous anti-Westernism. That's particularly ironic given Malaysia's numerous homages to the West, from its US-inspired flag to its urban elite's embrace of Western materialism and English Premier League football. The elite may be immune to its own propaganda, but it seems to work at the grassroots, beaches and rainforests.

Islamization's main effect isn't to unite the country but to highlight differences, whether it's with your Chinese neighbors or that Westerner ordering local fare. At half a century, Malaysia can be proud of its economic progress and remaining natural beauty, but arguably has a long way to go in the social sphere. Speaking as one 50-year-old to another, I can tell Malaysia it's never too late to learn. The first lesson might be to get its national house in better order before it invites guests.

- By Muhammad Cohen

Former broadcast news producer Muhammad Cohen is special correspondent for Macau Business and author of Hong Kong On Air (Blacksmith Books), a novel set during the 1997 handover and Asian economic meltdown featuring television news, love, betrayal, high finance and cheap lingerie.

Deputy Premier Najib in Trouble?

Pressure mounts in Kuala Lumpur to put the brakes on a scandal-tainted Malay politico


Speculation is increasing in Malaysia that of one of the country ‘s elite politicians, Deputy Prime Minister Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak, is in serious trouble due to a series of messy scandals.

There is considerable speculation that Najib, the son of Malaysia’s second prime minister, will be forced to step down from national politics. One rumor has him becoming chief minister of his native Pahang state, although the exit route for most discredited or politically suspect figures in Malaysia is a diplomatic or other posting overseas, according to sources contacted by Asia Sentinel. In any case, on March 13, he became sufficiently concerned that he called a press conference in his Perak constituency to deny rumors that Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was considering dumping him in favor of Muhyidin Yassin, currently minister of agriculture and agro-based industries and a Badawi ally.

Najib is said to be fighting back on a several fronts, making the rounds of the old bulls of the United Malays National Organization, Malaysia’s biggest political party, in an effort to save his career. In January, Najib reportedly flew to London to attempt to meet with Mahathir Mohamad, the octogenarian former prime minister who still carries considerable clout inside UMNO, in an attempt to shore up his support. Mahathir reportedly declined to see him.

In particular Najib has been wounded by speculation of his involvement, however peripheral, in the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, the 28 year-old Mongolian beauty whose body was found in a patch of jungle outside a Kuala Lumpur on October 20. Two policemen from an elite Special Operations Force whose ultimate boss was Najib were arrested for the crime. Altantuya disappeared after attempting to confront Abdul Razak Baginda, the head of a think tank closely tied to Najib, over support for her 18-month-old son. Razak Baginda is also facing charges for conspiring in the murder

Originally, a third member of the force – a 22-year-old woman lance corporal – was also arrested. She was never named in news stories by Malaysia’s government-friendly press and was released a week later without being charged. There is widespread speculation in Malaysia that she is the aide-de-camp and bodyguard to Najib’s wife, Rosmah Mansor.

Razak Baginda is scheduled to go on trial in June. The case leaves open the question of how two – and possibly three ‑ elite police officers became involved with a political analyst who has no formal government authority. The top leadership of UMNO, the dominant force in the ruling national coalition, have been tiptoeing gingerly around the case ever since the arrests in November.

Razak Baginda, originally scheduled to go on trial in March 2008, had his trial date moved up by months in an unusual move. That has raised additional questions in political circles over whether the move was engineered by Prime Minister Ahmad Abdullah Badawi or individuals close to him because there is evidence that would tie Najib to the case.

Kuala Lumpur’s energetic blogs are buzzing with rumors that prosecutors have a letter indicating that Najib asked Malaysia’s Immigration Department to issue the doomed Altantuya a visa, and that at one point Najib, Razak Baginda and Altantuya were said to have gone overseas from Malaysia together, although others point out that visitors from Russia, China, Mongolia and from lots of other countries can get visas very easily to visit Malaysia.

In addition to questions over the murder case, Najib is also under fire for the 2002 purchase by the Malaysian Ministry of Defense of three submarines that cost the treasury RM$4.5 billion (US$1.3 billion) for which a company controlled by Abdul Razak Baginda was paid a commission of RM510 million (US$147.3 million) in a sale that included no competitive tenders.

Although Najib was cleared in an investigation at the time of the purchase, his position has been weakened enough by the Altantuya scandal that opposition politicians, particularly onetime Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, have again begun to assail him over it. On the Al-Jazeera television network, Anwar Thursday also questioned commissions paid over the purchase of 18 Russian Sukhoi-30 jet fighters in 2003 when Najib was defence minister.


"There are complicities over the huge and massive commissions accrued by the government involving the Defence Ministry, Defence Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak," said Anwar during the interview.

Najib said he wouldn't respond to Anwar's charges. But, he told reporters recently, "Don't listen to the stories on the internet...they are all a myth. We should not react hastily, we must stick to principles and the truth...what is important is that we understand and know who will help us."

Driving Najib from national politics would be difficult. In addition to the cachet he enjoys from being his father’s son, as deputy party president he has strong ties among UMNO leaders in a career that goes back to 1978 as a functionary in the very strong UMNO Youth wing. The party’s nearly 200 division chiefs are key to his political wellbeing, and reports are that he has been wooing them assiduously, arranging in some cases for overseas junkets.

And, as UMNO goes, so goes Malaysian politics. Despite its endemic corruption and the pervasive sense of rot at the top, it appears highly unlikely that any outside political force could even dent it. Anwar Ibrahim, who was jailed on charges of sexual abuse that were widely perceived as spurious, has been leading a reform party movement, making speeches across the country about party corruption and in particular Najib’s connection to it.

But few believe Anwar has any chance to take down UMNO. The odds are instead that if Najib were to be sent packing, it would be at the behest of UMNO leaders who have decided he is too hot to handle, not by the country’s full electorate.

(Source)

Mr PM, indict Zulkipli!

Anti-Corruption Agency chief Zulkipli Mat Noor can no longer be in office holding on to his position as Director General. It is an embarrassment to the ACA! An institution entrusted with the highly demanding responsibility of checking and eradicating corruption cannot be headed by an individual whose character and integrity comes under a cloud of suspicion. We cannot tolerate this absurd situation. The Prime Minister must surely understand this.

Zulkipli was not merely accused of being corrupt by any ordinary citizen. It was not a wild allegation by any means. But in this case, the accusation came from a senior (now retired) ACA official, Ramli Abdul Manan, who had investigated the issue of corruption involving Zulkipli. According to Ramli, the former Sabah ACA director, he had studied this particular case and had indeed filed his report in July 2006 alerting the ACA, the then Inspector-General of Police and the Prime Minister regarding Zulkipli's corruption. Strangely, no action was taken to pursue this matter.

Besides this, it has been disclosed that several reports dating back to 1997 were lodged with the police by a woman alleging sexual molestation and behaviour unbecoming of an official, who strangely seems to be enjoying the confidence of the authorities.

In spite of these earlier reports, Zulkipli’s contract was extended three times since his appointment by former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad in 2001. (His current term ends on 31 March 2007.) We are now told that the police are investigating this case.

Notwithstanding this, further allegations of corruption have emerged with Dr Jeffrey Kitingan lodging a 24-page police report implicating Zulkipli with corruption.

What is really worrying Malaysians is that Zulkipli continues to be on duty and in service as Director General of the ACA. There is this real fear that, because of his top position, he has access to ACA files and information pertaining to his case. It is legitimate to wonder whether there is a possibility that evidence can be tampered with or witnesses threatened. This is something that cannot be easily dismissed or overlooked.

Zulkipli’s position in the ACA is tarnishing the image of the ACA. People are losing their confidence in the ACA as a body truly dedicated to wiping out corruption. When citizens no longer view the head of this very important agency as a man of impeccable character, then the entire outfit suffers. Its credibility is shattered and the very purpose of setting up the ACA is rightly questioned. We cannot have a person remaining in such a crucial office if his integrity has been called into question or if there is the slightest hint of irregularities.

Aliran is of the view that Zulkipli should be indicted. Indicting an officer while the case is being investigated is part of the disciplinary process. When an officer is cleared, he can be reinstated without suffering any loss in salary or seniority to his rank. Why should it be different for Zulkipli, Mr PM?



P Ramakrishnan

President

28 March 2007

Malaysia’s Losing Battle Against Corruption

A sudden spate of sleaze allegations unsettles politics at the top of Malaysia’s biggest political party

An unappetizing stew of allegations against high-ranking politicians and top bureaucrats is eating away at Malaysian Prime Minister Ahmad Abdullah Badawi’s popularity.

Many of the ingredients emanate from an angry former Anti-Corruption Agency investigator who charges he was sidelined because he refused to shut up about corruption among top officials of the country’s biggest political party.

Then there is the unrelated case of the deputy internal security minister, Mohd Johari Baharum. He is in the spotlight over a claim accusing him of accepting RM5 million (US$1.4 million) to assist in freeing several suspects detained under Malaysia’s Emergency Ordinance, which covers suspects accused of serious crimes. Local news reports say the released suspects are believed to have been involved in gangsterism, prostitution, illegal gambling, and illicit money lending.
.
The latest allegations are a further embarrassment to Badawi, who won a landslide victory at the last polls – with Johari as an ally ‑ on promises to root out corruption. The situation raises questions over whether the prime minister, whose personal honesty has traditionally been regarded as beyond reproach, has the backbone -- or the clout -- to clean out the United Malays National Organisation, the dominant political party in Malaysia’s ethnically-based ruling Barisan National coalition that has ruled the country since independence from Britain in 1957.

Former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is skeptical. “The government likes to talk about the rule of law and the perils of corruption but there is a significant gap between its words and its actions,” he said in an email interview with Asia Sentinel.

Mohd Johari is a case in point. He has been seen as a strong Abdullah supporter since he took an active stand that helped bar former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad from the UMNO party general assembly last September. The former premier, who had been launching a fusillade of complaints at his successor, was expected to go after Abdullah publicly at the general assembly. Denying him that national platform largely took the wind out of Mahathir’s sails. The charges against Mohd Johari, if they are true, illustrate Abdullah’s dilemma: the need to remain in power trumps cleaning out the stables.

It is unclear how much the corruption allegations have hurt Badawi’s political chances. The prime minister is expected to take the coalition to the polls in the coming months and defeating a leader backed by UMNO is unheard of, although Anwar Ibrahim, who was jailed by Mahathir on sodomy and corruption charges after a political dispute, is stumping the country, warning about corruption. It is more likely that UMNO would trade Abdullah in for a new candidate if he were perceived to be weak, but so far there are no signs of that happening.

And, for all the allegations flying around, the country’s corruption perception ranking is still better than its neighbors. In an annual survey released this week by the Hong Kong-based Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC), the country outpointed Thailand and Indonesia, ranking 7th among 13 Asian countries surveyed. The Philippines was last.

Nonetheless, the first Malaysia Transparency Perception Survey, published in 2006, described integrity and transparency in government agencies as problems that were “acute and serious.” The survey, commissioned by Transparency International Malaysia, was conducted by the independent Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research. The survey also found that the police force, road transport departments and customs and excise department were among the least transparent agencies. The concluded that the incidence of bribery in Malaysia increases proportionately to income level, with a whopping 52 percent of those earning RM5,000 and above monthly acknowledging having paid a bribe or having a family member who had done so.

The perception of levels of corruption is also having an adverse effect on FDI as according to Political and Economic Risk Consultancy. Malaysia’s economy is perceived by foreign businessmen to be more corrupt this year than it was last year.

The charges against Mohd Johari come just weeks after another round of allegations of graft and sexual assault ‑ against the very person that would have been tasked to investigate Johari. Anti-corruption chief, Zulkipli Mat Noor is under intense public fire over allegations that he has vast business and real estate interests. Before retiring in December, anticorruption agency officer, Mohamad Ramli Manan, told police in a report that described Zulkipli was "a very corrupt senior police officer who had amassed substantial property and assets through corrupt practices". Zulkipli has also been accused of operating two petrol stations said to be registered under the names of his son and sister.

Sexual assault charges stem from an unnamed woman who filed police reports in Kuala Lumpur and the state of Negeri Sembilan.

A parliamentary integrity committee was supposed to hear from both Zulkipli and Ramli last Monday on whether Zulkipli should continue to head the corruption agency, but the meeting was cancelled. Under public pressure, it was rescheduled for March 22. It has not yet been decided if the hearing is sub judice, or under court consideration and therefore subject to reporting restrictions, because Ramli has filed a libel suit against Zulkipli and five others over letters allegedly defaming him.

There are also questions over the spectacular slaying of Mongolian beauty Altantuya Shaaribuu, who was allegedly murdered by two police officers in Malaysia’s elite Special Operations Force as she sought to force top political advisor Abdul Razak Baginda to acknowledge fathering her baby and to pay her additional funds. Abdul Razak has close ties to Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, who supervises the Special Operations Force. Razak Baginda is due to go on trial for complicity in the murder in June.

“There are indications of serious misconduct by officials within or closely connected to the ruling party,” Anwar said. “We are talking about hundreds of millions of ringgit that have been stolen from the public coffers. Yet in each case there has been a rather appalling lack of follow-through on the part of the authorities in investigating these cases”.

The controversies affecting Johari and Zulpikli have been met with calls for their suspension pending further investigation. However, Abdullah Badawi has downplayed the charges, telling the press that generally more than 85 percent of corruption allegations are untrue and that care must be taken when launching investigations. The prime minister also told reporters Zukipli had been investigated twice before and found to be clean.

The corruption saga has also ensnared another minister from the Mahathir administration. Ramli charged that he was sidelined while in service and put in ‘cold storage’ after he persisted in investigating then-land and cooperative development minister Kasitah Gaddam for corruption involving a multi-million dollar share deal in the politician’s home state of Sabah seven years ago.
Soon after beginning his probe, Ramli was transferred out of Sabah and relocated back to the agency’s headquarters in Kuala Lumpur. Despite being one of the most senior officers, Ramli said, he wasn’t given a new position or even a desk at headquarters.

"For six years, I punched in my (attendance) card and got my salary. They gave me RM8,000 for doing nothing,” he said.

Ramli’s application for a transfer to another government agency as well as early retirement were denied. When he finally retired last year, he discovered that his pension was held back as a result of “disciplinary proceedings” taken against him, apparently for failing to punch in his attendance card. Ramli charged that he believed Mahathir was responsible for his transfer, which the former prime minister later denied publicly.

(Asia Sentinel- Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob )

Morality, Spies and Chastity Belts..

When Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi shot down a move last month by the Islamic government in the northeastern state of Terengganu to train spies to watch couples engaged in “immoral activities” like premarital sex, he was taking notice of a rising tide of fundamentalism in the country.

“There’s no need for that. Why should we ask people to spy and then reward them?” Abdullah told Malaysian journalists during a two-day working visit to Indonesia.

It isn’t the first time a Malaysian state government has moved to set up so-called ‘khalwat” (close proximity) informers to watch unrelated men and women, a seeming anomaly in what is one of the world’s most liberal Islamic countries. Nor is it the first time the federal government has batted them back. But it is emblematic of the growing tensions between increasingly sophisticated urban Malays, particularly women who have discarded their hijab hair coverings and prefer tight-fitting blue jeans to the floor-length dress of rural Malays.

As the country has zoomed upward economically, Terengganu and its rural, poor, Islamic northern sister states are an increasing anomaly. And, despite Abdullah’s quick renunciation of the practice, it has stirred renewed fears that conservative elements in the country are seeking to re-assert their authority, which former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad kept firmly in check during his 22 years in power.

“I think what most frustrates me is a general acceptance that women hold a lower position in society despite the strides we've made,” Marina Mahathir, the former prime minister’s outspoken daughter, told Asia Sentinel. “Women's sexuality is always taboo. Nobody asks about boys having sex. It's so blatantly unfair yet nobody questions these assumptions. I guess my real hope is that more women will voice their frustration with these attitudes. “

Nor are just women concerned. Moderate Muslim-Malays as well as the Chinese and Indian communities who do not profess faith in Islam in great numbers are worried that the rising conservative tide among some Malays will affect their way of life as well.

The concerns were given considerable impetus in a widely publicized incident last October when an American couple in their 60s were intercepted in their rented Lankawi Island bungalow by khalwat police threatening to break down the door; the moral enforcers refused to leave without seeing a marriage certificate despite the fact that the couple, both Caucasians, had been married for 42 years. The crusaders were only persuaded to go after seeing the couple’s passports.

The latest incident cropped up in a Feb. 23 interview with Terengganu Islamic official Rosol Wahid in the New Straits Times. “In Terengganu, we have informants who voluntarily provide information on immoral activities, including khalwat, to enforcement officers of the state Religious Affairs Department. They are not vigilantes or members of a special squad who snoop around to catch couples but they can be anyone who feels it is his responsibility to check immoral activities in their area.”

Being nailed in a khalwat raid can mean a two-month jail sentence. The issue obviously affects women the most due to the stigma and shame attached to such raids. Sisters in Islam, a Muslim women's group that champions gender rights, issued a statement saying that "moral policing by state religious authorities and their auxiliary services have often led to rampant abuses of power."

Sisters in Islam and other women’s organizations regard the Terengganu situation as only the latest event in a long buildup against women’s rights. In another recent incident, Abu Hassan Din Al-Hafiz, a respected Muslim advisor, suggested that chastity belts would help reduce cases of rape and incest. He quickly backed away said he was joking but many Muslim women didn’t find it funny.

“In a nation that has built the world’s tallest twin towers, a multimedia super-corridor, and is now planning to send a man into outer space, we find it flabbergasting that, at the same time, there are calls to send women back to the Dark Ages by strapping chastity belts on them,” Sisters In Islam said in a statement.

The subservient status of women can have sudden and dramatic consequences, according to Zainah Anwar, a prominent women’s rights activist. She recounted a conversation with a friend whose 34 year old daughter was unilaterally divorced by her husband of eight years.

"He wished her 'Happy Birthday', and then pronounced 'I divorce you'! Can you imagine such cruelty, such heartlessness?"

Women’s rights groups contend that a Muslim man's unilateral right to divorce his wife at will is the cause of a rising rate of divorce among Muslims.

The practice in which men could simply pronounce talaq (repudiation) and divorce led religious authorities to put a stop to the practice in the 1984 model Islamic Family Law adopted by each of Malaysia’s states, making the country one of the first Muslim countries to require that divorce take place only in court.

However, in 1994, amid objections from Muslim fundamentalists, the law was amended to allow the registration of divorces outside the courts, defeating the original intent and spirit of the 1984 reform. Now, only a minimum fine is required for breaking the law by pronouncing talaq without court permission. Women's groups object to the devastating emotional pain a woman goes through when her marriage is terminated without her being consulted or given any power to prevent it or negotiate the terms.

The problem is further compounded by the lack of female syariah (Islamic religious court) judges, making the religious system on the whole predominantly a man’s domain. The Women’s Section of Jemaah Islah Malaysia (JIM), an NGO, said that Malaysia has been slow in allowing female syariah judges even compared to countries such as Sudan, which already has hundreds of women judges.

"There has been a misunderstanding over the capabilities of women judges who have been blamed for being emotional, less critical and less objective when making decisions," said Dr Harlina Halizah Siraj, the head of JIM’s women’s section,.

Norma Yaakob, a former Chief Judge of the High Court of Malaya, lamented while on the bench that a lack of female appointments to Islamic courts was leading to prejudicial treatment and that complaints from women in general about discrimination were being denied.

A case in point is the Islamic Family Law Bill, which interest groups argue was rushed through Parliament in 2005 and gained legal approval even though it discriminates against women by allowing husbands to freeze the assets of their wives and children in divorce cases. Although the bill was suspended, it took considerable outcry before the authorities decided against putting it into practice. The three daughters of current and past Malaysian prime ministers – Hanis Hussein, Marina Mahathir and Nori Abdullah – joined hands publicly to denounce the bill, or probably it would have gone into law.

The issue of polygamy is also the subject of hot debate in Malaysia. In a bid to put an end to the practice, opponents of polygamy are seeking to produce a survey to strengthen their case that the practice throws families into emotional end economic turmoil. In what could be the most comprehensive survey ever conducted on polygamy in an Islamic society, Sisters In Islam researchers hope to interview 6,000 members of polygamous households.

“We need evidence-based material to strengthen our advocacy for awareness and reforms, rather than merely use stories or assumptions about polygamy,” Zainah said.

Islam allows a man up to four wives. But in Malaysia, activists say some polygamous husbands neglect their responsibilities to their wives and children. Government statistics recorded 13,516 polygamous marriages between 1995 and 2004, representing 1.4 percent of all Muslim marriages, said Norani Othman, a sociologist at the National University of Malaysia involved in the survey project.

However, activists believe the actual number is much higher because many men fail to report their second or third marriages in order to conceal them from their primary families. There is no official estimate of the total current number of polygamous marriages.

The projected survey is significant because existing research on Muslim polygamy in other countries has only scrutinized a small number of respondents and focused on legal issues. As such, there has been a failure to understand the financial and social impact of polygamy, Norani said.

Sisters In Islam plans to ask polygamous families a wide range of questions, including how their expenditure for clothes and other necessities is affected when the man marries another wife, and whether existing wives and children are forced to make financial sacrifices. The survey would extend to daily issues — including how husbands apportion their time among multiple wives, celebrate holidays and decide which wife to take to social function. The survey would also consider whether existing legal enactments protect wives adequately from mistreatment in polygamous marriages.

A 2005 pilot study by involving 40 members of polygamous households showed that some children suffer emotional problems as a direct consequence of the practice, Norani said. Sisters in Islam plans to publish their findings in early 2008.

Amid the furor over women’s rights, conservatives in general are practically silent on the issue of the exploitation of foreign women. There are bridal parades of hopeful Vietnamese girls at local coffee shops for prospective Malaysian husbands. Women’s groups here have denounced the practice as degrading.

Women's Development Collective (WDC) executive director Maria Chin Abdullah said: "We are living in the 21st century, and it is disgusting that we still resort to such methods to get married. It is revolting to know that we have fallen to such a low level to form relationships."

Women, Chin Abdullah said, are being viewed as a commodity to be bought or sold. "Such a perception should not even exist. This practice can be classified as an extreme form of sexual slavery conducted under a sham legal framework. The authorities need to look into this matter seriously."

In a newspaper column for International Women’s Day 2006, Marina Mahathir put into context the state of women in Malaysia: “These differences between the lot of Muslim women and non-Muslim women beg the question: do we have two categories of citizenship in Malaysia, whereby most female citizens have fewer rights than others? As non-Muslim women catch up with women in the rest of the world, Muslim women here are only going backwards. We should also note that only in Malaysia are Muslim women regressing; in every other Muslim country in the world, women have been gaining rights, not losing them.”

( By : Imran Imtiaz Shah Yacob - AsiaSentinel )

Banning History: When Will Malaysia Learn To Live With Her Past?

Written by Farish A. Noor
Monday, 26 February 2007

Scholars who are engaged in the humanities will tell you that History happens to be one of the most politically-contested disciplines. It is well known by now that the writing of history is hardly ever an innocent process, and that any claim – no matter how laudable or couched in lofty prose – to objectivity has long since been defunct. The saying that ‘history is written by the victors’ may have passed onto the register of clichés by now, but it remains true nonetheless. What is more history’s endless repetition of the narrative of sameness; the continuous telling of the story of ‘we and us, us and we’ is no mere rhetorical device. Any claim to objective moral ‘truth’ (if one can be made at all in the case of historical writing) often requires the re-telling of the same facts again and again, to lend the guise of consistency and solidity.

That is why official historiography and official (re: state-appointed) historians balk at the thought of the subaltern voice making itself heard. In so many post-colonial societies, the narrative of post-colonial independence was hastily written in a brazen attempt to hide or gloss over instances of collaboration with the imperial hegemon and colonial power; the petty internal feudal conflicts between the colonised subjects themselves; and the fact that most of these struggles were clumsy affairs, mixed with chance and flavoured by deceit.

This is true of many post-colonial countries and Malaysia is no exception to the rule. Malaysia’s independence, we are told, was a gentlemanly bout between British and Malayan aristocrat-patriots who did not bloody their hands in combat. Contrary to the case of Indonesia, Burma, the Philippines and most recently East Timor, Malaysia’s independence was a negotiated affair.

But what has been lost in this official narrative is the fact that long before gentlemen-aristocrats like Tunku Abdul Rahman – who became the country’s first Prime Minister – won the country’s independence, Malaya’s future was also being decided in a bloody conflict in the jungles that pitted the imperial forces of Britain against the Malayan Communist Party (MCP). Malaya gained her independence in 1957, but the country emerged into the world in a state of Emergency, that was declared by the British in 1948 and lasted till 1960.

Even before independence however, the MCP has been routinely stigmatised and demonised as the evil Red Menace threatening to devour the free world. Of course much of this rhetoric seems dated by now, following the end of the Cold War; but in the 1950s and 1960s the same discourse of demonisation was used to systematically present the MCP as a fifth column poised to take over Malaya and serve the interests of Peking and Moscow instead.

It is against this context that films about the MCP, its struggles and the biographies of its members have been banned in Malaysia. Most recently the latest ban was imposed on the film ‘Apa Khabar Orang Kampung’ (oddly translated as ‘Village People Radio Show’, for some unknown reason). The film’s director, Amir Muhammad, was in Berlin just a week ago to present his film which premiered at the Berlinale, to much public acclaim.

Yet, like his earlier film ‘Lelaki Komunist Terakhir’ (‘The Last Communist’), Amir’s latest film has been banned in his own country. While ‘The Last Communist’ was approved by the Malaysian censor board, it was banned by the Home Affairs Minister nevertheless. Amir’s latest film was banned on the grounds that it was ‘historically inaccurate’ and that it presents a distorted picture of history. How ironic, considering that for decades Malaysian historians have also argued that much of colonial history of Malaya/Malaysia was also distorted. And on that note one might as well reactivate the perennial question of history-writing itself: Can there ever be any historical account free of subjective bias, cultural perspectivism and the inherent solipsism of the author him/herself?

It would appear that Malaysia is still suffering from growing pains, despite the fact that the country will celebrate its 50th anniversary of independence this year. After 50 years, and despite the fact that the MCP is practically non-existent in the country today, the ever-so-sensitive sentiments of right-wing nationalists will tolerate no alternative viewpoint contrary to their own; even if this means denying the fact that it was the MCP and its military wing that fought against the Japanese imperialist army during the Japanese occupation of Malaysia during World War Two, and later the returning British imperialist army following the end of the war. Dubbed ‘terrorist bandits’ by the colonial power then, the MCP and its members have been steadily written out of the history books and the process of historical erasure continues unabated till today.

It is ironic, though not surprising, that Amir Muhammad’s film has been banned in the country. The word ‘ban’ shares etymological links to the word ‘banish’, which means to expel something from the space of the familiar. The banning of ‘Apa Khabar Orang Kampung’ may have been an attempt to banish from the present traces of the past, but in their zealousness to impose only their ‘correct’ version of history the Malaysian authorities have shown that Malaysia is still far from ready to live with a history that is complex and laced with alterity.

Last Updated ( Tuesday, 27 February 2007 )

Irresponsible blogging. ? Who’s behind “Walk With Us”?

I am deeply troubled by the Walk With Us website. In it’s two most recent post, it launched an attack on NSTP’s lawyers and their representing firm, Shearn Delamore. It didn’t require me much brain power to know the site is clearly against NSTP’s maneouvre but making personal attacks is like hitting below the belt. It’s like insulting someone’s mother or race. It’s biased and no longer credible. Also, it’s sub judice. Plus, to abuse the statement of claims is unforgivable.

- Politikus

To let you be the judge, we have obtained the documents from sources within Shearn Delamore, and published here, in four parts, to help you get a good grasp of the merits of the case. As we are not plagiarists — unlike Brenden John Pereira — please allow us to attribute to Rishwant Singh of Shearn Delamore as the author of the said documents.

So people, judge it. The statement of claims (which I too have provided) was meant to inform and fill the information gap. What WWU has done is to not only analyse the suit for you, it has helped you think and decide that Shearn and it’s lawyers are a bunch of wankers. ‘Merits’? Those aren’t merits. That is singling out Kalimullah and lowering him in the eyes of the public. It’s also known as defamation.

Is this responsible blogging? Is that what Rocky and Jeff wants? They have been gagged on their sites but that does not mean other sites should act in the extreme of accusations. Analysis are not facts. It’s a statement of claims ordered by NSTP and others, it is not Shearn’s. They merely act on the instructions of their paymasters.

Shearn Delamore will play dirty.

That’s not the last of Shearn Delamore’s shoddy slip-shot.

This is where the devils of Shearn Delamore and Kalimullah Masheerul Hassan, the dominant plaintiff, lie.

For now, you should know that Shearn Delamore and Kalimullah are now cracking. They have cocked up big time on the statement of claims to move their case forward.

By virtue of abusing such information, I can imagine WWU’s sources within Shearn will feel insulted. To help somebody be given shit back reflects badly on administrators of WWU. My concerns are that it would take many bloggers down with them into this crusade which they’ve set out for themselves.

So now looking at what irresponsible people do to credible information, it has affirmed my fear when I first laid out the suits against Rocky and Jeff. The information gap has been filled but sadly rumour mills and one-sided analysis travel faster than the speed of light. Think how popular Malaysia Today is and how unreliable it is. To gain popularity is one move (or as Jerry puts it, everybody wants to be general) but one must do it in balance and in a just manner. Being one-sided breeds extremism. And people decide to become martyrs before understanding the facts, appreciating the truth and being objective about things.

各位大家、博客朋友們：

今天中午，政治鼠 (Politikus) 找了胡某去喝茶。咱們整個新年沒見，本來我想見個面吹吹水也未嘗不是件好事。

於是，我們一行三人便走到離辦公室不遠的馬來餐室，那裡沒有冷氣，但有胡某鐘愛的 Mee Sup。我們坐下後不久，伊便拿出她的行動電話，給我看她最近收到某位博客傳給她的簡訊。

內容大意，是稱頌伊是個不可多得的博客；文筆好、見解精闢，他希望她能夠以真面目示人；據悉，他們正努力地勸說博客們拋開自己的網絡身份，爭取一個實名運動。

原來，這件事與不久前號稱大馬最具影響力的博客黃君被控上法庭後，大家都不約而同地在自己的部落格掛上右邊的這個「凝聚博客」的小圖，以示支持有關。

我想，當時大家一定沒有想到在短短的數月間，這網上起義的行動會變成這樣：

ANALYSIS. The day Rocky made his first appearance on January 25 to defend the defamation suit taken against him by The NSTP & Gang of Four, WALK WITH US went on record to expose the ultimate agenda of the plaintiffs — that is to muzzle the entire blogosphere, damn the bloggers AND censore [sic] the blog commentators by misusing an instrument of law — defamation suit!

[胡某譯：在一月二十五日 Rocky 出庭辯護自己被新海峽時報組織和四人幫控上誹謗罪的當天，與我們同行 (Walk With Us) 便公佈了起訴人的終極議程 — 那就是濫用法律上的誹謗條文把整個博客界消音，抹黑博客和檢查刪除部落格的留言！]

各位會否覺得以上的言論過於偏激和過火了呢？

支持言論自由空間並不表示我們支持不負責任的言論發表。

這蓄意地讓整件事情升溫的舉動讓胡某擔心，因為網絡上的四人幫究竟是誰尚待歷史給我們一個定論。

請大家自己思考這件事的是非對錯，冷靜地想一想，因為憤怒的群眾 (Mob) 是任由情緒左右的。

胡某想了很久。決定把這 “Bloggers’ United” 旗幟摘下。

因為胡某不想在這敏感的節骨眼上任由一個陌生人為我發言。

因為部落格是可以正面給予批評的，雖然胡某對整件事也覺得雙方都有過火之處，但是這不表示整件事就一定是有著陰謀的。

大家，請三思，切記。

- 胡祿豐謹草

Translation :


Dear All and blogger friends

This noon, I had lunch with politikus. Since I haven’t seen her for a while, it may be a good idea to catch up a bit and trade war stories. So, we went to a stall not far from the office, it’s not air-conditioned but they served my favourite mee soup. After taking our seats, she showed us how she was urged to reveal her real identity. Apparently, there is a group of people who are busy getting people to own up their real identity and the movement is on going. And this has to do with the case with Jeff Ooi, which prompted bloggers to put up the avatar on their blogs to show support. I believe no one would ever dream that in a short few months, this online movement has gone down to this:

http://walkwithus.wordpress.com/2007/02/25/67/

The day Rocky made his first appearance on January 25 to defend the defamation suit taken against him by The NSTP & Gang of Four, WALK WITH US went on record to expose the ultimate agenda of the plaintiffs — that is to muzzle the entire blogosphere, damn the bloggers AND censore [sic] the blog commentators by misusing an instrument of law — defamation suit!

Don’t you think the above is a little overheated? Supporting freedom of speech doesn’t mean supporting irresponsible blogging. This intentional raising of temperature within the blogosphere is alarming to me because only history will tell who is the real gang of 4 of the Internet age.

I think we need to calm down and think hard and fast, because a mob is ruled by emotions. I thought for a long while, and decided to take the banner down because I dun want to be represented by a stranger at this juncture of time. The blogosphere can be positive.

Though I think both sides are wrong in the case of NSTP vs Jeff Ooi, but it doesn’t mean there is a conspiracy theory behind this

Please people, think trice.

Remember

Jeremiah Foo

( translation by Jerry himself )



Comments posted @ Politikus


There was nothing objective about WWU@blogspot when the whole basis of setting it up was to side Rocky and Jeff per se, and the Malaysian blogosphere, in general. It was purely US vs THEM.

I already had doubts about the so called “insider’s information” WWU@blogspot got when in the post “round-2-nstp-gang-resorts-to-avoid-rockys-striking-out”, there were (and still remains) TWO links to a blog that has (I assume) no relation to SD.

IMHO, WWU@blogspot is as good a skanky publication as NST in terms of news mangling and gossip manufacturing. Let’s not even talk about Malaysia-today yet.

We want to win the war walking together, but can we even stand taller against our perceived enemies?

- Bolehland



I think Bloggers United and WWU are two separate entities with dissimilar functions. The former tries to get everyone together in defense of the 2, whereas WWU has an axe to grind with NST.

I cannot recall BU regurgitating or referring to WWU, and v.v. i think Sheih’s (founder) been rather reasonable and blogs as well as his poster days. So taking out the BU logo may be a little premature too.

Unity is always hard to maintain in any organisation or group, especially since blogging in itself is a rather individualistic solitary venture. So when there are Alpha bloggers, Betas and Gammas too, there are always a hundred generals too many, each with their own fantastic and strong opinions on how to move forward.

Perhaps keep in mind that we are in this, to express solidarity for the long lonely road that JO and R have to travel (and that I can attest, having a 10-yr-old civil suit still continuing and almost zero interest/attendance from the NGOs), and to remind ourselves that it could well be anyone of us in the near future if we don’t stand up, be counted and fight back.

- elizabethwong


Thanks Eli, you are so right. It’s not fair to equate Bloggers United and WWW - we’re not one and the same and we don’t agree with everything WWW says and does. The most we use them as reference, like we do all others. And if they are not right, others must point out, as politikus did, and we’ll move from there.

If you equate us, its just like PM and NST, attacking two bloggers and saying all bloggers are irresponsible. Think about it. Think about the bigger picture. I have said it before, those behind WWW should make themselves known. Doing something as huge as this but hiding behind a pseudonym doesn’t serve the bigger purpose. Good luck to those behind WWW but Bloggers United must focus on the big fight. In every revolution there would be believers and disbelievers, but the fight has to go on.

And Jeremy, I think its you who should think thrice, bloggers united is not a stranger. Look at my blogroll, and see how many of us are using our own identities to blog.

- susan loone


eli, susan: great points leading to a great discussion. i do agree BU is distinct from WWU but will everybody be able to see it? it’s the act of condemning the lawyers that bugged me the most because that is one of the reason why i never decided to be a lawyer because i can never go against certain principles that i have. seeing it in motion right now and i am sure it won’t be the last.

the motives of the WWU is questionable and it’s posts are impressionable. i simply hope people would know better and not fall into the trap of spiting shearn just to be a ‘general’. i not only have friends in shearn and i also have friends in every level in various fraternities of the legal system. the respect i have for the profession is still strong and unless the WWU crew can show some legal training perhaps, their analysis is a fallacy.

many think WWU is endorsed somewhat by the more prominent bloggers. looks like something that requires investigation into. irresponsibility also comes with a price. will speak to both shearn and chooi lawyers on this matter.

ek: i agree on WWU being the NST equivalent. the use of the word ’skanky’ was an excellent choice, i might add.

- politikus


“Speaking of Jerry, he has decided to remove the Bloggers United button from his page. Why? Here’s why.”

Dearest Politikus,

Bloggers United got nothing to do with Walk With Us. I personally do not know who is behind Walk With Us. It can be anybody, it can also be someone from NST. So let not start slamming each other just yet. The journey is still long.

As you interviewed me for Bloggers United establishing themselves on the net two months ago, It would be even nicer, if you could actually check with me first on this matter. But again, it is entirely your choice.

However, let me make it clear hear, Bloggers United is not Walk With US blog site and neither do Susan and me know anybody behind Walk With Us.

Regards,

Syed Azidi AlBukhary
@ Sheih Kickdefella



sheih: cheers for the clarification. i did ask a few bloggers to see if they are involved but trust me, my assumptions are not entirely mine alone. it’s great to hear it from the man himself spearheading the BU movement. however, the air isn’t cleared yet. conspiracy theories are rife and many BU supporters turn to WWU for information.

i’m not questioning the BU movement but i’m concerned with that could potentially happen, my fears for the long haul should people stream to WWU.

after i posted the amended SOC agst rocky, my hits shot to it’s all time high with about 90% of visitors were directed from WWU and it is shows MANY people turn to that site.

also sheih, many of you link to them including you yourself and it’s worrisome but it could come across as a from of endorsement. jeff does the same. i guess it’s people’s choice to decide who they want to link but i would never link sites whom i think loses sight of the objective of responsible blogging.

my views are my own and the fact i disagree with WWU is not to say ‘oh, don’t visit them’ but think hard and choose to understand, not to follow their footsteps in getting too carried away with their ‘battle’. i hope to think this isn’t some jihad but a positive journey that we walk hand and hand, and not by simply demonising others so recklessly.

in fact, no where in my post did i say BU was part of WWU so don’t hold that against me. but you can’t escape the fact that many many think they run absolutely parallel with each other. when i said i may take my BU button down, i stand by that but only if BU loses it’s focus and take the route that WWU has taken. but with your assurance abang sheih, i have the utmost faith it was stay there for awhile :)

jerry’s view are of course his own, he has a website where you can send your reply / comment / criticism.

once again, thanks so much for your reply :)

- Politikus


This is indeed a very interesting blog and a particularly interesting post. IMHO, I think this BU movement has been blown out of proportion. It started as a sign of support to the rocky and jeff but now, it’s like a strong movement sweeping across the blogosphere like a tsunami. Another up the pipeline is “band of bloggers”, I believe a logo for it is up in Malaysia Today.

I can’t say much as I am merely a 2 month old blogger, can be considered an infant. But when I first put up a BU logo in my blog (I think it’s my 3rd post), I meant to support rocky and jeff and in a way, show my disapproval to what NSTP was doing. But to gather all bloggers under the banner of BU and starting having agendas… now, that’s not very wise… not in Malaysia.

- zewt


come on, politikus and jeremy…dont beat around the bush…your reference to irresponsible blogging and bloggers united is crystal clear..eli, sheih and i could see…u mean to say we dont understand english?

anyway, all we want to do is make ourselves clear - we are not behind WWW - i made that clear to you when we were online — i believe even before you had lunch with jeremy—and this posting shocked me—but nevertheless it doesnt matter—we said what we have to—i have said it earlier and i will say it again, in any fight, there would always be those who break easily and those who continue to be strong.

and zewt, what is wrong with having bloggers under one banner?—you would realise the importance when you are sued for example.

there will be no more comments from me on this.

- susan loone


Dearest Politikus,

Bloggers United are link to lots of bloggers from different background, race and based. That is the unique thing about it. I was bombarded left and right for the differences Bloggers United carries. They condemned blogger united for having Gen-M and for having pro Mahathir site supporting us. But if you care to check, Bloggers United is a tool to look beyond the diferences. We are each and every Malaysia. We link beyond political parties, ideology and racial identities. We are difference because we unite all type of differences. Lets cherish the differences instead of condenming it.

Please, I beg us to unite not just for Rocky and not just for Jeff but for the future of blogsphere. We may started with Rocky and Jeff but if we manage to go this far, why not we continue to Unite for the sake of Malaysia, the real Malaysian ways.

Let’s forget who we vote for, lets forget who we fight for, we are not mainstream media, we do not answer to the shareholders. As for my personal opinion, Walk With Us have the entire right to post what ever they deem is appropriate for them, we as the readers have the entire right to post our comment whether twe agreed or disagree with them. That is what blog are about. At the end of the day, thats the beauty of it.

Today I pull out my poster because I received an email that inteprete my poster as sexist and discriminating and distasteful. I pull out because the commenter give me a point of view which I am blinded.

As we always believe, blogging translated our personal views to the world, we carries our emotion into it. We sometime even condemn our sister in our blog. Do we hurt her feeling by doing so?

Please, again, I beg us to cherish the differences because that is what Bloggers United are all about.

- Sheih


Apparently, there is a group of people who are busy getting people to own up their real identity and the movement is ongoing.

Jerry, nobody asked me to reveal myself. I have cross-swords with countless bloggers, Jeff and Rocky included. They knew me only as Zorro. When these two were “bullied” I came out in the open to defend them. I am just an insignificant poster. But I wanted blogsphere to know that I am a real person, posting without fear or favor. I wanted you all to know that it is a real person and not a nick, that will be speaking from the heart. I want to add credibility to every word I put out. There is nothing I want to hide. I have yet to learn to spin a top, at 67.

About ” a group of people who are busy getting people to own up”…..seriously Jerry, I move around with these bloggers and I have not heard anyone coercing anyone to own up. Yes some of us, Sheih, Rocky and I are playfully pressuring for Shar101, who currently posts some of the most meaningful, relevant and impactful comments, to start a blog. I still dont know what his real name is. I just call him Shar. Jerry, I do not know which pasar malam or mamak joint you got your piece. Come to the National Press Club where we spread no rumours but in revelry just piss each other off. Politikus is aftraid to come to the NPC….probably she will, if you bring her along. The beers on me Jerry.
Oh yes I respect your right if you want to take off the Bloggers United logo. Cheers.

- zorro-unmasked




ts disheartening to note that certain quarters are trying to throw mud onto the face of the Bloggers United movement. For now, it is rather unnecessary to mention just who these people are. But its expected, in every concerted effort against superpowers, there would be some who will break us in the process, and more who will continue to be strong and supportive.

- Susan Loone


It all started with the latest postings on unknown author blog Walk With Us (WWW)- the blog started right after the papers were served on Rocky and Jeff. Since then, it has garnered a huge following due to several revealing and controversial articles on Kallimulah and NST.

The latest postings have invoked the ire of some bloggers who are now raving and ranting about how irresponsible bloggers are. One I know have pulled down the Bloggers United logo from his website, saying he does not want to be represented by a stranger, another is threatening to do so.

According to these bloggers, the posting is irresponsible and sub-judice.

We respect your right of opinion about the posting, and to select who’s going to be on your blogroll but to make Bloggers United a victim of irresponsible blogging is unfair. We are not strangers, hundreds of us who support Bloggers United have our real identities out (just take a peek at my blogroll). If you equate us with WWW, it is just like what the PM and NST did, take action on Rocky and Jeff for their postings, and in the process, drag all bloggers in, and label us irresponsible.

Its disheartening when people start equating WWW with Bloggers United. We are not behind WWW, we want to make this clear. We support all efforts to support free speech, Rocky and Jeff, but we cannot be responsible for postings which are problematic to some.

What is more disheartening is that the person who wrote the posting did actually ask me if I were behind WWW and I had firmly said “No”. I do not know who is behind it, I can only guess, but I may be wrong. I know some of my more activists minded blogger friends are not behind it too (because I ask them). But sadly, this side of my story was not reflected in the said posting.

I’d like to reiterate that I am not against the posting which questioned WWW’s credibility, but when references are made to Bloggers United, no matter how tiny, I feel there is a need for us to respond.

Bloggers United has not contributed any articles to WWW, though many of us have their link in our blogroll. But that doesn’t mean we endorse and thorougly support blindly all they say and do. And this goes for hundred of blogs out there as well.

There are hundreds of blogs now under the Bloggers United movement - both in Malaysia and overseas. There are diverse opinions and postings too. Not all we agree to. But we will defend your right to say it, nevertheless.

Many are still anonymous, like WWW. We respect your right to remain so because the message is really more important than the messenger. And the truth is, many appreciate the efforts of WWW to offer us - hungry for information bloggers - an alternative source of information, though the information may always be disputable. But that is how democracy thrives. Yes, what WWW is doing is cyber guerilla warfare - very much needed, some would say - in a repressive state like ours.

What we like to say is this: you may join them or condemn them, the choice is entirely yours.

But the Bloggers United movement is NOT WWW, and vice versa. It is important to note that even the WWW does not carry the Bloggers United logo, courtesy of kickdefella.

Ps: Always check with Sheih and I, if you are doubtful of any action in the name of Bloggers United. We are responsible and we do not want to abuse your support and trust in this wonderful movement.



Band of Bloggers - to support or not?

Since the Band of Bloggers burst into the scene, we’ve been asked if Bloggers United supports them. Our stand is very clear.

1. We support all efforts to support freedom of expression and free speech, and those who come together to support Rocky and Jeff Ooi;

2. We recognise the diversity of blogs out there with a multitude of opinions on a variety of issues - some are political, some are not. However, inspite of each blog’s agenda, we are happy if bloggers come together to defend theirs (and others) freedom in blogsphere;

3. We do NOT represent anyone, you are free to make your own choice, whether to support this or that blog, whether to take this stand or that stand, whether you are UMNO, MCA,MIC, PAS, DAP or Keadilan, any party in Sabah or Sarawak, or whether you are partyless, whatever skin color or creed you are, Malaysian or not Malaysian, or somewhere in between;

4. We may not agree to everything you say, but we will defend your right to say it. However, if what you say is detrimental to our cause, we will defend ourselves with debates. We are not being emotional or personal, but if you choose to cross the line, we are at the front line;

5. We will NOT impose our ideas on others, we call for support, but we will not force you to support us if you do not want to. The space is free, and so is your choice. Do not let anyone compel you to do otherwise;

6. Most of all, we promote responsible blogging and will take responsibility for all our actions. If we are wrong, we will apologise, if we are wrong, please feel free to refute, comment or advice us. None of us is above the other; and none of us is above the law.

Sheih of kickdefella and Susan Loone.