Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Sabah untuk orang Sabah?
Infighting in Pakatan Rakyat?
Half truths and semi-lies
Sabah for Sabahans?
Much ado about nothing
The market sabotage of Pakatan
Is Selangor ripe for plucking?
The Chinese Owe BN Nothing
Ultra-nationalism comes to fore in pre-poll Malaysia
Bully-boy Malaysia immature and Australia's reaction so limp
Too many spanners in the works
Over-politicised political campaign
The real enemies of the state
Suaris Interview: The Future of Malays #4
Proton distorts market, bleeds Malaysians
We Need a new Huguan Siou
Gangnam style
Migrants in politics and the Borneo Xenophobia
Mahathir enters fray as Malaysia braces for poll
Gangnam twist for Malaysian elections

Posted: 19 Feb 2013 09:44 PM PST

Pada tahun 1970-an, Sabah berada di kedudukan kedua, di belakang Selangor (dan Kuala Lumpur) sebagai negeri paling kaya di Malaysia. 30 tahun kemudian, Sabah adalah negeri paling miskin dengan pertumbuhan KDNK sebanyak 2.4 peratus sahaja, di bawah Kelantan.

Izmil Amri, Roketkini

SAYA belum pernah jejak kaki ke Sabah. Apa yang saya tahu tentang Sabah adalah hasil dari pembacaan dan pergaulan dengan orang yang arif tentang negeri Sabah. Maka mudahnya saya tidak tahu banyak tentang Sabah, sama seperti anda juga yang bukanlah tahu banyak tentang negeri itu. Anda rasa macam tahu banyak tetapi sebenarnya tidak.

Adalah lebih mudah sebenarnya untuk kita semua diam dan mendengar, daripada cuba bersuara tentang perkara yang kita tidak faham. Kita juga yang akan kelihatan bodoh.

Namun demi segala yang benar, bersuara tentang Sabah adalah tanggungjawab yang mesti dilakukan.

Justeru sebagai permulaan, saya harus meminta maaf kerana telah menyebut Sabah itu sebagai sebuah negeri. Saya mana lah tahu rupa-rupanya Sabah adalah sebuah negara. Sama halnya dengan Sarawak.

Anda mungkin keliru dengan apa yang saya sebutkan ini. Mari saya cerahkan.

Pada tahun 1957, bulan Ogos hari ke 31, sebuah negara di Asia Tenggara telah diisytiharkan bebas daripada menumpahkan taat setia kepada Ratu England. Namanya Malaya, hasil gabungan negeri-negeri yang bersekutu dan tidak bersekutu serta dua daripada negeri-negeri selat kecuali Singapura.

Pada 16 September 1963, sebuah persekutuan lahir daripada gabungan Malaya, Singapura, Sabah dan Sarawak. Singapura kemudiannya merdeka sekali lagi setelah 'meninggalkan' Persekutuan Malaysia pada tahun 1965.

Maka mudahnya Malaysia pada tahun 1963 adalah persekutuan hasilan empat buah negara, yang setiap satunya menyertai persekutuan dengan hak dan kelebihan yang tersendiri. Itu antara sebabnya kenapa pihak eksekutif Sabah dan Sarawak dibahasakan sebagai menteri dan bukan Ahli Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan Negeri (EXCO) seperti di negeri-negeri di Semenanjung.

Itu juga sebabnya kenapa undang-undang imigresen Malaysia Borneo sedikit berbeza, dan anda memerlukan paspot untuk masuk ke sana. Macam masuk Singapura juga kaedahnya, kerana itu secara teknikalnya bukanlah negara anda. Boleh ikut setakat ini?

Kedaulatan Sabah
Sebagai sebuah 'negara anggota' dalam Persekutuan Malaysia, adalah amat menyedihkan apabila fakta menunjukkan bahawa Sabah mempunyai kadar kemiskinan paling tinggi.

Erna Mahyuni dalam tulisannya di The Malaysian Insider melaporkan bahawa pekan Nabawan di Sabah itu adalah pekan termiskin di dalam negara, dengan kadar kemiskinan setinggi 70 peratus. Saya sangkakan Kelantan negeri paling miskin. Berkesan betul propaganda UMNO ke atas saya.

Tulisan Erna itu lah yang buat saya terdiam sejenak dan betul-betul memikirkan tentang Sabah yang tidak pernah saya jejaki itu.

Menyulap kekayaan rakyat Sabah

Anda juga mungkin menyedari bahawa industri pelancongan negara adalah terjual dengan modal yang datang dari Malaysia Borneo. Sabah terutamanya menyumbang ikon Gunung Kinabalu dan populariti Sipadan serta segala tarikan yang menjadi sandaran kepada 'betapa Asia-nya' Malaysia ini.

Ini di samping ikonologi sumbangan Kelantan dan Sarawak, setiap satunya dengan wau bulan, burung enggang, serta tarian-tarian dan tradisi-tradisi yang tidak ada di Kuala Lumpur yang hanya ada tradisi membeli belah dan kesesakan lalulintas.

Maka, ya; Malaysia menjual ikon Sabah, Sarawak dan Kelantan (antara lain) sebagai pusat pelancongan untuk sekalian mat saleh yang menyampah dengan cuaca sejuk. Kebetulan, ketiga-tiganya negeri miskin. Satu daripadanya sudah puluhan tahun ditadbir PAS. Senang betul jadi kerajaan Barisan Nasional ini. Jual populariti negeri-negeri miskin, rompak pula harta kekayaannya, royalti minyaknya juga tak diberi.

Berbalik kepada Sabah.

Bagaikan jatuh ditimpa tangga, bukan sahaja pertumbuhannya kecil, kos sara hidup di Sabah juga amat tinggi bahkan kian meningkat gara-gara polisi kabotaj yang secara langsung meningkatkan harga barang lantaran syarikat perkapalan mengenakan caj tinggi untuk penghantaran barang.

Itu belum dikira royalti petroleum sekadar 5%. Brunei masih ketawa barangkali dengan nasib Sabah yang menerima royalti ciput sedangkan sumbangannya besar sekali..

Malang yang berlarutan

Barisan Nasional selesa di Sabah disebabkan beberapa faktor termasuk kemasukan pendatang asing secara pukal yang kemudiannya diberi kerakyatan sepertimana yang telah diakui oleh mantan Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir.

Sudahlah rakyat asal terbiar miskin melarat, dibenarkan pula warganegara asing masuk dan diberi kerakyatan sesuka hati demi kemandirian politik pihak-pihak tertentu. Inilah dia dosa besar Barisan Nasional terhadap Sabah secara khusus yang pastinya tidak akan dapat diampunkan sampai bila-bila.

Dalam satu persidangan politisi muda di Manila dua tahun sudah, saya bertemu beberapa politisi muda Filipina menceritakan kisah rakyatnya yang berulang-alik ke Sabah seakan-akan negeri itu sebuah hotel. Mereka bebas masuk keluar mencari rezeki dan kemudian pulang ke Filipina dengan duit berkoyan-koyan, kebanyakannya dengan meniaga rokok seludup.

Sekotak Marlboro di Filipina harganya baru RM2.90. Jual di Malaysia mesti RM10. Cukup untung setahun, sudah boleh bikin rumah batu tiga tingkat. Itu belum dikira imbuhan tolong mengundi Barisan Nasional dalam pilihanraya. Itu juga fakta popular di kalangan politisi Filipina yang saya sendiri tidak begitu arif waktu itu.

Barangkali Barisan Nasional di Sabah dan ketaatannya kepada pimpinan di Putrajaya sudah tidak lagi peduli dan merasakan adalah 'okay' untuk rakyat negeri itu dilayan seolah-olah warganegara kelas rendah dikeranakan keterasingannya dan ketidakfahaman Putrajaya ke atas kehendak dan keperluan masyarakat Sabah secara khusus.

Sabah tidak perlu 1Malaysia. Sabah sudah lebih dahulu makmur dengan persefahaman dan toleransi antara kaum tanpa memerlukan simbol 1Malaysia. Yang lebih penting ialah ia sudah cukup menderita di bawah tadbir Barisan Nasional untuk jangkamasa yang terlalu lama dan melampaui had sabar. Sabah tidak lagi mampu untuk duduk angguk dan menerima penindasan berterusan secara berlapang dada.

Suruhanjaya DiRaja hanya kini membongkar hakikat-hakikat yang sudah lama menjadi rahsia terbuka di kalangan orang Sabah.

Militan bersenjata yang singgah berdiam di Lahad Datu juga tidak menerima layanan sepak terajang seperti yang dialami demonstran di perhimpunan Bersih.

Angin perubahan sudah semakin menderu-deru di Sabah; meski politisi Barisan Nasional negeri itu sampai kiamat tidak akan mahu mengaku. Orang Sabah tidaklah bodoh seperti yang mereka sangkakan.

Semoga satu hari nanti saya akan dapat menjejak kaki ke negeri Sabah yang bersih dari jelaga Barisan Nasional. Ini kali-lah!

Infighting in Pakatan Rakyat?

Posted: 19 Feb 2013 03:20 PM PST

The PKR is the weakest component party of the Pakatan Rakyat and it has to rely on the DAP and PAS. Therefore, the party's interests should be prioritised, instead of personal interests. If Johor PKR loses the support of its allies, it will still fail to achieve anything even though if it is able to maintain its safe constituencies.

Lim Sue Goan, Sin Chew Daily

Cracks emerged between Johor DAP and PKR on the same day when the Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS), United Pasokmomogun Kadazandusun Murut Organisation (UPKO) and Parti Bersatu Rakyat Sabah (PBRS) offered each other the hand of unity, reflecting that changes can take place at any time in politics, and the relationships among component parties of the Pakatan Rakyat are not as good as they claimed.

If the above three political parties in Sabah are just uniting on the surface, at least they still know how not shout at each other. The Johor DAP and PKR, however, have failed to do so. If the contradictions are not eliminated before the general election, the Pakatan Rakyat might not even be able to achieve the target of winning 10 parliamentary seats, let alone to seize the Johor state power.

There are a few factors behind the hostility between Johor DAP and PKR, including the state has been neglected by the DAP due to the party's factional problem, and the PKR has been eyeing on Chinese votes amidst the wind of anti-ruling due to the lack of grassroots support, leading to the conflict with the DAP.

The Pakatan Rakyat has classified Johor as a front-line state. However, the DAP's concern for Johor is far less compared to Selangor, Perak, Penang, Sabah and Sarawak.

It has been confirmed that PAS vice president Salahuddin Ayub will return to contest in Johor and due to the lack of talents, former MCA vice-president Datuk Chua Jui Meng, who joined the PKR only in 2009, is appointed to lead the team in Johor. Many DAP central leaders are from Johor, but it was only heard recently that Bukit Bendera MP Liew Chin Tong might be fielded to contest in Kluang, Johor.

DAP Parliamentary Leader Lim Kit Siang has announced in June 2011 that Johor has been classified as a frontline state, and a special team headed by the party's Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng was set up to assist the Johor DAP in achieving the dream of seizing Johor.

However, Johor DAP Chairman Dr Boo Cheng Hau is not a mainstream leader. It might be the reason why the special team has not been taking great actions. Also, it is rumoured that some central leaders would help out in Johor, but no move has been made so far.

If the DAP central committee really attaches importance to Johor, the state's seat apportionment problem should be resolved through negotiations as soon as possible, instead of letting Boo to repeatedly express dissatisfaction publicly without taking any actions. Obviously, the party is facing internal communication and coordination problems.

Only DAP Chairman Karpal Singh has expressed support to Boo on that day after the statement accusing Chua of being behind "vicious attacks" against Johor DAP was issued. The contradictions of the two parties in Johor have surfaced and it seems unlikely to be solved within the state and thus, has to be submitted to the party's central leaders.

The Pakatan Rakyat is ambitious in seizing the federal power, but it lacks a drastic determination. It should follow the example of Negeri Sembilan DAP chairman and Lobak state assemblymen Anthony Loke, who volunteered to contest in the Chennah state seat to seize the only remaining seat of the MCA in Negeri Sembilan. Only such a fighting spirit can boost the morale of the grassroots.

Similar situation has taken place in another frontline state, Pahang. The situation there is favourable to the Pakatan Rakyat thanks to the rare-earth refinery plant issue. However, the DAP does not have a prominent leader to lead the team.

How is the Pakatan Rakyat going to beat its enemy in Johor, which is a BN's bastion, with a poor battle array led by no prominent candidate?

Those who do great things must carry the spirit of sacrificing for the greater goal. Nothing will be achieved if Pakatan Rakyat leaders lack such kind of spirit.

Half truths and semi-lies

Posted: 19 Feb 2013 12:01 PM PST

Believe it or not, MCA once had the gumption to provide an articulate critique of the NEP.

Stanley Koh, Free Malaysia Today

Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, according to George Orwell.

Hence, when Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak told the World Economic Forum that the non-Bumiputera community did not oppose his government's affirmative action policies in favour of Malays and other natives of Malaysia, he raised eyebrows even among some leaders of his Barisan Nasional coalition.

News reports quoted him as saying: "By and large, the non-Malays in Malaysia, the non-Bumis, don't actually oppose affirmative action. But what they want is the way you implement the policy should be done in a more transparent way."

One could, of course, interpret this as an admission that there had in fact been consistent and persistent opposition to this controversial policy.

Barisan Nasional has been holding on to this policy for more than 30 years – and particularly doggedly during the prime ministership of Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Has it been a disastrous failure? Has the nation become more divided rather than more united? Has the policy fuelled greed and corruption while making the Bumiputeras even more dependent on government patronage rather than more confident of their ability to compete in the marketplace of business and employment?

An ever-increasing number of Malaysians are inclined to answer "Yes" to these questions, if we go by commentaries on the more respectable blogs and news portals.

It seems that more and more Malaysians are becoming aware that our politicians are long on rhetoric and short when it comes to substance.

MCA's true stand

Indeed, even senior BN member MCA has often – but only in the past – questioned the effectiveness of the New Economic Policy.

For example, a memorandum circulated among the party's leaders in 2005 gave a list of the adverse effects of the NEP. We quote it here verbatim:

Agriculture and smallholders and estate workers gained little from the poverty eradication programmes as they were systematically denied fair access of land.

Petty traders received no government assistance while large development expenditures were given to Malays.

Low-cost housing, hawking facilities, and stalls were not allocated to non-Malays.

Non-Malay small businesses tend to be subjected to political, bureaucratic control and harassment for things like taxi licences, micro-credit facilities, factory sites, trade licences, import permits, and even applications for utilities. Since small businesses tend to be run by families who are generally not well educated, they have little means and knowledge on how to circumvent the bureaucracy. As a result, they resort to bribery and corruption.

District development machinery took upon itself to implement NEP, thus denying much needed funds to villages. This exacerbated the poverty among the non-Malays.

While large foreign companies were not subjected to the NEP rule, large domestic companies were forced to sell their 30% below market value. In cases where foreign ownership was shared, they were allowed to sell their equity at fair market.

NEP was deliberately distorted to apply to select companies to reserve senior positions for the Bumiputeras.

Privatisation projects went without tendering exercise and excluded the participation by non-Malays. This is a clear violation of the constitutional rights of non-Malays.

The practice of making developers allocate at least 30% and some even up to 70% of the houses to the Bumis led to price distortions. Often these quotas were not fulfilled, resulting in further holding costs. On top of it, discounts of 7% must be obliged to Bumis. Developers were requested to restructure their equity when applying for planning approvals.

Sabah for Sabahans?

Posted: 19 Feb 2013 11:58 AM PST

Unless you have lived in the state, know its peoples and have a firm grasp of its issues, you are in no position to solve its problems.

Before you send me to Kamunting, realise I am not advocating Sabah leaving Malaysia.

But I think it is high time Sabahans have a good, long think about the status quo.

As it is, things cannot stand.

Last I checked, Sabah is still the poorest state in Malaysia. Nabawan in Sabah is the poorest town in the country, with a 70-per-cent poverty rate.

On top of that, a small private army has landed in Lahad Datu intent on claiming Sabah as its own.

If we had a referendum, what with all the "free citizenships" Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's administration has so benevolently bestowed upon foreigners, would Sabahans actually have the numbers to keep the state in Malaysia?

Or would our new Sabahan brothers and sisters vote overwhelmingly to become part of the Philippines or even choose allegiance to the Sultan of Sulu?

A wanted Filipino fugitive is also now finding safe haven in the state, rumoured to have family connections on the Sabah government.

So much for Sabah "prospering" under Barisan Nasional rule.

Sabah politicians have called on the federal government to do something about the massive influx of foreigners into the state for a long time.

Only now has a Royal Commission of Inquiry been called, and it has confirmed what most of us already knew.

That we have been betrayed.

What right did the former prime minister have to give citizenships to foreigners as he liked?

What he did might have been technically "legal" but it was morally wrong and it was a betrayal of the state, a betrayal of the Sabah people and going against the heart of the 20-point agreement that said the state had jurisdiction over immigration matters. Not the prime minister.

And can Sabahans trust PKR to change things, when Sabah's PKR is a toothless body helpless to even choose its own leaders? When all decisions are centralised and it has no say in choosing who should lead it into the state?

I wouldn't be surprised if Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim attempted to parachute another West Malaysian in to lead Sabah PKR like he did with Azmin Ali.

What next? Azmin Ali as Sabah chief minister? If that happens, I am surrendering my passport and moving to the Philippines.

It is time Sabahans said, "Enough". It is obvious that Putrajaya and Pakatan Rakyat are deaf, dumb and blind to what Sabah really needs and what Sabah really is.

Sabah is not "just" another state. It was equal party to an agreement between Malaya, Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak to form Malaysia. Each had special status, certain rights, and to this day the federal government has chosen to piss upon the spirit and the words of the agreement.

If Sabah is to become more than an impoverished state beholden to cruel masters, it has to start rejecting subjugation.

The first step is saying a big, firm "No" to West Malaysian-based parties like Umno and PKR who are more interested in pushing the Malay agenda than the Malaysian agenda.

(I might perhaps make an exception for Sabah DAP, which has a long history in Sabah, refreshingly free of the stupidity displayed by both Umno and PKR in the recent years.)

Some say Sabah is "selfish" for harping about its rights when it should think of "Malaysia" as a whole instead of its special privileges.

Basically, Sabah should just lie on its back and think of Malaysia? Brilliant.

That has not worked now, has it? The more Sabahans demur, the more our rights are stripped away. Most of the state's revenue goes to the federal government while Sabah just has to make do with the leftovers.

Much ado about nothing

Posted: 18 Feb 2013 04:00 PM PST

Sheridan said Xenophon was over-enthusiastic in his involvement in Malaysian politics, adding that he should instead visit Vietnam or Cambodia if he really cares about democracy in Southeast Asia.

Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily

Xenophon, a weirdly sounding name that should make a good candidate for the namesake of Samsung's next generation of smartphones.

But of course, Xenophon is not a phone. He is a senator from Down Under.

If not because he was barred from entering the country through the LCCT, and was sent off on the next plane, not many people would have the slightest idea who Nick Xenophon is.

His deportation, along with a pathetic-looking self portrait taken at the airport, has caused quite a stir.

Incensed by the move of the Malaysian authorities, Australia's politicians have launched aggressive assaults on Malaysia. Prime Minister Julia Gillard has sided the senator despite their lukewarm relationship.

Who on earth is this Nick Xenophon? Is he the one the Malaysian government said "threatening our national security" and must be deported at once?

I asked a friend returning from Australia about this man, and was told Xenophon is just one of the 200-odd senators in Australia. Never a big shot himself, he is nevertheless unusual in that he is an independent senator who does things his own way, unbound by any political entity.

Although he is no celebrity in Australia, he has somewhat developed an affinity for Malaysian politics, having hammered the country's human rights records on Australian papers. A strong opponent of Malaysian palm oil, he made a personal trip to Kuala Lumpur last year in his capacity as Bersih 3.0 observer.

Not fully contented with my friend's account on Xenophon, I visited The Australian website for a better insight into this man from the Australian perspectives.

The Australian's foreign editor Greg Sheridan wrote in his op-ed "Nick Xenophon's grandstanding does us no good" that his "actions regarding Malaysia are either foolish or cynically self-promoting."

Sheridan said Xenophon was over-enthusiastic in his involvement in Malaysian politics, adding that he should instead visit Vietnam or Cambodia if he really cares about democracy in Southeast Asia.

Although Xenophon's style and stance could send the Malaysian government neurotic, sending him off and branding him "a threat to national security" are both oversensitive and impractical.

While the government is legally justified to act this way, it needs to demonstrate some degree of self-confidence in exercising its sovereignty and jurisdiction. Moreover, if we bother about how democratic we are, we should not handle diplomatic matters with such a restrictive frame of mind.

Even as we reject Xenophon's subjective views, we should refrain from such a hardline stance in responding to his presence..

To show our magnanimity, perhaps the government should allow him to come into the country, speak all he wants to speak and do all he wants to do, so long as he does not act beyond our laws.

To be honest, given our already distinctly polarised political environment, there is hardly anything Xenophon can do to tip the balance.

The market sabotage of Pakatan

Posted: 18 Feb 2013 12:21 PM PST

Ali Cordoba, Free Malaysia Today

At this moment, weeks before the next general election, there are undeniable signs that a large majority of the capitalists in and outside the country are not in favour of Pakatan.

Claims that the market would collapse and that it would bring down the nation's economy if Pakatan Rakyat wins the 13th general election, could be true, in the end.

However, the truth could be stranger than fiction, and the scenario exposed here shows how the contrary could be real. It would also show how the country is now divided, more or less, on an economic line rather than on racial or ethnic line.

MCA has warned the people of a huge financial disaster if Pakatan comes to power. The Barisan Nasional faction has predicted that the KL stock market indicator or KL Composite Index (KLCI) would likely drop 500 points. It added that this could happen within a week after Pakatan is in power.

This scenario is a possible one. The warnings are true, so true that we must all be prepared for a long-drawn battle between the government and the economic powers of the country. And these economic powers are the filthy rich, the capitalists, hence the cronies of the BN regime.

These multi-millionaires and billionaires hold the key to the KLCI, hence a fall of 500 points – though dramatic as it would seem – would only be an attempt to squeeze Pakatan out of its political might.

An electoral victory for Pakatan in the next general election would mean it would form the next government, thus it would be a powerful political group. Whether the victory would be by a slim or large margin, would not be important. Once Pakatan has a stronghold on power, it would be the one ruling the country.

At this moment, weeks before the next general election, there are undeniable signs that a large majority of the capitalists in and outside the country are not in favour of Pakatan. Besides the huge banners showing support to BN, statements of market panic and the bankrolling of BN campaigns, it could be said that the rich among the rich are not pro-Pakatan.

It could also be said, without much ado, that these elements have a tight grip on the local marketplace and the stock market depends largely on their mood. They are enjoying the current economic boom – with the spilling of contracts and whatnot across the board.

There is little doubt they would do everything to attempt a sabotage, if necessary, of a Pakatan regime.

This has been predicted – to a certain extent – by the now famous Bank Islam chief economist Azrul Azwar Ahmad Tajudin. Azrul forecast that a fallout would result from the Pakatan win, with the stock market set to respond in "knee-jerk" fashion as well as an extended period of perceived instability.

He did not rule out the possibility of "economic sabotage" by businesses and the civil service aligned to BN.

Taxing the rich among the rich

The recent claims by MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek, if it were to be taken seriously, falls right into Azrul's estimates that capitalists would try to sabotage Pakatan.

Nevertheless, the people should not worry too much about the 500-point fall, as predicted by Chua.

"So either the country would go bankrupt within two years, or Pakatan would target taxpayers for more funds." said Chua.

"If that happens, the Chinese would suffer the most because they are the single biggest taxpayers group in the country," he added.

The point is, why would the Pakatan attack its own voters with more taxes when it could simply tax the rich among the rich? Since it is being proven that the filthy rich are not pro-Pakatan, it would not be difficult to overtax them.

Is Selangor ripe for plucking?

Posted: 18 Feb 2013 12:11 PM PST

If Pakatan loses Selangor, it would be disastrous for PKR. After all, DAP appears unshakable in Penang, while come hell or high water, Datuk Seri Nik Aziz Nik Mat and PAS will hang on to Kelantan. What has PKR got?

N Shashi Kala, fz.com

ABOUT a week ago, I was sharing an exquisite teh tarik at a kenduri in Klang – not my favourite place, having had the ill luck to end up as a crime statistic there not once but twice – when I heard something interesting.

The table next to mine was in an animated diuscussion about, what else, the upcoming general election.

Now there was a sort of minor VIP at the table – a businessman who was a local bigwig and a staunch supporter of the Barisan Nasional (BN). He was telling those at the table – and all the evesdroppers such as myself – about a recent party machinery meeting where the division chiefs were told an interesting tidbit: according to the latest "intel" from Special Branch, Selangor will be back in the BN fold after GE13. We will win by a at least seven seats, said the VIP, who was smiling smugly.

The seats that he mentioned as "definitely winnable" included Seri Andalas, Pandamaran, and Seri Muda, all of which he claimed had been poorly served by Pakatan Rakyat (PR) reps.

"They can talk about how corrupt the former BN state government was, but basic services such as rubbish collection and maintanence of public infrastructure were carried out.

"Now, garbage collection is a major problem, and the rakyat is being held to ransom over water issues. What's the point of trumpeting free water when there's no water to begin with? So short-sighted. People are fed up.

"The midde-class may still talk about BN's flaws but after 5 years, the poor people in Selangor are talking about PR's flaws too. And there is enough momentum there to push PR out," he said in a booming voice to a not altogether appreciative audience.

Oh, he did add that BN components have not been idle, and that a lot of money is being splashed out to ensure that the message gets across. He claimed "a major property developer" is allegedly bankrolling the "Win Selangor Back for BN" campaign and hundreds of youths are being paid to "reach out to voters".

In all, it sounded pretty dire for Pakatan, and PKR especially as the seats "ripe for plucking" were all from Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's camp, with a few from PAS and two from DAP.

Selangor was supposed to be the showpiece for the PR government – this is how we will manage the country, its leaders had said.

In some ways, the state can be proud of the way it has managed its coffers. It ranks top in investment according to latest figures, while the state has tabled a balanced budget in the past few years. Its cash reserves too, are high, around RM2.5 billion.

But it has not been immune from scandals – many originating from decisions made by its municipal councils. The councils of Klang, Sepang, Petaling Jaya, Shah Alam, Selayang and Ampang have, at one point or another, made headlines for all the wrong reasons.

The state's inability to get the councils in line and its councillors to do a better job in safeguarding the people's interest is a cause of frustration and an opportunity BN plans to exploit.

The prolonged impasse over the water issue is also not doing anyone any favours. The finger pointing and the lack of progress made in regards to increasing the amount of treated water in the state (either through reducing water wastage through pipe leakage, etc., or by building more plants) is only resulting in Selangor citizens becoming rather uneasy over their supply.

The Chinese Owe BN Nothing

Posted: 18 Feb 2013 12:03 PM PST

Najib should note that despite the barriers, the Chinese accepted their lot. And many Chinese – for whatever warped or bewildering logic – actually supported BN throughout the times they were marginalised!

Kee Thuan Chye

Najib the vendor of half-baked spin was at it again a few days ago when he said the Chinese owed their success to Barisan Nasional (BN).

At a 1Malaysia open house, he said BN formulated good policies and ensured there was harmony in the country and an environment that "allowed the Chinese to make a good living".

Najib had the cheek to say this.

He of course wants the Chinese to be thankful to BN and therefore vote for the coalition at the upcoming general election. But his half-baked spin completely ignores the other side of the story.

For instance, the Chinese also owe it to BN that they became second-class citizens in their own country because of BN's discriminatory policies – and, let's not forget, practices.

As a result, the Chinese have to work harder to succeed. To get places in Malaysian public universities. To have their children score the highest number of As and still not get accepted to do, say, Medicine in these institutions. And therefore be forced to send them overseas, at much higher cost.

The Chinese owe it to BN that they were compelled to leave Malaysia to seek fairer opportunities overseas, some never to return, and thereby contributing to a huge brain drain for which Malaysia is now paying the price.

Many who are now settled overseas may indeed be thankful that they left, but I'm sure Najib is not looking to them for gratitude. Some of them won't be eligible for voting, anyway, having taken citizenships in their countries of adoption.

The Chinese also owe it to BN that to take on business projects of sizable proportions, they have to pay kickbacks – some to BN bigwigs themselves, some to their cronies.

The Chinese owe it to BN that they find it virtually impossible to rise to the highest echelons of public service – in the judiciary, the military, the police, the universities, the civil service. Not because they don't have the merit to fill these positions; in fact, they do, which therefore makes it even more unjust and painful.

Can Najib name a single Chinese vice-chancellor in a Malaysian public university? Can a Chinese person become Inspector-General of Police or Admiral of the Fleet or Chief Justice?

In fact, Najib should watch what he says in the run-up to the general election, especially if he is hoping to win Chinese support for BN.

As it is, many analysts believe that about 70 to 80 per cent of the Chinese are not in favour of the ruling party. If he wants to win at least some over, he needs to say the right things. More than that, he needs to do the right things. Although even then, one wonders if it might not be too late.

Many Chinese still remember what he reportedly said in 1987 on the eve of Operasi Lalang at the Umno Youth rally in TPCA Stadium. As the Umno Youth chief then, he displayed ethnocentric gusto in unsheathing his keris and announcing that it would taste Chinese blood by the end of the day.

It might have been an act of foolish bravado but it still resonates among some Chinese today. Considered together with the video that is making the rounds again of his address to the Umno and Malay NGOs audience in Putra Word Trade Centre (PWTC) a few days after Bersih 2.0, in which he said, with much tribal sound and fury, "We will show them whose country this is!", many wonder if the leopard has changed its spots.

For all his talk of 1Malaysia, Najib is still an ethnocentrist at heart.

He has said he will meet the Chinese educationist group Dong Zong to discuss the latter's demands in regard to Chinese education. In all likelihood, he will agree to meet some if not all of them as a last-ditch measure to win Chinese votes. He might even declare the Government's recognition – finally – of the United Examination Certificate (UEC), a dream the Chinese educationists have been pursuing for the longest time.

If this consequently prompts Dong Zong to endorse Najib and BN for the coming general election, it could sway a good number of Chinese votes in the direction of BN. Then, like they did in 1999 when they saved Mahathir Mohamad's bacon by strongly supporting his coalition when the Malays were swinging to the Opposition, they could hand BN a victory … and, who knows?, maybe even a two-thirds majority, which is what Najib desperately covets.

However, this is going to be a crucial general election. It is the one time when real change for the country can come about with a change of government.

The Chinese need to consider carefully about giving their vote to BN. They need to consider the long-term effects of another BN victory. They need to weigh the possibility of real reform in the event of BN being booted out and a new coalition taking over that could bring positive change.

They need to be wary of Najib's sweet talk and his gifts. If he gives them Government recognition of the UEC, more independent Chinese schools, whatever, they might want to just accept these politely, say thank you and think of voting according to what they think is right.

Dong Zong on its part should remain neutral and not take a stand by endorsing BN. For if it does and Pakatan wins the general election, it would find itself in an awkward position.

The Chinese have a big role to play now in this coming general election. Najib can say anything till he is blue in the face, but they have to weigh the truth or lack of it in what he says. Besides, ensuring harmony and a conducive environment for work and living in the country is, after all, the responsibility – indeed, duty – of any government for which no gratitude from the citizens is necessary. So the Chinese don't owe BN anything.

Above all, the Chinese must not forget about the corruption that has been rampant under BN rule for decades. And the rent-seeking. And the slow growth of our GDP since 1980 in comparison to South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, etc. These affect the whole country, not just the Chinese, and are therefore all the more important.

So, when it comes to the crunch, the Chinese must vote for only one thing – a better Malaysia.

* Kee Thuan Chye is the author of the bestselling book No More Bullshit, Please, We're All Malaysians, and the latest volume, Ask for No Bullshit, Get Some More!

Ultra-nationalism comes to fore in pre-poll Malaysia

Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:49 AM PST

THE focus on Nick Xenophon's being barred from Malaysia has been on the senator's calculated outrage, but the story behind it is the Malaysian government's emerging re-election strategy: a return to proud recalcitrance.

Rowan Callick, The Australian

Prime Minister Najib Razak was educated largely in England, had a brief commercial career and then, inevitably, turned to the family business. His father, Abdul Razak, was Malaysia's second prime minister, and his uncle, Hussein Onn, its third.

His public political style is almost one of reluctance, of gentility, rather than that of a cynical son of one of Asia's great party machines. His party, UMNO, has ruled Malaysia for almost 55 years.

Four years ago, Najib was ushered into the prime ministership without a contest by his predecessor Abdullah Badawi, who had been dumped by the party machine after UMNO lost control of five of Malaysia's 13 state governments.

Najib began as a reformer, removing bans on opposition newspapers and releasing 13 people held under the harsh Internal Security Act.

He introduced the Government Transformation Program to make the public service more accountable and efficient. He fostered knowledge industries and foreign investment.

He began to axe sugar and fuel subsidies and lowered the minimum ethnic Malay ownership in listed companies from 30 per cent to 12.5 per cent.

But his name has become associated with a complex, shady tale involving the death of a glamorous Mongolian woman caught up in a series of defence purchases involving hundreds of millions of dollars. He was twice defence minister.

More important, his popularity has fallen to its lowest for 16 months, and the ratings of the government are also slipping.

The party backroom is becoming increasingly anxious since a general election has to take place by mid-year, and Najib has not yet faced the voters.

Several months ago, they began to fret that tactics to prise apart the unusually unified opposition coalition led by Anwar Ibrahim were not yet working.

So besides hiring costly consultants, especially from the US, it is back to the tried and trusted stratagems so successful for Mahathir Mohamad, the fourth prime minister, who ruled for 22 years until 2003.

He remains, aged 87, a powerful presence within UMNO. On Sunday, he railed against the liberty granted new media, lamenting that "their freedom is almost total".

Thus the dramatic turning back of Xenophon at the weekend is not exactly "surprising", as Foreign Minister Bob Carr described it. It is part of a reversion to the old successful pattern of uber-patriotism and uber-Islam that worked so well electorally under Mahathir.

This is the new Malaysia Solution, tailored by Kuala Lumpur and not by Canberra.

Bully-boy Malaysia immature and Australia's reaction so limp

Posted: 18 Feb 2013 11:45 AM PST

Malaysia's decision to ban an Australian independent senator, Nick Xenophon, tells us a good deal about the state of its government, the world's longest-ruling outside the communist world, as it heads to an election. Australia's response tells us a few things about ourselves, too.

Peter Hartcher, Sydney Morning Herald political and international editor

Before critiquing the ruling party, the party of Mahathir, now the party of Prime Minister Najib Razak, we should acknowledge that it knows a thing or two.

First, it's worked out how to hold power continuously for 56 years, ever since Britain granted Malaysia independence. That's a serious accomplishment.

Second, it hasn't done a bad job of running the economy. Malaysia's sharemarket was one of the best-performing in the world last year and the economy is growing about 4 to 5 per cent annually.

Malaysia is a pleasant, multi-racial country with the middle-income living standards that an average per capita GDP of $10,000 delivers, about the same as Turkey or Mexico.

So why is the government so afraid of Nick Xenophon? Why stop him at the airport with the confected explanation that he represents a threat to national security?

The reason is that he is an international observer campaigning in favour of a free and fair election. This is not a threat to Malaysia's national security, but it is a threat to the ruling party's grip on power. As the opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim, told me some time ago: ''In a fair and free election, I am absolutely sure we will win.''

Xenophon says that his detention and deportation shows ''a high level of paranoia''. But is it paranoia, or does the ruling party really have something to fear at the election it must call by the end of April?

At the centre of the long success of the ruling party is racial politics.

The county had a history of communal violence; the coalition National Front or Barisan Nasional (BN) party addressed that problem because it was founded on the principle of power-sharing between racial groups, the Malay majority with the Chinese and Indian minorities.

This balance held in check the fear of racial violence on a communal scale. But another key concept in the long years of BN rule was that the native Malays were inferior. They may be numerically dominant, but they lacked the skills and abilities of the other races.

''Deep within them,'' wrote Mahathir in his 1970 book The Malay Dilemma, ''there is a conviction that no matter what they decide or do, things will continue to slip beyond their control; that slowly but surely they are becoming dispossessed in their own land. This is the Malay Dilemma.''

How to address it? By granting the Malays special privileges, including guaranteed dominance of the public sector and automatic, unearned shares of national wealth. In short, affirmative action. ''It should not be wrong,'' wrote Mahathir, ''for the Malays to cling to a system which can elevate them to the status of other races, thus creating a more equitable society.''

The system kept the peace, but one side-effect of such a long stasis was that the government's monopoly on power allowed it to wield a near-absolute control over the other arms of the state, including the courts.

Mahathir shocked the world when he demonstrated the way that he'd managed to compromise all parts of the system when he moved against his deputy and potential nominated successor, Anwar, by trumping up charges that he'd sodomised his aide and speechwriter. Anwar went to jail for six years.

This was supposed to discredit Anwar permanently. But after moving to the US, the aide who testified against him recanted. In the police cells he had been ''brutalised to make a totally false confession'', he said.

Anwar, freed, led a barnstorming campaign as the leader of the opposition. He delivered the BN government a terrible shock at the 2008 election - it lost its customary two-thirds majority of parliament.

And while the BN retained a big majority in the parliament, the actual voting figures show that the contest was much closer than it appeared. BN won 51.4 per cent of the votes while the greater opposition gained 48.6 per cent.

The BN is protected by a gerrymander which means that while some electorates have more than 100,000 voters, others have as

few as 7000. It's also protected by other systemic factors including a restricted press - the opposition parties need government permission just to print their own newsletters.

These are some of the awkward facts that Xenophon, as part of a wider international observer group, pointed out in a report last year. That group reported that in its discussions with the secretary-general of BN, Adnan Mansor, he'd stressed the importance of ''avoiding racial strife'' in Malaysia. He had posed this question to the group: ''Are our people mature for freedom?''

The Malaysian government is afraid not of an Australian senator but of this question. In particular, the Najib government is frightened that the answer might be ''yes.''

Too many spanners in the works

Posted: 17 Feb 2013 05:22 PM PST

Now here we have a prime minister who was educated by missionary brothers in St John's Institution and went to the University of Nottingham which have crucifixes on every steeple and wall — and that has not altered his faith as a Muslim. And while he is espousing 1Malaysia wherever he goes, there are the likes of Ibrahim who want to cosy up to him yet, spew rhetorical divisive venom.

Terence Fernandez, The Malay Mail

LET'S be honest. The prime minister is in the fight of his life. In an interview with The Malay Mail in December, Datuk Seri Najib Razak acknowledged that going into GE13 is not only the biggest challenge of his political career, but also in his 59-plus years of existence!

Truth be told, he needs support from all sides to win. But it appears that his biggest obstacles to gaining the mandate he needs, and whom many say he deserves, appears to be within his own party and administration.

There are many examples to cite. From the top of one's head, the Christmas open house in 2010 where he was the guest of honour comes to mind. Here, a senior officer from his office instructed the hosts at St John's Cathedral to remove all religious signs and ensure there was no singing of hymns.Jingle Bells was fine.

Then there is so called "supporters" or BN-Umno friendly NGOs like Perkosa — sorry I mean Perkasa — and its head honcho Ibrahim Ali (whom I'm ashamed to say is from my beloved home state of Kelantan) who incite people to burn Bibles!

One is sure Ibrahim was just making political speak and never intended to burn anything but his bridges with the non-Muslim community. But the fact remains that his association with the present ruling coalition will damage the later's chances with non-Muslim voters at the polls.

Then we have political partners who have been tainted by allegations of abuse of power and graft. These individuals should do the right thing and step aside instead of clinging on to power.

It is akin to a child caught with his hands in the cookie jar but not only denying it — but demanding another piece.

Of course, the reality of politics is that some of these politicians are powerful allies who can deliver blocks of votes hence, political expediency demands that they be tolerated — but for awhile.

However wether the voters will be able to stomach this impunity is another matter.

We also have administrators who act contrary to the interests of their political masters.

The chaos on the streets during the Bersih 3.0 rally is one, where the on-going criticisms of highhandedness of the police is going to resonate with some at the polling booth.

And closer to home The Malay Mail is now being investigated for criminal defamation for carrying reports on the death of a young woman in a police shooting, in Klang last month.

While it may be within its rights to probe us, our stand is that it is intimidation and an attempt to silence the Press.

The fact that I received calls from the Prime Minister's Office querying on that matter, reflects the concerns at the top.

And while the 100-or-so armed invaders in Lahad Datu are being given a taste of Malaysian hospitality, our authiorities kick out an Australian senator merely because he seems to be cavorting with the Opposition.

Again, the law is completely on the government's side.

Unfortunately, the spirit of the law is often ignored, hence the accusations of selective persecution.

Najib, with all his efforts — drum beating and all — has received kudos from a large section of the Malaysian public. As an individual leader, he has the best chance of regaining his two-thirds. But my take is, it will not happen.

"In Najib we trust" was our headlines on Friday. While this may be true for many, sad to say the same cannot be said for some of those who are expected to be his close allies and right arm.

But the prime minister did say in the interview to "give me a chance".

Let him have his mandate and see the reforms that will take place.

One is eager to give him that chance. The only nagging issue for me is the words of Najib's predecessor Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi when I interviewed him in 2008.

"So what if I get 90 per cent of the mandate? If Umno does not want me, what can I do?" I want to believe that Najib is made of sterner stuff.

Over-politicised political campaign

Posted: 17 Feb 2013 05:19 PM PST

These strategies and approaches are being adopted by political parties on both sides. While a popularist approach might be attractive, it does great disservice and damage to the political process. Malaysians must show their displeasure with what is being adopted by political parties and call on political leaders and candidates to articulate the substantive issues of governance and why they deserve our vote.

Denison Jayasooria, The Malay Mail

POLITICAL party strategists are free to be creative and innovative in drawing voters.

As we get closer to GE13 we are seeing worrying trends which we must resist and call upon politicians from both the political divide to focus on the core issues and not divert to what could be called unhealthy approaches

We are seeing the trend towards entertainment such as spicy dance girls and engaging popular foreign artists.

We also see others approaching political campaigning with incitement of burning religious scriptures, the justification for two-third majority to deny individuals of citizenship. Yet others are giving out numerous goodies through public funds in an unsustainable and short term focus only.

These strategies and approaches are being adopted by political parties on both sides. While a popularist approach might be attractive, it does great disservice and damage to the political process.

Malaysians must show their displeasure with what is being adopted by political parties and call on political leaders and candidates to articulate the substantive issues of governance and why they deserve our vote.

Recently at the Malaysia Strategic Outlook Conference organised by ASLI Malaysia I highlighted five general trends toward GE13 which have long-term damaging effects. It is often said that politicians are just concern for short term either capturing power or retaining it.

As responsible citizens, we must call on all political parties and potential candidates to focus on the real issues and not be distracted by side shows.

Trend 1 — Politicisation of race and religion The worrying trend is the increasing reference to race and religion in political speeches. Here we see the incitement to burning bibles on one side and another is the poster war of political faces at Thaipusam. These are not election posters but non-Muslims seeking to ride on a religious festival through popularity or crowd catching.

Concern has been expressed by the silence of political leaders linked to the Federal administration especially on extremely sensitive issues like incitement to burn bibles. The efforts by Kelantan chief minister in visiting the Penang Catholic Bishop and the efforts by civil society to re-agenda the burning of bibles to reading the bible are brilliant efforts by society to defuse the issues in the spirit of moderation, tolerance and appreciation.

However these efforts were not initiated by Federal linked officials nor were there any action by the authorities. It is essential to reaffirm certain parameters for political talk and action. Malaysia has reached a stage of political maturity that we must focus on substantive political discourse and not a cheap fling on emotive aspects.

Trend 2 — Politicisation of welfare and assistance There is a battle on the ground to give out short term, dependency driven cash hand-outs which is unsustainable. Federal and state politicians are using public funds to induce a culture of dependency which is unhealthy

Trend 3 — Politicisation of the administration Federal and state officials and machinery are being used for political purposes. While ministers and Exco members officiate functions, the events are more like election campaigning. In some situations funds are being channelled via NGOs or voluntary oganisations to the grassroots. Its recipients are not broad base but focused on supporters or linked to political leaders.

There is a thin line here between services and political favouritism. We must as citizens demand that all public sector agencies at all levels of government at Federal, state and local government must be A-political and politically neutral, serving all its citizens irrespective of political affiliation or association.

Trend 4 — Politicisation of Election Commission

While the Election Commission (EC) has taken efforts to explain the situation such as the reliability of the voter list, the recent Sabah Royal Commission of Inquiry via the statement of witnesses is impacting the credibility and neutrality of the agencies involved especially the schemes to enlarge the voter base through granting of citizenship to establishment favouring citizenship seekers from neighbouring countries.

There is much distrust and it will be helpful for EC to work closely with civil society such as Bersih and Transparency International to enhance its image rather than seeing these public interest citizens based networks as just anti-establishment.

The EC appointment of Election observers under tight conditions have not instilled greater public confidence. The conditions and type of organisations accredited must be reviewed so as to regain public confidence.

However the matter for long-term structural change is the way EC commissioners are appointed. It must be a transparent and independent process with non-former civil servants appointed in contrast to the current composition.

Trend 5 — Politisation of public discourse and media coverage

Political discourse is most often propaganda style with mainstream media focused on pro administration and the social media for alternative views. While there has been a number of public debates, this approach is not popular among the politicians in a face to face debate. A majority shy away from these and those from the current administration.

The very propaganda style is not good for the best interest of the citizen.

The citizen-voter must be able to hear what the policies and provisions are in a calm and conducive environment. There must be a lively debate and interaction on issues pertaining to good governance, economic growth and equitable distribution, accountability and human rights compliance

The real test is why any political party or candidate should secure a vote. The politicians must explain why. They must from all side focus on the substantive concerns and make a commitment.

There must be a greater commitment for public reasoning. We must not treat the voter as uninterested in policy discussions and future trends of the nation. Some tends to treat voters as ignorant and only interested in hand-outs. The 2008 election results showed this was a wrong perspective. Malaysians are matured citizens who must insist that national interest and not personal interest is the character of the new politics. Some key policy areas of national concern which potential candidates must be able to answer are:

• What are your policies to ensure economic growth and equitable distribution whereby inequality is addressed?

• How would you ensure all-inclusive socio-economic development?

• How would you address issues pertaining to ethnic discrimination, abuse of power such as excessive use of force by enforcement and curtail corruption?

• How would you ensure all communities have their cultural and religious rights protected?

• How would you protect and promote human rights and strengthen the human rights institutions and accountability at the parliament level?

At the end of the day it is the citizen-voters, who set the agenda. They must not be passive and let these negative trends dominate Malaysian politics. They must set the agenda and ensure politicians and political parties are more accountable and treat the citizen-voter with greater respect and dignity

Datuk Dr Denison Jayasooria is the Principal Research Fellow, Institute of Ethnic Studies (Kita), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) & secretary-general Proham (Society for the Promotion of Human Rights.

The real enemies of the state

Posted: 17 Feb 2013 01:47 PM PST

By deporting Senator Nick Xenophon, the Malaysian authorities have given the impression that there is something to hide.

S Vell Paari, FMT

When I arrived in Kuala Lumpur from Perth two days ago, the first SMS that I received upon switching on my mobile phone was that Australian senator Nick Xenophon had been detained at the Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) and was awaiting deportation for allegedly being an "enemy of the state".

The enemy of the state claim, to me, was bewildering.

Setting aside his scheduled meetings with Anwar Ibrahim and certain NGOs, wasn't he and the delegation representing all the political parties in Australia scheduled to meet with the Election Commission and Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Abdul Aziz as well?

When a senior federal minister of Malaysia and the Election Commission could see fit to schedule a meeting with Senator Xenophon, where is this security treat?

Let's be frank, Senator Xenophon is not an independent observer, he is aligned to Anwar and Pakatan Rakyat but have not our leaders like Xenophon been critical of foreign countries and their policies. Were this leaders considered a security threat and deported when they arrived in those countries?

Dr Mahathir Mohamad during his tenure as prime minister made various threats against the US and Australia, was he ever deported during any of his visits there? Even recently he made statements against the US and Hilary Clinton but when he went there to receive an award, he was not deported for being an enemy of the state.

It took three Bersih rallies before we realised that it is best to give an approval in the case of the Himpunan Rakyat, where everything proceeded peacefully and with praise for the police.

Similarly, we should have just allowed Senator Xenophon together with the delegation to carry out their visit, hold their meetings, state their views and return back to Australia, without drama.

By choosing to deport him, we have turned him into a hero. By deporting him, we have given the world an impression that we have something to hide.

Just two weeks ago we had a similar group from Europe who came to look into the government's control over the mainstream media and their statement was not favorable to the government, which was aired by certain mainstream TV channels and online media.

The real security threat

What about George Soros? He visited Malaysia to launch his book. This man was accused of attempting to destroy the Malaysian economy and to bring Malaysia to its knees to beg IMF's help. But was he deported as an enemy of state?

It is these sort of double standard approaches that brew disaster for Barisan Nasional.

For example, recently about a 100 rebel fighters from the Philippines landed in Sabah fully armed. And the Home Ministry is still figuring out how to deal with them. Is this not a major security treat? Were they deported?

I think it must have been Xenophon's V-neck T Shirt which is the cause for the security threat.

Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:57 PM PST

Najib promised to, borrowing his latest buzzword, "transform" his administration. How could he possibly do that when all his ministers would again stand for election? If they win, they would surely again be ministers. What transformation did he have in mind? Hishammudin becoming Women's Minister?

M. Bakri Musa

Suaris Interview: The Future of Malays Part 4: It is said that Malays are at a crossroad. This is particularly so with the upcoming General Election 13 where the choice is between feudalism and liberalism. To what extent do you agree with that viewpoint?

[The original in Malay appeared in suaris.wordpress.com on February 6, 2013.]

MBM: I agree that we Malays are at a critical juncture. Our choice is between continuing on the present path that has led us to where we are today, with our minds still trapped, or make a sharp turn towards liberating them. Remember that the path to the dumpsite is the one well-trodden.

I do not agree that the forthcoming election (GE 13) will be a choice between liberalism and feudalism, as I understand both terms. Instead it will be between a party that has grown old, tired, and bankrupt of ideas versus another that is young, vigorous, and full of fresh talent.

As an aside, "liberalism" to me means a system that treats every human as having certain inalienable rights or freedoms granted unto him (or her) by Almighty Allah, among them, the freedom of thought, to choose our leaders, own properties, and pursue happiness. Feudalism on the other hand was the social system prevailing in Medieval Europe where humans were either lords or peasants. Land, property and peasants belonged to the lords. Your fate and place in society was determined at birth and remained fixed throughout life. Meaning, born a peasant, and you would remain one until death.

Clearly from the perspective of respect for human lives and values, liberalism is closer to Islam than is feudalism.

True, Malay society today still retains many feudal elements. Nonetheless we are free to choose our leaders. Even though we could not choose our sultans, we do not consider ourselves slaves to them. Yes, we use the term "patek" in referring to ourselves when addressing a member of the royalty. That is merely a habit. A sultan can no longer grab a village maiden for his palace collection. We hitherto peasants could now (if we wish to and can afford it) own a house more palatial than the istana and drive a car that could overtake the sultan's in speed, price and glamour.

Returning to GE13, before we make a decision as to which party to vote for, it is prudent to do a downstream analysis. There can only be three possible outcomes. First, Barisan be returned to power; second, Pakatan to prevail; and third, neither winning a decisive victory. By decisive I mean where the buying of a handful of victorious candidates would not alter the balance of power a la Perak 2008.

If Barisan were to win, that would mean voters approve of the current pervasive corruption and abuse of power. We would have gone further, essentially rewarding those who have destroyed MAS, Perwaja, Bank Bumiputra, and others. Expect the greed of ministers and their families to grow unabated. Our rotten system of education would continue its decline. Our professors and academic leaders would continue to be chosen based not on their scholarly contributions but their ability to suck up to the politically powerful. Najib would continue to lead as he has for the last four years – delivering an alphabet soup of acronyms, endless exhortations, and a surfeit of sloganeering, much like the character in Shannon Ahmad's short story Uggapan (Slogans).

Barisan leaders are scaring citizens into believing that our stability depends on their winning the election. On the contrary, if Barisan fails to secure a greater victory than in 2008, (no one is predicting it will win a supra majority), there will be an ugly power struggle at the top. The Najib/Muhyyuddin rivalry would eclipse the earlier Abdullah/Najib power struggle in its messiness. It would be even uglier than the Mahathir/Ku Li confrontation a generation earlier. The permanent establishment would be paralyzed, not knowing which faction to support. Mahathir has already sharpened the knife that he used with devastating effectiveness on Abdullah. This time the victim would be Najib.

In defeat, there would be much soul searching in Pakatan. Perhaps their leaders would now resolve to focus on the things that they could agree on that would benefit the nation and citizens, as with eradicating corruption and abuse of power, ensuring justice, improving the education system, while distancing themselves from such meaningless symbolic items as with an Islamic state and who could use the word "Allah." Those obsessions do not contribute to the well being of citizens, on the contrary, they divide us.

The second possible outcome would be a Pakatan victory. That would not mean that all our problems would magically disappear. Far from it! First, Pakatan leaders are only human; there would be a great temptation to regard their victory as a bountiful harvest. There are many more family disputes during such times! Expect a not-so-pretty grab for positions, and contentious issues like who would be Deputy Prime Minister and whether he (unlikely a she) would be a Malay or non-Malay. There would also be the jostling for key portfolios as with education, finance, and internal affairs. Those are to be expected.

The pettiness would challenge the wisdom and patience of Pakatan leaders. If they were to behave like kids at Hari Raya or Chinese New Year greedily grabbing duit rayas and ang pows, then their future and also that of the nation would indeed be gloomy. However, if they were to consider their victory not as Hari Raya but the beginning of Ramadan, meaning, a time to be tested, patient, and diligent, then their and our future would be bright.

More interesting is to imagine what would happen to UMNO in defeat. Those who joined the party not for the sake of the party and country but for their greed would quickly abandon it. Their flow of opium would be cut off. Meanwhile the new 2M team of Mahathir and Muhyuddin would be merciless on Najib. Erstwhile sleepy supporters of the equally soporific Abdullah Badawi would now be intent on exacting revenge on the two sides.

As ugly and embarrassing as that would be to Malays, it would bring only good to UMNO. The party would begin its slow and long overdue rehabilitation, back to it glorious past. Its members would now be limited only to those who truly love and are passionate about the organization and of Malays. The party might once again be the pride and love of our people and not as at present, an enabler for the corrupt and criminal.

There are two other much more meaningful consequences to an UMNO defeat. Consider that the corruption of Khir Toyo, former Chief Minister of Selangor, was only exposed with Pakatan winning the state. Had UMNO won in 2008, that slimy character would now still be its chief executive, with his greed and corrupt ways unabated. Because Pakatan won, he is now awaiting jail, pending appeal, for his corruption conviction. There are many Khir Toyos at the federal level; they could only be exposed with a Pakatan victory.

The second important consequence would be on members of the permanent establishment, from senior civil servants and heads of GLCs to sultans and professors. They would now realize that their careers are no longer dependent on their skills at sucking up to Barisan. They would be forced to examine themselves carefully and not be so politically partisan. The future of their careers would now depend on their dedication, diligence and professionalism, not their political skills and leanings. That could only be good for the country generally and its administration specifically.

Many, especially in UMNO, predict a vicious racial riot a la May 1969 with the party's defeat. I totally disagree. First, in 1969 the power shifted from Malays (UMNO) to Chinese (DAP). If UMNO were to lose in the coming election, power would still be in Malay hands except that those Malays would not be from UMNO. Second, our society is much more wise and mature now. The Chinese for example need not have to parade with their dragons to show off their might. A look around KL and Penang would be enough to reassure them and others. And if Malays were to run amok on the streets, those luxury bungalows and BMWs they would burn down might just belong to the likes of Khir Toyo and Abdullah Badawi!

In 1969 UMNO was still Malay, and Malays, UMNO. Today conditions have changed radically, as evidenced by the recent massive KL112 rally.

Extremists like Ibrahim the Frog could easily be taken care of. An offer of a directorship or two and trips to Macao would silence them. Alternatively, do not impede the anti-corruption agency. I am simply amused that Malay leaders from Mahathir to the academic Ramlah Adam would pin the hopes of our race to characters like Ibrahim the Frog.

For Malaysians, the greatest consequence to a Barisan defeat would be that we actually get to experience and benefit the meaning of free elections. That is, by merely putting an "X" in the appropriate box on the ballot paper, we could change our government. There is no need to riot or demonstrate on the streets. A Barisan defeat would effectively demonstrate the true meaning of checks and balances in a democracy.

The third and worst possible consequence would be if neither party were to win convincingly. We had a glimpse of that ugliness in Perak following the 2008 election. All, politicians from Barisan to Pakatan and members of the establishment from civil servants to the sultan, did not shine. Their behavior brought shame to the nation. They however, were oblivious of that.

Expect that, only worse, in Putrajaya. The behavior of these politicians would be more flagrant than those of the ladies of the evening. As odious as that would be, there would be some redeeming values. We would finally see those politicians for what they really are, worse than those prostitutes at Chow Kit Road. At least those ladies had the morality not to sell themselves so openly and in broad daylight.

The odiousness would so enrage many that able and honest citizens would now be encouraged if not compelled to offer themselves as candidates in the future. That can only be good! We would finally get to appreciate the awesome power of the ballot booth and that elections have consequences, prompting us to be more prudent the next time we vote. That is one invaluable lesson.

In short, the best outcome for Malaysia in GE 13 would be for Pakatan to win convincingly. Next would be for neither side to do so. The worst outcome would be for Barisan to be returned to power. Stated differently, a hung parliament would be a not-so-pretty Pakatan victory.

Next: Suaris Interview. The Future of Malays #5: You appear cynical towards things labeled "Islam." Many view you as not being enamored with "conservative Islam" as currently practiced by most Muslims and not with Islam itself. What's your comment?

Proton distorts market, bleeds Malaysians

Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:51 PM PST

The thrust of the turnaround plan is to boost Proton's image by ditching the idea that cheap is the way to go. Nothing is being said here about value for money and being competitive. Obviously, bringing in a German associate company not so long ago to help with quality control is not working either.

Joe Fernandez

It's interesting that former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad should reveal at this juncture, as Proton Advisor, that the privatized national car maker is putting the finishing touches to a turnaround plan. This man has an infinite capacity to continue spewing sheer nonsense in economics.

The forthcoming 13th General Election no doubt figures prominently in the so-called turnaround plan. The idea is designed to make the embattled Barisan Nasional Government and the national car concept suddenly look attractive.

If Proton has a genuine turnaround plan, it must mean that the market distorting parasitic vendors and suppliers a la Bumiputeraism will be phased out to open up the market to competition. This will never happen as this community continues to leech off the car owners unfortunate enough to own a Proton and need spare parts and service. Opportunities, the politics dictate, are to be hogged.

The turnaround plan must also mean that there will be greater diversity in its workforce. Again, it's a non-starter, given the politics of "creating and keeping the jobs for our community alone".

For another, turnaround must pledge that Proton will somehow conjure up a new series of engines and not through sheer magic. The engine, the core of what car-manufacturing is all about, is the national car maker's Achilles heel. It has no R&D facilities worth speaking about, no world-class engineers, and all this despite Government promises of continued financial and other support in this area.

This leaves the so-called national car maker dependent on continued hand-outs from the tax-payer despite having gone private and Government protection to ensure that its market share of 50 per cent along with Perodua doesn't shrink even further.

There's a limit to how much the Government can help protect Proton's market share. Foreign makes are likely to make further inroads into the domestic market, given their economies of scale and the newly-found tendency among Proton-allergic Malaysians to fork out ever-increasing amounts to get a foreign car model which will be worth their investment.

Mahathir thinks in a contradiction in terms that producing more expensive versions, as part of the turnaround plan, will help pull Proton through and put it on the road to viability and sustainability. This hare-brained approach based on a simplistic notion fails to take into account the fact that it was a combination of Government protection, infusion of tons of money from the tax-payer and Petronas, and cheap pricing that in the first place initially won it the lion's share of the domestic market. That market share is now in grave peril as it's set to shrink year by year.

The national car project, to rub salt into the wounds, does not enjoy the kind of economies of scale that has helped world number one Toyota for example to take the world by storm. It's said that no car manufacturer can be in the game for the long-haul unless production exceeds one million units a year, a new engine model is turned out every three years, and one has a share of the world export market.

This is where Proton completely falls apart on all counts.

Proton is congenitally incapable of raising production levels and even if could, it will not be able to sell the number unless the export market has no qualms about coming to the rescue of an uncompetitive and long outdated engine model.

Clearly, Proton thanks to Mahathir during his long innings in power has painted itself into a corner and there's no way out.

This is the end result of thinking like a communist – read Mahathir -- when it comes to economics and the market.

Communism has proven that the idea of a national anything is a non-starter and it's anybody's guess why Malaysia chose that path under Mahathir. Ignorance is bliss, a little knowledge is dangerous, and the politics of race obviously had a lot to do with it. The Proton idea appears to have been hatched by a jaguh kampung over a teh tarik at a mamak stall: "If Japan can produce cars, why can't we? etc etc . . . Malaysia Boleh!"

It's a certainty that the Proton idea would be killed in any change of Government in Putrajaya, and with good reasons. The future of the automobile industry is in India and China, a fact already recognised by global manufacturers in Japan, Korea and the West who are flocking to the two Asian giants. Proton cannot emulate the established car manufacturers to live and fight another day simply it has no standing whatsoever in the industry.

Hence, any new Government will be foolish to fork out even a sen to the ailing national car maker and this will suddenly make the future all the more dangerous for it.

If the carpet is pulled out from under the feet of vendors and suppliers, spares will suddenly dry up and car owners will ditch their vehicles in a panic. The bottom will fall out from the market. It's not clear to what extent the slack can be taken up by spares available from Japan and Taiwan.

Proton cannot continue to be an ego game at the expense of long-suffering Malaysians, especially car owners.

It was not so long ago that Proton started at the same time as Hyundai of Korea. Hyundai has gone on to achieve global recognition and ranking. Proton remains a manufacturer struggling still very much at the kampung level.

If there's one thing that has done Proton in, it's taking Mahathir's advice on car manufacturing when he's no subject matter expert. If Mahathir reads widely and everything, as his apologists claim, he should have realized this ages ago.

Joe Fernandez is a mature law student, among others, who loves to write. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.

We Need a new Huguan Siou

Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:47 PM PST

THE CURRENT issue arising from the so-called declaration of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as Huguan Siou has another angle to it that the people of Sabah need to be aware of. But first, I say there is NO need for Anwar or PKR to apologise to KDCA. In fact I really feel the KDCA and its president, the Huguan Siou, should instead apologise to the Kadazandusuns for failing to serve them.

Richard Libun Adou, former Vice President of KDCA

Jonathan Yasin and Datuk Wilfred Bumburing have now denied that Anwar was installed as Huguan Siou of Malaysia . But my purpose here is not to argue on that point. What I want to state is that there is a powerful reason why Anwar was declared, (oh, okay, given a sash that says) "Huguan Siou of Malaysia ."

The reason this happened is that the new generation of Kadazandusuns are hungry for real leadership because their original Huguan Siou, Tan Sri Joseph Pairin Kitingan, has become weak, ineffective and no longer acts as a fighter for the rights of the Kadazandusuns and Muruts (KDMs). To them, their Huguan Siou is a just a puppet with no teeth or courage to say and do what need to be said and done.

The title of "Huguan Siou," I think, was chosen by the PKR leaders of Paginatan because they wanted Anwar to be seen mainly as a new leader of the KDMs. They could have chosen another word for "paramount leader" but unfortunately, the Kadazandusun language doesn't have any other word for that has equal weight as "huguan siou."

Maybe it would have been a better decision to use a Malay title, like "Pahlawan Reformasi Malaysia" or something, but it would still be not as meaningful as "Huguan Siou" in the context of Sabah.

Unfortunately, this decision rattled a lot of people. They have forgotten that the words simply mean "paramount leader" or "highest leader." Is the name really sacred? Is the KDCA the only body who has the exclusive right to use the name which is in the KDCA's Kadazan Dusun Malay-English Dictionary?

What if another Kadazandusun association wants to give their president the same title? I believe in the old days each village in Penampang had its own huguan siou, so they were more than one huguan sious walking around in those days!

Whatever the arguments going on about this, one thing is clear: the new generation of KDMs are crying out for a new and dynamic leadership which is strong and courageous in fighting for their cause. They need something new which fits the needs of the KDMs in the new globalized world. They feel that Pairin has betrayed them by being on a political platform which to most of them is against their spirit for rights and dignity.

Many of them also feel that the Huguan Siou shouldn't be a politician, but someone who serves his people socially and culturally without any political affiliation. As it is Pairin is a Member of Parliament for Keningau, assemblyman for Tambunan and a deputy chief minister. With these responsibilities he has no more time to serve as Huguan Siou, or even as president of the KDCA.

And because of this the KDCA has become weak and inactive. It no longer works aggressively to pursue the objectives listed in its constitution. It is as if KDCA has lost its spirit because its Huguan Siou is no longer osiou (brave) enough to do and say the right things because it has become subservient to a greater master.

KDCA has become so quiet and lethargic, making noise only during the Pesta Kaamatan. A former deputy president of KDCA had prepared a strategic plan for KDCA to become more active and productive, but this was never implemented.

This is so unfortunate because the Kadazandusuns are having their vision confused and blurred in a very challenging time. At one time the association was at least producing a good number of books, but now this productivity has stopped. It needs to organize the young members to compliment their knowledge and skills, or at least boost their morale and spirit and be proud of KDCA and their Huguan Siou.

There is a need to groom them for leadership in their community. There is also a need for documentation works to record countless aspects of the cultural heritage which is fast disappearing, It cannot use the excuse that KDCA doesn't have the money because most activities, like producing CDs of traditional musical performance, need very little money, but such CDs can be sold to tourists for good income.

Also Pairin and Dr. Maximus Ongkili if they wanted it aggressively, can get government funding for many worthy causes, such as youth leadership seminars, or cottage industry courses. Sadly these are not done by KDCA or the Koisaan Co-operative because of a lack of dynamic and creative leadership.

In fact by now the Koisaan Co-operative should already have a franchise of KDM-owned minimarkets all over Sabah offering discount prices to KDMs. The immigrant people such as the Bugis and Pakistanis have their respective bodies to help their own people go into business but we the so-called proud natives are unable to do this.

Even the management of the Pesta Kaamatan at the Hongkod ground had overlooked the need to help our own people as proven by the mistake of charging extremely high rental for the stalls and canopies during the Pesta Kaamatan. The rent are so high that many sellers had to share stalls. This is against the spirit of helping our own people.

It will hurt the feelings of many KDMs when someone says the Paramount Leader may have become a No-amount Leader, but this is the reality of our fate as a people. We don't dare tell our leaders there need to step down no matter how ineffective he has become, thinking that such an advise would go against the sacred, or that it will cause ousung (cursed for going against an elder). But the truth is the concept of ousung is dragging us back into the stone age.

Gangnam style

Posted: 17 Feb 2013 12:25 PM PST

Young people may well enjoy watching Psy on YouTube — the music is infectious and the dance steps are great fun but that doesn't mean they'd select their leaders in the same way: entertainment is one thing, politics is another.

Political strategists have been very focused on how to win over Malaysia's all-important new voters. There are now more than five million young people aged 20-29, most of whom are first-time voters with no clear political loyalties.

Over the Chinese New Year in Penang, the prime minister made a stab at winning their support. Sharing a stage with the global YouTube sensation Psy of "Gangnam Style" fame, he sought to enhance his "coolness" and therefore his electability.

Firstly, it's worth mentioning that YouTube sensations like Psy are exactly that — momentary blips on the radar of celebrity. Bringing him into Malaysia to drum up support shows that Barisan Nasional is behind the curve in understanding this youthful demographic because these fads pass very, very quickly. They aren't anticipating or leading: they're just following.

Secondly, if Malaysia was a presidential-style democracy, such tactics might stand a chance.

However, we are not. For better or for worse, we've adopted the Westminster system: a system that requires strong political parties, solid constituency representation as well as an adept collective leadership.

Thirdly, the event with Psy also reveals the pitfalls of seeking to win over the younger voters by associating yourself with something "cool". Being "cool" isn't easy. Moreover, once you try too hard you're instantly the opposite of cool, something the PM experienced on that stage on Monday as he implored people to vote for Barisan.

Finally, there's also a major tactical error at work. Young people may well enjoy watching Psy on YouTube — the music is infectious and the dance steps are great fun but that doesn't mean they'd select their leaders in the same way: entertainment is one thing, politics is another.

For young Malaysians and especially those with degrees, the issues they're facing are very straight-forward. A cool PM is great but one who can solve sky-rocketing car prices, dismal starting salaries and the soaring price of housing would be truly rocking...

With this in mind, I've spent some time talking to some Malaysian graduates — especially those pouring out of the country's 20 public universities and 50 or so private institutions of higher learning.

For them, the job market is extremely challenging. A 2011 Graduate Tracking Index released by the Ministry of Higher Education in September 2012 revealed that at least 40,000 of these graduates were unemployed 12 months after they had completed their studies.

Johari (not his real name) is recent graduate from the International Islamic University (IIU) in Gombak, Kuala Lumpur. First mooted under the current Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim when he was in the administration, the IIU with its lavish suburban campus has become a leading tertiary educational institution, in part because the course-work is conducted in English.

Working at a non-profit, Johari earns a seemingly comfortable RM3,000 per month. However, as he explains his take-home pay is very quickly reduced to a far more modest amount:

"I'm every lucky that my parents live within commuting distance of the city. Friends from Terengganu or elsewhere have to fork out another RM400-500 on accommodation. Having said that, I spend about the same amount on my transport, leaving home every morning by 6.15am. More often than not, I only get back to the house by 10 or 11 at night."

Transport is a big chunk of Johari's monthly expenditure. He'd like to buy a car but he knows he can't afford to run it and more especially pay for parking in the city.

Separately, he resents Malaysia's inflated car prices — a legacy of the Mahathir era especially that of the national car project Proton.

"I go on the Internet and compare prices for cars in Malaysia with Thailand or elsewhere. We're paying so much more for the same models because of the duties!" In fact, he's read the criticisms of the Malaysian automotive policy from the up-and-coming opposition politician Rafizi Ramli.

Johari adds: "I'm not a political person but I have to agree with Rafizi's arguments."

However, Johari stresses that he does not necessarily agree with all of the opposition's populist rhetoric. For example, he rejects their more radical views on student loans dished out by PTPTN (National Higher Education Fund Corporation).

"I believe we should be responsible for paying for our own tertiary education. However, I would add that if we're good students and win better grades this should lessen our repayments." At the moment, he's accumulated some RM28,000 in student loans that he's paying off at the rate of RM100 per month. He acknowledges that he won't settle this debt until he reaches 40.

Housing is a further source of complaint and he says: "I don't know if I'll ever be able to afford a house in the Klang Valley. I imagine that I'll have to settle for a small flat somewhere. Saving enough money for a deposit will take a very long time and that's before we're even talking about marriage! As graduate I should be able to bring mas kahwin (dowry) of at least RM12-15,000. My last girlfriend was quite straightforward about her expectations. Status really matters."

Migrants in politics and the Borneo Xenophobia

Posted: 15 Feb 2013 05:37 PM PST

Logically, I would have assumed that as 25% of parliament was allocated to Sabah and Sarawak since 1963 to date, they would have increased the seats to 7% by the 2013 General Election. No other demographics have changed except the vast oil and gas potential of Sabah and Sarawak and of course the population size. So, you see, there really isn't any excuse to deny Sabah and Sarawak 35% of parliamentary seats in this country.

Nilakrisna James

Xenophobia is a morbid fear of foreigners. At the heart of Sabah and Sarawak lies a deep distrust of foreign people, foreign cultures and foreign intrusion. It has formed the backdrop of our policies and Federal-State relations the past half a century; a crippling phobia that may never end and which may mar the judgments of all present and future political representatives that we send to parliament. This will be the downfall of the Borneo states.

It is this deep distrust of foreigners that made us afraid of Malaya in the first place but when it came to the White People ("Orang Putih"), we treated them as rajahs or masters. Yet, one of the same colour and stock can never be our superior and to this day the descendants of head hunters and migrants refuse to bow to a brown authority.

These descendants will continue to demand autonomy and rights and a Borneo Agenda and some have gone as far as asking for a similar exit as Singapore, even going so far as thinking that our former colonial caretaker may still have pity for us and take our woes seriously.

FEDERAL AGENDA VS. BORNEO AGENDA

I was asked whether Malaysia is made up of three separate nations under one federation or a federation made up of 13 states. Good question but I ask humbly, what difference does it really make?

I stand by the premise that the Malaysia Agreement stands paramount as the document which binds this nation together and gives the country, known as Malaysia, legitimacy. In its paramount status, it can neither be revoked nor amended nor breached. In the Malaysia Agreement, four separate territories stood on equal grounds to agree to an amalgamation that respected the equality of these territories, neither one being less equal than the other. Britain was merely a signatory to release her obligations as caretaker. Singapore eventually exited. Three separate territories remain, with the United Nations clearly recognising that these three territories have gained independence from Britain, with two independent territories—Sabah and Sarawak—gaining their independence by joining Malaya, a country that had already gained its own independence six years earlier. The United Nations and the Commonwealth now recognise these three separate territories as one nation, which in 1963 agreed to call itself Malaysia. Sabah and Sarawak were officially "swallowed" into one nation and henceforth lost their separate and independent status as territories in their own right.

It is the Federal Constitution, which has been amended no less than 650 times, which makes Sabah and Sarawak merely "States" in the entire Federation. This officially and legally makes us two separate States out of 13 in the Federation; an arrangement agreed to by our forefathers; men who were clearly not in any position to argue otherwise. Herein lies your answer. We are a federation made up of 13 states, nothing more, nothing less, because the Malaysia Agreement allows us the freedom to determine our status via a Federal Constitution in accordance with the recommendations made in the Cobbold Report of 1962.

It is even more chilling to note that though the Borneo Agenda may have been a crucial part of the negotiation process in 1962, Appendix F of the Cobbold Report of 1962 reinforced the recommendation that the principle of a strong Central Government must never be prejudiced by the safeguards demanded by the Borneo territories and I quote directly from that Memorandum:-

"The Committee, of course, is of the opinion that whatever safeguards might be provided for the Borneo territories must conform with the expressed wish of the Borneo people themselves but that such arrangements should not prejudice the principle of a strong Central Government or curtail the fundamental liberties of the nationals of the Federation of Malaysia."

Therein lies the true motive of Malaya and the final scenario wherein the Federal Agenda must never be compromised or prejudiced by the Borneo Agenda. In this respect, we have deliberately drafted a Federal Constitution that would prioritise forever a situation that would be very much in line with Prime Minister Najib's 1 Malaysia concept. It hopes for unity on the premise that the rules of the Federal Government are complied with fully.

WAY FORWARD: INCREASE BORNEO PARLIAMENTARY SEATS

Of course, we could be romantic and start a process of wishful thinking and hope that the fragile nature of our Federal Constitution (which can be amended anytime) may one day create a scenario where a new Government could reverse that whole motive and bow to the demands of the Borneo States.

That will only happen if the Borneo States end up in a better bargaining position because West Malaysia remains so hopelessly divided that they have no choice but to look towards Borneo for extra political leverage. We can't always bank on West Malaysian disunity though. At some point, West Malaysian leaders will tire of our Borneo demands and will learn to bridge their own divides to keep Borneo MPs under control. Politics isn't about holding your peers and opponents to ransom. It is about negotiating your values for the greater good.

I asked what difference this all makes because ultimately the only way our fate in Borneo will take a turn for the better is if we increased our parliamentary representation significantly so as to be able to actually make a difference in policies and at least protect further erosion of Borneo's interests through unfair legislation. We need AT LEAST 35% of MPs to come from Sabah and Sarawak who could en bloc (it is hoped) exercise their power of veto and at least think in one mind when it comes to Borneo's interests.

The current situation is this: 222 seats in parliament; 56 for Borneo (25%) and 166 for West Malaysia (75%). The total number of MPs from Sabah and Sarawak do not even make up 35% of parliament to allow us the right to veto a Bill or an Act of Parliament, even if such legislation to be passed were to the detriment of the two Borneo states. Even if we were granted 35% representation, our Borneo MPs are so deeply fragmented between political parties whose interests and loyalties are so fundamentally rooted in the Federal Agenda that it still ends up being a far-fetched dream. But it would be the first step forward.

The Cobbold Report 1962 suggested that the number of MPs from Sabah and Sarawak, respectively, must be determined by taking into account the population, size and potentialities of the two States.

In 1963, the population of Malaysia was 8.9 million. 13% lived in the Borneo States: 5% lived in Sabah and 8% lived in Sarawak.

In 2010, the population of Malaysia was 28.2 million. 20% lived in the Borneo States: 11% lived in Sabah and 9% lived in Sarawak.

60% of the total land area of Malaysia is in Sabah and Sarawak but only 20% of the population live in Malaysia's Borneo States, an increase of 7% in population since 1963.

So, you see, there really isn't any excuse to deny Sabah and Sarawak 35% of parliamentary seats in this country.

WILL THE BORNEO STATES SEEK INDEPENDENCE?

I read it now often in various blogs and am often questioned by so many different people, who are so sick of the political situation and lack of prospects for their families in this country, if there is a way out of Malaysia.

There was a time when nobody dared to raise this issue for fear of being thrown into indefinite detention without a fair trial under the Internal Security Act. Lately though, people have become bold, more vocal and more willing to risk their freedom to find a solution because nearly all the people who ask me this question want to migrate to another country but simply cannot afford it. So, when left in a rut without choices, these people feel angry, frustrated and dissatisfied. The majority turn their anger towards new migrants who threaten their political legitimacy and, probably, may also be doing better financially, but quite a sizeable few are now taking their anger onto the streets, the NGOs and political parties, and they will vent this anger towards the ruling government of the day.

The thought of Sabah and Sarawak being on their own in the hands of present leaders who are also accused of corruption and wrong-doing quite frankly scares me more than an annoying Malaysian environment. Within seconds of freedom, they would be at each other's throats trying to be the next Sultan!

In any event, even if these angry people took their case to the International Courts, the United Nations and the Commonwealth, the demands for independence would require the mandate of the majority of the residents of Sabah and Sarawak by way of a State Government led referendum.

This scenario may not be entirely impossible but is highly unlikely to succeed given the fact that the majority of the people of Sabah and Sarawak consider themselves to be secure, financially stable and relatively at peace in the system that Malaysia has built for them the past 50 years.

We can be frustrated with the political chaos in this country but level headed people would understand that this is a natural evolutionary process in politics when a civilised bipartite system begins to form and not necessarily a situation that would justify an exit from a country they have grown to love.

By nature, Sabah and Sarawak people are unwilling to challenge the status quo they have grown accustomed to since 1963 and though our native forefathers may have willingly chopped people's heads off, our natural instinct is to be a migrant like our ancestors and run away from revolutions and wars by jumping on the next boat out to sea. Ultimately, we just want to live a settled and prosperous life. We are no different to the aliens.

In addition to this, the voices of those who are angry are moderated by the voices of new migrants who have happily settled down in the Borneo States. In Sabah, at least, the new migrants are now apparently in the majority and they will not be voting in favour of an exit from Malaysia.

We are angry because it is alleged that these new migrants came through illegitimate channels in droves for a more sinister political reason aimed at neutering our local political voice. We can afford to be angry when these methods are illegal.

So, in recent months, we have attempted to challenge their legitimacy in the Royal Commission of Inquiry, yet I frankly believe that even if their status is confirmed to be illegal, the Government would take years and millions of tax payers' money to resolve this situation. Their status as new migrants would probably not be resolved in time for the next General Election.

And while we continue to complain and bicker and blame these new migrants, the Federal and State Governments would have amicably found a proper way to streamline and legitimise migration into Sabah and Sarawak for more people to settle permanently in the Borneo States. In the long run, new migrants will outnumber old migrants and they will have a legitimate reason to cast their votes in future general elections.

Our best option in Sabah and Sarawak is to accommodate old and new migrants, legal or illegal, and increase the population and power bargaining status of our two States so as to eventually demand a reasonable increase in our parliamentary seats and our Federal budget. With so many mouths to feed in Sabah and Sarawak we could finally justify a bigger annual budget.

Many natives would not want to be drowned by the political voices of groups from Indonesia or the Philippines but the reality is that as our borders worldwide become more porous, humans will move and migrate between various nations to seek a better life, more economic opportunities and better infrastructure.

People only form political parties in this country when they feel their racial groups need representation or when they feel disenfranchised. So the more we reject new migrant groups and insult their very existence or their religion the more likely they are to retaliate and create descendants who are more than willing to form their own vocal NGOS and political groupings. By then the native population would have been reduced even further so as to render us completely irrelevant. This ultimately is where the real danger lies when it comes to native xenophobia in Borneo.

The future of Sabah and Sarawak lies in peaceful co-existence with migrants. By treating them as stray animals we deny our own humanity and risk our own future legitimacy.

If we therefore continue to see ourselves as being separate from the rest of Malaysia by drawing upon our racial divide, we run the risk of self-extinction. If we absorb new migrants as one of us, we become a stronger political force and can continue to exercise certain controls and demands even if the Borneo Agenda ceases to be relevant.

THE END OF RACIAL POLITICS AND A NEW MALAYSIA

With these realities, Sabah and Sarawak will remain in Malaysia and the racial demographics will change in the next 50 years as racial groups continue to inter-marry as a matter of economic and political survival.

The new racial demographics will break down political barriers and eventually lead to a more acceptable form of civilised politics that can transcend beyond race and religion.

One day only two parties will be acceptable to the Malaysian people who see themselves first as Malaysians, race as second. Those parties will have no necessity for component race based parties and will have no place for racism. They will be multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-ethnic and above all, progressive and issue-based. If mosquito parties should exist, they, too, will be issue-based to represent policies which perhaps the two main parties are unwilling to resolve or discuss. By then political racism will be passé, illegal and completely unacceptable.

If we continue with racial polarisation and refuse to react to the pulse on the ground and pacify the budding seeds of discontent, this country will descend into anarchy and revolution. Everything we have worked so hard to achieve will be demolished within a decade. It is this fear that has driven millions of Malaysian talents to seek their fortunes overseas and, ironically, it would be Malaysians who end up roaming the planet as new migrants.

This country will one day grow up and embrace the reality of happy citizens who were all once of migrant stock; of white, of black, of brown, of bloods that bear one colour: Red. We will eventually also honour the reality of their dual love and dual citizenship for their country of origin and their country of adoption.

Until such time as we have leaders of integrity and worth, the road continues to be a rocky one.

"Remember, remember always, that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants and revolutionists." –Franklin D. Roosevelt

Nilakrisna James is a Sabah-based lawyer, writer and activist who co-founded the apolitical NGO United Borneo Front (UBF) in 2010. She left the group in 2011 and remains a member of the ruling Barisan Nasional.

Mahathir enters fray as Malaysia braces for poll

Posted: 15 Feb 2013 09:32 AM PST

"Cheating and fraud could be the deciding factor" ... opposition activist Ambiga Sreenevasan.

Lindsay Murdoch, Brisbane Times

As Malaysia approaches its tightest election in half a century, the opposition activist Ambiga Sreenevasan has shrugged off calls for her to be stripped of her Malaysian citizenship.

''This will be the dirtiest election ever because it is the most closely fought … Cheating and fraud could be the deciding factor,'' Ms Ambiga, who heads Bersih, a group campaigning for free and fair polling, said.

This will be the dirtiest election ever because it is the most closely fought.

''There are many discrepancies appearing on electoral rolls, particularly with the sudden registering of foreigners, many of whom appear to be migrant workers.

''The mainstream media is far from free and fair … [The ruling parties] are doing everything they can to stay in power.''

Mahathir Mohamad, the former prime minister who ruled for 22 years, last week called for Ms Ambiga to be stripped of her citizenship.

Ms Ambiga said she and her family had lived in Malaysia for generations and she would leave it to others to judge whether Dr Mahathir - who broke a promise to stay out of politics when he left office in 2002 - was playing race politics in a country where ethnic Malays made up about 65 per cent of the population of 28 million. Ethnic Chinese account for another 25 per cent and ethnic Indians 8 per cent.

Opinion polls show the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition has lost much of the support of the Chinese, who have been alienated by corruption and policies favouring ethnic Malays, leaving the coalition heavily reliant on Malay votes to stay in power.

Ms Ambiga said voters had become empowered through the internet and social media and were no longer prepared to accept corruption.

''There is also for the first time a strong opposition which has brought out the scandals … I can sense the momentum is picking up,'' said Ms Ambiga, whose organisation has brought tens of thousands of people onto the streets to rally for free elections.

With only a few weeks remaining before the Prime Minister, Najib Razak, must call an election, religious tensions are also flaring over a call by an independent Muslim MP for the mass burning of Bibles which use the word ''Allah'' to refer to God.

Lim Guan Eng, the chief minister of the opposition-ruled island of Penang, put police on alert after a note was found at a church promising a Bible-burning ''festival'' this weekend. ''Let's teach 'em a lesson,'' the note read.

Financial markets are jittery over the political uncertainty in a country where the BN has never lost an election since independence from Britain in 1957.

At the last election in 2008, the BN lost its two-thirds majority as well as five out of 12 contested state governments.

Mr Najib, who became Prime Minister in 2009, has abolished repressive national security laws and hopes Malaysia's strong economic performance and handouts to poorer Malaysians will shore up his support.

In a bid to placate Malay voters, he has also softened an earlier pledge to replace a 40-year-old affirmative action policy that favours Malays with a ''new economic model''.

In one poll released in January, Mr Najib was only one percentage point ahead of the charismatic Anwar Ibrahim, a former deputy prime minister who heads the multi-ethnic opposition alliance Pakatan Rakyat (People's Pact).

An opposition rally drew close to 100,000 people in Kuala Lumpur on January 12, one of the country's largest-ever shows of political strength.

More than 3 million new voters have registered since the last election, deepening uncertainty about the result.

Analysts say many of them are young voters who are likely to be more open to change.

Gangnam twist for Malaysian elections

Posted: 15 Feb 2013 09:28 AM PST

The episode shows that while the ruling BN coalition has vast human, financial and media resources at its disposal for the upcoming election campaign, social networking tools continue to expose government gaffes and blunders, magnifying and slanting them to audiences several times larger than spectators at the original event.

Anil Netto, Asia Times Online

PENANG - As a pivotal general election looms in Malaysia, online social media tools are playing a prominent role in challenging the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition's overwhelming dominance of traditional print and broadcast media.

Election campaigning took a Gangnam Style-twist on February 11 when popular South Korean musician Psy staged a live concert in Penang. BN Politicians who hoped to gain a popular boost from the global singing and dancing sensation, however, lost more face than they gained, underscoring the growing power of social media to influence public opinion.

Seeking favor with youth and ethnic Chinese voters, the BN coalition invited Psy to perform during Lunar New Year celebrations held in Penang. The concert was strategically held at the Han Chiang College, the same venue where the opposition Democratic Action Party held a mass rally just days before sweeping to power in the state at the 2008 general election.

Federal level BN politicians likely thought they had pulled off a local electoral coup by securing Psy's presence at a free open house event organized by the Malaysian Chinese Association, a BN component party. Both the open house celebration and PSY's performance were advertised widely on BN-aligned television stations and newspapers. Elections must be held by June but have not yet been officially called.

However, a series of blunders spread over social media arguably turned the event into a public relations disaster for the BN. Critical bloggers were quick to note that the Gangnam Style dance is actually a parody of the high-flying ways of the wealthy elite in Seoul's Gangnam district, similar to the extravagant lifestyles many BN politicians are known to lead.

Fans in Malaysia pleaded on Psy's Facebook page for him to snub the event to avoid being used by the BN as a political tool. Questions were quickly raised about whether public funds were used to bankroll the performance, though the private company that managed the event later said it was neither engaged nor paid by the government.

On the night before the event, thousands of flags bearing the logo "1Malaysia" - Prime Minister's Najib Razak's slogan in promotion of national unity in the ethnically divided country - were put up on roadsides around Penang in a clear attempt to associate Najib with Psy's highly anticipated performance.

On the morning of the actual performance, Najib himself took to the stage at the concert, asking the crowd repeatedly, "Are you ready for Psy?" Each time, the crowd of about 40,000 in the sweltering heat roared back, "yes".

Najib followed up by asking the crowd, "Are you ready for BN?" Video clips of the beck and call showed clearly that the "no's" overwhelmed the "yes's" to the question. Najib asked twice more and each time the "no's" grew louder. Within 24 hours, different copies of the one minute video-clip of the rebuff had gone viral on Youtube with over half a million collective views.

BN leaders tried to downplay the incident, including in affiliated newspaper coverage that portrayed the concert as a blow to the political opposition. "Not everyone present had yelled 'no'. We have video records showing a large segment of the audience had yelled 'yes' when the prime minister asked that question several times," a Penang BN leader was reported as saying.

More red faces emerged when invitations to Psy to join in the tossing of the 'yee sang', the Lunar New Year salad, with BN leaders including Najib on stage went unheeded. Despite repeated several loud calls by the event's emcees for the Gangnam Stylestar to return to the stage to join BN politicians, Psy failed to appear.

To many observers, Psy had partially heeded the call of his fans not to be used as a political tool ahead of what are expected to be hotly contested general elections. A video-clip of Psy's no-show on stage has since been released on Youtube and received 100,000 views in two days.

Read more at:

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Rabu, 20 Februari 2013

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan