Stop Najib and Anwar from playing political games at our expense

June 16, 2013

MY COMMENT: It is time to tell both Najib and Anwar straight to their faces that they should not treat all of us as a bunch of  idiots. I am glad that CT Ali has taken on the task of delivering the first salvo to these politicians.

Najib should perform his duties as Prime Minister and not be distracted by party politics ahead of the forthcoming UMNO General Assembly. Anwar Ibrahim in turn should behave like a Leader of the Opposition in our Parliament, no longer the agitator he was in his days at the University of Malaya. He should show us that he has it in him to be an effective Opposition Leader. We need ideas and proposals for getting our country out of the post election mess as soon as possible.

So let us pressure both sides of our political divide–Ministers and Parliamentarians– to deliver results, not more crap and politics. We need to stop corruption, want stability for business to invest so that we can have jobs for our citizens who are entering the labour market, and we expect solid development for the future of our country.–Din Merican

by CT Ali @http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

“…the political leaders we now have are not honourable men. They are not men upon whom we can stake our future and the future of our country.They are not men who will do what we need most for our country – to restore political accountability and social justice.”-CT Ali

Rightly or wrongly too many of us think of wealth as a sign of greatness. And money is the root of all evil – even more so in politics.In as long as that view prevails, our political leaders will have problems of morality because the political leaders we now have are not honourable men.

They are not men upon whom we can stake our future  and the future of our country.They are not men who will do what we need most for our country – to restore political accountability and social justice.

It is one thing to tell a white lie to gain an immediate or temporary political advantage over your opponent and for the most part the public can understand and possibly forgive this transgression.

But we are less likely to forgive a hypocrite. These are leaders who deceived and made deliberate efforts to continue to deceive the public over a lengthy period of time to gain political advantage.

In other words they take the public for a fool. Inevitably when truth prevails and these leaders are exposed for their wrongdoings, the public will react with contempt and disgust and forgiveness will not be possible.

Both Najib Tun Razak and Anwar Ibrahim have done this many times in their political life and the public has had enough of their duplicity.If we cannot believe in the honesty of our leaders than how can we allow them to lead us?

The turmoil our country is now in is because our people do not see the leaders that they want in either Najib or Anwar. Their political past reeks of duplicity, deceit and a denial to do what they themselves have promised their electorates they will do – good governance, openness and accountability while in public office.

The political realities after the 13th general election promises nothing more than continued turmoil that has allowed the Opposition to question the legitimacy of the electoral process.

The Opposition has chosen to do this not in a measured and structured manner. It has chosen instead to take its grievances to the people via its rallies on the premise that public opinion is the highest court in the land.And so the stage is set for the massive June 22 rally.

The self-serving belief

As far as I am concerned, Najib and Anwar can play at their selfish games but do it in their own time. Our country, our people, our future must take precedence before their personal mind games. For every action that they now take, they must ask themselves what their motives are.

The people are counting on the two of them to ensure that they are able to take care of their family, the community and country’s needs and will hold them accountable for their sins of commission and omission.

Unfortunately our leaders lost their moral compasses many years ago. They have not made enough effort to develop their moral and ethical compass to face True North! True North requires them to see themselves not as heroes but as servants of the people they lead.

For Najib and Anwar, power and prestige are the obvious attractions and yet they fool themselves into believing that they are serving something bigger than themselves – the people, King and country – not forgetting religion. And they have the audacity to believe that the people, King and country cannot do without them.

This self-serving belief drives them to keep going no matter what, and this will eventually lead to them breaching ethical and moral standards by which they have once held themselves accountable to.

The highs and the peaks of holding political power intoxicate them and they lose touch with reality – and the people around them learn not to confront them with reality.

In the lead up to the 13th general election, Anwar had convinced himself that he will win the general election. When he lost he could not accept the reality and so he continues to seek ways and means to secure that elusive win.

It is time Anwar confronted the fact that he has lost the election – however painful the reality is – before everything gets out of balance, and he will lose not only the respect of the Malaysian public but also his position within the Pakatan Rakyat coalition as its leader.

Where is Najib now taking us and our country to? It cannot be denied that there has been many irregularities and fraud in the election process, aided and abated by a compliant Election Commission.

The question now is this – if Najib and BN are already involved in these fraudulent activities to win the election, how will they now conduct themselves when in government? Can we trust them?

If a pact existed between Najib and Anwar – brokered by the former Indonesian Vice-President Jusuf Kalla to accept the results of the election whichever way it went – then our question has to be “why was a pact needed in the first place?” And why was this pact not made known to the public?

The long goodbye

All this and more boils down to moral leadership or the lack of it.You cannot abandon all those promises of open, accountable and good governance that you have both previously elevated to lofty prominence simply because it is no longer convenient for you to do so.

What separates good men, good leaders are the morals by which they live their life. Hubris and isolation from the real world is no excuse.

For Najib and Anwar, the long goodbye has started. Najib will have another five years to make good the promises he made to the people of Malaysia to gain him that five years. Anwar has the task of seeing that Najib does make good those promises. But more critical, Anwar has to make ready the next echelon of Pakatan leaders who will once again give the people of Malaysia a viable alternative.

CT Ali is a reformist who believes in Pakatan Rakyat’s ideologies. He is a FMT columnist.

UMNO is without a Strong and Focused Leader

June 10, 2013

MY COMMENT: I can understand where Zaid is coming from and share his views about the leadership deficit in our country. The strongest and most dominant party, UMNO is in a dizzy state because Najib is not the leader who can bring the fractious party together and give our country a clear sense of direction it needs to prosper in an increasingly competitive global environment. He drifts like the lalang (the weed) at the mercy of the political winds.

With Najib in charge and with no one willing to challenge him in the forthcoming UMNO elections, our country will remain divisive and moribund. All the talk about transformation remains a figment of Najib’s imagination, with due respects to his hardworking salesman, Minister Idris Jala.

The Prime Minister flip flops on every issue connected with 1Malaysia and his Economic Transformation Programme. For example, his so-called New Economic Model was stillborn because he could not stand up against the conservative elements of his party. His courtship of PERKASA and shameless pandering to party warlords make a mockery of his 1Malaysia. He has also failed to fight rampant corruption and manage our debt ridden economy.

In his speech, Zaid gives Tun Mahathir high marks for his strong leadership of UMNO, Barisan Nasional, and our country. The Tun never claimed to be a democrat. He is someone who is tough and decisive when it comes to defending our national interest, especially   the plight of Malays. As Zaid says, “he had a long history of protecting Malay interests without talking too much about it”.

I am also intrigued by his comments about Anwar Ibrahim, de facto PKR leader and Opposition leader. He expresses a view about him that I share and that is, to quote him,

“On the side of the Opposition, I can only say that I am somewhat disappointed by the attitude shown by the Opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim. His combative and uncompromising attitude in not wanting to accept the result of the general election is regrettable. We are all disappointed with the result, but the right thing to do is to continue seeking peaceful means on how the shortcomings of the electoral process can be overcome…He may indeed be a good orator and popular with the people, but what he needs to show is his Parliamentary prowess. We still need to see more of his abilities in policy deliberations and offering specific policy initiatives.”

The question before us is rather straightforward. How do deal with this serious leadership deficit in our country? There is not much we can do about it in the short term since Malaysian politics is not attractive to our new generation.

As far as UMNO is concerned, the decision must rest with its membership body, especially the delegates to the UMNO General Assembly. But it is good to remind them that their choice of the next leader, if it comes to that, will determine the fate of our country. UMNO cannot fail as too much is at stake for stability, and national unity.–Din Merican

by Zaid Ibrahim*

After the most closely contested general election in our history, many of you probably want to know what will happen next. What do the results of GE13 mean for Malaysian politics, and for us? It’s a big question to tackle over lunch, so I have decided to address it from a limited perspective, and that is: what kind of leadership is in store for us after this past election?Since I am no longer involved in politics, some will say I am not the best person to answer this question. However, my being away from the front line of politics actually helps me to see things more clearly and objectively than a party member. I have no allegiances to service, no agenda to serve. What I say is based purely on what I see and understand about the inner workings of these political parties within the context of the larger political landscape.Najib is weak , UMNO and Country suffer

Four years ago in my speech at this same hotel, I said that Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak was not a suitable man to succeed Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. With such deep-seated problems of corruption, intensified by distrust amongst the different races, coupled with the glaring weakness of the Police force to address the question of security and the deaths in Police custody, I believe that the country needs a strong leader.

Since the election, we are further faced with the terrible truth about the inefficiency and partisan behaviour of our own Election Commission, the irresponsible and provocative behaviour of UMNO’s media apparatus in maligning those they felt had not supported Barisan Nasional, the spate of arrests and charges against students and political leaders – all these matters have contributed to the present state of helplessness and anger amongst the people. Will the Prime Minister tackle these issues head on?

UMNO cannot function when its leader is weak, and neither can the country. The many years of indoctrination, including the inculcation of fear of threats from other ethnic communities, require that UMNO have a strong leader. This leader is someone who doesn’t fear his own family or the UMNO warlords, and who can employ the strength of his convictions and intellect to push his economic and social agenda successfully.

Mahathir is a strong and decisive leader

More importantly, UMNO requires a leader who at heart is someone who will not let the Malay community down. He is someone the Malays can have implicit trust to take care of them. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is a classic example of a strong UMNO leader. He committed some errors during his years as Prime Minister and gave a number of projects to his non-Malay friends, but the UMNO Malays trusted him to always take care of their interests. He had a long history of protecting Malay interests without talking too much about it.

Although lately he was rather harsh on the Chinese community for rejecting the BN and making the most unfortunate remarks in his blog, he was never like that when he was the Prime Minister. In fact, the Chinese community was always supportive of BN under him. He was a strong Malay leader who was acceptable to most non-Malays.

Perhaps that’s why he was strong enough to replace the NEP in 1990 with the National Development Policy, and was also able to come up with Vision 2020, which articulated a future in which Malaysians of all races could live together in harmony in a developed Malaysia. That’s why he was strong enough to get the school children to learn English through science and mathematics. There was no Utusan to mock or attack him and his policies, and there was no backlash from UMNO businessmen because he had the foresight to distribute the country’s largesse fairly.

During his tenure, there was never the kind of racial incitement or extreme posturing amongst the races. Relations between the Chinese and the Malays were good except for a brief moment during Operasi Lalang in 1987. He was able to do what others could not. That’s why he was able to sign a historic peace deal with the Communists. If he was the Prime Minister today, Chin Peng would have been allowed back home. Dr Mahathir would have honoured the agreement and Utusan and the ultra Malays would not have bothered him. That’s what a strong UMNO leader is capable of.

I am prepared to revise my opinion about the current Prime Minister if he would address the three main issues facing this country.  One, he has to stop racial polarization by making a clear and unequivocal stand on the matter. He must show he is able to control Utusan Melayu from further provoking the Chinese community.

Second, he has to address the endemic corruption and abuse of power in the country, with particular emphasis in revamping the entire Police force. Third, he has to work on a race relations legislation so that we can have better race relations; where there is no place for “hate politics” between the ethnic groups in the country and thus save this country from turmoil. These are big steps to take but that’s what a leader is for.

At this point in time, Najib does not fit into this frame of what is being described as “strong leader” at all. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He is cosmopolitan and lives the life as that of the rich and famous. I would imagine he is the type that relishes being flown by private jet, say to watch the sunrise in Sydney before jumping on the same jet to fly to New York to see another sunrise for the New Year! He is not perturbed by his family’s spending sprees, even though many Malaysians are still languishing in the low-income bracket. He has never been a natural leader known for his beliefs and convictions.

That’s why his so-called reforms and transformation plans seem so dangerous to UMNO Malays. He has no history of doing enough for them and so they are worried his transformation plans would  be to their detriment.

As I have said, Dr Mahathir might have been described as an ultra but in my opinion, he was fair to the other races; which is why the non-Malays had supported Barisan Nasional when he was Prime Minister. He had strong convictions and would not waver in the face of objections; and this gave the people comfort. He would not have the government fund movies such as Tanda Putera or a television series for the novel, Interlok.

During his tenure, you would not hear of Utusan regularly attacking the non-Malays as they do now. That can only be explained in this way: the UMNO Malays were assured that Dr Mahathir would always take care of them, despite being generous with the non-Malay towkays.

The question then is: can Najib convince the Malays that he will never ditch them for the sake of his so-called reforms and transformation plans. You see, only a strong and trusted UMNO leader can espouse and implement real and much-needed reforms or transformations.  Similarly, any rapprochement or reconciliation amongst the races can only be facilitated by a strong leader. If carried out haphazardly by a weak leader, then it will be seen as selling out and will inevitably fail.

Is there anyone who would mount a challenge to Najib? Insiders say that Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin would prefer to wait for the durian to fall without having to shake the tree. It’s also true that waging an UMNO contest entails spending a lot of money, and having spent so much already during the General Election, not many supporters have the appetite to submit to another round of “donations.” Some of the big donors who are usually prevailed upon to supply election war chests are strapped for cash. Even if they are inclined to support the challenger, they remain wary of Najib. The Prime Minister can easily make the call to the banks and these industrialists would be exposed to some serious recall of their loans.

If Najib can display strong leadership by tackling current problems with determination, perhaps he may be the preferred choice of UMNO delegates. And by the definition of “strong”, it does not mean threatening words or unleashing the keris, but one where the people of all races can be assured that he would stand by them in any circumstances.

So perhaps the challenge may not come after all or it may come from someone who is a proxy. We all remember that the same tactic was used against former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn when someone lower down the ranks, namely Sulaiman  Palestine, was put up as a challenger. He did well enough to embarrass Tun Hussein Onn, who then later resigned. This may well be the scenario that we will see unfolding come this year’s UMNO elections.

Anwar Ibrahim’s Uncompromising Attitude regrettable

On the side of the Opposition, I can only say that I am somewhat disappointed by the attitude shown by the Opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim. His combative and uncompromising attitude in not wanting to accept the result of the general election is regrettable. We are all disappointed with the result, but the right thing to do is to continue seeking peaceful means on how the shortcomings of the electoral process can be overcome.

His reluctance to talk about specific proposals on what should be done to improve the Election Commission whether by Parliament or the government is telling. This is in contrast, say with Lim Kit Siang, who mooted several options on how the Election Commission should be structured.

Recently, Anwar’s unwillingness to submit questions to Parliament certainly reflects badly on Pakatan Rakyat as the Opposition leader; as if he wishes to boycott the entire Parliamentary process completely. He may indeed be a good orator and popular with the people, but what he needs to show is his Parliamentary prowess. We still need to see more of his abilities in policy deliberations and offering specific policy initiatives.

What will all of this mean for the country? A strong leader is what the country needs from whichever side he comes from. He will be able to better control the excesses in the country’s politics (including his own party), which means incidents of harassing the other side – be it the Opposition or Government– will be reduced.

Unnecessary arrests by the Police for sedition or that of making racial threats through the party organs or newspapers will lessen. Such a leader, having been selected by the grassroots of the party, will face less pressure to behave as if he is the champion of one particular group since he is more assured of his position. The stability and unity factors will be harnessed and the national focus will go towards implementing good policies for the country.

For now, I believe a strong leader in UMNO will go a long way towards bringing stability to the country. I repeat, by “strong”, it does not mean ruthlessness and having no regard for the law. Being “nationalistic” towards your own ethnic group does not mean you have to antagonize, discriminate and hinder the progress of other communities.  “Strong” means you are clear in your mind as to the boundary of where and how all ethnic groups must conduct themselves towards one another.

Any effort towards genuine national reconciliation and taking steps to improve racial harmony can only happen when UMNO has a leader who is assured of himself, as well as that of his position.

On the other hand, those who are unsure of themselves or of their position in the party will pull all sorts of tricks to camouflage their weaknesses. In doing so, they will attack the Opposition, jail their opponents and do whatever they believe is necessary to show how “strong” they are. Equally, the Opposition camp must also play its part not to unnecessarily aggravate the schism, which can lead to the rupture of our social fabric and harmony. Responsible leadership is thus required from both sides.

Malaysia is facing the most difficult moment in its history. To allow the problems to continue unattended is most irresponsible. It is so urgent we find a suitable leader to lead us. Whether it be Najib or Muhyiddin or someone else, the people will expect nothing less than real leadership from that individual.

Speech at the Rotary Club of Pudu at Shangri-La Hotel, Kuala Lumpur on  June 

Anwar Ibrahim mulls boycott of 13th Parliament Opening Session

June 7, 2013

MY COMMENT: When will all the post-election politics end so that we can begin the business of government? Lim Kit Siang is right when he was reported to have said that DAP will not boycott the opening of the 13th Parliament.Kudos to him.

Elected representatives must be sworn in as soon as possible. All questions which each representative is required to submit to the government must be sent so that written answers can be prepared and presented to Dewan Rakyat. This is in my view the first duty of a Member of Parliament.

Anwar represents his Permatang Puah constituents in this august house. The Leader of the Opposition (I assume that the DAP which won the highest number of seats in the last election has agreed to Anwar remaining in that post) should set the example. If he wants to be considered as being the opposite number to the Prime Minister in Parliament, then he must act accordingly.

Most of us are not satisfied with the outcome of the elections because of alleged fraud and other irregularities, but our government and Parliament must function. It takes the government and the Opposition to work together if the deep divisions in our country are to be mended. National reconciliation requires cooperation. Nitpicking won’t do.–Din Merican

by Terence Netto@www.malaysiakini.com

Pakatan Rakyat supremo Anwar Ibrahim is mulling the issue of a probable boycott of the opening session of the 13th Parliament to back widespread suspicions over the legitimacy of the May 5 general election and has refused to submit parliamentary questions.

The deadline for the submission of questions for ministerial replies in the session that opens on June 24 passed on Wednesday.

Permatang Pauh MP Anwar did not submit any questions – a matter that is certain to come in for criticism by detractors from across the aisle.

“Politics is also a matter of perception and the widespread perception is that GE13 was tainted by fraud broad enough for us to mull the option of whether to boycott the opening session,” said Anwar, who is likely to be proposed as parliamentary Opposition Leader despite his party, PKR, trailing coalition partner DAP in the seats tally.

The role traditionally goes to the leader of the party that gains the most seats among the Opposition. DAP garnered 38 federal seats to PKR’s 30 at the May 5 polls. PAS, the third partner in the Pakatan triad, secured 21 seats.

Two-week deadline too long

Anwar said his non-submission of questions was also prompted by a desire to protest the two-week deadline of acceptance of questions for ministerial reply which he described as “unwarrantedly long.”

“You have a three-workday deadline for submission in legislatures around the world. The British Parliament has it and so do several others,” he remarked.

“Two weeks is too long a deadline for a matter of this nature. Political developments spurt and twist such that you frame a question on an issue today, it is rendered obsolete by ongoing events by the time it is answered more than two weeks down the road. Wasn’t it Harold Wilson who remarked a week is a long time in politics? What more two weeks!” mused Anwar.

Former British Prime Minister Harold Wilson is famed for the bon mot – “A week is a long time in politics” – which famously encapsulated the futility of prognostication on a medium as fluid as politics.

Before the opening session of the 12th Parliament in April 2008, several newly elected PKR legislators were caught flat-footed by their failure to submit questions by the two-week deadline before Parliament opened.

The failure was attributable to their status as neophytes learning the ropes rather than in the case of Anwar who is a veteran legislator of three – albeit interrupted – decades’ standing.

GE-13: Shifting Balance of Power requires Cooperation in Governance

May 31, 2013

by CT Ali@http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

After half a century of greed, will UMNO now lead or will the need for greed overcome all other considerations? UMNO feeds the greed of its political elites for wealth and political power, and it’s political dominance allows little accountability for the things they do.

What UMNO takes for themselves from the wealth and resources of our country, how they lie and manipulate our people to believe that what they do is in the interest of our common good when it is certainly not, and how they “manage” the opposition and any “national threat” are nothing out of the ordinary for UMNO.

Corruption, money politics, unlawful detention – all the evils of a repressive regime that does not allow social justice and basic human and civil rights upon its own people.

A tainted Judiciary, a Police force that does its bidding, submissive civil servants and, amongst others, a compliant Election Commission are some of the evil tools of trade that UMNO uses to keep its hold on political power. This “banality of evil” permeates UMNO at all levels.

Banality of evil is a phrase used by Hannah Arendt in the title of her 1963 work “Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil”. Her thesis was that the great evils in history generally, and the Holocaust in particular, were not executed by fanatics or sociopaths, but by ordinary people who accepted the premises of their state and therefore participated with the view that their actions were normal.

Thank God for us that all this has started to change after the 12th and 13th general elections.The balance of power in Malaysia has shifted. What was once UMNO’s unchallenged political dominance in Malaysian politics is now no more.

There is now a potentially formidable, effective and hopefully robust Opposition in parliament. Also the rakyat’s ability to question the commission and omission of any act or deeds perpetrated by those in high public office is in its ascendancy.

Our political elite can no longer pillage and plunder our nation’s resources with impunity. Whatever they do now can be effectively challenged in Parliament, by the social media, street demonstrations and tentatively through the Judiciary.

These politicians have been served notice that when conferred with the privilege of high public office and the power that goes with it, they should concern themselves with the responsibilities that come with the office rather than the spoils that political power makes possible.

And so for UMNO, it will no longer be “business as usual”. The responsibility of the Opposition now is to ensure that political change will keep pace with changing realities.

Compromise on all sides

How will we define the modalities of the Malaysia that we all aspire to? What are the certainties that we must have? The protection of human rights, social justice and quality of life? How shall the Malays and non- Malays now base their political and social relationship?

What do we replace Ketuanan Melayu with if the majority of Malays are to be placated? How will the traditional role of the Chinese in commerce be handled so that a more equitable distribution of wealth is made possible? How will the underprivileged, the poor and the aged be treated? How do we protect the interest of the minorities?

These are but just a few of the tasks that await the leaders that will take us into the post 13th general election era that is already upon us. For now our country is in a flux.

Pakatan won all the battle that was to be won in this 13th general election but it lost the war.That notwithstanding Pakatan must continue to be the party for reform and change.Malaysians are angry and more so now with the manner in which the 13th general election has been conducted.

What Pakatan must not do is to talk about change and reform and avoid doing anything about it. Pakatan must become responsible, open and accountable in the states that they govern while taking upon itself the responsibility of being an effective Opposition in parliament.

UMNO must realise that Pakatan – and the people of Malaysia – is a side they cannot defeat nor unilaterally impose its will upon. They must understand that the sharing of power with Pakatan through some consensual process is preferable to the flux that our country is now in after this 13th general election.

Invariably it would require a compromise on all sides but the outlines of a settlement is already apparent. UMNO must share political power with an Opposition that holds the popular mandate from the electorates while Pakatan must accept that UMNO still holds a majority in Parliament.

This is the constrain imposed by the electorates upon them. It would take the wisdom of Solomon, the patience of Job and the sincerity of our beloved Tunku to make Malaysia the nation all good Malaysian aspire to!

And so I ask that we pause to think what we should do to support BN and Pakatan as they start the process of reconciliation as reconcile they must for we are now, to all intents and purposes, a two party nation.

We do not want BN trying to govern Malaysia without the consensus of over half its electorates who have put their trust in Pakatan.Nor do we want Pakatan to talk of being a responsible political coalition while it goes about inciting hundreds and thousands of Malaysians to take government from a duly elected government of Malaysia.

CT Ali is a reformist who believes in Pakatan Rakyat’s ideologies. He is a FMT columnist.

Daim: BN lost votes due to wrong strategy, infighting

May 27, 2013

by Ida Lim@www.themalaysianinsider.com

Why BN allowed stupid events like these? People are insulted because they knew you thought they could be bought with money, concerts and dinners. So they came to relax, have free makan and be entertained. This is an election. It’s a serious matter. Let Anwar be the entertainer. — Tun Daim Zainuddin

Barisan Nasional (BN) lost votes in the May 5 polls because of the wrong strategy employed by coalition leader Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s advisers and party infighting, former UMNO minister Tun Daim Zainuddin has said.

In the run-up to the general election, observers noted that Najib had banked on his personal popularity in his bid to help BN regain the two-thirds parliamentary majority it lost in 2008, which Daim said was the wrong approach.

“Really, you should ask BN. But in my opinion, it’s the wrong strategy. As I’ve said before, this is a parliamentary election, not a presidential election.

“The PM’s advisers should be sacked. If you associate a vote for BN as a vote for him, then BN’s poorer results reflect on him too,” Daim was quoted as saying in a transcript of his interview with local daily China Press, which was carried on veteran journalist Datuk Abdul Kadir Jasin’s blog today. For full transcript of the China Press interview go to http://kadirjasin.blogspot.com/2013/05/incorrect-strategy-cost-bn-votes.html

“I kept reminding them that those huge numbers at BN’s ceramahs do not translate into votes. You don’t try to fight his (Anwar’s) numbers with your even bigger numbers.

“Let Anwar be the entertainer (borrowing from the Financial Times). We are not entertainers, we don’t know how to sing, dance and tell jokes. It’s a serious business electing a government, so let’s leave this clown’s strategy alone and not play to his game.”

Daim also blamed BN’s failure to win a two-thirds majority on the misallocation of its resources in efforts to capture urban seats as well as Chinese-majority seats.

“If I know, then surely BN knows that the Chinese majority areas were gone. Why waste time and money? As a strategy, you should concentrate on those areas where you lost by slim majorities in 2008 and strengthen the seats you won in 2008. There was also the question of choice of candidates, and for example in Pandan, why be petty?

“Let’s recognise that nowhere in world is it easy to get a two-third majority. Urban voters everywhere in the world are anti-government. BN’s strength lies in the rural areas. Yet too much time and money were wasted in urban areas where the results were almost certain,” he said.

Daim was asked to comment on Penang, where a self-proclaimed non-political NGO, 1 Malaysia Penang Welfare Club, had spent heavily in providing free dinners and star-studded concerts in the weeks leading up to Polling Day.

“These people are amateurs. They are silly people. They think they are clever and throw money around. Better give to charity. Why BN allowed stupid events like these? People are insulted because they knew you thought they could be bought with money, concerts and dinners. So they came to relax, have free makan and be entertained. This is an election. It’s a serious matter. Let Anwar be the entertainer.”

In Penang, BN only won 10 state seats after its rival Pakatan Rakyat (PR) won a landslide victory by taking up the remaining 30 state seats there.

In response to another question, he said BN should have focused on addressing the issues close to the people’s hearts, listing them down as corruption, good governance, security, education, inflation, urban poor and young graduates.

“Government instead focused on giving handouts. You give dinner once, people thank you. Give them five times and they think you are trying to buy their votes,” he said.

Daim attributed BN’s poor showing in Selangor to infighting and sabotage, saying that this was caused by the coalition picking the wrong candidates for the polls contest.

BN won 12 of the 56 state seats in Selangor, fewer than its 2008 win of 20 seats, but kept its haul of five out of 22 federal seats there. He also blamed the Selangor results on the coalition’s state election director Datuk Seri Mohd Zin Mohamed, who he claimed had ignored feedback on the ground by still giving Daim assurances of BN’s victory in seats there.

“I think Zin was a wrong choice. He was dropped from Cabinet by Najib because obviously he didn’t think much of his ability and then you then appoint him as Selangor UMNO secretary. I don’t understand Najib’s logic,” Daim said, having pointed out that Sepang UMNO Youth chief Datuk Suhaimi Mohd Ghazali had contested against Mohd Zin and that many divisional chiefs had allegedly campaigned against him.

“When you asked me at the last interview, I said there were problems of wrong candidates. Ketua Bahagians were not happy. Among UMNO (members) sabotage was everywhere. I told Zin a list of state seats that were in trouble. Zin said yes a bit of problem but BN would win. In all those seats that were in my list, BN lost.With wrong candidates not going to the ground, ignoring divisional chiefs, not visiting your members and voters, sabotage, you couldn’t win,” Daim said.

Daim illustrated his point with how BN lost the Bukit Selambau state seat in Kedah’s Merbok parliamentary constituency, where there was allegedly a quarrel within BN over the candidate choice.

“They were still quarreling about the state candidate, even when it’s one day before polling. I told them they were crazy. Just vote BN. Told them they had half a day left to campaign and go together and campaign and be seen to be united.

“They lost by 500 votes because they closed their pondok panas by 4pm, confident that they had won. … but the Indians there have to quarrel even at the last minute about candidates and we lost. We are our own worst enemies.”

Anwar Ibrahim snookered by Najib

May 27, 2013

Anwar was extremely confident that he would become Malaysia’s 7th Prime Minister after GE13 (as he was about taking Putrajaya on September 16, 2008) that he wanted some assurance from Najib that there would be an orderly and peaceful transfer of power if UMNO-BN was defeated. That is a  normal thing to do. But it seems strange to me at least that he should seek the assistance of former Indonesian Vice President Jusuf Kalla. He could have done so directly with Najib. It is equally unusual  that a foreigner would agree to interfere in our domestic politics. What influence does  Anwar think Mr. Kalla has over Najib when it is common knowledge that Najib would only listen to UMNO warlords headed by Tun Dr  Mahathir.  As far as I am concerned, Anwar is not politically astute as we are made to believe. He deserves to be “snookered” (to quote Netto)  by Najib as he blinded by his arrogance and over confidence.–Din Merican

Anwar Ibrahim snookered by Najib, thanks to Indonesia’s Jusuf Kalla

by Terence Netto@http://www.malaysiakini.com

May 26, 2013

COMMENT: What prompted Anwar Ibrahim to agree to a deal brokered by former Indonesian Vice-President Jusuf Kalla that required both the Opposition leader and Prime Minister Najib Razak to agree to peaceably accept the results of GE13?

The Wall Street Journal quoted Jusuf Kalla as saying in this weekend’s edition of the paper that he faults Anwar for reneging on the deal. In his defence, Anwar is quoted by the same paper as saying that the terms of the deal were nullified by the manner of the campaign waged by BN – that it had demonised the opposition, tactics that the Jusuf-brokered deal had required the BN to abjure.

It’s strange that after all what he has been made to endure in the last 15 years by the powers-that-be – the two trials for sodomy, one for corruption and abuse of power which led to a six-year stay in jail, dissemination of a video showing someone looking like him in a transaction with a sex worker, among a host of other calumnies leveled at him – Anwar could still be credulous enough to believe that Umno-BN can abide by the terms of the deal negotiated by Jusuf.

There was not a little surprise when Najib, in the course of announcing in nationally televised remarks on April 3 the Agong’s consent to the dissolution of Parliament, also let on that his party would abide by the wishes of the electorate and accept a peaceful transfer of power if that was what voters wanted.

Responding for the opposition Pakatan Rakyat that he leads, Anwar the same day welcomed Najib’s assurance of a peaceful transition in the event one was decreed by voters. At that time, there was no way of knowing that these pantomimes were pre-ordained by the terms of a deal worked out by Jusuf Kalla, as reported by Wall Street Journal.

According to Anwar’s version of the terms, as reported by the internationally respected paper, Najib had agreed not to demonise the opposition in BN’s campaign waged through their doormat mainstream media. There was in the versions to Wall Street Journal given by the three parties to the deal some stuff about a role for the loser in a reconciliation process that would presumably take place after the vote. But this was rejected by one or the other party.

Concern over power transition

Deals like these are invariably hedged with ambiguity, this one more than others because it was inherently unworkable. Asking the BN not to demonise the Opposition in an election campaign that could well have resulted in their loss of power after a half-century’s incumbency, is like distracting the Taliban from their goal of an Islamic emirate in Afghanistan with the idea that they would be better off as farmers growing poppy.

From the Wall Street Journal’s story, it could not be inferred with certainty who made the initial approach for a deal – Anwar, Najib or Jusuf. Jusuf claims it was Anwar who approached him to broker the deal, but Anwar implies that the whole idea of the deal arose from concern in some ASEAN capitals that a transition of power in Malaysia after GE13 would be prone to violence.

To avert violence, get the two competing coalitions’ spearheads, Najib and Anwar, to agree a deal where they would abide by the election’s results. Anwar’s pre-condition for agreeing to the deal was that BN not demonise the opposition during the campaign. The curious thing about this aspect of the deal is how did Anwar conclude that broker Jusuf had expertise in seeing to it that the BN abided by its terms?

Apparently, Jusuf had no difficulty in phoning Anwar the day after the election, May 6, to remind him about the opposition leader’s “commitment” to accept the results with acquiescent serenity. But all a perplexed Jusuf got in return, according to the Wall Street Journal, is: “They said, ‘No, no, no.’ ” It looks like Anwar has allowed one Bugis, Jusuf Kalla, to get him snookered by another, Najib Razak.

Anwar broke a secret deal with Najib by protesting polls results, reveals WSJ

May 26, 2013

Behind Malaysian Poll Protest, a Peace Deal That Collapsed

by Patrick McDowell and James Hookway (05-24-13)

JAKARTA, Indonesia—A former Indonesian Vice President with a history of brokering peace agreements has accused Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim of reneging on a secret deal to respect the outcome of Malaysia’s elections on May 5.

Jusuf Kalla (right) revealed the pre-election accord in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, amid a public protest campaign by Mr. Anwar over what the Opposition leader said was widespread vote fraud by the ruling National Front coalition.

The election returned Prime Minister Najib Razak and the long-ruling National Front to power in the tightest national election in Malaysian history.

Mr. Kalla said the two candidates—whom he said he considered friends of his going back decades—had made a written agreement in April to refrain from personal attacks during the campaign and to accept the outcome, in a deal first proposed by Mr. Anwar.

Mr. Anwar acknowledged he had made the pact with Mr. Najib, with Mr. Kalla as mediator, but said the National Front had rendered it void by the way it ran its campaign.

He singled out Malaysia’s media, much of which is controlled or owned by the government or members of the ruling coalition. “How can you talk reconciliation when you demonize your opponent in this manner?” Mr. Anwar said to The Wall Street Journal. He also said it was Mr. Kalla, not him, who first proposed the pact.

Mr. Najib stressed reconciliation in his first public remarks after the election, though both sides said that the other had rejected a clause in the pact that the winner was to offer the loser a role in a “reconciliation government.”

Mr. Najib’s camp confirmed that the agreement was made and dismissed Mr. Anwar’s view that it had been undermined by the campaign—during which both sides accused the other of low blows and distortions. Mr. Anwar had strong support among Malaysian Web-based media during the campaign.

Mr. Kalla said he felt that both sides met their commitment to refrain from personal attacks during the campaign, and he hasn’t criticized Mr. Najib over the conduct of the election.

Mr. Anwar said he plans to step up a legal campaign to overturn the results in 29 electoral districts, raising political tensions in Malaysia, which has grown increasingly divided in the aftermath of the election.

Mr. Anwar, a former Deputy Prime Minister who has been the country’s most prominent Opposition leader for the past 15 years, has led a national campaign of mass rallies since the election. The scene has grown increasingly confrontational. Three prominent opposition activists were detained and later released in the past week.

In the weeks before the election, Mr. Anwar alleged that the National Front and Malaysia’s Election Commission were manipulating electoral rolls and mobilizing illegal voters. On May 5, Mr. Anwar said his alliance had won and accused the National Front of stealing the election.

The National Front and the Election Commission rejected the allegations of electoral fraud. The Commission said there were extremely few irregularities, and that a record 85% of voters cast ballots.

Mr. Anwar said he is pessimistic that courts would overturn results in key districts.

The final vote count showed that Mr. Anwar’s Pakatan Rakyat alliance won a majority of the popular vote, but Mr. Najib’s coalition won heavily in many rural constituencies, where he has strong popular support, to emerge with a 21-seat parliamentary majority.

Mr. Kalla said that the outcome of the balloting, held on a Sunday, was clear. “We had a commitment,” he said. “On Monday, I asked Anwar to accept it and look at reality. But they said, ‘No, no, no, no.’ ”

Mr. Kalla said Mr. Anwar approached him about an agreement two months ago, and they met at his Jakarta home. Mr. Anwar asked him to reach out to his opponent and secure his commitment for a peaceful election outcome, Mr. Kalla said.

At the time, Mr. Anwar was leading in voter surveys in Peninsular Malaysia, where most of the country’s 29 million people live. A victory by his alliance—a collection of Islamists, a mostly ethnic Chinese party and the largely urban secular party he leads—would have been an earthquake to an establishment controlled since 1957 by the coalition that Mr. Najib now leads.

Mr. Kalla had brokered peace agreements in various conflicts across the troubled Indonesian archipelago during his time as vice president from 2004 to 2009, and had roles in peace negotiations in Thailand and Sri Lanka. He said that he shuttled back and forth between Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur, meeting the Opposition leader and Mr. Najib.

Mr. Anwar sought Jusuf Kalla’s assistance to secure a mutual agreement between BN [Barisan Nasional, the National Front] and [Pakatan Rakyat] stating that both sides agreed to accept the results of the general election, even in the event of a slim majority by either side,” an adviser to Mr. Najib said. “The Prime Minister reiterated privately to Jusuf Kalla and in public before the election that BN would respect the will of the people and accept the election results, even if the opposition wins.”

Mr. Anwar said Mr. Kalla reached out to him to offer his assistance in ensuring an orderly outcome to the elections. “There were many friends around the region who were concerned about the transition of power and whether it would be peaceful,” he said.

Both candidates had pasts rich with fodder for personal attacks during the campaign. Mr. Anwar spent nearly six years in prison on sodomy and corruption convictions after failing to unseat his one-time mentor, Mahathir Mohamad, in 1998. The sodomy charge was overturned, and he was later acquitted on a second sodomy trial. Mr. Anwar consistently denied the charges.

Mr. Najib, meanwhile, has been subject to rumors widely disseminated in the media—which he has denied—that he had an affair with a Mongolian model and translator who was later murdered. Two police officers were convicted in the murder. Mr. Najib hasn’t been charged with any wrongdoing.

Mr. Kalla said he fears that the longer the dispute between the two political leaders goes on, the divisions in Malaysia—among factions in the majority Malay Muslim group and between Malays and the ethnic Chinese minority—will harden and perhaps lead to violence.

Malaysia was racked by race riots in 1969 and Mr. Kalla’s neighboring country, Indonesia, has suffered repeated outbreaks of sectarian violence.

—Celine Fernandez in Kuala Lumpur contributed to this article.

Write to Patrick McDowell at patrick.mcdowell@wsj.com and James Hookway at james.hookway@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323336104578503170302457636.html

A version of this article appeared May 25, 2013, on page A7 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Behind Malaysian Poll Protest, A Peace Deal That Collapsed.

Kisah DUA kali Lima dan LIMA kali dua

May 24, 2013

oleh Aspan Alias

http://aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com/

Seminggu yang lepas heboh diperkatakan oleh Zahid Hamidi supaya rakyat meninggalkan negara ini jika tidak bersefahaman dengan sistem pilihanraya di negara ini.

Dua hari lepas timbul pula desakan dan seruan supaya siapa yang tidak bersetuju dengan sistem yang ada supaya tinggal di dalam hutan. Seruan yang ini datangnya dari Noh Omar, Timbalan Pengerusi Perhubungan UMNO, Selangor.

Seorang meminta supaya meninggalkan negara dan yang seorang lagi meminta sesiapa yang tidak bersetuju dengan kerajaan sekarang supaya tinggal di dalam hutan. Apabila kita sarat dengan pemimpin yang ‘gila’ seperti ini, sememangnya tidak dapat sesiapa menyalahkan rakyat memberontak dalam pemikiran mereka. Rakyat mahukan kepimpinan yang selari tahap dan kemampuan mereka untuk berfikir dan bertindak mengikut waktu dan zamannya.

Kita tidak kisah dengan Noh ini, kerana beliau bukanlah seorang pemimpin yang perlu diberikan perhatian. Beliau hanyalah seorang daripada ramai yang memimpinkerajaan yang begitu keliru dengan kedudukan yang mereka sandang. Kumpulan pimpinan seperti ini adalah kumpulan pemimpin yang tidak tahu bagaimana mereka boleh menjadi pemimpin. Adakah mereka menjadi pemimpin kerana main politik wang, atau menaiki hairaki parti dengan mengampu atau apa? Yang pasti mereka naik bukan kerana mereka itu kepimpinan.

Dulu saya selalu berkata dalam UMNO bercakap benar itu adalah haram dan salah dan mereka yang bercakap benar wajar disingkirkan. Dalam UMNO, pemimpin mereka terpaksa bersifat menekan terhadap mereka yang tidak disukai kerana pimpinan di dalam parti itu tidak tahu untuk berhujah kerana mereka bukannya pemimpin yang sejati dan ‘genuine’. Kalau ditanya kenapa dan bagaimana mereka menjadi pemimpin mereka tidak akan tahu jawapannya.

Pemimpin lemah seperti pemimpin UMNO tidak akan senang dengan sistem demokrasi yang sebenarnya. Mereka tidak akan tertahan dengan kritikan dan pandangan yang berlainan daripada kemampuan mereka berfikir. Mereka selalunya ego dan jangan sekali berbeza pendapat dengan mereka. Mereka tidak berupaya berpolitik dalam keadaan demokrasi. Sebenarnya pemimpin UMNOlah yang sepatutnya dihalau keluar atau dihalau ke dalam hutan. Merekalah yang sebenarnya tidak menerima sistem demokrasi itu. Itulah sebabnya mereka kadangkala terpaksa menipu dan melakukan jenayah demokrasi itu secara besar-besaran.

Pada siapa yang sudah berumur akan tahu bagaimana demokrasi sebenarnya tidak boleh diterima oleh pimpinan UMNO itu. Apabila Mahkamah meminta UMNO mengadakan pemilihan sekali lagi kerana ada penipuan dalam pemilihan UMNO dalam tahun 1987 yang lalu, Mahathir tidak mahu memenuhi tuntutan undang-undang itu. Mahathir lantas mencari jalan agar UMNO itu diharamkan dan wujudkan UMNO yang baru, UMNO yang ada pada hari ini. UMNO tidak tahan dengan demokrasi itu dan itu merupakan penyebab kerana UMNO begitu dipandang rendah oleh rakyat hari ini.

Jadi kalau Noh Omar hendak bercakap besar atau Zahid hendak menghalau orang lain, UMNO itu sendiri mesti dikaji, apakah UMNO itu sebenar-benarnya terletak di atas landasan demokrasi yang sebenarnya? Noh mesti sedar yang UMNO itu wujud atas ketidak-mahuan pimpinan UMNO itu sendiri menerima demokrasi. Itu secara tulennya. Menipu di sana dan menipu di sini.

Itu sebabnya saya tidak begitu terkeliur untuk bersama ‘rally’ anjuran Anwar ini kerana Anwar sendiri adalah seorang pendukung kepada pengharaman UMNO itu dan menjadi Naib Presiden kepada Jawatankuasa Penaja UMNO baru itu. Parti baru itu ditubuhkan di Seri Perdana pada Februari 1988.

Kepada yang muda-muda yang tidak pun bergiat atau masih main tali seluar lagi semasa itu, tidak akan dapat merasakan apa yang orang seperti saya rasakan.

Anwar pernah berkata semasa beliau bersama Dr Mahathir, “Kalau dapat ku pintar awan di langit, akan ku tuliskan namamu Mahathir,” begitulah kuatnya Anwar menyokong Mahathir yang tidak demokratik itu. Jadi bagaimana Anwar mengajak kita untuk melakukan ‘rally’ setiap malam kerana tidak mahu menerima keputusan  PRU 13 itu? Sekarang ramai di kalangan kita tidak percaya kepada Mahkamah.

Barang diingat Anwar jugalah yang bersama-sama merobohkan sistem Mahkamah semasa itu bersama Dr Mahathir dan sekarang bolehkah beliau mengkritik ketidak-adilan Mahkamah itu jika ia masih berlaku? Anwar jugalah yang menyokong penyingkiran Hakim-Hakim Mahkamah Agong yang diketuai oleh Tun Salleh Abas dahulu.

Saya menyebut ini kerana yang hendak membetulkan keadaan itu juga adalah orang yang mewujudkan keadaan yang tidak betul itu. Baik dalam PKR atau UMNO itu mereka adalah dari acuan yang sama sahaja. Itu maksud saya sejak akhir-akhir ini. ‘Buntut kuali mengatakan buntut belanga itu hitam’… Bagaimana orang-orang seperti saya hendak yakin? Itulah sebabnya juga saya merasa kasihan terhadap mereka yang bersorak siang dan malam bersama Anwar menuduh negara tidak demokrasi?

Kalaulah Anwar itu tidak dipecat kerana kesalahannya sendiri dahulu, sekarang Anwar sudah menjadi Perdana Menteri BN dan akan mengekalkan keadaan yang sama juga untuk mengekalkan kedudukannya. Saya mungkin mendapat kritikan kuat dari ramai tetapi apa boleh saya buat? Saya tidak dapat berbuat apa-apa kerana itulah kebenarannya?

Itu sebabnya mana-mana parti yang tidak telus pemilihan di dalam partinya itu tidak akan kekal lama. Lama-lama nanti parti yang kuat itu akan lemah juga kerana akhirnya kebenaran akan timbul juga.

Tidak kira parti-parti itu di pihak BN atau pembangkang, jika pemilihan pimpinan partinya tidak telus akhirnya parti itu akan menjadi parti kebencian ramai. Hanya masa akan menentukannya.

Anwar Ibrahim: The Triumph of Persistence and Resilience

May 9, 2013

by RK Anand(05-08-13)
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

Anwar Ibrahim has now accomplished so much more than what he could have as just another UMNO President and default Prime Minister. He would have just been another photograph on the PWTC wall.

Fifteen years ago, Anwar Ibrahim came within a few feet of becoming the Prime Minister. Then it all fell apart. But unlike others who had their political ambitions decimated by Dr Mahathir Mohamad, this man refused to fade.

He has now accomplished so much more than what he could have as just another UMNO President and default Prime Minister. He would have just been another photograph on the PWTC wall.

What unravelled in 1998 was a bane for him but a boon for Malaysia.It is because of Anwar, the fortress called Barisan Nasional suffered its biggest crack and it was he who showed Malaysians that change was possible.

When he formed PKR from behind prison walls, he started the ball rolling for a true multi-racial political platform.While UMNO still struggles to court PAS, Anwar managed to convince the Islamic party and secular DAP to sit at the same table to form Pakatan Rakyat.

The emergence of a powerful opposition also amplified the voice of the civil society, which began to play a more instrumental role in checking the powers-that-be and exposing wrongdoings.

And the 13th general election showed that the majority of voters had cast their ballots in favour of Pakatan to govern this nation and for Anwar to become Prime Minister.

Whereas Najib Tun Razak had assumed the post not because of popular support but rather due to the first-past-the-post system.In their hearts, BN leaders know that the coalition had lost the polls.

And one wonders if not for their choke-hold on the media, police, Election Commission, what would have been the real percentage of support? Not to mention if the allegations of a tainted electoral roll, vote-buying and foreigners casting their ballots hold water as well.

So Anwar failed to capture Putrajaya but he managed to secure something more significant, the people’s mandate to become prime minister. If this was the presidential elections, Najib would have been vanquished.

The powers-that-be threw everything at him except the kitchen sink but he conquered the odds. A lesser man would have relented.

And the wave of change which Anwar started had grown larger than him and Malaysians must thank him for providing us with an alternative.

A bitter pill for Mahathir

The election result had been a bitter pill for Mahathir to swallow because it was also a rejection of his legacy. And as expected the octogenarian spewed an endless stream of gibberish.

First, he accused Chinese voters of not accepting the Malay hand of friendship, which was another glaring example of the delusion which UMNO suffers from, thinking that it represents all Malays.

The fact is, Chinese voters rejected the courtship of UMN, preferring to embrace PAS and the Malays in DAP and PKR instead, who unlike Mahathir, never questioned their citizenship.

The Malays in PAS, PKR and DAP are not the patrons of movements that call for the torching of Bibles and Pakatan did not field a candidate who labelled them as illegal immigrants.The Malays in Pakatan do not run a newspaper that constantly stokes racial and religious tension.

In actual fact, the so-called “Chinese tsunami” was an urban wave that witnessed voters of all races rejecting BN in the polls. Number crunching would show that a significant number of Malays also voted for the Opposition.

Mahathir described the Malays who voted for DAP as the “educated and sophisticated” ones. Going by his logic, one must ask what kind of people voted for UMNO, BN as well as for his son then?

Mahathir also remarked that he never expected Najib to perform even worse than Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, completely ignoring his role in both the 2008 and 2013 election debacles for BN. The former Premier could be considered as one of the coalition’s greatest liabilities. His so-called project IC was the main reason that Sabahans are fuming today. Yet he escapes retribution.

Mahathir’s successors are struggling to contain the damage done during his 22-year reign and he has the audacity to question their leadership capabilities.The more this man speaks, the more it becomes evident that his century-old mind is a stumbling block and threat to this nation.

The former UMNO President also predicted that Najib would face internal resistance in UMNO, and similar signs are emerging in MCA and MIC as well.But changing the leadership is not going to make a difference. The people voted for change!

So the end is near. Goodnight BN.

Tok Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat–An Iconic Leader

Anwar Ibrahim–A Symbol of Liberty and Freedom

Anwar Ibrahim The Next PM

May 5, 2013

Anwar Ibrahim The Next PM of Malaysia

By Rusman

There is no telling who will win the 13th General Election. An inch ahead is darness, goes one Japanese proverb. Yet, come May 5, many Malaysians will step out of their sheltered lives for the first time to usher a transition amounting to a primal call for reform.

The screams and signs of change are so endemic to permeate the manifesto of both Barisan National (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR).Be it ‘Ubah’ promised by Anwar Ibrahim, or, ‘transformasi’ peddled by Najib Razak, it is clear that the status quo is not an option.

But between these two leading figures who deserve to be the next Prime Minister ? There are many reasons to prefer Anwar Ibrahim.

Having experienced the hell of solitary imprisonment, Anwar Ibrahim is no longer the same man, if ever he could be. He who hails from the streets of Malaysia, will always feel for the Malaysians in the streets.

Invariably Anwar Ibrahim has acquired an unquenchable thirst to make things work for the benefit of all and sundry, before the wealth of Malaysia are allowed to be squandered and sullied by the corrupt and greedy regime.

As a son of a former hospital porter, who rose through the ranks to be a Member of Parliament, Anwar Ibrahim, too, knows the travails of being the people’s representative. Regardless of the sacrifices one puts in, un-appreciation is but a close relative. Yet, Anwar Ibrahim, through decades of unstinting service, has persevered without fail—–this despite the humiliations faced by him and his family time and again. Through them all, Anwar Ibrahim has stood tall to serve Malays, Chinese, Indians, and all.

As a devoted father, subsequently grandfather, Anwar Ibrahim knows the daily rigours of life right down to the hardship faced by their spouses and children. As Anwar Ibrahim’s daughter Nurul Izzah affirmed in a poignant video: “I know you, I am one of you.” Only the same can be said about Anwar Ibrahim.

Yet, above and beyond all, Anwar Ibrahim deserves the Premiership for the intellect and integrity he can bring to this high office; especially on issues verging on inter- civilizational peace. As a progressive Islamic firebrand, who is comfortable in Washington D.C and other Western capitals,as he is in Jeddah and Istanbul, he represents the hopes of many Muslims who desire nothing less than a just and durable peace.

One can, of course, go on and on about the leadership qualities of Anwar Ibrahim. Such are the privilege of a quintessential man. But, in an election as decisive as the one on May 5h, Anwar Ibrahim, a former prisoner of conscience, demands nothing more than everyone voting according to their inner most belief.

To the extent this belief is hoisted on creating a better and stronger Malaysia, one based on freedom, fraternity and equality, the path towards these values and goals, still redound on Anwar Ibrahim: The man from the street. Only this time, he is not alone. But he is taking on the structures of oppression and corruption together with his multi-racial colleagues in the coalition that is now Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

Vote PR. Vote Anwar Ibrahim for a future free from inane corruption where the poor has to cater to the whims of the politically connected rich and powerful UMNOputeras, when the latter deserve nothing but one’s contempt.

Malaysia at (yet another) crossroads

April 1, 2013

The DRUM Opinion

by Gerhard Hoffstaedter and Greg Lopez

While Malaysia has achieved admirable economic success under its dominant coalition government, this has come at the expense of human rights and the free press. Now, the opposition is offering greater transparency, write Gerhard Hoffstaedter and Greg Lopez.

The Malaysian government and its multiple state governments have become caretaker governments and elections will have to be called before June 28, 2013 if the country wants to maintain the semblance of an electoral democracy.

Everything is at stake at these elections. Malaysia has been ruled as a country by one coalition since independence in 1957 and its hold on political power has been tenacious. The economy and society remains formidable.

Opposition coalitions have tried at every election to make inroads in a system clearly stacked against them. In 2008, there was a real breakthrough, with the opposition capturing five out of the 13 states of the federation and breaking the ruling coalition’s psychologically important 2/3 majority it had become accustomed to.

It is not easy to categorise the two opposing coalitions and its members, as they are disparate, complex, and, with multiple agendas, often fractured. The ruling coalition is run by UMNO, the United Malays National Organisation, with other constituent parties largely serving the Chinese and Indian populations as well as some indigenous communities of Sabah and Sarawak.

This consociational model of politics provided each major ethnic group a share in the political domain under the leadership of the Malays and an increasingly Islamicised UMNO. In return, the basic social, cultural and economic rights of the non-Muslims were guaranteed. With a plethora of positive discrimination for the Malays to become upwardly mobile, a new Malay middle class was created, which secured a peace between and among what in Malaysia are referred to as racial groups.

This coalition and its grasp on power has maintained this status quo, which has served the elite very well and achieved real economic success, at least on a national level, with Malaysia almost eliminating absolute poverty, recording impressive socioeconomic outcomes, building state-of-the art infrastructure, and achieving upper middle income status in less than half a century after independence.

However, outward peace and economic success were built on enduring human rights violations, a lack of a free press, corruption, and the capitulation of the civil sphere to reactionary and extremist nationalist and religious zealots.

The Opposition promises to unmake some of these strictures and aims to provide a more transparent form of governance, which it demonstrated in two of Malaysia’s most populous, rich and industrialised states – Selangor and Penang – which it has governed since 2008.

But the Opposition coalition is a looser coalition, made up of a predominantly Chinese party with socialist ideologies, Malaysia’s only Islamist party, and the People’s Justice party, headed by former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. He remains a divisive figure in Malaysia. His democratic credentials (as well as his economic liberal ones) are well known in the West, but in Malaysia punters are more concerned with his sexuality. The ruling coalition will continue to pursue any opening it can to destabilise his appeal as elder statesman.

Prime Minister Najib, meanwhile, is ignoring corruption charges in a French court over kickbacks in the purchase of French submarines and, more disconcertingly, questions about his involvement in the murder of a Mongolian model in Malaysia, who had acted as a translator in the said French submarine deal.

The campaign thus far has been fought by chipping away at both leaders’ capacity to elder statesmen and their ability to lead a divided country. The ruling coalition has, upon advice from an American PR company, rolled out a more inclusive image of its administration and vision for Malaysia, epitomised under its “1Malaysia” concept that now features on shop fronts, medical centres and government offices.

It has not, however, reined in the divisive reactionary movements and NGOs that call for Sharia to be the supreme law in the country or that continue to call non-Malays ‘sojourners’ in ‘their’ land.

To overcome the divided body politic, it will require a leader of substance and integrity. For many, that continues to be Anwar Ibrahim, while others are less sure. But without any alternatives, the stage is set for a bruising and expensive campaign with the highest of stakes and the lowest of strategies – in terms of quality – to get there.

Australia has largely been able to accommodate and deal with even the intransigent Mahathir, so continuing with a Najib administration will suit it just fine. In fact, Najib signed off on the Malaysia solution, or refugee swap deal, has furthered economic ties, and has been a gracious host to Australian delegations, bar one.

Independent Senator Nick Xenophon learnt the hard way, being the wrong person at the right time for Najib Razak and UMNO to show their mettle domestically. UMNO moving into overdrive in the home stretch made it clear that there is a magic, invisible line foreigners should not cross when ‘meddling’ in Malaysia’s affairs.

Any commentary on the democratic process in Malaysia is not sought from the officials and Australian interventions, even in election observation, is not tolerated. These are the limits of good neighbours like Malaysia in its current political climate.

If the Opposition wins, it is unlikely that there would be any fundamental departure in the overall Australia-Malaysia relationship as it is on solid footing. If anything, it would further improve bilateral relations as the opposition coalition’s stated aspirations of social justice are quite similar to Australia’s core values.

There are two outstanding issues currently – the Malaysia solution and the Lynas rare earth plant. In relation to the Malaysia solution, Australia would have to renegotiate and reassess its border protection plans as at present the opposition coalition does not have a clear refugee policy other than stating its commitments to current international norms. They may sign a range of international conventions including ones that would protect the rights of the refugees, and require that Australia process them onshore.

However, in signing the various international conventions, the ‘Malaysia solution’ would also meet the requirements of the Australian High Court decision and leave open the possibility of renegotiating them. The Lynas issue is more complex as it involves an approved investment. The issue has created a groundswell of popular domestic dissent, but the opposition has been ambiguous on what it would do if it comes into power.

But for now, all we can do is wait for the election to be (finally) called.

Gerhard Hoffstaedter is a lecturer in anthropology in the School of Social Science at the University of Queensland, and the author of Modern Muslim Identities: Negotiating Religion and Ethnicity in Malaysia. View his full profile here. Greg Lopez is a visiting fellow at the department of political and social change, Australian National University. View his full profile here.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4603166.html

Terrence Netto responds to Tun Daim’s Interview in the NST

March 26, 2013

by Terence Netto@www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT Because he was uncannily accurate on the results of the March 2008 general election, former Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin enjoys a reputation as a prognosticator of sorts.

His visage in the last week or so has been all over the Chinese press which, understandably, had sought him out on how GE13 would go. In the immediate prelude to GE12, it was the Chinese press that first carried Daim’s prescient predictions – that Penang, Selangor and Kedah would fall to the Opposition – before the other language streams picked them up for their readerships.

No surprise, then, the Chinese press, in the final lap to GE13, has again interviewed Daim for his take. Having accurately called one throw of the general election dice, they think he would be useful at reading the tea leaves on the next.

Daim (right) loves this sort of thing. Long an inhabitant of the shadowy corners where politics intersects with business, he guards his privacy from which he departs from time to time to emerge, gnome-like, into the limelight with premonitions on matters that turn out to have tidal impact.

One such prediction, in 1994, shook the stock market following his “sell” prognosis. Another, in 2008, resulted in a shakedown of UMNO-BN.Clearly, to many in the media, the man has what in the industry is called star quality: the ability to generate the illusion that the enterprise in which he appears is better than it actually is.

But it appears that Daim, in his pre-GE13 interview phase, was not as keen on polls predictions as he was on party and personality assessments, and a rebuttal of charges that he had been the chief cause of Anwar Ibrahim’s tribulations of 1998 which saw him expelled from government and UMNO.

In the latter regard, it seemed that Daim was more interested in tendering what looked like a preemptive defence against the accusations that he was the “chief conspirator” behind Anwar’s travails at that time.

The non-Mandarin reading public cannot help but gain this impression from the substance of the two-part interview Daim gave to the New Straits Times which appeared in last Sunday’s edition of the paper and in yesterday’s daily version.

There Daim displays his scant regard for the training he has had as a lawyer by opining that “I want Najib to win because I don’t think that Anwar is the right candidate to be Prime Minister because he will mess up the country…”

It is as if Daim’s immersion in his zealously guarded privacy has insulated him from the more recent revelations – one set concerning the second sodomy case against Anwar, and another set having to do with statutory declarations made in respect of the Altantuya murder case – that pertain to the PM and, because the latter has not denied them, affect his worthiness to hold office.

It must take a bold man indeed – and that too one from a legal background – to hold forth magisterially on a pair of individuals’ worthiness to hold high office and prefer for the role of PM the one who is seen in grave danger of being a felon to the other who has had all manner of accusations hurled against him that have yet to be proven and from a few of which has been exonerated.

It is a piece with the vast devastation of values that has occurred in this country that a former Finance Minister can presently engage in this travesty with a straight face.

Downfall of Salleh Abas

But this former economic czar, who came loaded with wealth to high ministerial office in 1984 and left after two stints in 2000 even richer than when he arrived, is not only saddled with the accusation that he was “chief conspirator” behind Anwar’s fall in 1998, it is also bruited about that he was behind the impeachment of then Lord President Salleh Abas in 1988.

If there was a pivotal cause behind the moral turpitude in which the country is presently immersed, it was that impeachment event of 1988.

Word has it that Salleh came back from a judicial seminar he attended earlier that year in New Delhi and spoke to fellow judge, the late Hashim Yeop Sani, of being impressed with the way seminar participants had spoken of the need for jurists to be imbued with the “rights” of supplicants when deciding cases.

Hashim, a government-favouring flunkey, hurried to inform Daim of the Chief Justice’s newfangled interest in a jurisprudence of “rights.”

When Salleh (left) convened the full nine-member bench of the Supreme Court to hear the appeal of the case in which High Court judge, the late Harun Hashim, had ruled UMNO an illegal body for having 13 deregistered branches participate in their presidential election of April 1987, Daim carried his misgivings about Salleh’s “rights” inclinations to then-Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad who proceeded to advise the King on the Lord President’s liability to impeachment.

Salleh was duly impeached by an international tribunal of judges and with that development, the debasement of our Judiciary began with assorted other deteriorations to the civic values of the country following in its train.

Salleh was not the only judge impeached. In the ensuing conflagration that engulfed the judiciary and shocked the nation, other senior and respected judges were impugned and sacked for their “misdeeds.”

Mahathir was in the imperial phase of his long premiership, with dire consequences to anyone who made bold to step into his crosshairs, Anwar included.

Daim, with his skill at gliding in and out of the dark corners of Malaysian politics, likes to think that he can evade the zone of culpability for the misdeeds of the Mahathir era, just like the period’s author.

The trend of recent developments and their likely electoral impact are running counter to that expectation. His views on the parties and central personalities involved in GE13 are deeply coloured by the resultant anxiety.

The Oracle of Jalan Syed Putra speaks: Part 2

March 25, 2013

“Okay, my answer to Anwar — I’m no Cassius. I maybe thin but I don’t have the hungry look. And definitely, I’m no Brutus…

I have always maintained, the danger with Anwar is that Anwar is more Sukarno than anything else. All fiery speeches, completely economical with the truth and an instigator at his best.”–Daim Zainuddin

THIS is final part of the interview with former Finance Minister Tun Daim Zainuddin, who helped the Malaysian economy survive the 1997 Asian financial crisis.

Without mincing words, Daim discussed with New Straits Times journalists A. JALIL HAMID, RASHID YUSOF and HARIZ MOHD and photographer ZAHARI ZAKARIA the key events during the “Mahathir Years”, including the events which led to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s downfall.

Question: Media reports suggested at the time of your departure from the cabinet in 1991 that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had three names in mind as the new Finance Minister — Tan Sri Sanusi Junid, Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Was this indeed the case?

Answer: Rafidah was then the Minister for Trade, having been appointed to the post after the Team A versus Team B split in 1987. Sanusi was Minister for Agriculture.

Dr Mahathir wasn’t too sure about Anwar. He said, “I don’t think Anwar can handle the Ministry of Finance” given his academic background. He was a graduate in Malay studies.

My counter argument went along this line — “I think if you want him to be your successor you have to groom him.I can help him and guide him, give advice.”In the end, I managed to convince Dr Mahathir.

Anwar used to come to my house very often to seek my advice on matters related to the ministry of finance.He would also bring me to to his house for lunch very often. His aunt cooked my favourite dishes.

Question: Given that Anwar had later named you as the “chief conspirator” leading to his sacking from the cabinet in 1998, when did things actually turn sour?

Answer: There was no fallout between us until he started accusing me of being a chief conspirator. This is an old story. No one is interested in the whys and wherefores. It is the now and the future that people are interested in.

Really, we should not waste time with Anwar. He is past his use-by date. His time had come and gone.

I also think that you should not give so much news space to him. That’s what he likes. He does not like to be ignored, so ignore him I say. He should be left to be the entertainer that he is, dancing and singing at ceramahs. As I said his time is gone, like a burung punggok merindukan bulan, (a dog barking at the caravans, and the caravans have moved on).

But as you keep insisting, I will answer. The best person to speak about Anwar is Sanusi. They were in school together. They were in ABIM (Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia) and in the cabinet, and Sanusi was Ssecretary-general of UMNO. Anyway, I promised to answer so I will answer.

Okay, my answer to Anwar — I’m no Cassius. I maybe thin but I don’t have the hungry look. And definitely, I’m no Brutus.

When Anwar claimed that I was the conspirator, he knows the truth that I played no part, no role whatsoever. I knew nothing about the case until I was told about it. I might be a busybody, but I do not interfere with people’s private life. I don’t want people to know about mine either. I don’t want to know what people do behind closed doors. I’m not interested. People whispered to me, but I said, “Look, we are all human, we all have weaknesses.”

But I understand he was under pressure, it was his political survival and he was a drowning man, clutching at whatever to keep himself afloat, plus he knew that I would never answer any allegations thrown at me. I thought I was his friend and he was in trouble, and I let it be.

I also thought that it was so farfetched that it was laughable. Anwar, for example said I took out RM2 billion cash by plane. I must be an idiot, and any way how much is RM2 billion cash? Probably a few lorries to transport!

At the end of the day, truth will always prevail. You can’t hide it. If not today, one day, the truth would be told. In the case of his supporters, even if he were to do all that he is alleged to have done, right on the carpet in front of their eyes, they will not believe. To them, everything is a conspiracy.

Anwar’s problem was that his image was whiter than white. When stories got around because he got this image, it’s difficult for people to believe. In life, some things are too strange to be true but they are true.

As Sherlock Holmes said, “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”.

There was a myth about Kennedy, too, but people did not talk about it during his lifetime. After his death, you read about him and what he did behind closed doors.

Question: There was talk back then that your motivation in ousting Anwar was that you were anxious about protecting your business interests?

Answer: That was his line, that he was this super hero fighting crime and corruption and, therefore, had to be brought down. If you know the things about him that I know, that line of his is hilarious, and the cheek of it all, to claim righteousness.

I had then retired and what business interests did I have? I had to sell all my assets before joining the government in 1984. But later on, after I had left, when I was made chairman of the northern triangle, there was a clause in the agreement that I would be able to venture into business. I was not a member of the cabinet anyway.

I ventured overseas after my retirement. I didn’t want to do my business in Malaysia. But after my banks overseas became successful I needed to have a bank locally, I bought a bank. You can check, it was very expensive, I paid higher than anybody else. At that time, the highest anybody ever paid for a bank. This was a one-branch bank. Later, I sold this bank, too, when I rejoined the government at the last financial crisis. I really should stop buying banks in Malaysia. Every time I buy one, I’m made Minister of Finance and have to sell them.

Immediately after my retirement, I went away to Harvard University, in particular to the Kennedy School of Government as a visiting scholar.

Anwar kept calling me in Boston. (He asked) why I stayed there and asked me to come back. He needed me to help him, but I said I was enjoying my stay. I met a lot of people.

It was at Harvard that I met Francis Seow (who once served as Singapore’s Solicitor-General). He was writing books. Interesting books. You should read his books. We became good friends and often exchanged views over lunch.

Then it was about the so-called “Daim Boys”.They were also very close with Anwar after I left.Most were Malay College old boys. They were in school with Anwar.

Yahya (the late Tan Sri Yahya Ahmad) was his head boy and Halim (Tan Sri Halim Saad) was at the Malay College.

Anwar, through his accusations, repeated the lie that I wanted this contract and that contract, and that because he was in the way, I got rid of him. A lie repeated many times, unfortunately, becomes a truth.

What contract? I want to ask, which contract did I or my family secure? Show me.Show me one single contract I got from the government.

So I have always maintained, the danger with Anwar is that Anwar is more Sukarno than anything else. All fiery speeches, completely economical with the truth and an instigator at his best.

Question: Was there a turning point, one that had caused a fall- out?

Answer: There was no particular fallout. I was his scapegoat, among many other scapegoats. I was his friend. Dr Mahathir defended him. I told him not to open the Pandora’s box by making a police report but he thought he was clever.

I’ve told you earlier that you should not waste news space on Anwar. But you insist and I’m answering only to make the point that if you have Pakatan and him leading Pakatan, then we are heading down the road to disaster. He was tested during the Asian financial crisis and he failed. I also think that he failed not just because of his policies, but also of his motivation.

Dr Mahathir, for example, was totally offended by the crisis. He could not bear to see what he had taken time to build destroyed because of the greed of speculators and financial vultures, and he wanted to make sure the country was safe again.

Question: Some commentators had pointed out that Anwar at the time of the crisis did not help by raising interest rates to such a high level?

Answer: In the case of Anwar, at that time, he was really badly advised. Because all along we know, Anwar on his own did not know what to do.

He has to get people to advise him and that was OK so long as you get good advice.And of course at that time he really liked (Michel) Camdessus of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and James Wolfensohn of the World Bank.

And he was also close to Robert Rubin (secretary of treasury of the United States).All these people later came to endorse him.But you see, different countries have different environments, different stages of development, different conditions.

It’s not the same.You look at what happened during that crisis to South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and us.

There’s Singapore, China and Japan.During that time, Anwar’s stance was “follow what was advised by the IMF and World Bank”.

That would be a normal reaction — in a crisis like this, you need some big fellows to come and advise.Because if there’s any trouble, the IMF and World Bank will come and assist.And if America backs you, you are also okay. And America has big influence over the IMF and World Bank.

In the case of South Korea, it wanted to borrow from Japan so that it would not go down. But America refused to help. America told the Japanese not to help, so it went down and mind you, South Korea was close to the US. Don’t expect the US to support us.

At that time, Robert Zoellick, who was Deputy Secretary of State, made it known that the doors were open for the American companies to go in to pick up companies at fire-sale prices.

This was the case with Indonesia when they came in and took almost everything they wanted.They killed Thailand, too.We saw what was happening. Dr Mahathir understood.He said: “What we built… will be destroyed”.Years of growth and stability will be wiped out.

And if we are not careful, there might be riots like in Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand.Probably worse.So, he had to think how to stop it.

Question: Based on your articulation on the political scenario, you are troubled not by Anwar’s so- called misconduct but more of his character?

Answer: I’m worried that he has not got the depth on economics. If he again becomes the Finance Minister or Prime Minister, his inclination is to take the American line. America is in crisis, Europe is in crisis.

He likes to identify with Europe, America and Australia.He tried to get Australia to support him, to condemn and say our election will not be fair, etc.

He talks of Arab Spring, but he said the Arab Spring here is not a revolution but through the ballot box. He had been telling the world that he will win this election.

If PR were to lose, it would be because of unfair practices and mobs could then go to the streets to protest. He promised to form the government in September 2008. Everybody got jittery and many believed him. That is his style. He is all talk and promises. Now, he tells the world he will win.

But the government isn’t even responding. There has never been riggings in elections here. Last election, they formed five state governments. Otherwise, how did the opposition win so many seats if the government rigged elections?No election is perfect in this world.But he has started this, and the government must respond.

Anwar is conditioning the minds of the people here and telling the world PR will win but he knows he cannot win. As I said earlier, I question his (and also Pakatan’s) motivation. His personal ambition is so overriding and an obsession that he does not care that it will be at the expense of peace and stability in his country.

Can you imagine the scenario if Pakatan does not get to Putrajaya? He will go on to claim that it is rigged and then bring on the Arab Spring here. Instigate the people that under Barisan Nasional, their votes were stolen and they have to go out to the streets to reclaim their votes.

This will cause havoc and he won’t care because his ambition overrides all other considerations. And Pakatan doesn’t care, too, because they are on the same ride.

GE-13:Anwar Ibrahim pushes ahead with his Reform Agenda

March 20, 2013

Anwar Ibrahim pushes ahead with his Reform Agenda

by Terence Netto (03-19-13)@ http://www.malaysiakini.com

Pakatan Rakyat chief campaigner Anwar Ibrahim said that good leadership would smother threats posed by ‘Little Napoleons’ in the civil service who may not like the egalitarian thrust of the Opposition coalition’s manifesto.

The PKR adviser was speaking yesterday at a dialogue session organised by his party’s Johor Baru division for representatives and activists from Indian-led NGOs in the state.

Some 200 people attended the session which was held in the early evening after which the Pakatan supremo hurried off to Skudai to speak at a huge rally to mark fellow coalition member DAP’s 47th anniversary celebrations.

At the dialogue session, Anwar sought to placate Indian fears of continued marginalisation, a situation participants at the dialogue session felt would persist because ‘Little Napoleons’ in a Malay-dominated bureaucracy could baulk alleviative measures mandated by a Pakatan federal government.

Anwar was asked to respond to the observation that in Malaysia “a Malay problem is a national problem, a Chinese problem is a racial problem, and an Indian problem is no problem.”

Anwar said that it would be “a question of leadership” when and if the implementation of Pakatan policies is resisted by ‘Little Napoleons’ in the civil service.

“When I was Finance Minister, I was asked why a non-Malay (Clifford Herbert) was appointed as the ministry’s Secretary-General,” cited Anwar, as an example of what he meant when he said good leadership focused on national priorities can overcome sectarian considerations.

Anwar, who was Finance Minister for eight years (1990-98), fended off pressure from Malay higher-ups in the civil service unhappy at Herbert’s appointment by citing the man’s “good macroeconomic view” and “sound grasp of fundamentals” of the Malaysian economy as the appointee’s merits.

“I’m sure people in the civil service will respond to good leadership that is focused on national priorities,” said Anwar.

Stateless Indians

Once again Pakatan’s putative PM-designate reiterated what he has said several times in the recent past – that within 100 days of the coalition’s federal empowerment, the problem of stateless residents would be resolved.

Indians constitute a disproportionately large percentage of stateless residents, conjectured to be 350,000 out of a probable half million, others being Chinese, and Dayaks and Kadazan in remote parts of Sarawak and Sabah.

“I’m not proposing to grant citizenship to someone who only came here from Chennai yesterday,” quipped Anwar.

“I am proposing to give it to people I know such as a case in Batang Kali who was born in 1943 and till today has not got an identity card. These are fundamental guarantees in the constitution and after half a century if cases like these persist, it is a crying shame,” said the PKR adviser to resounding applause.

Anwar said no leader should without censure question the fundamental right to citizenship of Malaysians qualified for the privilege.

This was said in apparent deprecation of attempts to question the fitness for Malaysian citizenship of such government critics as Ambiga Sreenevasan (left), co-chair of electoral reform advocacy group Bersih.

On the question of entry qualifications to universities, Anwar said these would be based on merit to promote and sustain “quality education.”

“We will give intensive additional courses to students who are poor and have fallen short of the qualifying mark so that they can then qualify,” he said.

“To sustain quality tertiary education, we must insist on merit-based entry qualifications,” he stressed.

“This is like our policy towards the different language streams in primary education. We will aid all such schools but we will insist that in every language stream, be it Mandarin, Tamil or Arabic, pupils must be proficient in Malay and at the secondary level, there must acquire proficiency in English,” he said.

The dialogue session lasted an hour and a half at the end of which Anwar was given a resounding ovation and was mobbed as he made his way to the lifts in the hotel where it was held.

GE-13: It’s Santa Claus Politics

March 17, 2013

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com

As Election 2013 fever spurs Malaysian politicians from both sides to serve up expensive sweets to boost their bid, a Singapore paper reminded voters today that they would be the ones to pick up the tab.

“The intense fight for votes has led both the administration of Prime Minister Najib Razak and the Opposition Pakatan Rakyat to promise more and more populist measures.

“You could call it Santa Claus politics,” Reme Ahmad, Assistant Foreign News Editor in the widely-read Straits Times, wrote in an opinion piece for the paper’s Sunday edition.

He noted that Najib who leads the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) has been dishing out more cash “gifts” to offset rising living costs that are the main concerns of a significant 40 per cent of the 13.3 million voters struggling with bread-and-butter issues; and signal there may be more to come if the coalition maintains power.

Among the billions of ringgit worth of sweeteners he listed were the second round of RM500 cash aid for each household, RM200 smartphone rebates for the hundreds of thousands of youths, the RM250 student book vouchers and just last week, pay hikes for the country’s 230,000 policemen and soldiers who are seen to form a core deposit in the coalition’s vote bank.

The writer noted that the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) Opposition, which is seen to be a viable contender to take federal power for the first time, has also promised many goodies.

Among them, he listed free university education, cheaper utility bills, lower transport costs through cuts in car and petrol prices and highway tolls that formed the key proposals in PR’s manifesto launched last month.

“But here is one worry the politicians are downplaying. With all the goodies disbursed or promised, will the next government shift more public money towards productive activities such as upgrading ports and boosting worker education, or will it be forced to give yet more sugar and spice to voters fattened by everything nice?” the writer asked.

Reme said that the reality was that sugary deals and promises of more handouts will not necessarily reel in the votes, as several political observers here have said.

“The harsh reality is that the more you give, the more people want.A second point is that the freebies have to be paid for by somebody down the line,” Reme said.

He pointed that Malaysia is already into its 16th year of a budget deficit since the 1997 Asian Financial crisis that the money to pay for the government’s spending came from taxes and “other piggy banks, such as national oil firm Petronas”.

He reminded that tax revenue that could have been spent to build new roads may instead be funnelled for other purposes to keep the political election pledges, like petrol price subsidies or compensating highway companies to remove their toll booths.

“In other words, they will be paid for by the same voters who thought they got them for free.”

PM’s polls-delaying gambit becomes a farce

March 12, 2013

by Terence Netto @http://www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT: Steadily and surely, the options have whittled down to naught for the Najib Abdul Razak administration. Five years have lapsed since the last general election (March 8, 2008) and almost four full years have passed on Najib’s prime ministerial watch alone.

But Najib had not seen it fit, before it is constitutionally mandated, to call for polls.  Newly installed Malaysian Prime Ministers have not waited this long to seek a national mandate.

Najib’s father, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, waited four years from taking over from predecessor Tunku Abdul Rahman in 1970 before calling for a general election in August 1974. But there were extenuating circumstances and so the delay was justifiable.

Razak (centre in photo) had officially taken over more than a year on from the race riots of May 1969 that exploded days after independent Malaysia’s third general election.

Those were times of political turbulence and the gestation of a new post-May 13 political order was not something that could be foreshortened before electoral endorsement of it was sought.

Since Razak, a newly-installed PM has not waited an interminable length of time such as Najib has. Tun Hussein Onn, who took over as PM when Razak died rather suddenly in January 1976, waited something like 31 months to call a general election in August 1978, a long time indeed but not as yawningly long as Najib has tarried.

Hussein was induced to leave legal practice by Razak to join the government in the fraught days after May 13, 1969.  He was a reluctant politician and a stop-gap Deputy Pime Minister as a result of the death of the reliable and formidable Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman in August 1973.

Waiting 31 months before newbie PM Hussein sought his own mandate was not, in the circumstances, an impugnably long time for him to seek his mandate.

47 months since Najib took over

Since Hussein, newly installed PMs, Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, took nine and four months respectively before they sought and obtained their own mandates.

So Najib’s wait of a now 47-months since taking over as PM – a length of time that winds down the incumbent’s term to its constitutionally mandated limit – is extraordinary by any means, redolent more of fear than confidence at what the ballot might bring.

Najib has a pat explanation for the delay: he is said to want all aspects of his transformation programme to be implemented before he goes to the polls. Just now there is mordant irony to the transformation that the PM speaks of.

Wags are apt to remark that the only transformation they have seen in recent times is the rather startling transformation of the band of intruders at Lahad Datu who arrived on February 9, from an innocuous-seeming ragtag bunch, albeit touting M16s and grenade launchers, to “terrorists”who have to be arrested or exterminated, in Defence Minister Zahid Hamidi’s telling.

There can be no blinking the matter now. The Prime Minister’s gamble in deferring GE13 has turned out to a comprehensive dud: he has lost much more by delaying the polls than he possibly could have gained.

Had he gone to the polls, as he may have wanted to simultaneously with the Sarawak state election 22 months ago, he could well have pulled off a victory with room to spare.

The excruciatingly embarrassing National Feedlot Corporation scandal, Deepak Jaikishen’s damaging revelations, and now the ‘dead in the water’ sodomy case against nemesis Anwar Ibrahim where the father of accuser Saiful Bukhari has revealed that matter was an “evil conspiracy” whose trail of responsibility allegedly leads to the PM’s office – were all matters that had not yet come to light.

The PM’s dithering attributable to either a spiraling scandal or a swelling protest march induced in him a polls-deferment psychosis.

Two botched approaches

But deferment did not bring, as Najib obviously hoped, enhancement or retrieval of BN’s slumping prospects, either on the coattails of government goodies to the rakyat or on the strength of liberalising policies purporting to reflect an administration transformed from the sleepwalking of the Abdullah years.

In addition, there was the matter of his government’s two botched approaches to the show of people’s power by polls reform pressure group BERSIH in July 2011 and April 2012 – demonstrations that turned out to be indicative barometers of mounting public sentiment against the powers-that-be.

When finally Najib’s administration got things right as reaction towards public displays of discontent – as was the case with regard to the People’s Uprising (Kebangkitan Rakyat) Rally on January 12 – the turnout for the Opposition-organised demonstration was so large that it did not matter anymore that the government had things, finally, right with respect to public demos.

Lessons tardily learned, like justice too long delayed, are as useless as buried treasure. It became apparent that to the Najib administration, polls deferment was a narcotic to dull the pain of realisation that no matter what it did to tidy up its act or to dole out the goods, ongoing exposures of scandals and the success of the Pakatan Rakyat-controlled state governments of Penang and Selangor had combined to call time on continued UMNO-BN rule.

The drip-drip-drip of scandal was like acid, corroding public belief in the ability of a new broom PM to transform government after decades that had seen its bad ways become entrenched and ossified.

In the final few weeks of its term, the botched handling of an intrusion by a foreign armed band in Sabah, resulting in eight Malaysian lives lost thus far, combined with dramatic disclosures in the sodomy case against Anwar to render the Najib administration a joke as gruesome as the mutilation inflicted on six of the our dead in Semporna.

Anwar Ibrahim: Pakatan Rakyat will take Putrajaya by at least 10 seat majority

March 8, 2013

by Chong Pooi Koon, Bloomberg @http://www.malaysiakini.com

Pakatan Rakyat will win the country’s upcoming general election with a parliamentary majority of more than 10 seats and control at least six of the nation’s 13 states, leader Anwar Ibrahim said.

On day one of taking power, a People’s Alliance government would liberalise newspaper licences, Anwar said in an interview in Kuala Lumpur today.

Policy priorities within the first 100 days would include education, corruption and government procurement. No retribution would be taken against past leaders, including Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who sacked him in 1998, he said.

“I don’t want to sound over confident, but I believe looking into the trend now it will be a comfortable majority,” the 65-year-old politician said. “Beyond 10 is comfortable.”

Prime Minister Najib Razak must dissolve parliament for polls by April 28, after which an election must be held within 60 days. Anwar wants to oust a government he once served as Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, and which has ruled Malaysia for 55 years.

Mahathir, who served as Prime Minister for 22 years before retiring in 2003, took on the role of finance minister himself after firing Anwar during the Asian Financial Crisis. Subsequent premiers Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Najib also held the portfolio. Anwar said he would give the job to someone else if he becomes Prime Minister.

“Having experienced eight years as Finance Minister, I know it’s very taxing,” said Anwar. “You cannot have a Prime Minister as Finance Minister. You won’t have time when you have forex problem, dealing with the Securities Commission.”

Pakatan hasn’t decided who would be Finance Minister nor other cabinet posts, he said.

The contest will be “very close,” Ibrahim Suffian, a political analyst at the Merdeka Center for Opinion Research, said by phone. “This is the opposition’s strongest moment in the history.”

Anwar was jailed for corruption and sodomy after being sacked by Mahathir. His conviction for sex with another man was later overturned. Since his release from prison in 2004, Anwar has taken charge of an ideologically disparate and multi-ethnic Opposition. He has pledged to roll back racial preferences for the ethnic Malay majority and trim the budget deficit if he wins power.

The governing BN coalition won the 2008 election by its narrowest margin, prompting Abdullah to take responsibility by handing over the reins mid-term to Najib.

Sabah incursion

The Prime Minister said in December his ruling alliance wants to restore its two-thirds majority in the poll. His approval rating fell to 61 percent in early February from 63 percent at end of December, the Merdeka Center said on February 26.

“For Najib, it’s very, very precarious because if he loses he’d be out, and if he wins with a narrow margin they’d force him out,” Anwar said. “He’d be removed either way.”

Pakatan will probably retain Penang, Selangor, Kelantan and Kedah states, Anwar said. It will also regain Perak, win Negeri Sembilan for the first time and make inroads in Johor, he said.

The Opposition leader was less certain about prospects in Sabah in light of a recent insurgency. Najib yesterday declared parts of Sabah special security zones. Police and military are fighting a Muslim clan that invaded Malaysia’s eastern state last month from the Philippines to assert its sovereignty claim.

Voting could be delayed in these areas, Bernama reported yesterday, citing Election Commission chairperson Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof. Polling elsewhere isn’t likely to be postponed, Anwar said. The Opposition currently holds 75 of 222 parliamentary seats, while BN has 137 seats.

Winning a 10-seat majority would give Anwar’s supporters 116 seats after the election.

- Bloomberg