National Debate on Najib’s Leadership?


August 31, 2014

National Debate on Najib’s Leadership?

by Khoo Kay Peng

NajibTun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s criticism and his right to do so should be respected even if some of us may not agree entirely with his grouses against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak. As a citizen and an ex-Premier of the country, Dr. Mahathir is entitled to his views on the leadership.

Mahathir has said that many policies, approaches and actions taken by the government under Najib have destroyed inter-racial ties, the economy and the country’s finances. As a result, he has withdrawn his support for the Prime Minister.

Mahathir claimed that the abolition of the Internal Security Act and the Restricted Residence Act has spiked crime activities because many gang leaders were released.  It is ironic that Mahathir has targeted Najib but did not mention anything about our law enforcement officers.

The abolition of the two draconian and archaic laws is not the reason for the spike in criminal activities. The government’s reluctance to fully restructure and rejuvenate the Police Force has played a large part in the failure to curb growing criminal activities.

Suggestions made by the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on the Police Force were largely restricted toKhalid Abu Bakar reporting purposes. Key recommendations contained in the report were largely left unimplemented. The RCI had comprehensively concluded that the Police Force needed to be reformed in order to recapture its past glory, to reclaim its credibility and to enhance its efficiency in keeping law and order.

Apart from the Police Force, other law enforcement agencies such as local councils and immigration department should be subjected to a thorough review too. In the Klang Valley and several key cities, illicit and illegal businesses such as clubs, massage parlours, gambling dens and others are mushrooming. This is the main financial lifeline to the gang leaders and a select few are raking in billions of ringgit a year.

Can the authorities safely say that they have been working very hard to cut the financial lifeline of these gangs by curbing these illegal and illicit businesses? Can they confirm that none of their enforcement officers are actively or passively “involved” in condoning these activities?

Why aren’t there any comprehensive actions taken against these organisations, for example the Police Force, the Immigration Department and the local councils? It is because it is difficult for the government to take action against any organisations or agencies that are dominated mainly by the race and the party “that had all this while supported and saved the government”.

PerkasaMahathir has criticised Najib for the failing inter-racial relations. Yet, it is not by accident that he is the patron of the right wing Malay Muslim pressure group PERKASA. The group has no qualms making some of the most absurd statements and demands to promote its right-wing agenda. To the leaders and supporters of this group, a particular racial denomination and religion shall be the basis that represents the right and wrong. There’s no moral compass or principle that the group’s viewpoint is subjected to for a fair justification.

But Najib should not be commended for his “achievements” (or a lack of it) in fostering better inter-racial relations through his 1Malaysia initiative. In fact, Najib was too afraid to go against organisations such as UMNO and PEKASA even if their actions may have contravened his administration’s own vision in inter-racial relations. In short, Najib is not willing to risk his position to do what is right for the country.

His inability to curb the racial sentiments from the organisations and to moderate the behaviour of their leaders has been his biggest failure in fostering better inter-racial relations. With a political figure such as Mahathir backing it, PERKASA is able to make all sorts of threats against the Najib administration to accept its wishes, demands and views.

If Najib has erred, he made a mistake for giving too much space and respect to leaders of the right-wingNajib2 organisations. If Mahathir is so concerned about the people, and the society’s multi-cultural and multi-racial fabric, he should not appear to speak for just a particular race or party. Although Mahathir’s criticism of Najib may have its merits, he missed the point by a mile. He should help to answer the question, “what has contributed to the deterioration of inter-racial relations in the country?”

Mahathir is right about the 1Malaysia cash handouts. Cash handout is being used as a means to show that the government cares for the people, especially the low-income group. Both the Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat governments have used it. Sadly, supporters from both sides of the divide are eager to defend the programme, not based on its merits and effectiveness but blinded by their own political loyalty.

For this purpose, there is very little debate and serious scrutiny being conducted to study the impact of the policy. There’s very little interest from both coalitions to take up serious socio-economic policy research to seek the best solution and action plans to reverse the fortune of the faltering Malaysian economy.

Excessive politicking has been chronic and disastrous to the economy and nation. It is unfair to load the entire responsibility on just a man, the prime minister.  However, Mahathir’s criticism should be measured carefully and its only contribution would be to trigger a national debate on various key issues such as inter-racial relations, deteriorating economic competitiveness, rising crime, worsening education quality and others.  If this happens, it could yet be a huge contribution from Mahathir.

Khoo Kay Peng is a political analyst and a management consultant. He believes that this nation can only progress with the collective will of its people.

http://www.theantdaily.com/Outspoken/Mahathir-s-criticism-should-trigger-national-debate-on-key-issues/#sthash.msi1jJwK.dpuf

‘AMANAT MERDEKA’ by The Hon’ble Prime Minister of Malaysia


August 31, 2014

‘AMANAT MERDEKA by The Hon’ble Prime Minister of Malaysia

Najib2[Following is the English translation of the full text of speech delivered by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak at the 57th National Day address at Dewan Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysian Tourism Centre (Matic) in Kuala Lumpur on the evening of August 30, 2014.]

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim, Assalamualaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh, Salam Sejahtera and Salam 1Malaysia, Beloved Malaysians,

1.Alhamdulillah, praise and thanks be to Allah, with His permission once again, wherever we may be in this country, we continue to be protected in peace, to celebrate the anniversary of our independence.

2.Unlike in previous years, when the message was recorded and broadcast over the television, tonight I have chosen to speak live to hundreds of people present on the eve of independence, to express the spirit of patriotism and the burning desire of the nation’s struggle, from eye to eye, from heart to heart, especially for all of you who are here representing the people of Malaysia.

3.The reality is that every independence begins with a noble struggle and unparalleled sacrifice, especially by the Malay Rulers and palace, political leaders and the people.

4.In this respect, if we look at the history of our nation, we were colonialised for four and a half centuries, beginning with the fall of the Malacca Malay Sultanate at the hands of the Portuguese in 1511 until the British administration. The colonialists came in succession to reap the benefits and to suppress the natives, up until independence on August 31, 1957.

5.Looking back at history, everyone must remember that this country originated as the Federation of Malay States, and subsequently united with Sabah and Sarawak.

6.With reference to this episode, we hear rumblings and unsavoury voices which question why the date of the formation of Malaysia is not the same as the date of independence; why September 16, when in the Peninsula, it’s August 31.

7.In this matter, we have to study what was really worked out by the special commission which was assigned to conduct a referendum among the people of Sabah and Sarawak in the process of the formation of Malaysia at that time.

8.For the information of the public, the later date came about due to technical reasons, because the Cobbold Commission had to wait for verification from the United Nations on the majority agreement through a referendum before finalising its report. As such, September 16 was fixed as the day for the formation of Malaysia.

Beloved Malaysians,

9.Going from there, this year, we celebrate the 57th anniversary of independence and the 51st year of Sabah and Sarawak having been with us as one Malaysia. Long live Malaysia, long live Malaysia!

Beloved Malaysians,

10.As such, we are thankful for the common history between the peninsula and Sabah and Sarawak, which are separated by the South China Sea, as well as the bond of brotherhood of all Malaysians from Arau in Perlis to Semporna in Sabah and Ulu Lachau in Sarawak, that cannot be broken; in fact, God willing, it will be strengthened further.

11. Hence, as soon as the 13th general election was over, to symbolise the new mandate received by the government, I did not hesitate to appoint a number of ministers and deputy ministers from Sabah and Sarawak in respect of the support given by our brethren there to the Barisan Nasional (BN).

12. Now more than one year has passed. The number of representatives from Sabah and Sarawak in the government is an important yardstick in determining the next course for our beloved Malaysia.

13. I had stressed in my major addresses over the past more than one year that the present government has a huge responsibility in prioritising the interests of the people, particularly the Malay and Bumiputera communities, Muslims and non-Muslims, who represent more than 70 per cent of the Malaysian people, by 2020.

14. So, whatever the opposition tries to do though incitement and accusations, we are steadfast in our agenda to empower the people.

Beloved Malaysians,

15. Recalling our pre-independence history, the complexities surrounding our quest for Merdeka had caused some apprehension among certain quarters on our choice to do it our way. But it can be seen that we have turned our plural society into an asset for prosperity and an ingredient of success at the highest level.

Beloved Malaysians,

16. We plan and leave the rest to God; this country had faced and weathered numerous challenges. Yet our Merdeka heart, Merdeka soul and Merdeka spirit shine through, such that we are able to rise above all and acquire success, our own way. Well done, Malaysians! Well done, Malaysians!

17.For instance, when the nation gained independence, the poverty rate was over 60 per cent. It dropped to 1.7 per cent in 2012, where hardcore poverty was almost eradicated.

18.When I took over the leadership and administration of the country in 2009, the 1Malaysia concept of ‘People First, Performance Now’ was introduced, based on the National Transformation Policy or NTP. The framework encompasses the bigger national transformation agenda, which began with the Government Transformation Programme or GTP, Economic Transformation Programme or ETP, Political Transformation Programme or PTP, Community Transformation Programme or CTP, Social Transformation Programme or STP and Fiscal Transformation Programme or FTP.

19. The results, in five years, were numerous achievements, which have been acknowledged internationally and which I have outlined in my speeches and reports.

20.The national economy showed a very encouraging trend in the second quarter of 2014 with a gross domestic product growth of 6.4 per cent, compared to 4.5 per cent in the corresponding period in 2013, the highest ever recorded since the fourth quarter of 2012. This makes our achievement the highest among the Asean countries for the first half of 2014.

Source: http://www.nst.com.my/node/28407

Selangor in Crisis, nation in extremis


August 27, 2014

Selangor in Crisis, nation in extremis

“But when the leaders choose to make themselves bidders at an auction of popularity, their talents, in the construction of the state, will be of no service. They will become flatterers instead of legislators; the instruments, not the guides, of the people. If any of them should happen to propose a scheme of liberty, soberly limited, and defined with proper qualifications, he will be immediately outbid by his competitors, who will produce something more splendidly popular. Suspicions will be raised of his fidelity to his cause. Moderation will be stigmatized as the virtue of cowards; and compromise as the prudence of traitors; until, in hopes of preserving the credit which may enable him to temper, and moderate, on some occasions, the popular leader is obliged to become active in propagating doctrines, and establishing powers, that will afterwards defeat any sober purpose at which he ultimately might have aimed.”

Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France

by Terence Netto@www.malaysiakini.com

For Pakatan Rakyat the Khalid Ibrahim saga has become a rent garment – the more they fuss with it the worse the tear becomes. The issue begs closure; regnant confusion in the Attorney-General’s Chambers over the distinction between legitimate criticism and seditious speech has now become the most ominous threat to fundamental liberties.

Pakatan Rakyat ought to be concerned with the latter menace. Unchecked, it will wipe out the gains theGani Patail federal opposition has made since the seminal general election of March 2008. The country is drifting without a rudder because it has a leader at the helm who mistakes decidedly inelegant silence for moderation, in tandem with an Attorney-General who misconstrues the irreverent for the inflammatory.

Because Pakatan views itself as a government-in-waiting, it cannot allow continued neurosis over who is to be Selangor MB to be as disabling as Najib Abdul Razak’s catatonia and Gani Patail’s confusion are for the country.

Fatal to Pakatan would be the impression, now fast gaining ground, that it is a coalition where problems within one component incapacitate the whole, or worse, exposes its unity as a thing of expedience more than principle. Hence the question of who is to replace Khalid Ibrahim as Menteri Besar of Selangor must now be resolved with all deliberate speed. The matter has preoccupied Pakatan for eight exasperating months during which public confidence in the ability of presumptive occupants to Putrajaya has been gravely undermined.

wan azizah 1The crisis is headed for further protraction, judging from the initial reaction of PKR and DAP to soundings yesterday from the Selangor Palace that each component of Pakatan should recommend three candidates for the position of MB. It appears that PKR and DAP are insistent on wanting only Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail for the post. Their insistence on nominating one candidate will keep the matter of Khalid’s replacement simmering.

After withering on the vine for eight months, the issue demands resolution, if only because it has been overtaken by other – weightier – concerns, of national rather than merely provincial import. Further delay in resolving it will redound to Pakatan’s disadvantage more than it would to any other entity, now that Khalid has tendered his resignation and has been requested by the Sultan to hold it in abeyance until his replacement is appointed.

PKR and DAP, in insisting on one candidate for the MB position, will appear to be unduly captious just when they should be – especially now when greater dangers impend – more concerned to get things over and done with.

Horizon-scanners, not navel-gazers  

Their insistence will open them to the charge of being navel-gazers, to the point of myopia and hallucination, just when they must be horizon-scanners – for the good of the overall polity, given the clear and present danger posed it by a rudderless national leadership and confused law enforcement.

The DAP, in particular, should put itself within sight of a Deputy MB-ship in Selangor, something that can be contemplated within the dynamics of political developments in the state. Should a PKR candidate other than Wan Azizah be appointed, the DAP’s support for that candidate would be critical and, therefore, a quid pro quo is within the ambit of the possible. (Isn’t politics the art of the possible?)

This is not to say that the DAP should put position before principle. There is the matter of the room that democratic politics allows its players wherein they can test the parameters of the allowable. They should look at what is happening in a neighboring country which has elected as President someone who is from well outside the usual strata of Indonesian political society from which candidates for that position usually emerge.

The DAP ought to be encouraged that, by the elevation of Joko Widodo to the Indonesian Presidency and Jokowithe avenue this has opened for Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, an ethnic Chinese and – what is more – a Christian, to become governor of Jakarta, the proof is clear that democratic politics rotates on an axis that is ultimately subversive of unjust barriers posed by race and religion.

Therefore the DAP should not feel itself unduly tied to the logic of what is essentially internecine feuding within PKR, especially if that wrangling has more to do with of individuals who have the destructive serum in the veins from their party of origin (UMNO).

khalid-ibrahimThe Khalid Ibrahim of the last several months is not an aberrant incarnation but a continuum with his party of origin. Nothing much can be done about this phenomenon unless, of course, the pestilence of UMNO rule is finally removed from the body politic.

More delay in resolving the Selangor crisis means more deferrals to the day of our release from our primary ailment. With the spate of sedition charges filed against an assortment of Pakatan stalwarts, that ailment is at its most febrile. Pakatan must not be seen to fiddle in Selangor while the country seethes in an UMNO-induced stupor.

 

Ethnic Inequalities in Malaysia remain after 57 Years of Independence


August 27, 2014

Ethnic Inequalities in Malaysia remain after 57 Years of Independence

by Jenni Dixon (received via e-mail)

Mahathir and his wards

Ethnicity has played a major role in Malaysian political and economic policy since the inception of the federation in 1963. The launching of the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1971, with the primary aim of promoting economic growth, with particular emphasis on exports, had another important objective: to promote unity and harmony in one of the most ethnically diverse of nations.

The laudable idealism of the project, which attempted to raise incomes and reduce unemployment in all ethnic groups, to reduce poverty and create a restructured society in which race played no part may have kept ethnic differences, prejudices and jealousies at bay while the country prospered, but the simmering tensions below the surface of society were bound to boil over as the country’s economy began to decline.

However, while many observers do accept that the NEP reduced overall poverty, it has to be said that it was only partially successful in achieving its goals. The policy of Bumiputera, which gives preferential treatment to the Malay ethnic majority, has gone some way towards reducing disparities in income and wealth, but has sharpened the rift between Malays and the other main ethnic groups, the Chinese and Indians. New policies following on from the NEP after 1990 have adhered to its philosophy of affirmative action. These have targeted education, employment and the development of new enterprises.

Programmes aimed at halting the decline of standards in primary and secondary education, increasing the manufacturing base and stimulating regional development have benefited some sectors of the urban population while neglecting the problems of the Malay rural and urban poor. While the reality of Malaysia’s social problems may be seen more clearly from a perspective of class, as a division between rich and poor, the country’s more visible ethnic differences colour much political analysis so that the division between the Malay/Muslim sector and the rest of the population has perhaps been allowed to dominate more than it should.

Playing the percentages

In 1971, over 66% of the Malaysian corporate sector was foreign-owned, while the indigenous Bumiputera, who made up 60% of the population, owned only around 2%. The NEP target was to increase Bumiputera holdings to 30%, that of other Malaysians to 40%, and reduce foreign holdings to 40% by 1990. The outcome was disadvantageous to the Bumiputera, who increased their holdings to only 20.4%, while the other Malaysians, mainly Chinese, benefited most with a rise to 46.8% that exceeded expectations, against a decline of foreign holdings to 25.1%. However, a booming economy during the 1990s and the early years of the 21st century ensured that all sectors increased the value of their holdings, which went some way to disguising ethnic resentments.

The current slowdown in the economy has only deepened the distrust between Chinese and Malays. Prime Minister Najib Razak has appeared to ignore these rising ethnic tensions in favour of strengthening his Malay support base. For several years he had been pressing for a review of Bumiputera policy. His recent close election victory, with his ruling National Front coalition winning a majority in the lower house with only 47% of the popular vote, compared to the 51% who voted for the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition, has put into sharp relief his lack of support among the ethnic Chinese, causing him to consider the benefits of pursuing policies favourable to the ethnic Malays. Indeed, in the autumn of 2013, he announced a new low-price housing policy aimed only at Malays.

Prejudices and disadvantages

Over the decades since 1970, when Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamed delineated the controversial ‘Malay Dilemma’, which helped to create the political climate for the instigation of the NEP, political rhetoric has only accentuated the fallacious negative image of Malays as struggling to overcome their ethnic inferiority. For those who want to believe these prejudices, Bumiputera policies that introduced quotas for education, scholarships and business contracts only seemed to confirm their validity. The false logic of this argument says that because Malays needed help in these areas, they were clearly lazy, uneducated and lacking in the business acumen for which the Chinese and Indians were renowned. Malays happen to make up the majority of the rural population, where there is a lower per capita income and more people live in poverty.

Social problems associated with poverty are necessarily more common among Malays; for example, the percentage of people needing help for drug abuse is far higher for Malays, which in 2008 was 74.97% against 12.61% for Chinese and 9.75% for Indians, and drug rehabilitation programmes show a recidivism rate of over 50%. On Anti-Drug day 2014 Prime Minister Najib Razak urged Malaysian families to do everything in their power to prevent their children becoming prey to drug addiction. These sorts of problems associated with poverty are better remedied in this way, in giving general encouragement and advice and relieving poverty than targeting a particular ethnic group.

New Bumiputera policies

In March 2014, Prime Minister Najib Razak launched the new Bumiputera Business Expansion Fund worth RM200 million, which is designed to help Bumiputera technology companies to expand internationally. These will be flexible loans offered without the need for collateral with a generous payment period of six years, beginning two years after the beginning of the loan. Another RM25 million has been given to the Bumiputera Agenda Steering Unit, to be managed by the Malaysian Technology Development Corporation, and a further RM1.4 billion in Facilitation Fund Grants had already been approved for Bumiputera companies to develop 132 projects, creating about 23,000 new local jobs. The Prime Minister said that the loans were aimed at businesses in the cutting edge of a wide range of technological industries, and stressed that each proposed project must have a clear prospect of profitability and expansion.

The downside of Bumiputera is that while it is an attempt to stimulate the economy by preferential loans, it also by definition ignores other important sectors of the population. It has caused many Chinese Malaysians to emigrate as well as put off Chinese nationals from coming to study in Malaysia. The signs of a new ‘Malay Dilemma’ are already there to see, which may not be easy to remedy. In Kuala Lumpur, for example, preferential treatment is given to Malays for jobs and University places, and Malay shop owners and restaurateurs enjoy lower rents and ease of access to premises. Chinese resentment over these inequalities has created increased ethnic tension.

Sources

http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/Policy-Politics/Malaysias-ethnic-tensions-rise-as-its-economy-declines

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2012/06/21/nep-the-good-and-the-bad/

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2012/06/21/nep-the-good-and-the-bad/

http://www.academia.edu/531386/Rethinking_the_Malay_Problem_in_Singapore_Image_Rhetoric_and_Social_Realities

https://my.news.yahoo.com/najib-announces-rm200-million-bumiputera-business-expansion-fund-112631364.html

http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2014/02/19/PM-urges-families-to-unite-against-drug-abuse-Establish-a-happy-and-trusting-home-environment-says-N/

http://hornbillunleashed.wordpress.com/2013/09/21/50340/

http://www.malaysia-today.net/how-to-criticize-bumiputera-policies-101/

UMNO Leaders lack the guts to openly respond to Tun Dr. Mahathir’s Criticisms of Prime Minister Najib Razak


August 24, 2014

Whether we agree with his take on politics or support his policies when he was our PrimeDin MericanY Minister (1981-2003), we must admit, albeit grudgingly, that Tun Dr. Mahathir is an intellectual with a few books, countless articles and speeches (written by him). He has a very successful blog with hits running into the millions to his credit. He is also an avid reader and student of history, politics and economics. We can’t take that away from this controversial and outspoken leader. I have disagreed with him. But this time, I share his criticisms of our incumbent Prime Minister.

It is time for Najib to take heed  and be very serious about his job. He should stop sleepwalking, spinning, and preaching. Najib must not run away from serious problems and issues, leaving our country rudderless. His silence about them is irritating, no longer elegant. Notice that whenever there is a crisis, he conveniently goes abroad. So if he cannot take the heat, Najib should get out of the kitchen. Do us all Malaysians that special favour, and then he can go on  holidays with his lovely wife forever.

As for the kaki ampu UMNO Ministers and leaders like Shahidan Kassim, Ahmad Maslan and others, please stop defending Najib, and start telling him some obvious truths about his leadership of our nation, even if that means losing your jobs and positions in UMNO. Please show us that you got  guts and integrity.–Din Merican

“Nothing turns out to be so oppressive and unjust as a feeble government.” Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France

UMNO Leaders lack the guts to openly respond to Tun Dr. Mahathir’s Criticisms of Prime Minister Najib Razak

Commentary by The Malaysian Insider

Perhaps the point is lost on UMNO Information Chief Datuk Ahmad Maslan that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad did complain and criticise Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak privately.

mahathir baruAn Outspoken  Gutsy Leader

But it didn’t work, so the country’s longest-serving Prime Minister had to take his complaints and criticisms out in the open for all to see, no matter if UMNO’s political foes take advantage of it. This isn’t the first time that Dr Mahathir has publicly dropped support for an UMNO President. He did it to Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi two years ahead of the 2008 general elections.

The UMNO Information Chief said although he respected Dr Mahathir, he felt that the veteran politician should have been circumspect with his criticism of Najib’s leadership. “Please bear in mind that the situation and circumstances during Mahathir’s times are different from Najib, both economically and politically,” he said during a speech at the Seputeh UMNO meeting today.

This is the thing with UMNO politicians who cannot argue with Dr Mahathir, who was in power for more than 22 years. Instead of arguing with him point for point, UMNO politicians insist they respect him but the circumstances are different.

How different is it? UMNO and Barisan Nasional (BN) still hold Putrajaya. They still control the mass media. They run the economy and under Najib, have put several transformation programmes for the country to be a high-income nation come 2020. But they have yet to argue that Najib’s policies have worked although Putrajaya’s efficiency agency, Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu) says that the policies are working.

Najib+Tun+Razak.snoozeWake Up, Prime Minister

Let’s put in perspective what Dr Mahathir said this past week was carried only by the online media and not the mainstream electronic and print media. “I have tried to give my views to him directly, which are also the views of many people who have met me,” wrote Dr Mahathir on his popular blog, chedet.cc.

“This has not been effective so I have to criticise. I have no choice but to withdraw my support,” he said, adding that Najib was no better than his predecessor, Tun Abdullah Badawi.

Dr Mahathir said he had hoped Najib learnt lessons from his poor performance in the last general election but it appeared that he had not. “Many policies, approaches and actions taken by the government under Najib have destroyed inter-racial ties, the economy and the country’s finances,” he wrote, citing the BR1M direct cash aid and kow-towing to foreign countries.

This isn’t new from Dr Mahathir. He has articulated this in the past in his blog and several forums in the past year. So why bother asking him to continue criticising in private when it has not worked?This is the same mentality as having no-contests in Umno elections, which was the standard practice when UMNO was reconstituted after being made illegal in 1988.

So times have changed, as Ahmad Maslan says. But UMNO elections are still the same no-contests as in Dr Mahathir’s time to ensure party unity. If there is truly a change in situation, UMNO politicians like Ahmad Maslan should take it upon themselves to reply to Dr Mahathir point by point. Respect Dr Mahathir by arguing with him, not asking him to criticise in private. – August 23, 2014.

Anwar wants to be PM, what’s wrong with that?


August 20, 2014

Anwar wants to be PM, what’s wrong with that?

by Sakmongkol AK47

DSAIUndiminished Passion to lead Malaysia

My friends are saying, if we listen to Dr Mahathir, the Selangor political saga is all because of Anwar. Anwar wants to become PM and Selangor is his stepping stone. By controlling Selangor he can buy UMNO and others to cross over and join Pakatan.

If Anwar does that, it is nothing new. Buying his way out of most political predicaments is second nature to people like Najib himself. Monetary gratification is a most effective way to soften the most hardened of political opponents. Selangor should be used as a strategic vantage point if the objective is to capture Putrajaya from the more evil clutches of BN politicians.

So what is wrong with Anwar wanting to become PM and using Selangor in a more strategic way? Some other friends are saying- it’s true, the problem in Selangor is caused by Anwar. But the problems in Malaysia are all due to Dr Mahathir. Dr Mahathir can be faulted for almost everything bad in Malaysia while he is credited with many things that are right for Malaysia.

So, we should not be overly concerned with what Dr Mahathir says. He has an undying hatred for Anwar. The two will continue to battle until one dies. We ought to see any statements about Anwar from Dr Mahathir as personal assessments with little political significance.

Anwar Ibrahim has the right to want to become the PM of Malaysia. If more people accept him, there is nothing anyone else can do. Not even Dr Mahathir. Since the Khalid Ibrahim issue broke out, Anwar Ibrahim has been relatively quiet. Perhaps he has been issuing directives behind closed doors. Otherwise, his treatment of Khalid has been tangential- producing a subdued article about what is a leader without followers. Not quite a fire and brimstone article.

Otherwise, Anwar hasn’t criticised Khalid aggressively as did the others in PKR. Perhaps Anwar’s approach is a reflection of what Khalid has achieved in the more positive side.

hype_najib1

Why is it wrong for Anwar to harbour the ambition to become PM? If he thinks he has the capacity to become the next PM and he has the support of Pakatan and the rakyat, Anwar ought to be voted in to become PM. I have said it many times, if Najib can become PM, anyone else can. You can look at the statement from any perspective you like.

If I can single out Anwar’s most important achievement, it is that he has bonded 3 different major political parties to share a common platform. Not even Tengku Razaleigh when he broke away from UMNO to form Semangat 46 could achieve what Anwar did.

With a shared platform, Anwar has managed to offer the rakyat an alternative to BN, itself made of up of several different political parties. So why should Anwar be seen a lesser man and therefore not fit to become PM? Malaysians owe him an eternal debt of gratitude for forging a common platform.

Anwar-UbahAnwar’s Legacy–Pakatan Rakyat for Change

The common platform is by no means absolute- it is rather a continuing work in progress as the different political parties strive to understand each other better. The recent Selangor saga showed clearly, the bond that exists between PAS- DAP and PKR must be strengthened with mutual respect, understanding and trust.

The only chink in Anwar’s armour is his alleged sexual misconduct, so depraved as the BN paints it out to be, that Anwar is morally unfit to become PM. His alleged recent most victim, Saiful Bukhari is suing Anwar for RM50 million. That makes Saiful the owner of the most expensive behind in Malaysia!

Now that morally depraved, is something you cannot conclusively proved. Since 1998, Anwar has been in and out of courts and even jailed for a number of years. The duration of his association with the courts, which makes Anwar the ‘other’ friend of the court, is now seen by the rakyat as being no ordinary prosecution but a persecution.

How can a man be persecuted for that long a time? Anwar’s endurance has even earned and gained admiration for that can only reflect a resolute and unshakeable spirit of the man. Any other man would have wilted a long time ago.

Indeed, rather than indicate a morally depraved being, Anwar’s endurance to withstand the longest persecution in Malaysian history has shown that Anwar has the moral fortitude. Surely such a man is more than qualified to become the PM of Malaysia.

How I personally feel about the man, is not significant at all. For that matter, to anyone else. Can and will he gain the trust of the rakyat is more important and far greater significant.