Malaysia’s Greatest Crisis: Loss of National Pride and Unity

 

May 13, 2019

by Murray Hunter

Malaysia’s Greatest Crisis: Loss of National Pride and Unity

Love him or hate him, Mahathir Mohamed during his first stint as prime minister was able to instill a great sense of national pride and unity.

Mahathir went on a massive infrastructure drive. Most Malaysians were proud of the Penang Bridge that finally linked the island with the mainland. The North-South Highway project changed the nature of commuting up and down the peninsula. Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) was built and the development of Putra Jaya gave the country a new seat of administration.

Mahathir’s fait accompli was the building of the KLCC towers in central Kuala Lumpur, which were the tallest in the world at the time. These buildings are now the country’s major icon. Langkawi became a must holiday place for Malaysians. He brought elite Formula One motor racing and built a special purpose circuit for the event. He promoted the Tour de Langkawi as a local version of the Tour de France. He spared no expense on building massive new sporting complexes at Bukit Jalil to host the Commonwealth Games in 1998.

When the member nations of ASEAN abandoned the idea to build a regional car, Mahathir went alone, picking up old technology from Mitsubishi, creating the Proton Saga for better or worse although the national car project has been roundly criticized for losing hundreds of millions of dollars and costing more in terms of consumer lost opportunity.

Nonetheless, Malaysia became an Asian Tiger and Mahathir himself became an outspoken leader internationally. The country was proud of what it had achieved.  He knew the value of national symbols. The slogan Malaysia Boleh (Malaysia Can) was often heard along with the waving of the Jalur Gemilang (stripes of glory – Malaysian Flag) at public displays of national pride and unity.

The Barisan Nasional was a working government coalition that symbolized national unity through the make-up of the cabinet and its true multi-ethnic flavor. Ministers like Samy Vellu from the Malaysian India Congress and Ling Liong Sik from the Malaysian Chinese Association had high public profiles.

Although Mahathir was labeled as an ultra-conservative Malay, he worked with anyone who could help him fulfil his vision. Businessmen like Vincent Tan, Robert Kuok, Lim Goh Tong, Ananda Krishnan, and Tony Fernandez all had very close relationships with Mahathir. Malaysia Inc. was more important to Mahathir than Malay supremacy.

That’s now 30 years ago. The prime casualty has been national pride and unity. The generally positive perception of the Mahathir era drastically changed when he abruptly sacked his deputy Anwar Ibrahim from office in 1998. The accusations and conviction of Anwar for sodomy polarized the population. The goodwill that Mahathir had built up over more than 25 years in public life was put into question.

Although it was his intention to eliminate his nemesis Anwar from politics, he made sodomy a household word in a conservative society, taking luster away from his legacy.  He was painted by the Anwar propaganda machine and the alternative media as a tyrant with millions of dollars hidden away in foreign banks. In addition, two years of headlines and court reports about Anwar’s sodomy trial took away a sense of innocence, showing Malaysia’s ‘dark side’ with TV pictures showing a stained mattress being carted into and out of court every day on which Anwar was convicted of performing sodomy.

Under weak successors, belief in government further faltered. Respect for national leaders took another hit with Mahathir’s successor Ahmad Badawi painted as someone who slept on the job and enjoyed a luxurious lifestyle while many suffered economically. Badawi was painted by the PKR propaganda machine as corrupt. The dealings of his son-in-law and political adviser Khairy Jamaluddin were portrayed as corrupt nepotism.

Mahathir engineered an ungraceful exit for Badawi, replacing him with Najib Razak in 2009. The Najib premiership was tainted from the outset with rumors of murder and corruption. Najib’s wife Rosmah also became an object of ridicule, bringing respect for the institution of government to an all-time low.

However, it’s not just the corruption of politicians that destroyed respect for Malaysian institutions. The rakyat (people) have always wanted to believe in royalty. Even with stories about royal misdoings, there is no real talk of abolishing the monarchy. Whenever a member of one of the royal families acts in the interests of the rakyat, there has always been public praise and support. However, when members of a royal family act against the interests of the rakyat, the social media react.

Stories have been circulating for years about the misdeeds of Johor Royal Family. The current spat between Tunku Ismail, the Johor Crown Prince, commonly known as TMJ and Mahathir is extremely damaging for the royal institutions. Only the sedition act, a de facto lese-majeste law, is protecting the institution from much wider criticism.

Royal decorations and titles, VVIP service in government offices and special treatment for some citizens over others, shows a muddled Malaysia still clinging to the vestiges of feudalism. These artefacts are doing nothing to unite the country, a hangover from the old days of colonial class distinction.

However, the most powerful source of destruction for national pride and unity is the ketuanan Melayu (Malay Superiority) narrative which has become much more extreme. One of the basic assumptions is that bumiputeras — indigenous peoples – are the rightful owners of the land. From the point of view of the ketuanan proponents, land is not seen as a national symbol and non-Malays are excluded. This is a great barrier to developing any sense of national pride and unity.

The gulf between Malay and non-Malay has widened dramatically over the last two generations as Islam has grown into a major aspect of Malay identity. Citizens once celebrated their diverse ethnicities in harmony. Decrees made in the name of Islam now discourage this. No longer are Hari Raya, Chinese New Year, Deepavali and Christmas shared Malaysian experiences.

The way of life has become Islamized to the point where there is little place for other religions and traditions. Food, dress codes, entertainment, education, the civil service, government, police and the military are all Islamized.

Shared apprehensions about what Malaysia will be have caused the Chinese to close ranks. The influence of Ketuanan Melayu in government policy excludes non-Malay participation in many fields like education, civil service and the military, etc. The younger generation of Chinese today tend to see themselves as Chinese first and Malaysians second. Chinese schools promote language and a strong sense of Chinese culture over a Malaysian identity as a mass defence mechanism.

The New Economic Policy, put in place in 1969 after disastrous race riots as an affirmative action program for the majority Malays, has also done a disservice to those it was designed to help. The thesis of Mahathir’s book The Malay Dilemma was that Malays were basically lazy and needed help from the government is the faulty grounding assumption. The NEP is actually an attack on Malay self-esteem.

Rather than offering something spiritual, Islam has become a doctrine of conformity, where particular rights and rituals must legally be adhered to. Failure to do so in the case of not fasting during Ramadan can lead to punitive legal action.  Any views outside narrow social norms lead to heavy criticism. Just recently the Islamic authorities (JAKIM) in Selangor started investigating a discussion forum on women’s choice about wearing the hijab. Not just freedom of discussion is stifled, but also the right to be creative.

Islam has buried the principles of Rukun Negara (national principles), the supposed guiding philosophy of the nation. Rukun Negara was once a symbol of national pride and unity but has almost totally been replaced by a Doa (or prayer) before public events. A sense of nation has been sacrificed for the Islamization of public gatherings.

Today we see much less flag-waving during the Merdeka season. There are more divisional narratives on all ethnic sides. There is disappointment with the political system. Islam is seen by many as something overpowering rather than emancipating. People feel they need to conform to be accepted in society.

National pride and unity are at their lowest ebb since independence, where after 30 years of education the younger generations of Malays see Islam as more important than nationalism. Chinese and Indians are apprehensive about what Malaysia is turning into. Even the Orang Asli – the original inhabitants of the peninsula before the arrival of ethnic Malays from Indonesia — and non-Muslim indigenous people of Sabah and Sarawak identify as second-class.

Malaysia has travelled far away from the aspirations of Tunku Abdul Rahman when the Jalur Gemilang was raised for the first time over a free Malaya in 1957. Malaysia’s economic prosperity is relatively declining in the region and the nation is increasingly strangled by the need to conform. Malaysia appears to be a ship without a rudder, its reform agenda locked away under the Official Secrets Act.

The possibility of racial violence festering once again cannot be overlooked. Divisive narratives are being pushed until one day an unknown tipping point could be reached. The strong sense of social conformity, the exclusion of a national sense of ownership to all, the current totalitarian nature of authority and ketuanan Melayu narratives are a very dangerous mix.

Murray Hunter is a regular Asia Sentinel contributor. He is a development specialist and a longtime resident of the region.

Malaysiaopinionpremium

How the Market Is Betraying Advanced Economies

April 16,2016

Apr 9, 2019 Diane Coyle

As lifestyles in the world’s developing economies improve drastically, many in the advanced economies are seeing their well being deteriorate – a trend that automation will only exacerbate. Without fundamental change in the framework of public policymaking, it is difficult to imagine a prosperous future in these societies.

 

CAMBRIDGE – Despite ever-improving conditions for millions of people around the world – documented by entities like the University of Oxford’s Our World in Data and highlighted by scholars like Steven Pinker – popular discontent is on the rise in many places. The reason is simple: whereas the first trend is being driven by low- and middle-income countries, the second is concentrated in high-income countries.

Apr 9, 2019 Joseph E. Stiglitz thinks it’s his attacks on the truth-seeking institutions that underpin economic prosperity.

Throughout the developed world, conditions for many workers are deteriorating, with no recovery in sight. Income inequality is near historic highs, wealth inequality is even higher, and economic insecurity is widespread.As the United Kingdom tears itself apart politically and constitutionally over Brexit, many of its citizens struggle with low-quality jobs, inadequate housing, and poverty so severe that they rely on food banks. France’s Yellow Vest protests have been hijacked by violent extremists, but they reflect real grievances about the growing challenge of maintaining living standards. In the United States, the Economic Report of the President touts the supposed elimination of poverty, but life expectancy does not decline in a prosperous country.In short, the post-World War II social contract in many of today’s developed economies is breaking down. And even more uncertainty and insecurity are on the way, as new technologies such as artificial intelligence and robotics take root.Though the pace and scope of the next wave of automation is impossible to predict with precision, the impact will be profound. Like other digital technologies, AI and robotics will boost the value of some skills while reducing the value of others. And, by reinforcing social biases, extensive algorithmic decision-making risks amplifying existing inequalities further.It is impossible to uninvent technology. But we should not fall into the trap of technological determinism. The forces that drive structural economic change are always refracted through policy decisions, which can help ensure that technological innovations contribute to a more prosperous future.

Given the depth of the transformation ahead, however, it is not just the policies themselves that must change, but the very framework on which they are based. This means abandoning the idea – which has shaped public policy for more than a generation – that the “market” must be the organizing principle for collective decision-making.

The market, in this sense, is an abstraction – one that has little to do with actual markets, which are social institutions as varied and multitudinous as Leo Tolstoy’s unhappy families. It embodies the assumption that, overall, we secure the best economic outcomes if producers compete to respond to the desires of individual consumers (in line with their purchasing power). And its performance is measured according to the number of contemporaneous exchanges taking place.This is unlikely to be the best metric. For one thing, it does not account for the depreciation of assets, from houses in California destroyed by wildfires to insect species at risk of extinction. It also fails to account for the fact that a growing proportion of exchanges in the digital economy involve “public goods,” consumption of which is non-rivalrous (the good can be shared by any number of people without being depleted).But there is an even more fundamental problem with assessing an economy’s welfare according to the satisfaction of individual choices. As the late William Baumol pointed out, if you assume that economic agents are independent, you will conclude that independent choices maximize their well being. This is circular reasoning.In fact, economic agents are not as independent as the conventional wisdom would have us believe. People’s consumption preferences are not discovered through introspection and then upheld permanently; they are shaped socially and change over time. In the age of social media “influencers,” this may be truer than ever, with turbocharged network effects amplifying the impact of one individual’s choices on others.Likewise, in production, there is far-reaching potential for economies of scope and scale – potential that grows even larger in high-tech domains. This means that one firm’s production decisions affect production by others in the same market.The conceptual underpinnings of policymaking need to be updated to reflect this economic reality. For starters, governments need to recognize that their decisions shape the structure of production, and develop strategies to support particular strengths in production (through innovation policies or procurement frameworks) or to address weaknesses (in areas such as skills). Economists like Dani Rodrik and Justin Yifu Lin have led the way in proposing ways to think about modern industrial strategy.Governments must also improve the opportunities available to those left behind in today’s fast-changing economy. This means ensuring that all citizens have access to quality public education, public transportation and broadband infrastructure, adequate health care, and decent housing. Such basic services are more important than income subsidies, because they are public goods, which the market – where decisions are made by aggregating individual demand – will not provide.The organization of millions of interdependent individuals in a technologically complex society will always be difficult to manage. With productivity flat-lining and public anger growing, it is clear that existing policies are not up to the challenge. Without a new approach, it is difficult to imagine a prosperous future for Western societies.

Apr 9, 2019 Diane Coyle

7 Commentaries

Diane Coyle is Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge.

 

• B Wilds  Apr 14, 2019

  We must recognize the natural progression that takes place as an economy matures. A failure to recognize this economic transition and reflect upon the natural progression of society ushers in conflicts and even war as politicians wrangle to produce the ever-growing growth demanded by a majority of voters.

  The idea that the way to grow is to increase our population is flawed. Simply adding mouths to feed and efforts to merely add new workers to replace those retiring creates additional demand but is flawed and shortsighted because it ignores the problem of exploding population growth across the world. More on this subject in the article below.

  http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2017/10/economic-transition-reflection-upon.html

  Read More

 

• WmC Mantis  Apr 14, 2019

  Is Diane Coyle trying to tell us that economic policymakers should be doing more to ensure a continually rising mean household quality of life? If so, she could have done it in fewer words.

• Elizabeth Pula  Apr 11, 2019

 

Is this alternative NEW option really not new at all, but “indentured servitude” reserved for the 21st century?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-04-09/college-grads-sell-stakes-in-themselves-to-wall-street

Read More

• Andrew Benington  Apr 11, 2019

  Voters will determine the policy response to growing automation, capital and income concentration. Voters love something for nothing. The difficulty for policy makers is having set course on the abandonment of home ownership by the majority, they now find themselves in that awkward moment between declining home ownership and growing numbers of tenants, between promoting house price inflation and promoting rent control, secure tenancies, secure employment, higher and ever rising take home income.

  Read More

• Elizabeth Pula  Apr 11, 2019

 

“situational awareness”- perspective varies depending on your position- the state VS the citizen or state the result of social contract between and amongst citizens.

https://graphics.straitstimes.com/STI/STIMEDIA/Interactives/2017/08/can-you-spot-yourself-in-the-national-day-parade/index.html

Read More

• Elizabeth Pula  Apr 11, 2019

  There are “other” issues that are developing in Advanced Economies, that may bear some very unforeseen consequences due to the possibilities in, and of the marketplace. There are many implications due to market betrayal, that could be very serious on the humanity level, that interplay with the AI issues, as mentioned in this link:
  https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613277/chinese-scientists-have-put-human-brain-genes-in-monkeysand-yes-they-may-be-smarter/

  Read More

 

• Elizabeth Pula  Apr 11, 2019

  AI is an extremely complex aspect of the “market abstraction”. Individual understanding of “situational awareness” for, and by everyone will become increasingly critical to maintain “social contracts” and more critically, individual psychologically intact personal, individual identities.

  https://www.hstoday.us/subject-matter-areas/emerging-innovation/perspective-ai-is-changing-the-game-for-situational-awareness/

  04/11/2019

  Read More

• Robert Bruce  Apr 10, 2019

  There is no doubt that basic services, paid for by public funding, are an essential investment for all social and economic progress. And nowhere has the lack of investment been more apparent than in housing, where the market incentive actually works to restrict the supply of affordable housing, and push prices up.

  However, that does not mean that we should be forced into an artificial choice between income subsidies and basic services – a healthy market economy needs both. Markets can only meet the essential needs of consumers, if they have the income necessary to purchase them. Without a stable income, citizens lose any agency in a market economy. As growth of the digital economy accelerates economies of scale, our economy is polarising into big centralised winners (like Amazon and Google) and many more localised losers (like retail workers and local journalists). As a result, we are starting to see whole communities and regions go into decline as their real incomes stagnate.

  Politicians can only offer ideologies of the 20th century. The right want power over jobs to rest entirely with the markets – private banks and business owners, creating a race to the bottom. Meanwhile the left want the government to control our lives – with promises of job guarantee, planned and provided for by the state. But there is another alternative. Basic Income gives power and agency to individual citizens and communites to shape their own future. It is a solution that creates local markets where consumers have both money and time to spend as they choose, and can work in cooperation to meet each others needs. This is why UBI is so much more than just an income supplement. It is a whole new way to imagine a market economy that works for everyone, and not just for the winners in “The Global Race”.

 

• Paul Friesen  Apr 12, 2019

  I agree that a basic income is one way to solve the problem of the declining need for human labour. But I think there is a better way. That is a negative income tax – an income tax that turns into an income subsidy for those with low income.

  Any such scheme needs to be paid for with taxes, and the tax rate required to run a negative income tax would be lower, because there are no payments to the wealthy, and other payments would be lower. The end result would be the same – a fairer income distribution.

  Read More

 

• vivek iyer  Apr 10, 2019

  Diane Coyle says that Economics is a worthless discipline. We agree. But, she is herself an economist. The Government employs Economists. But because economists are stupid, the Govt. makes worse decisions than any one else.

  The ‘framework of public policy making’ is sheer idiocy. All that happens is that some private sector company, which wants a padded contract for robbing the exchequer and delivering a terrible service to the public, lobbies the Govt. using some fashionable Davos speak and, though nobody is fooled, the taxpayer nevertheless takes a hit.

  It is difficult to imagine a prosperous future for kids born to poor people who will themselves have kids before they are well settled. It is easy to imagine a prosperous future for kids born to successful people who are saving money to set them up in life- perhaps in a different country with lower taxes and more opportunities.

  On the other hand, I do agree with the learned Professor regarding insect species. They are under represented not just in Parliament but also in the Media. For this reason, many are becoming disheartened and going extinct.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Messag

 Cancel

Please select a

 

 

First Name

Last Name

 

 

Please provide more details about your request

Cancel

1. Putin’s Art of the Purge

   

   Putin’s Art of the Purge

   Apr 15, 2019 Andrei Kolesnikov predicts that the recent arrests of former government ministers will have a chilling effect on Russia’s elites.

   0 Add to Bookmarks
2. Will Free Trade Make Africans Sick?

   

   Will Free Trade Make Africans Sick?

   Apr 15, 2019 Walter Ochieng urges governments to address the health risks stemming from the continent’s increasing openness.

   0 Add to Bookmarks
3. How to Tax a Multinational

   

   How to Tax a Multinational

   Apr 15, 2019 Jayati Ghosh argues that a single corporate-tax rate on firms’ global profits would benefit developing and developed countries alike.

   3 Add to Bookmarks
4. Our Zero-Emission Future

   

   Our Zero-Emission Future

   Apr 15, 2019 Jeffrey D. Sachs describes how the world’s energy and food systems can – and must – be transformed by mid-century.

   2 Add to Bookmarks
5. The Roots of Right-Wing Dominance in Israel

   

   The Roots of Right-Wing Dominance in Israel

   Apr 15, 2019 Shlomo Avineri points to several structural factors, not least the cumulative impact of profound demographic change.

   2 Add to Bookmarks
6. The Brexit Impossibility Triangle

   

   The Brexit Impossibility Triangle

   Apr 12, 2019 Emily Jones & Calum Miller provide a definitive outline of the tradeoffs involved in any scenario for a post-European United Kingdom.

   13 Add to Bookmarks
7. The Rising Cost of Strongman Rule in Cambodia

   

   The Rising Cost of Strongman Rule in Cambodia

   Apr 12, 2019 Sam Rainsy warns that Prime Minister Hun Sen’s repression of workers and opponents risks hobbling the economy.

   1 Add to Bookmarks
8. Closing Europe’s Confidence Gap

   

   Closing Europe’s Confidence Gap

   Apr 12, 2019 Ana Palacio asks what can sustain the European project now that peace and prosperity are no longer enough.

   2 Add to Bookmarks

• On Point
• Sections
• Big Picture

• Videos
• Podcasts

• Columnists
• Archive

Get our weekly newsletter

• Donate
• Magazine
• Subscribe
• The PS Store

• About Us
• Careers
• Contact

• Syndication
• Submission policy

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Youtube
• LinkedIn
• G+

© Project Syndicate – 2019 | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Cookie Policy

Cookies and Privacy

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. To find out more, read our updated cookie policy and p

Linking BRI with Cambodia’s rectangular development

March 29, 2019

Khmer times:

Chinese President Xi Jinping (R) meets with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen in Beijing, capital of China, May 17, 2017. Xinhua/Rao Aimin

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is an ambitious international cooperation and connectivity project initiated by China in 2013. Cambodia is one of the staunchest supporters of the initiative with the expectation that BRI will contribute to peace and shared prosperity. As a small and open economy, Cambodia is committed to building an open and inclusive international system.

The second Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation will take place in late April this year to further expand and deepen international collaborations and partnerships based on the spirit of peace, cooperation, openness, transparency, inclusiveness, equality, mutual learning, mutual benefit and mutual respect by strengthening cooperation on the basis of extensive consultation and the rule of law, joint efforts, shared benefits and equal opportunities for all.

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen will lead a big delegate consisting of deputy prime ministers, ministers and other senior leaders to attend the forum in Beijing. Cambodian leaders will also have a number of bilateral meetings with some key Chinese business leaders who are interested in investing in Cambodia. BRI is a key framework, or even a catalyst, to encourage and facilitate the investment inflow from China to the Kingdom.

..

In the joint statement of the first forum, the leaders stressed of forging joint endeavour on BRI and urged to build synergy between BRI with other connectivity initiatives. From the Cambodian perspective, building synergy between BRI with the five-year development plan, called Rectangular Development Strategy, is the priority of bilateral cooperation between Cambodia and China.

The Rectangular Development Strategy Phase IV prioritises four pillars namely human resource development, economic diversification, private sector and job development, and inclusive and sustainable development. At the core of the four pillars is the acceleration of the governance reform, which refers to institutional reform and capacity building, strengthening accountability and integrity in the public administration, strengthening of work effectiveness, and strengthening of private sector governance.

Under the BRI cooperation framework, China should further align BRI with key development areas of Cambodia. So far, Chinese development assistance and investment projects concentrate on hard infrastructure and labour-intensive industry. Both countries need to expand their areas of cooperation to include human resource development, digital economy and sustainable development.

The Chinese companies and factories should build vocational training centres or schools to build and transfer skills to local workers. Due to lack of local skilled labour forces, most of Chinese companies choose to bring Chinese workers, which costs more than hiring local workers. Chinese companies should also provide on-the-job training to build the capacity of local workers in order to improve productivity. In this regards, Chinese companies can learn a great deal from Japanese companies in terms of skills development and knowledge transfer.

Digital economy is the future economic sector of Cambodia. The key challenges facing Cambodia to realise a full-fledged digital economy are the lack of human resources and digital infrastructure, and the lack of public and private investment in innovation and entrepreneurship. Mega Chinese private companies like Huawei and Alibaba could help Cambodia to build the necessary infrastructure and human capital to help the Kingdom fully harness digital economy and the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

..

In terms of inclusive and sustainable development, China and Cambodia should work closely together to link BRI with the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the National Sustainable Development Goals. Chinese investments need to further link with rural development and poverty reduction. Some investment projects relating to land grabbing, serious environmental degradation, and socio-economic exclusion need to be reviewed. Environmental and social impact assessment needs to be seriously conducted before deciding on investment or development projects.

The success of BRI depends very much on the quality of the projects and the perception and participation of the local community. Both countries still need to double their efforts to ensure that development projects under BRI really benefit the local people. People-centred development approach should be at the core of BRI and Cambodia-China partnership.

Suos Yara is Member of Parliament from Cambodia.

..

• 

Will David Malpass be a malady for multilateralism?

February 18, 2019

15 February 2019

http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2019/02/15/will-malpass-be-a-malady-for-multilateralism/

by  Peter McCawley, ANU

 

In early January 2019, World Bank President Jim Yong Kim made the startling announcement that he is resigning. Reports suggested that the United States would nominate senior US Treasury official David Malpass for the post. Soon after, Donald Trump officially nominated him. 

Now that he has US backing, the chances are that he will quickly get the job. In principle, the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank is committed to an internationally competitive selection process. As soon as Jim Kim announced his resignation, the board issued a list of Selection Principles proposing five key criteria to be considered. The list, which was a good one, includes having a proven track record of leadership, the ability to articulate a clear vision for the World Bank’s development mission and an appreciation for multilateral cooperation.

It’s a good try. But the board’s effort will almost certainly fail. The United States has come to regard the World Bank post as a gift from the US President. The Trump administration doubtless expects that the board will confirm Malpass as World Bank president without too much fuss.

Malpass has a solid Republican background. He worked in the Reagan and HW Bush administrations, had a career on Wall Street working for the Bear Stearns global investment bank before it collapsed in 2008, and ran (unsuccessfully) in a Republican primary in New York for the US Senate in 2010.

More recently he worked as an economic adviser to Trump during the 2016 presidential election campaign and was appointed as Undersecretary for International Affairs at the US Treasury Department in 2017.

Since joining the Treasury Department, Malpass has been an outspoken sceptic of both multilateralism and, more specifically, of the World Bank’s activities. In an extended interview in 2017 he outlined the Trump administration’s view that ‘multilateralism has gone substantially too far’. One of the problems of the multilateral system, he said, is that it ‘often drifts away from our values of limited government, freedom, and the rule of law’.

Malpass was also critical of the World Bank’s program of lending to China. He said that it ‘doesn’t make sense’ for China to receive money borrowed in the United States, using the US government guarantee, when Beijing has ‘plenty of resources’ of its own and access to capital markets.

Views of this sort reflect boilerplate Republican approaches to international agencies such as the World Bank. They will nevertheless dismay staff of the World Bank, many of whom were bewildered by the nature of Jim Kim’s abrupt departure.

It may be that not too much should be made of Malpass’ tough language. Senior US Treasury officials — Republican and Democrat alike — have a long track record of growling at the World Bank and pounding the table during international negotiations over funding. They need to demonstrate to their colleagues around Washington and especially to Congress that they are protecting US foreign policy interests.

Neither are their criticisms always unreasonable. It is certainly true that the World Bank and numerous other international agencies have fat that can be trimmed. It is also true that many of these agencies are subject to ‘mission creep’ and that close reviews of their work programs are often useful.

If and when Malpass takes up the post as President of the World Bank, he will find himself in charge of a sprawling bureaucracy that contains many internal fiefdoms. He will face much resistance to change, both from within the World Bank and from many of the 189 member countries that belong to it — including, no doubt, China.

Hopefully Malpass will balance scepticism with enthusiasm as president. His faith in US benevolence should help bolster him in his work. In the same 2017 interview, he explained that it is in the United States’ ‘own self-interest’ as a global leader to see neighbours do well.

If he can apply principles of this kind to his new job, Malpass might come to leave his mark as one of the more successful presidents of the World Bank.

Peter McCawley is Honorary Associate Professor in the Crawford School at the Australian National University. He is formerly an Australian Executive Director on the Board of the Asian Development Bank in Manila.

Reflections on Achieving the Global Education Goals

February 15, 2019

Feb 12, 2019

by Amina J. Mohammed

In today’s deeply interconnected world, the benefits of strong and inclusive education systems are far-reaching. A quality education gives people the knowledge they need to recognize the importance of safeguarding the planet’s finite resources, appreciate diversity and resist intolerance, and act as informed global citizens.

https://www.project-syndicate.oryO8cnaCfxvpRj6xZQWIVfABNo8v98hSxJ6_Tzc6M

 

NEW YORK – Throughout my life, I have seen the power of education. I have witnessed how quality education for all can support the creation of dynamic economies and help to sustain peace, prosperity, and stability. I have also observed how education instills in individuals, no matter their circumstances, a strong sense of self, as well as confidence in their place in the world and their future prospects.

But I have also seen what happens when young people and their communities are robbed of education – and of the optimism it engenders. In my country, Nigeria, the militant Islamist group Boko Haram purposely removes young people, especially young girls, from education to engineer a lost generation. The consequences are manifold: loss of dignity, exclusion, declining health, poverty and stagnating economic growth, and the denial of rights.

We know that each additional year of schooling raises average annual GDP growth by 0.37%, while increasing an individual’s earnings by up to 10%. If every girl worldwide received 12 years of quality education, lifetime earnings for women could double, reaching $30 trillion. And if all girls and boys completed secondary education, an estimated 420 million people could be lifted out of poverty. According to a 2018 World Bank report, universal secondary education could even eliminate child marriage.

In today’s deeply interconnected world, the benefits of strong and inclusive education systems extend even further. Education gives people the knowledge they need to recognize the importance of safeguarding the planet’s finite resources, appreciate diversity and resist intolerance, and act as informed global citizens.

The United Nations Millennium Development Goals, created in 2000 to guide global development over the subsequent 15 years, gave new impetus to efforts to ensure education for all. From 2000 to 2015, primary-school enrolment in the developing world rose from 83% to 91%, reducing the number of out-of-school primary-school-age children from 100 million to 57 million. Moreover, from 1990 to 2015, the global literacy rate among people aged 15 to 24 increased from 83% to 91%, with the gap between men and women declining substantially.

But much remains to be done. Globally, at least 263 million children were out of school in 2016. This includes half of all children with disabilities in developing countries. Furthermore, half of all children of preschool-age – the most crucial years for their cognitive development – are not enrolled in early-childhood education.

For a limited time only, get unlimited access to On Point, The Big Picture, and the PS Archive, plus our annual magazine, for less than $2 a week.

S

The situation deteriorates further in conflict zones, where girls are almost two and a half times as likely to be out of school as their peers in stable countries. And this does not cover the estimated 617 million children and adolescents of primary and lower-secondary-school age – 58% of that age group – who are not achieving minimum proficiency in reading and mathematics.

To help close these gaps, the successor to the MDGs, the Sustainable Development Goals, also emphasizes education. SDG4 commits the world to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all – essentially to harness the power of education to unlock every person’s potential. Despite the scale of the challenge and the diverse barriers that can restrict and disrupt learning, we know what an effective strategy would entail.

First, to be a true force for change, education itself must be transformed in response to the realities of accelerating globalization, climate change and labor market shifts. While advanced technologies – such as artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and blockchain – raise new challenges, they may be able to play a role in improving educational outcomes. Digital skills must be part of any curriculum, and new alliances with the tech sector – which can provide valuable insights into these topics – should be actively pursued.

Second, an inclusive and lifelong approach, focused on reaching the most marginalized and vulnerable populations, is essential. As UNICEF’s Innocenti Report Card 15 shows, this does not mean sacrificing high standards. In fact, as the report points out, children of all backgrounds tend to do better when they are in a more socially integrated school environment. Such an inclusive approach will require sharing best practices and investing in what is proven to work. Meanwhile, development partners must provide long-term support that emphasizes capacity-building and institutions, and balances humanitarian, economic, and security imperatives.

For education systems and services to be truly inclusive, however, they must also leave no one behind, such as refugees. UNESCO’s latest Global Monitoring Report estimates that refugees have missed 1.5 billion school days since 2016. While eight of the top ten hosting countries, including several low- and middle-income countries, have shouldered considerable costs despite the strain on education systems to ensure that refugees attend school alongside nationals, most countries either exclude refugees from national education systems or assign them to separate facilities. This entrenches disadvantage and hampers social integration. The two landmark global compacts on migration and refugees adopted by UN member states last December point the way toward addressing this challenge.

Achieving the needed educational transformation will require far more financing than is currently on offer. As it stands, the global annual funding gap for education amounts to nearly $40 billion. Closing this gap will require not just increased domestic financing, but also a renewed commitment from international donors.

Everyone has the right to an education. Upholding this right – and achieving SDG4 – will require well-designed strategies, coupled with a prolonged commitment to implementation and effective cooperation among all relevant stakeholders. The UN and its agencies will continue to support such actions, as we strive to ensure that no one is left behind.

1. Feb 6, 2019 Daniel Gros

Amina J. Mohammed

Writing for PS since 2015

2 Commentaries

 

Amina J. Mohammed, former Minister of Environment for Nigeria, is Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations and Co-Chair of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network’s Leadership Council.

 

 

 

Could a Green New Deal help Malaysia invest in clean energy?–Getting our Priorities Right.

January 20, 2019

Opinion  |  Kenneth Cheng, Penang Institute

http://www.malaysiakini.com

The United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, António Guterres, did not mince words when he proclaimed in March last year that climate change is “the most systemic threat to humankind”.

  

United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, António Guterres

COMMENT | The United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, António Guterres, did not mince words when he proclaimed in March last year that climate change is “the most systemic threat to humankind”.

The report subsequently issued in October 2018 by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was equally damning when it stated that the Earth is projected to reach a 1.5 degree Celsius increase in average global surface temperatures compared to pre-industrial levels between 2030 and 2052.

Once that happens, sea levels will rise and this translates to increasing instances of floods and heatwaves. Some parts of the world would experience either intense droughts or rainfall.Malaysia will not be absolved of the sobering reality the world is currently grappling with. It is saddening that the devastating impact wrought upon Malaysia through floods, droughts and extreme wildfires are becoming an accepted truth to most Malaysians. According to the findings of the International Disaster Database, major floods are the most frequent natural disaster in Malaysia, while their impacts are also getting more severe. Floods, especially in the east coast region, in 2014 and 2017 were arguably the worst climate disasters in Malaysian history.

Ironically, the attitude of Malaysians towards our planet’s greatest threat remains lukewarm at best.

Pertinent environmental issues are not usually on the minds of most Malaysians.

The survey by Merdeka Centre in December 2016 found that under a third of Malaysians showed great concern about climate change.

However, 42.5 percent of Malaysians do concede that they have been not contributing enough in terms of protecting the environment, and more than half of Malaysians, in the same survey, also admitted the average temperature has been higher in the last three years.

Malaysians are generally perceived to be indifferent to the environmental challenges the world is facing now, but at the same time, they do acknowledge that the responsibility of protecting the environment lies with each individual and that the climate is indeed changing abruptly.

Existing measures

Thus, the onus remains on the government to take an active role in educating the public about the importance of preserving the environment.

Initiatives such as introducing environmental subjects, as was mooted by the previous government, should be debated once again within the cabinet. Early exposure to various environmental issues during adolescence would inculcate within young Malaysians the sense of civic responsibility that is much needed in preserving the environment.The government – having rightly recognised the threats posed by climate change – has tried to focus on ensuring continued economic growth through environmental sustainability, while building Malaysia’s resilience against natural disasters.

For example, the government has a Government Green Procurement (GGP) policy, whereby the procurement of products or services by any ministry or government agency is required to meet strict environmental criteria and standards set by the government.

According to the government, the implementation of GGP resulted in a reduction of 100.431 kilotonnes of carbon dioxide emissions in 2016 alone. The government also believes that the implementation of GGP would encourage the growth of a more environmental-friendly market.

Malaysia should also be applauded for introducing alternative green financing schemes such as green sukuk (bonds) and the Green Technology Financing Scheme (GTFS), to finance and stimulate sustainable projects. Both of these schemes are touted to be instrumental in growing Malaysia’s clean technology industry.

Green technology is loosely defined as technological processes which would keep environmental damage to the minimum.

Green sukuk is hailed as an innovative manner through which to raise funds to support environmentally sustainable infrastructure projects. Meanwhile, the GTFS was introduced with the aim of inducing the private sector into supporting the development of the green technology industry.

Areas for improvement

While the government’s numerous policies to combat climate change are commendable, they do not go far enough in terms of climate change mitigation.

Firstly, Malaysia’s research and development (R&D) in the fields of the environment and climate change is still lacking.

While the aforementioned financing schemes may bring inventive new technologies to the mainstream, its effects are limited as long as Malaysia’s green technology industry is stagnated as a whole.

This would further disincentivise the private sector from dipping their hands into the green economy, since the availability of green technology in Malaysia is limited and would result in a high capital cost should the private sector utilise such technology.

Moreover, government-backed financing schemes are limited in terms of being able to provide fundamental R&D for green technology. For instance, R&D projects are not included in GTFS, as it can only finance projects which are ready for commercialisation.Arguably, the biggest barrier towards successfully tackling climate change in Malaysia, and changing the preconception of climate change in Malaysia, is the dichotomy between economic development and environmental protection.

As a nascent developing nation, Malaysia – perhaps being desperate to rise through the economic ranks internationally – is more likely to forego environmental sustainability in pursuit of present-day development.

Malaysia’s climate change dilemma is also exacerbated by how its economy is predicated upon coal, natural gas or palm oil – natural resources which bring about enormous and irreversible impacts on the environment.

Green New Deal

Having said that, what if there was a way to propel the economy forward and yet, at the same time, preserve our environment?

Lately, the United States has been contemplating a ‘Green New Deal’ in an attempt to kick start the country’s slowing economy, while ensuring reductions in carbon dioxide emissions.The essence of a green new deal is simple enough: a government economic stimulus aimed specifically at clean technology designed to modernise the American economy while achieving the effect of mitigating climate change.A green new deal aims to energize the economy through huge public investment with the focus of constructing a more extensive renewable energy infrastructure.

The spillover effects of these public green investments would also lead to the creation of a swathe of green jobs and, crucially, expand the job market in renewable energy technology.

The Malaysian context

I believe it is worth contemplating the possibility of replicating a stimulus policy akin to the green new deal in America within the context of Malaysia. As I mentioned earlier, there is currently a dearth of investment in green technology in Malaysia, since the private sector is reluctant to invest in green technology as of now. Therefore, we are left with only the government as our only viable source to kickstart investment in green technology.

Significant but wisely targeted investments in clean, low-carbon technology would have the multiplier effect of boosting our economy and leading to the creation of modern and sustainable green energy jobs.The merits of such a move cannot be overstated enough. Aside from protecting the environment, the introduction of green energy jobs in Malaysia would also have the knock-on effect of transitioning Malaysia’s economy from one relying on non-renewable resources to a strong but self-sufficient economy powered mostly through renewable energy.

Green energy jobs also have the advantage of being mostly high-skilled jobs. The creation of such jobs would give the employment markets in Malaysia a much-needed lift, since we are currently suffering a mismatch of having too many low-skilled jobs but a large quantity of skilled labour.

It is no surprise that China, despite being the world’s largest coal consumer, is equally committed toward investing in green energy because of the economic potential it entails. By investing heavily in green energy, China is actually outpacing the US in terms of creating clean energy jobs.

Major public green investment does not appear to be popular enough, since it usually suffers from the time-lag effect and requires consistent funding.However, this wouldn’t be the case if the Malaysian public was aware of the huge monetary costs of natural disasters in Malaysia, and the projected future costs of climate change.

The floods in Kelantan between 2014 and 2015 caused an estimated RM200 million in losses, with buildings and government infrastructure most affected.

Additionally, the Penang state government has allocated a total of RM22.7 million for rebuilding infrastructure damaged by floods in 2017.

Heavier investment in clean energy will likely give us the opportunity to avoid such economic damage moving forward.Nevertheless, it would be difficult to obtain the approval of Malaysians to increase public investment in green technology at this current juncture, let alone have it debated in Parliament. But I argue that this is the only possible way to steer our country towards a modernised economy that truly puts the term ‘sustainable development’ into actual practice.Most importantly, it also ensures that our children possess the same privileges as us to take pleasure in what this planet offers us. Therefore, it is about time Malaysians started talking and acting strongly on the issue of climate change.

---

KENNETH CHENG is an analyst at Penang Institute. He holds a bachelor’s degree in economics and graduate diploma in politics. Hailing from the Silver State (Perak), he believes the challenge of a researcher is to temper his/her ‘pessimism of the intelligence’ with ‘optimism of the will’.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.