Mahathir justified in pulling out of Rome Statute

April 8, 2019

Opinion  |  S Thayaparan

Published: Today 6:26 am  |  Modified: Today 6:26 am

 

 

“And if we find whoever breaches the law – we don’t care who they are – we will take action, whether they are prince or pauper, we will take action. That is our stand.”

– Dr Mahathir Mohamad

COMMENT | If certain quarters assumed that “forcing” the Pakatan Harapan government to pull out of the Rome Statute was some sort of victory, reading the transcript of Mahathir’s press conference should be a reality check for them. If anything, the pugilistic response – even in defeat – is more of a slap in the face than anything in the Rome Statute.

Some people are disappointed that Harapan pulled out of the Rome Statute. Some people are disappointed with the non-Malay political operatives for supporting this move. It makes the Harapan government look weak when the far right forces, in collusion with certain members of the royal houses, disrupt a democratically elected government from carrying out policy decisions.

Foreign Minister Saifuddin Abdullah rightly points out that the deep state – my term is the deep Islamic state – is mounting a vigorous offensive to usurp the democratic process in Malaysia.

This anti-democratic element must feel great that they have managed to usurp the legitimate aspirations of people who voted for the Harapan government.

This anti-democratic element must feel great that they have managed to derail a democratic process in the name of race and religion

This anti-democratic element must feel great that they have managed to make the prime minister of this country bend to their will and, of course, the non-Malay political operatives sit silently while Malay power structures flex their muscles.

This may sound strange, but I have a lot of sympathy for Lim Kit Siang  when he says this decision was forced upon them. This Rome Statute fiasco was initiated by elements who are not democratically elected, but who have the influence to plunge this country into a protracted constitutional crisis that could derail any form of reform, however small.

While Kit Siang wonders how people’s minds could be poisoned, the reality is that the “people” had nothing to do with this. The Rome Statute issue was not fuelled by populist sentiment in the Malay polity, but rather the machinations of certain individuals to erode the legitimacy of a democratically-elected government.

There was nothing Harapan political operatives could say or do, which would mitigate the damage done by individuals who have a stake in the intersection between commerce and royal prerogative, which has had a deleterious effect on the political process, but which has been condoned by the Malay political elite (in collaboration with non-Malay power structures) since independence.

Which is why Anwar’s response to this plot to destabilise democracy was predictable and disappointing. Mahathir was not “wise” to withdraw from this. It is never wise to withdraw from something that Anwar admits “is good for reforms, transparency and rule of law”.

Claiming that some concerns should be “assuaged” is bone-headed since we know, Harapan knows and anyone with a smidgen of intelligence knows, that there were never any legitimate concerns, only the concerns of individuals who decided to challenge a democratically elected leader, using the toxic politics of race and religion.

This is the issue here. What we have is a member of a royal house leading the charge to usurp the democratic process. The only options were:

(1) Confront those institutions which are hampering reforms head-on by signing the statute and probably creating a manufactured constitutional crisis (a royal showdown), or

(2) Reminding those people that even if the statute is abandoned, they will still be held accountable for any malfeasance they commit and the false hope that their station in life protects them from legal consequences is just that, a false hope.

The only viable option is to play the shadow game until Harapan gets its acts together by demonstrating that, even without the symbolism of such international treaties, it is willing to carry out reforms which, so far, Harapan has lacked the backbone to do.

This is payback for the Malay political elite who, for years played this race and religion game, are now confronted by genuine democratic impulses of a Malaysian polity restless for real change and stymied by the very institutions they defended for years.

Now, if Bersatu is the sole protector of race and religion that it wants to be, then things would be different. Suddenly the people would be knowledgeable and those individuals whose agenda is to stir up trouble would be bereft of political influence.

This is why Bersatu strategists and political operatives have been texting and calling me, pointing to this situation as the perfect example as to why Bersatu needs to beef up its presence in Harapan.

The prime minister is on his own here. While I may have a little sympathy for the ruling Harapan elite, this is the fault of Malay power brokers who have weaponised institutions and religion for years against the rakyat.

For years they used the royal institutions for their own purposes. Now the royal institution is flexing its muscles to curtail the agenda of democratically-elected leaders because the reality is that Harapan does not have the majority of the Malay community behind them.

If you think the attacks against the prime minister is getting harsh, think back on the fascists’ attacks against someone like Fadiah Nadwa Fikri (above) who is being investigated by the Harapan state for comments made about royalty.

In order to take on the anti-democratic forces in this country, Harapan has to commit to serious reforms, many of which would lay bare the toxic confluence of religious, racial, royal and corporate power in this country.

They have to stop demonising citizens like Fadiah Nadwa and commit to an agenda of reform, which does not necessarily mean signing on to international treaties, but rather, legislating and creating policies that empower the people and not merely anti-democratic institutions.

If Harapan does this, it will not be forced to do anything by the anti-democratic forces in this country and Malaysians will come to understand that all roads lead to Rome.

---

S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. A retired barrister-at-law, he is one of the founding members of the National Patriots Association.

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

Dr. M Bakri Musa-Make Way for Anwar Ibrahim

April 1, 2019

Soon after his coalition’s stunning victory in the 14^thGeneral Election of May 8, 2018, Prime Minister Mahathir admitted that he had not expected it, thus the “thick manifesto with all kinds of promises.” Today nearly a year later and at 93, Mahathir, aware that he is getting “very old, and very soon I will weaken and I will die,” is a man in a hurry.

Mahathir does not need to confess, apologize, or lament. His dislodging the Najib Administration was a monumental achievement in itself. Mahathir’s victory, expected or not, saved Malaysia. Having achieved that, it is time for him now to exit. Delaying would only risk tarnishing that singular achievement.

Mahathir should not wait to be asked as no one would. That is not our culture. By the time we want our leaders to go, rest assured that the message then would not be polite, much less subtle. Mahathir does not need any reminding on that.

Mahathir has nothing more to prove or achieve. Besides, if he could not accomplish his goals back then when he ruled Malaysia unchallenged for over 22 years, and when he still had his vigor and wits, the probability that he would achieve them now is nil. Time to declare victory and exit stage left.

There is little need for him to pit his debating prowess against bright young Oxford undergraduates, preach to Africans on beating corruption, or be bestowed the Highest Imperial Honor from the King of Konga.

Were he to linger, there is a real danger that old bad habits and repressive patterns, Mahathir Version-1 as it were, might reemerge. That would not be good for him or Malaysia. Already many of his utterances of late, especially his resorting to stereotyping, are verbatim quotes from his 1970 book, The Malay Dilemma.

Delaying would risk having to do it in a chaotic or precipitous manner. Malaysia cannot afford a leadership crisis. After the disasters of Abdullah Badawi and Najib Razak, that would not be a worthy legacy.

Mahathir produced two dud leaders in Abdullah and Najib; with Najib– an insatiably corrupt one too. Mahathir thus should not pick or be given the choice to pick his third successor.

Hand over power to Anwar Ibrahim, and do it now. That was the consensus before the election among the coalition partners even though not stated in their manifesto. That was also the expectation of voters. Mahathir validated that by seeking Anwar’s immediate post-election royal pardon and his subsequent entry into Parliament via the Port Dickson by-election.

No one in Mahathir’s current cabinet is capable or worthy of leading Malaysia. I had high hopes in the beginning for Wan Azizah. She has the smarts. However, her performance has been underwhelming. Perhaps her heart is not in it, believing that she is merely warming the chair for her husband. Or perhaps (intuiting from her displays of piety) she believes that a community led by a woman is doomed for failure, as a prophetic tradition would have it.

Muhyiddin Yassin too, like Mahathir, is on borrowed time. He should be spending the remaining precious little time he has with his loved ones. He has been in politics and government long enough. He had not shined in all those years; he is unlikely to bloom now.

As for that character who cannot keep his advice to himself, Azmin Ali was not even born in Malaysia. Not many countries would allow a non-natural-born citizen to be its leader. As for his Emotional Quotient (EQ), an important attribute in a leader, Azmin is in conflict with all his siblings, as well as other family members. Don’t expect him to get along with his cabinet colleagues.

Azmin has yet to demonstrate his competence or relevance as a minister in charge of the economy. His bio touted him as an economics graduate from the University of Minnesota, which on the surface sounds impressive, except that he did not attend its prestigious flagship Minneapolis campus, instead one in the ulus.

Mahathir would be picking his third dud of a successor if he were to choose Azmin.

Anwar Ibrahim remains the most capable to lead Malaysia. The Anwar of today is a very different person from the one who tried to upstage Mahathir in the late 1990s. After being incarcerated twice on trumped-up charges, Anwar has emerged not only intact physically (except for his back ailment) but also stronger, wiser, and more tolerant. A lesser soul would have long ago crumbled or capitulated.

Anwar’s decency and humanity showed at the interview he gave on BBC soon after his pardon. He was serene, with no sense of bitterness towards those who had done him wrong. I saw a Nelson Mandela in him. Through his sense of humor I also saw a man of deep faith. No mortal who has gone through what he did could have such an equanimity as Anwar showed during that interview.

He was not at all riled up by the tough questions, as on the sensitive matter of his relationship with Mahathir – his erstwhile tormentor and the man he would like to succeed.

I have a special empathy for Anwar. He was a few years my junior at Malay College and I have many fond memories of supervising his evening class-prep hours. Our children too are of comparable ages. The thought that struck me when Anwar was hauled to jail for the first time with his infamous black eye after being bludgeoned by the-then Chief of Police was:  How would I react if I had been Anwar?

What could replace those precious years of missing your children develop into and go through their turbulent adolescence and then mature into young adults without your being there lending support and guidance? And most of all, to savor those precious memory-building moments that could never be replicated.

I had an earlier intimation of this inner, steely Anwar. Soon after his first conviction was reversed on appeal and while he was out on bail awaiting trial for his secondsodomy charge, Anwar was allowed the rare privilege to travel abroad. At a private dinner at Stanford given by his hosts, l asked him whether his being given that special dispensation was a divine sign for him to seek his freedom in the West, a view shared by many at the table. After all many great leaders had done that.

My suggestion startled him.

“Oh no! I could never do that, Bakri!” he replied in his soft voice. He had a mission for his country and was determined to complete it regardless of the personal price or burden. I was humbled by his response.

That was the depth and strength of Anwar’s commitment. It is time for Mahathir, having done his part, to let his hitherto protégé, Anwar Ibrahim, move Malaysia forward.

 

Race, religion and rhetoric ramp up in ‘New Malaysia’

March 31,2019

30 March 2019

Author: Harris Zainul, Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysiahttps://www.eastasiaforum.org/2019/03/30/race-religion-and-rhetoric-ramp-up-in-new-malaysia/

After recouping the Semenyih state legislative assembly seat, it comes as little surprise that the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) and the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) are finally formalising their cooperation. The implication of this is that political discourse will only regress further to the right. The hardening of racial and religious divides on the back of perceived Malay-Muslim victimhood is another consequence.

 

Any legislation the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government introduces will be scrutinised through racially-tinted lenses. Policies perceived as affecting the interests of Malay-Muslims can expect stronger challenges from now on. At best this would come at the cost of significantly increased political effort to pass much-needed reforms — at worst, it could see an increase in the wielding of vetoes.

In this new political landscape, UMNO are no longer shackled by the Barisan Nasional consociational model of power-sharing and PAS are free to up the stakes rhetorically. This collaboration will demand even more exclusivist policies when it comes to the Malay-Muslim agenda.

For UMNO and PAS this formalised collaboration also lends credence to its preferred narrative. They can argue that Malay privilege and the special position of Islam are only upheld through mutual cooperation of the Malay-Muslim political parties on one hand and the broad unwavering support of the Malay-Muslim electorate on the other.

By presenting an image of Malay-Muslim interests being under siege by the other parties, UMNO and PAS can expediently position themselves as defenders of everything ‘Malay and Islam’ in an attempt to consolidate votes on racial and religious grounds.

Not novel in Malaysian politics, they mirror the same sense of impending victimhood as the Democratic Action Party (DAP), a largely ethnically Chinese political party now part of the PH coalition. The DAP pushed the appointments of non-Malay-Muslims to the key positions of Attorney-General, Chief Justice, Law Minister and Finance Minister.

The political calculations for this are obvious.

Malay-Muslims constitute the largest voting bloc in Malaysia but no one political party has a significant majority over another. The Malay electorate in the 2018 election were split 25–30 per cent in favour of PH, 35–40 per cent towards UMNO–Barisan and 30–33 per cent to PAS.

Also as Article 113(2) of the Constitution states, any re-delineation of constituencies is only permissible after 8 years. The constituencies allegedly delineated along racial lines just before the 2018 election will remain so until the next election. Up for grabs then will be 134 out of the total 222 federal constituencies in Malaysia that have Malay majorities.

Coupled with the reality that the non-Malay electorate had almost completely repudiated UMNO and Barisan Nasional (BN) in the previous general election, this cements the case for UMNO to collaborate with PAS and jointly attempt to capture the Malay-Muslim vote.

In contrast, PH is constrained by its positioning as a multiracial coalition and by DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang warning that his party will leave the newfound coalition if the ideals of ‘New Malaysia’ are abandoned. The DAP commands 42 out of 125 of PH’s seats in the Dewan Rakyat, making up almost a third of their strength.

There is also the risk that even slight flirtation with any Malay-Muslim political exclusivism could come at the expense of PH’s non-Malay vote base. This stood at 95 per cent of Chinese voters and 70–75 per cent of Indian voters in the 2018 election.

Temptations to flirt with Malay political exclusivism will only rise further as UMNO and PAS increase the stakes and rhetoric. PH ought to refrain from knee-jerk reactions to appease the Malay electorate that play into the hands of UMNO–PAS. Instead, PH should understand that Cameron Highlands and Semenyih have always been traditional BN strongholds and not read too much into the results.

As of now it remains uncertain how successful the UMNO–PAS collaboration will be, and whether it poses a genuine threat to PH. In the meantime, PH should view the current racial and religious groundswell as a manifestation of the Malays’ insecurities, and perhaps, how things have not changed for the better since the 2018 election.

The unfortunate fact is that while GDP and foreign direct investment numbers matter to some in urban bubbles, it means little to many at the grassroots if it does not improve more direct ‘bread and butter’ issues such as high living costs, stagnant wages and low employment opportunities.

Without meaningfully addressing this, the sense of victimhood felt by the Malay-Muslims will only amplify, making it no wild stretch of imagination for the Malay swing electorate to revert to the familiarity of UMNO and PAS in the next elections.

There lies the foundation of any counter-narrative PH can offer to the electorate. This counter-narrative also needs to be coupled with nation-building initiatives to undermine the racial and religious bravado propped up by UMNO and PAS that seeks to appeal to the baser instincts of race and religion.

It would be unrealistic to expect PH to turn the tide around overnight. But with the elation of the May 2018 election victory quickly fading, PH would be wise to ignore the cacophony. It should focus on its mandate, remembering that there can be no legitimate government in Malaysia if it merely represents one ethnic group.

Harris Zainul is a researcher of economics, trade and regional integration at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies (ISIS) Malaysia.

10 unlikeable things about Dr M

March 28,2019

Opinion  |  P Gunasegaram

https://www.malaysiakini.com/columns/469866

QUESTION TIME | Nurul Izzah Anwar’s misgivings about Mahathir, aired in an interview she gave to Singapore’s Straits Times, has been both condemned and praised for calling Dr Mahathir Mohamad a former dictator and a person who is very difficult to work with.

Unfortunately, less attention has been given to some of the reasons for her dissatisfaction, which is of greater importance to what is happening in our country. As she further said in the interview the government, led by Mahathir, has not done enough to embolden moderates.

Here’s an extract from the report in Malaysiakini: “We’re not doing enough to embolden the middle. We’re not doing enough to embolden those who are considered moderate,” she was quoted as saying.

The former PKR vice-president also admitted to being dismayed by how UMNO lawmakers are being courted to join Harapan over the last several months.

“It’s a horrible predicament, not just for Keadilan, (but) for Malaysia, for their voters, for our voters, for Malaysians as a whole.

“It’s just a sad state of affairs because I believe a two-coalition system is important for the future of Malaysia,” she lamented.

That hits out at the fundamental problem which is facing the ruling coalition. It really is not about gaining Malay support, but Mahathir boosting his own power within the coalition by swelling the numbers of Bersatu MPs through defectors. Bersatu has doubled its number of MPs to 26 from such defections. And it’s about what kind of reform should take place.

There is a lot not to like about Mahathir if we go back in history and he is everything and more what Nurul said he is. He changed the constitution and laws to become a virtual dictator both within Umno and the country, and paved the way for Najib Razak to abuse his powers to approve and condone the largest kleptocracy the world has seen.

The important question is how much is Mahathir a changed man post GE14? Here are 10 unlikeable things about Mahathir and what his fervent supporters say about him.

1. Without Mahathir, the elections would not have been won.

This is a rather ridiculous statement to make by his supporters. Would the elections have been won without PKR or DAP? Certainly not. The numbers indicate that without a doubt, with PKR having won a total of 47 seats, and DAP 42. Mahathir’s Pribumi won only 13 seats, while Amanah took 11.

PKR and DAP’s parliamentary seats win rate for Peninsular Malaysia was over 80 percent and 90 percent respectively. Amanah’s was 35 percent, but Bersatu’s was a mere 25 percent, despite the largest number of seats contested in the peninsula of 52. I have explained this in much greater detail here.

2. Mahathir came up with a rather lopsided cabinet.

Despite just having 13 parliamentary seats, Mahathir abandoned consensus, which the coalition had advocated, in favour of prime ministerial prerogative to give his party Bersatu – a right-wing Malay party – a disproportionate number of key seats in the cabinet.

Such was Mahathir’s patently unfair cabinet that out of the 13 MPs he had, six became full ministers, a further six deputy ministers, and one, Mahathir’s son, became menteri besar of Kedah. Four of the Bersatu ministers were first-time MPs, including a boy MP and minister, clearly ignoring those who had fought long and hard in PKR and DAP. I have dealt with this in detail here.

3. He deliberately caused schisms within the coalition.

By appointing Lim Guan Eng as finance minister without consultation and consensus within Harapan, he almost derailed the coalition in its first few days when there was a protest walkout by PKR leaders. The tense situation was only alleviated later after PKR and Harapan de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim intervened.

The DAP was elated with Lim’s appointment, and frequently cited prime ministerial prerogative in the early days when Mahathir had appointed just 10 key people to the cabinet. When Mahathir ignored his own promise to ensure ministerial composition reflects parliamentary representation, even the DAP was disappointed. (see table).

The other thing he did was to appoint PKR deputy president Azmin Ali as economic affairs minister when his name was not even in the list of PKR nominations because he was menteri besar of Selangor at the time. The more prescient among us saw that as a move to position Azmin as a possible successor to Mahathir, and to drive a wedge between Azmin and Anwar. It has worked very well.

4. He brought in Daim, undermining the cabinet.

It is an open secret that Daim (above) and Anwar don’t get along, and that Daim has a finger in many economic and business pies. Thus, to appoint him the chairperson of the so-called Council of Eminent Persons (CEP) and to put him overall in charge of producing a blueprint for Malaysia Baru was a slap in the face of the new government which had reform in its mind.

Daim, despite all the unease that people have expressed to Mahathir about him and have written about in the media, still holds considerable power and is the lead negotiator with China, a country that undermined Malaysia by doing corrupt deals with Najib’s administration. He is also said to be in charge of 1MDB investigations and why this should be so is unclear.

Daim being put above the cabinet and reporting directly only to Mahathir, raises key questions as to how transparent the new government is and possible conflicts of interest because of his ties to business and his closeness with many businessmen.

5. Mahathir has not done anything about legal reform.

During his tenure, Najib introduced a whole slew of new laws to increase his hold on the country. These laws can easily be overturned pending a more holistic review of the legal system to put in checks and balances for the executive branch, but Mahathir has not moved at all on this. Instead, he said that the Official Secrets Act (OSA), which he tightened during his previous tenure to provide for mandatory jail sentences, will remain.

Then he rather ridiculously stated that many promises made in the Harapan manifesto cannot be implemented because Harapan did not expect to win the elections.

Some promises such as eliminating tolls may need to be dropped because of under-estimation of costs. But this is not the case for changing laws, which can be done by a simple majority. There is no need for a two-thirds majority to amend many of these laws.

6. He perpetuates the lie that the national debt is RM1 trillion.

He perpetuates the lie that the national debt is over RM1 trillion, first stated by finance minister Lim as an excuse for not fulfilling some promises.

While the national debt position may not be in the best possible situation, it is wrong to say the debt is RM1 trillion, as I explained here. It is so only after taking into account contingent liabilities, guarantees and lease payments. Not all contingent liabilities or guarantees became debt. And lease payments are not necessarily debt. Certainly not in terms of internationally accepted debt classifications.

7. He is reviving his pet failed projects and concepts.

After his Proton national car project failed spectacularly, requiring several rescues and resulted in losses to the public in terms of excess prices paid for cars of hundreds of billions of ringgit, Mahathir is still foolishly adamant about a third national car project.

The car industry is already being shaken up and mergers have taken place. The much bigger companies make it impossible for a new Malaysian car project to succeed. This is irrationality of the highest order.

Then he talks about privatisation again, when during his time the government gave up plum operations to connected businessmen, making them overnight billionaires. They include toll roads and the independent power producers amongst others.

8. He has shamefacedly accepted defectors into Bersatu.

Mahathir blithely talks about getting a two-thirds majority to change the constitution, but he has done nothing yet in terms of reform. That’s an excuse to just increase the pathetic number of MPs Bersatu has by pilfering other parties’ MPs. This is against the express wishes of the two largest parties in Harapan – PKR and DAP.

That these defections can happen now is because Mahathir, in his previous role as PM, changed laws and the constitution to make it legal for defections to happen, luring MPs into the ruling government to topple democratically elected state governments. He is doing the same now, not for any national interest, but to widen his narrow power base by dastardly means.

9. His government does not have a comprehensive plan and action programme.

Some 10 months after taking power, there is no plan on the table for the overall development of the country and to solve the various problems facing it. For the first few months, it was up to Daim and the CEP to come up with it. This has been submitted to the PM, but not made public. So no one, but a few, knows what they are.

Now, after the CEP, an economic council is being formed to formulate policy. What’s the point of the ministries then? Shouldn’t all of them have their own plans for the areas they supervise and should they not put it up before the cabinet and seek their approval?

10. He has not taken steps to be inclusive.

While Harapan campaigned on the promise of inclusiveness of all Malaysians in development and a needs-based approach to the assistance of deprived groups, Mahathir plays to the Malay gallery by talking about the Malay agenda, plans to distribute wealth among the races, and hiving off business activities to bumiputeras. Azmin echoes him, producing the schism between races that Harapan had promised to eliminate.

On top of that Mahathir equated the injuries sustained by a fireman at the Seafield riots to “attempted murder,” adding oil to an already incendiary situation, to appease the Malay gallery and vilify Indians without first properly ascertaining the facts.

All these are a reflection of Mahathir wanting to go back to the old status quo under a different name of Malaysia Baru. It’s about Malay supremacy and Mahathir is a Malay supremacist. It is very obvious at this stage that Mahathir is not the prime minister to reform this country. Someone else has to.

At the end of the day, this is what Nurul Izzah’s concerns are about. We should not be too concerned about where she said it or if she should not have said some things. We must look at the substance of what she said, and there can be no doubt that her concerns are justified.

Harapan should do something or lose its soul.

---

P GUNASEGARAM says dictators, even former ones, don’t easily take to reforms. E-mail: t.p.guna@gmail.com.

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

Not easy to work with Dr M, says ‘heartbroken’ Nurul Izzah

March 25 , 2029

https://wordpress.com/post/dinmerican.wordpress.com/146500

 

 

t has been a difficult year for Permatang Pauh MP Nurul Izzah Anwar, as she revealed to Singapore’s Straits Times how she nursed a “broken heart” brought on by Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s return to power.

“Oh, it’s been so turbulent and tumultuous.

“I’ve learned so much, but I think my heart’s been broken as well, somewhat,” said Nurul Izzah, who recounted Mahathir’s first stint in power when her father, Anwar Ibrahim, had served as the deputy prime minister.

Quizzed on the cause of her broken heart, Nurul Izzah told the Singapore daily it was not easy having to once again work with the man who brought down her father nearly two decades ago and sent him to prison.

“I mean having to work with a former dictator who wreaked so much damage, not just on our lives, but the system.

“It was not easy,” she admitted, although Anwar himself had openly made peace with Mahathir through a historic handshake three years ago, and is once again positioned as Harapan’s prime minister-in-waiting.

According to the Straits Times, Nurul Izzah still speaks with emotion about Anwar’s innocence and how imprisonment had taken him away from the family – including her mother, Deputy Prime Minister Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail – and her five younger siblings.

“Insya Allah,” she said, when reminded that Anwar would eventually assume the country’s top post.

Daim’s appraisal of our academics

March 23 ,2019

 March 22, 2019 7:26 AM

by Tajuddin  Rasdi

https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/

Daim Zainuddin recently made two important points in his speech at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia in Skudai.

Firstly, he said the Malays are being fed a narrative bordering on the idea that their race and Islam are both under threat, and that more affirmative policies will be needed in the new Pakatan Harapan government in the coming years and decades.

Secondly, and this is the main point of my article, he said Malay academics appear to be doing nothing at all but are letting this narrative play out to the opportunism of certain political parties and selfish NGOs.

I have been writing to the media for 20 years, saying absolutely the same thing, but it has earned me a negative perception from the Malay establishment especially in the public universities and even the previous higher education ministry.

Daim’s statement came as a sweet surprise to me as he was never one of my favourite politicians.

I know him as a savvy businessman who grew up within the Malay patronage system. As the economic and corporate worlds are outside of my understanding, I have shied away from trying to know anything about the man himself.

But a few days ago, I was surprised to find him articulating a historical, religious and political construct of what I consider a “Malaysia-Malay construct” as opposed to what I term a “Melayu-Malaysia” one.

A Malaysia-Malay construct is simply a Malay who understands his or her own heritage and faith within a Malaysian constitutional, multi-religious and multi-ethnic acceptance of co-existence, while a Melayu-Malaysia construct is a Malay who is just a Malay, then, now and forever, living in a land geopolitically defined as “Malaysia”. No compromise, no apologies.

The Melayu-Malaysia expects others to change for the sake of his race and faith, without the need to understand, tolerate or even acknowledge the importance of the existence of others as partners in nation-building.

The academics of this country have become purely self-serving and disinterested in nation-building.

The story of a disinterested academia began in the 1980s.

The Universities and University Colleges Act, or UUCA, was instituted to kill off or control student political activities and also that of the academics.

Under UUCA, no academic can speak or write to the media or the public without getting permission from the authorities. That basically sums it up.

A few academics were charged under the act, one of them the late Fadzil Noor who was the PAS president and an academic at a public university.

The involvement of the academia in nation-building basically died. With this law, the culture of academia turned inwards to a concentration on teaching until the idea of “world class” and being “internationally recognised” in rankings came into being in the late 1990s.

With this new mantra, academics are said to be successful if they publish in “high impact” or Scopus journals and receive million ringgit grants.

It would also sweeten the deal if an MoU were signed with European or American or Western universities deemed to be “world class” and “international”. Whether such ties would produce a culture of research and inquiry was disregarded as long as universities “dapat nama”, and a minister was there to observe the deals being signed. That’s it.

After the turn of the 21st century, public universities went full blast on rankings by journals with overseas publications. Locally published books, encyclopaedias and journals were regarded as third rate.

In the old days, books and media writings commanded a high percentage and weightage but now there is hardly a column to put them in on an evaluation or KPI form.

Once, I had to put my books, articles and 200 encyclopaedia entries in a column marked “other publications”.

I used to read Aliran, whose writers are academics from universities in the north. I found their writings to be fresh, bold and highly academic.

After 10 years, I noticed their designation was still “associate professor” and wondered when these people would be called “professor”.

I soon found out that they had migrated to the National University of Singapore. There is no future in Malaysia for “public intellectuals”.

I was lucky enough to be appointed a full professor before all the crazy journal hype began to take place in universities. I managed to squeeze by with my books, papers and other writings after attending the professor interview twice.

As my writings increasingly touched on society and the nation, my appointments at committees on the national level became fewer and fewer.

I no longer got invitations to public talks from universities, because I was told that I am “controversial” in the corridors of the chancellery.

So the only appointment letters from public universities that came to me were to be an examiner for PhD candidates and evaluator of professorships and associate professorships in architecture.

The coup de grace came after I went on optional retirement, leaving after 27 years of teaching and writing at a public university, exiting the campus alone and uncelebrated.

My application as contract professor to two public universities was rejected on grounds of me being “controversial”.

I have mentioned that the key to our future is the reeducation process of the Malay mind by Malay academics who understand that Islam is strong only if you read and understand, and not sit in front of the TV or the mosque podium listening to an ustaz giving his half-baked ideas of religion and society.

The fate of our country hinges on academics changing the narratives of what is important for Malaysians in the coming decades and centuries, to be in line with the goals of sustainable development outlined by the United Nations.

We won’t go very far listening to Friday sermons condemning progressive thinkers or LGBT that may have caused Allah to turn the hot weather on us.

Forget about STEM education if academics do not speak about it.

We are facing a Malay-Muslim society that has grown up with the Islamic resurgence of the 1980s with most Malays conscious about the afterlife and religious values for their children and society.

The International Islamic University Malaysia as well as Istac and Ikim were supposed to guide the Malays into a new era of modern and democratic understanding of Islam vis-a-vis nation-building and coexistence.

But where were these academics when two muftis encouraged the use of “kafir” on non-Muslim citizens, or when calls for “jihad” against the enemies of Islam came from the national mosque?

Daim’s speech must give pause to all the vice-chancellors of public universities to rethink their KPI for academics.

We need more public intellectuals to reform and rewrite the narratives of the nation, to bring social and religious harmony and sustainable wealth to the country.

We don’t need “high impact” journals to measure our success.

Just ask the man on the street whether he should vaccinate his children or whether the world is flat or defending minority groups would start a tsunami somewhere.

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.