Hope that we can believe in?

JAN 23, 2009 — While the new 44th President of the United States took his oath of office on a pristine yet chilly Tuesday in Washington DC, Americans and the rest of the world were brimming with hope that the most powerful man on earth will bring actual change from a weary period of President George Bush Jr.
On one hand, it speaks volumes about the legacy of Bush — the failing US economy, the disastrous war on terror which led to the Iraq War followed by the commissioning of the notorious Guantanamo Bay detention camp, and many other embarrassing events for the former US President.
However, the more important fact is that Americans and the world bought into the "Politics of Hope" that is represented by a slim and slender built man of mix parentage — white Caucasian and black African — called Barack Hussein Obama.
The political message that was creatively and innovatively crafted by Obama's campaign team painted a persona of a superhero whose powers are that he will change the world with his ability to listen and his openness for direct engagement as well as dialogue with the most venomous of enemies — Iran, Hamas, maybe even Osama bin Laden.
Many actually believed in the rhetoric of "Change We Can Believe In" that has being designed to build hope among people desperate for a change in the country's policies and actions.
The campaign played on the emotions of the people who are tired and despised Bush's gung-ho and Texan swagger style of administration.
The inspiring political advertising campaign created a momentum which became a wave and almost everyone jumped onto the bandwagon which was very appealing to the masses.
Whether Obama and his team realised it or not, they managed to raise the expectations of Americans and the rest of the world so high that many became sceptical even before he was sworn into office.
John McCain may just be thanking his lucky stars that he lost the presidential elections and is not in Obama's position to satisfy the thirst of an increasingly critical and to a certain extent narcissistic American public.
Obama promised in his first official public speech as President of US that he will introduce an era of openness — which is all good and well.
However, Americans will not be satisfied with just inspiring leadership and a motivational almost evangelical leader.
Americans will be looking for tangible and empirical evidence of improvements coupled to the "era of openness".
Being an American liberal, Obama is likely to project some protectionist policies to ensure that he delivers the election promises he made.
Obama promised that he will introduce an economic stimulus package that will create three million new jobs; this smells much like big government — big spending and a very liberal policy (socialist in Malaysian terms).
This means that a big chunk of the stimulus package worth some US$825 billion (RM2.9 trillion) or even US$1 trillion, for that matter, will be spent on "housekeeping" to improve the local domestic economy with lesser priority on international trade.
The concept of free trade which has been the cornerstone of a successful US economy will be put in the backseat for the time being.
However, being the "open" leader he is, the outlook of US foreign policy may create a persona that the US is no longer the world's policeman projected during the Bush era but rather a conciliatory leader for the rest of the world.
With the humanitarian crisis in Gaza now settled due to the Israeli pullout and Hamas ceasefire, Obama has to take advantage of this situation to ensure that engagements to kickstart the peace process are revived.
However, this means nothing if we look at Obama's close affinity to the Zionist cause — which he considers a just idea and likens the struggle for the betterment of the Jews to the civil rights movement in the US.
He has also put conditions before agreeing for dialogue or engagement with Hamas, which are to recognise Israel, abandon terrorism activities and abide by previous peace accords.
Whether Hamas is brave enough to accede to these conditions remains to be seen but at the same time, would Israel want to talk to the very people who have been shooting Qassam rockets into their homes?
The US economy, the Middle East peace process, the Iraq War, etc are among the many issues plaguing the US and the world, and Obama has to hit the ground running from Day One.
Soon, many pessimists will rise to turn the tables on Obama unless he delivers results rather than just promise that heaven will fall to grace the earth.

- published in The Malaysian Insider : Jan 23, 2009

Cutting off our nose to spite the other guy's face

Jan 13 – The invasion by Israel into Gaza has led to many calls by political parties, NGOs and Islamic consumer associations to take political and economic action against the United States.
The public tends to blame the US for anything and everything that Israel does.
The posturing of the outgoing Bush administration in siding with Israel does not help to dispel the perception that the US plays guardian angel to Israel.
Any resolutions that the United Nations Security Council or the General Assembly intends to push to reprimand Israel will almost definitely be blocked by the US.
Acts of aggression or ethnic cleansing or assassination attempts by Israel or its agents will go unpunished due to the gargantuan shadow of the US.
There are many other reasons why the US is being blamed for all the ills that originate from Israel.
To many, the US is the actual cause of the uncontrolled and unbridled Israel's disregard for international law and human decency.
Hence, it is not rocket science that the public, especially Muslims vent their anger on the Americans whenever there is any news of Israeli actions against the Palestinians.
However, the conflict between in Palestine is not merely an Islam versus Jews issue. It is a humanitarian crisis that requires international intervention.
Closer to home, the hatred towards Israel and the US bind together political rivals.
Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat led a protest in Kota Baru and even burned effigies of US President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
Meanwhile, former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is leading the calls to boycott products from American brands like McDonald's, Coca Cola, Starbucks and even KFC.
Some of the business tycoons known to be close to the former premier might not be too enthusiastic about the boycott idea as their investments in McDonald's and Starbucks may be affected.
Big corporations like Kulim-QSR, which owns a chain of KFC restaurants in Malaysia and is helmed by a Bumiputra corporate leader, may also be affected if the calls for boycott resonate with the public.
Dr Mahathir is familiar with international actions of this sort, using economic sanction as a potent tool.
In his early tenure as PM, a disagreement with the United Kingdom over university tuition fees sparked off a boycott of all British goods, led by Mahathir himself, in what became known as the "Buy British Last" campaign.
However, the proposed boycott US goods may not strike its intended target and, worse still, it could backfire.
Boycotts of this ilk rarely work because most of the products mentioned are made, produced, sold and purchased by Malaysians.
The government realises that it is not rational option for them to make this boycott of US products an official government policy.
With the US being Malaysia's second biggest trading partner, and against the backdrop of the global financial crisis, a general boycott may lead to economic tit-for-tat retaliation.
It also makes less sense in international diplomacy for the country to be embroiled in this boycott.
Malaysia would not want a repeat of the embarrassing moments when the aloof but supposedly eloquent Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Utama Rais Yatim praised the shoe-throwing insult against US President George Bush in Iraq as "remarkable".
Hence, any measure with international repercussions or consequences should be considered from all possible angles.
Boycotting US goods will achieve very little of the desired effects and, indeed, may cause hurt only to ourselves. It's akin to cutting off our own nose to spite the other guy's face.
The escalation of violence in Gaza is a political issue that is turning out into a humanitarian crisis.
Multilateral efforts and relentless pressure by the international community on Israel will hopefully compel the US to coax Israel to stop heaping suffering of the Palestinians.
Egypt President Hosni Mubarak and French Premier Nicolas Sarkozy took the lead to try and broker a ceasefire between the warring parties. This is only a stop-gap measure before confidence building measures between the two parties is revived.
However, the listless and Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) have not done anything to pressure, mediate or broker any international deal of that sort.
Any chance for peace require determined political will on both Palestinian and Israeli sides with wholehearted support by the international community and key organisations like the Arab League, OIC, European Union (EU) and the UN.
Only then will we see some light at the end of the tunnel for long lasting peace in the Middle East.

- published in The Malaysian Insider : Jan 13, 2009

In search of the promised land

JAN 7, 2009 — The latest escalation in the Israel-Palestine conflict is most worrying to the international community but one that is not unexpected.
Israel insists on wiping out Hamas with all its sophisticated arsenal and armoury; the Palestinians, on the other hand, with light arms and pebbles are determined as ever in defending their sovereignty.
Israelis cower whenever Kayutsha rockets come flying into their homes and at the same time, innocent Palestinian civilians especially women and children are turned into refugees if they ever manage to survive the carnage in Gaza.
The United Nations, with its hands tied and mouth shut, looks on in despair, unable to undertake any peacekeeping mission, what more broker any ceasefire between the warring parties.
The world body cannot even pass a resolution condemning the Israeli aggression due to the veto by the United States.
The mighty US has demonstrated time and again that any attempt to twist Israel's hand in the face of the international community's anger will come to nought.
The conspicuously silent US President-elect Barack Obama on this dire issue is certainly putting off hopes for a more sensible US President in dealing with international conflicts.
The cost on human lives due to this conflict is unbearable.
For every Israeli shell that destroys homes and schools, all peace-loving people around the world shed a tear.
Hamas, on the other hand, is putting on a brave face, trying in vain to stop the incursion by the Israel Defence Forces into Gaza.
Try as it may, the Kayutsha rockets that it sends flying into residential areas in Israel are causing no more than tarnished egos on the Israel military.
At the time of writing, 555 Palestinians have been killed with only handful of casualties on the Israeli side.
This has caused a displacement of innocent victims in large numbers towards the border with Egypt.
The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is brewing into a tragedy and all parties, especially the UN, the European Union and the OIC, have to be decisive to prevent the loss of more innocent lives.
On the other hand, the inaction of the OIC and Arab League is most despicable, being unable to answer their Muslim and Arab brother's cry for help.
It is shameful that Muslim countries are unable to even raise a finger, what more send peacekeepers to protect their brothers and sisters who have been turned into refugees in their own backyard.
Furthermore, there is not even any hint of talk among the OIC and Arab League countries to even consider sending troops to defend the sovereignty of Gaza and Palestine.
Ordinary Muslims blame these leaders as the cause of Palestine (under Hamas or Fatah administration) being treated as a pariah and humiliated time and again.
The Palestinians have never been able to call Gaza and the West Bank their home or their land.
Israel, on the other hand, has spent much effort and cash in creating instability in the region by its antagonising posture and attitude towards Palestine.
This latest acts of aggression began when the Palestinians put Hamas into office in the last election and by kicking out the corrupt Fatah government.
Following this, Israel with the support from US has been doing everything possible to ensure that the Hamas administration is crippled and sidelined in the international arena.
It is to everyone's benefit that the Middle East is peaceful and this can only be achieved if Palestine is a sovereign state and Israel feels secure surrounded by its Arab neighbours.
One after another the peace accords in Oslo, Madrid, Camp David, etc have passed without any lasting solution in sight.
Most Palestinians and Israelis wish for the land they reside in — and which is considered holy to Islam, Christianity and Judaism — will achieve peace and tranquility for their children's future.
The promised land for both Palestine and Israel remains elusive for as long as they are unable to reduce hostilities and break down barriers between them.
We certainly cannot depend on the US, not even their new President, to correct this wrong and return the promised land, peace and harmony back to where they belong — for Israelis and Palestinians to live side by side with each other.

- published in The Malaysian Insider : Jan 7, 2009

Feed thy tummy first

DEC 31, 2008 – As we countdown to a new year, 2009, emotionally charged debates are tearing the social fabric of this nation.
The hot debate on the relevance and position of hudud within the legal maxim of a multiracial country like ours is being overplayed in the media.
Muslims are confused whether hudud should be implemented and non-Muslims are afraid if they are to be subjected to the hudud in Malaysia.
The longer the debate goes on, more and more Muslims are increasingly viewing the hudud not from a religious point of view.
The hudud debate has been over politicised to the extent that it has lost all divine values in it.
Pas who initially espoused the need to implement hudud at their height of administering Kelantan and Terengganu, seemed trapped by their own self-righteous and rigid stand on the hudud.
They are having great difficulty to balance between their so-called struggle to implement hudud and at the same time trying to honour the trust that were given by many non-Muslims who supported their candidates in the March 8 General Election.
Meanwhile, Umno seemed to be having the upper hand on this issue as it managed to corner Pas into blurting out their long standing position on the hudud which has never changed in the first place.
However, Umno itself has a rather ambiguous stand on the hudud but at the same time trying to call the kettle black on PAS — to the Muslims, Pas is soft on hudud because of their Pakatan colleagues' resistance and to the non-Muslims, Pas is dangerous because they are bent on implementing the hudud laws.
Many of these hard-line and extreme elements within both Pas and Umno believe that hudud must be implemented at all costs because it is a divine law from Allah Almighty.
However, contentious issues in Islam can be answered not just in black or white but there is a grey area that demands more sophisticated and rational justifications.
Renowned Muslim scholar, Dr Yusuf Al-Qaradhawi coined the concept Fiqh al-Awliyat which in means placing the priority on the most pressing need and requirement at the time.
Hence, one question comes to mind — is hudud the most pressing issue at this current moment?
Most sensible Muslims would agree that there are definitely more pressing issues — the status of the economy — rather than the hudud law being implemented in this country.
It is also worth revisiting many of the hadith (collections of Prophet Muhammad's traditions — words and actions — and accounts of his daily practice) that places importance on avoiding and tackling abject poverty.
One of the Prophet's hadith has even forewarned man that poverty may lead oneself to atheistic nature or blasphemy against Allah Almighty.
No sane Muslim would deny that hudud is part of the Syariah (Islamic law).
However, it is also crystal clear that hudud is not the most demanding issue that ought to be bulldozed and carried out in Malaysia, what more in a country that only comprise of about 60 per cent Muslims.
In the face of global financial crisis, it is imperative that the leaders do all they can to ensure that the country will not slide into recession.
If this happen, many businesses and industries will close down, which will definitely push many of the population under the poverty line.
Resources, time and energy wasted on the never ending hudud debate is better channelled to planning and implementing projects to stimulate the nation's economy.
Leakages from corruption, lack of accountability and low transparency levels in corporate governance need to be tightened to ensure that there are more funds available to elevate the welfare of the people.
If Muslims leaders are able to formulate strategies and carry out plan of actions that will bring prosperity to the people regardless of faith, creed and culture the image of the religion will almost definitely be elevated.
This will also be able to dilute the phenomenon of Islamophobia affecting the world of late.
Islam is not just about stoning adulterers or amputating robbers; it places more priority in ensuring that the people's welfare is protected.

- published in The Malaysian Insider : Dec 31, 2008

Managing change and chaos

DEC 24, 2008 – As we wind down the year of 2008, the March 8 general election will most certainly go down as the one single event that shaped the year.
Analyses of how the election was won and lost, the issues surrounding it and the consequences of the election on the political landscape, economy and social well being of the country and its population continue to bombard us as we close the chapter of 2008.
One thing that struck me most is how unprepared we are to accept, manage and adapt to changes.
When BN almost obliterated the Opposition In the 2004 general election by winning 90% of the parliamentary seats, PM Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi was at that point of time hailed as a reformer.
From that point onwards, every single action of the government was scrutinized and more importantly, this dissection was done in a very obvious and open manner (by design or otherwise).
Many in Abdullah's administration were not able to manage the drastic change in the approach towards political management as compared to the former PM Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's almost autocratic management style.
We were served with an array of mouth-watering political debates; not just between the Opposition and the government but more hilariously between BN Ministers and component member parties themselves.
In doing so, they revealed their true colours with despicable antics and aloofness as well as unsophisticated actions and reasoning to the public.
This delicacy of political chaos has been the hallmark of Abdullah's administration, which we are grateful that he persevered with or of his inability to reverse the wave of change.
Fast forward to 2008, the country is still unable to manage and adapt to the new dynamics emerging within the political and economic sphere.
March 8 was more than just a political tsunami; it was a total disaster for the establishment but it also was a godsend for those hoping for change.
Those supporting the establishment blamed it upon the weakness of their leadership in allowing open dissension within the rank and file that ultimately led to the biggest defeat they have ever faced.
They hope for a return to the old order, a firm hand in managing the political scene.
Basically, they want to be ordered about, they liked to be barked at and they find joy if they are reminded that they cannot think nor survive for themselves without the intervention of the state.
At the same time, they also want to prolong the hand-me-down economic benefits which went uninterrupted for so long.
They desire for that calm and stability in the domestic scene, for this is a paradigm and mindset that they were brought up on for decades.
They have yet to realize that the dynamics have changed and people are less daunted by change.
Hence, they will not change their ways and will always be in self destruct mode.
On the opposite side of the fence, the opening up of media self-censorship especially in the Chinese, Tamil and English medias have largely benefitted the Opposition.
They took full advantage and with those medias giving them more coverage, the often negative public opinion of them were largely neutralized.
The momentum that was built snowballed into an unexpected win for the Opposition on March 8 but at the same time they have also not been able to digest these changes.
The performance of the Opposition's infant state governments has yet to prove to the public that they are able to satisfy their high expectations and at the same time surpass the achievements of their predecessors.
The way they behave is very much like an Opposition, not realizing that they are now given powers beyond their wildest dreams to govern and make the actual changes required by the country.
They had better change their mould fast before people begin to change their minds and take back the opportunity given to them in the first place.
Civil societies and pressure groups are also among the main catalysts responsible for the transformational changes in the country's political and social landscape.
However, with the country being more open to democratic changes there have been efforts using the name of civil society groups that intend to turn back the clock on the progress that the country has made.
Religious and racial undertones seem to be the order of the day for these minute groupings.
Their interest is too obvious for everyone to see with their emotionally charged demands pushing for a return to status quo.
These fringe groups are uneasy with any form of expressions – by actions or words – that challenge the status quo.
Their relentless efforts have been successful in getting the government, Opposition and civil societies groups and leaders drawn and sucked into this obvious backward agenda.
However, as a democracy, we need to allow all these elements that make up our society – liberals, centrists, socialists, religious, nationalist, etc – to play a part in charting the future of our nation.
Everyone is a stakeholder and everyone deserves a right to be heard as well as play a part in the development of the nation.
While we are grateful that we do not have to face wars and famine like our regional neighbours, the seemingly chaotic period that we are going through is a necessary puberty'phase that the nation has to survive in order to progress and mature.
It is important for everyone to realize that change has begun in earnest and all parties must be ready to accept, manage and improve upon these changes so as not to be deemed irrelevant.
A return to the old order is not what the nation needs and is not what the people deserve.

- published in The Malaysian Insider : Dec 24, 2008

Politics of education

DEC 16, 2008 — Respectable as he may be, Prof Khoo Khay Kim's suggestion for the Chinese and Indian communities to do away with vernacular schools was greeted with dismay and anger by politicians and Chinese educationists alike.
On the other hand, Umno politicians especially Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir considered the backing by Khoo as "vindication" that their demand for the closure of vernacular schools is justified.
This tug-of-war between Chinese educationists and Umno politicians has been going on for decades.
One of the most bitter being the 17-point Suqiu demands in 1999 — with mother tongue education being one of the main demands — which was then followed by the highly-charged demonstration in front of the Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall led by former Umno Youth vice-chief Aziz Sheikh Fadzir.
Photos of this brutish thuggery were used widely as the main campaign material in the Lunas by-election in 2000, leading to the spectacular loss of the BN seat to Keadilan.
Chinese educationists have also had brushes with previous education ministers like Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and Datuk Seri Najib Razak in their quest for recognition and right for mother tongue education.
On the other hand, Malay educationists or academicians rarely express themselves nor do they invite hostile reception.
They are very much docile compared to their Chinese counterparts.
When the government bulldozed the implementation of the policy to teach Science and Mathematics in English in 2003, Malay educationists and interest groups like Gapena, Pena or Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka were muted in their response and did not object vociferously to the policy which clearly challenged the sanctity of the Malay language as the national language.
Except for one or two academicians who aligned themselves with the opposition to oppose the policy, the rest cowered in fear of losing power and position.
The policy is fast becoming a farce and the Education Ministry is now in a bind on whether to reverse the decision or persevere with its grave mistake of introducing the policy which lacks planning, foundation and support system.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
In Malaysia, politics and education are two main commodities that use and abuse each other.
The recent suggestion for UiTM to be opened up by 10 per cent to non-Malays was met by angry calls of "traitor" and "blasphemy" by Malay interest groups.
Dr Halimah Ali, Selangor state exco for Education, floated the idea which received the support of Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim on the condition that studies indicate that it would improve the quality of Malay graduates.
Excessive politicisation of the issue has caused consternation and anxiety among ordinary Malays.
Notwithstanding that it remains a mere suggestion — the Selangor government has no jurisdiction over UiTM — the issue was overblown and exaggerated for cheap political mileage.
Rallies and demonstrations were well orchestrated to show thousands of UiTM students expressing their disapproval of the suggestion.
The fact of the matter is, opening up 10 per cent or even 30 per cent of the UiTM intake to non-Malays will not improve the quality of Malay graduates substantially nor will it improve the quality of teaching and learning in UiTM.
Education is not a commodity that can be traded or negotiated.
Just like healthcare, education should not be imparted with tainted and blemished quality.
Basic and quality education must be provided to everyone who is deserving, regardless of race or creed.
It is the responsibility of the government to ensure that adequate places are available for everyone to further their studies which will then render irrelevant the endless demands and counter demands for quota intakes into universities.
Those who are qualified academically must be given the opportunity to further their studies in higher education and provide a pathway to uplift them socially and economically.
This will be achieved not only with adequate infrastructural development but also with the latest and innovative teaching methodologies and tools.
Quality education will never be achieved if it is being manipulated to serve as a political tool.
Education and the higher education system in our country are already in a sorry state, mix it with politics and it is the students who will suffer the most.
During the era of Tan Sri Arshad Ayub as Vice-Chancellor of UiTM, there were many non-Malay lecturers imparting knowledge to deserving Malay students.
Malay College Kuala Kangsar also has a history of non-Malays and even foreigners as teachers in the institution.
Logic defies me: how is it that we can allow non-Malays to teach us but we cannot allow non-Malays to study alongside us.
Our leaders enforce rules and regulations to protect the Malays from their own shadows.
This will not allow the Malays to progress but keep the Malays more and more insulated in their own utopia.
The more I think about it, the more I feel threatened by my own race than anyone else.

- published in The Malaysian Insider : Dec 16, 2008

Vernacular or not?

DEC 9, 2008 — The recent debate over the existence of vernacular schools has seen vociferous defence and attacks from proponents and exponents alike.
Exponents argued that vernacular schools are hurting national unity, but the actual harm is being inflicted not by the curriculum of the vernacular schools but the actions and rhetoric of politicians from both sides of the divide.
Political rhetoric on the erosion of Malay rights, the position of the national language and Islam and now vernacular schools have been hitting the front pages on an almost daily basis since the March 8 general election.
One wonders whether these so-called sensitive issues would be highlighted if the results of the election had been otherwise and hegemony not under threat.
I suppose not.
The debate questioning the need for vernacular schools is an attempt to take an offensive stand to uphold the hegemony for certain quarters and certain elements within society.
There is no sincerity in discussing the actual issues — whether the education system or national unity.
To put a seemingly logical and righteous spin, national unity is being raised as the raison d'être to justify the need for a single uniform education system.
While the man in the street is not really bothered about the supposed adverse effects of vernacular schools on national unity, extreme peripheral elements are trying to sway the majority to see their point of view.
Hence, it is vital to put the discussions and the anger stirred up by these extreme elements into perspective.
We should not miss out on history in the discussion of this important issue even if it was raised for political expediency.
It is a fact that the Razak Report recommended the need for a single education system but in the same breath it also allowed for the right of vernacular schools to exist.
The British told Tunku Abdul Rahman and his delegation that Malaya would be granted independence as long as the foundation of the country was agreed upon by all the main races inhabiting it at that point of time.
The British wanted every single community to be represented hence the compromise on the special position of the Malays and the right to mother tongue education.
It was to be that Malaya will not be exclusively for the Malays.
Malaya is a migrant state and we should be proud of it.
Some historians have put forward the theory that even the Malays originated from southern China, they migrated to this region and the Nusantara in search of a better life.
Some other historians claim that the Malays were from the extended Polynesian family, with physical attributes akin to the natives in Hawai'i and the neighbouring cluster of islands.
Our diverse culture, language and beliefs are a boon to the nation as we are a melting pot.
Should we not discuss and debate issues sacred to each other?
As a dynamic nation we should be able to discuss — to agree or disagree — on any issue even if it touches on our constitution.
Those calling for the Sedition Act or the Internal Security Act to be used on those questioning these two issues — the special position of the Malays and the right of vernacular schools to exist — are the ones guilty of stifling a mature democracy.
For us to mature as a country, meaningful debate— whether it is on the special position of the Malays or vernacular schools — must be allowed to flourish.
These leaders do not realise that they are species of the same kind; they bark in different languages but want the same thing — they do not want debate.
To me and the rest of apathetic Malaysians, they are simply not democrats but hypocrites.

- published in The Malaysian Insider : Dec 9, 2008