Malaysia after regime change - PAS and Islam

As Malaysia prepares for its 13^th general elections, due no later than April 2013, the long-standing competitive authoritarian regime will face one of its most difficult tests. The 2008 elections dealt a surprise blow to the incumbent Barisan Nasional (BN), and ever since, Prime Minister Najib’s government has struggled to protect its now-fragile majority. After four years of renewed opposition activism, rumours of defection from UMNO (the United Malays National Organisation), and the recent acquittal of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysians will have the chance to vote the BN out of office once and for all.
In a post-BN Malaysia, observers will closely monitor the role of Islam in public life. Much of what happens will depend on the shape of the government that follows. In terms of the composition of a post-BN government, two outcomes seem most likely: (1) a multi-ethnic Pakatan Rakyat-based (PR) coalition in which PAS (Parti Islam SeMalaysia/Pan Malaysian Islamic Party), PKR (Parti Keadilan Rakyat/People’s Justice Party), and the DAP (Democratic Action Party) all participate, perhaps along with one or more East Malaysian parties; or (2) an UMNO-PAS “Muslim-Malay” coalition, again perhaps involving the cooperation of one or more East Malaysian parties. Either way, PAS—an explicitly Islamic party—will be part of the government.

That PAS would advocate for a greater role for Islam in Malaysian public life is undeniable. PAS describes its goals as follows:

• Memperjuangkan wujudnya di dalam negara ini sebuah masyarakat dan pemerintahan yang terlaksana di dalamnya nilai-nilai hidup Islam dan hukum-hukumnya menuju keredhaan Allah. [Fighting to create a society and government that is run according to Islamic principles and the laws which please Allah]
• Mempertahankan Kesucian Islam serta kemerdekaan dan kedaulatan negara. [Defending the sanctity of Islam alongside independence and national sovereignty.]

The prospect of PAS in government alone is worrying for those many Malaysians (both Muslims and non-Muslims) who express concern about the Islamisation of Malaysian politics and society. Moreover, a PR-based government would struggle to balance PAS’s goals with the DAP’s largely non-Muslim constituency. That would make an UMNO-PAS alliance all the more attractive to PAS, while UMNO, whose membership is not restricted to Muslims but is overwhelming Muslim anyway, would likely not hesitate to return to power with a new coalition partner.

Questions about PAS after the BN may reflect the concerns that many non-Muslims in Malaysiahave about the role of religion in public life, and Malaysia’s Hindu minority in particular has cause for grievance on this account. But this obscures the corrosive effects that six decades of ethnic partisanship have had on the prospects for Malaysian democracy. It is a mistake, in other words, to focus narrowly on PAS, or broadly on Islam itself, when anticipating Islam in a post-BN Malaysian political order. Doing so confuses the potential consequences of PAS in government with the factors that have contributed both to PAS’s popularity and to the current state of Islam in Malaysian public life.

PAS itself has not played a major role in the Islamisation of Malaysian politics or Malaysian society. Rather, it was Malay politicians in the pre-independence period (the very same group that went on to found UMNO) who enshrined Islam in the constitution and legally defined Malay-ness with reference to Islam. This was done not in the name of Islam, but to protect what were perceived to be “Malay interests” (see for example A History of Malaysia, pp. 256-257). After independence, with communism illegal, social democracy discredited (through its historical affiliation with a largely Chinese opposition party), liberalism cast as antithetical to Malaysian values, multiculturalism or pan-ethnic solidarity discouraged through the party system, and the bumi/non-bumi split underlying every aspect of social and economic policy, the only “Malay” alternative to UMNO’s Malay platform was PAS’s Islamist platform.

Today, in a society in which economic function and demographic characteristics such as urbanisation no longer distinguish Malays from non-Malays as easily as they once did, core issues such as religion have a new importance for voters whose political identities are constructed through an ethnic framework.

The strategic logic of political competition in Malaysia’s plural society therefore rewards parties seeking Malay votes when they appeal to the characteristics that define Malays in opposition to non-Malays. It should not surprise anyone that when Malay voters find UMNO politicians wanting, they are likely to vote for the only opposition party whose political outlook has not been labelled as “un-Malaysian” for the past half century.

Facing this, non-exclusivist opposition parties such as the DAP and PKR have struggled to transcend the ethnic paradigm in Malaysian politics. The choice for non-Malay, non-Muslim voters has been whether to cast their lot with their own regime-allied (and ethnically-constituted) parties, the “un-Malaysian” multiethnic opposition, or the Islamist PAS.
The fundamental challenge for public life in a post-BN Malaysia is not Islam, it is ethnicity’s dominant role in defining Malaysians’ political identity, and this challenge is just as pressing today as it would be if a new government with PAS comes to power following the upcoming elections. Of course, PAS’s explicitly religious goals are important to note, but there are few things that it could do in government that are not already within UMNO’s capacity today.

UMNO has presided over—and its campaign messages and public policies have encouraged—the rise of Islam in public life. It is tempting today to see what Judith Nagata called the “reflowering of Malaysian Islam” as merely a local instance of a global Muslim awakening, but this misses the very politics of Islamic politics in Malaysia.

In the Malaysian context, the rise of religion is the unavoidable consequence of the politicisation of ethnicity. A PAS-led government might go further than the BN has in prosecuting perceived insults to Islam, or in expanding the domain of Islamic family law, but such worries already mark Malaysian public life. The religious issues facing Malaysia are far deeper than the ruling party’s religious outlook, and having PAS in government is best understood as the outcome of decades of social change and religious conflict rather than a possible independent cause of future religious tensions.

It is reasonable to wonder what Malaysian politics would look like with an avowedly Islamist party like PAS in government, but as always, the meaning of Islam in Malaysian public life cannot be separated from the dominance of ethnicity in Malaysian politics.

The “solution” to the “problem” of Islam in Malaysian politics—if one believes that Islam is indeed a problem—is the same as the solution to many of the other issues that face contemporary Malaysian society: a post-ethnic movement (not merely a multi-ethnic one) in which Malaysians identify, assemble, and act as Malaysians rather than as representatives of ethnic groups in a zero-sum competition for power and resources.
This is what many hope that a PR government would mean, and in rhetorical terms, that is what Najib’s 1Malaysia campaign promises. A recent article in the Economist suggests that many young Malaysians would welcome such a post-ethnic politics. But they will have to wait, for Malaysian politics as BN-versus-PR restates the ethnic politics framework without moving past it.







Thomas Pepinsky is assistant professor of government at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY,USA. His work focuses on comparative politics and international political economy, with a special focus on contemporary issues in island Southeast Asia. His interests include the politics of finance, authoritarianism, Islam, and finding a way to move Ithaca to the tropics.

REVIEW - An Analysis of Malaysia’s 12th General Election

1.    Introduction

In our pre-election analysis, we estimated that the Opposition parties will win about 50 parliamentary seats and face a very strong challenge from DAP-Keadilan in Penang. We also warned of the strong wind blowing in the Indian and Chinese communities towards the Opposition. We did not and could not then anticipate the equally strong wave of Malay support for the Opposition which resulted in the Opposition gaining 82 seats in Parliament, denying the Barisan Nasional of its two-thirds majority, the first time since the May 1969 General Election. We had in our pre-election analysis noted the possibility of a divided outcome with a strong Malay government against a strong non-Malay Opposition. However, this did not materialize as Malay support for the Opposition was also strong resulting in multi racial Keadilan winning 31 seats and PAS 23 seat in Parliament. In fact, the popular votes obtained by UMNO (35.5%) and combined PAS/Keadilan (34.8%) was almost equal. Whilst the loss of Penang state to the Opposition did not come as a surprise after the first week of campaign with massive turnout at DAP ceramahs and large donations collected on the spot for the DAP candidates, the fall of Perak and Selangor was totally unexpected. What happened? What caused the massive swing?

Some facts on the 12th General Election should be noted and analysed. The Barisan Nasional within Peninsular Malaysia failed to obtain a majority of popular votes cast. It only obtained 49% of the popular votes in Peninsular Malaysia whereas the Opposition had the majority of popular votes – 51%. UMNO won 35% of popular votes against 34.8% won by PAS and Keadilan. Although the Barisan Nasional won 140 seats in Parliament, 54 seats came from Sabah and Sarawak. So, without Sabah and Sarawak, Barisan Nasional will not have even obtained a simple majority in Parliament. If the Federal Territory was to be considered as a state, the Barisan Nasional actually lost 6 states. In Negeri Sembilan, it survives with only a 4-seat majority. In Pahang, Barisan Nasional even lost the state capital, Kuantan. Even the Barisan Nasional fortress of Johor was successfully penetrated by the Opposition this time with both DAP and PAS winning seats. There are no safe bastions for Barisan Nasional anymore.

Although, the Chinese and Indian votes have decisively swung to the DAP and Keadilan, causing MCA, MIC and Gerakan to lose massive support, it was totally unexpected for UMNO to lose in urban and semi-urban Malay seats like Titiwangsa and Lembah Pantai (in Kuala Lumpur city), Shah Alam, Hulu Langat, Kuala Langat, Kuala Selangor, Gombak, Ampang, Sungei Petani, Merbok, Kulim, Nibong Tebal, Balik Pulau (in Penang), Parit Buntar and Bagan Serai in Perak. Barisan Nasional even loss Kuantan – the capital of Pahang and Indera Mahkota. With increasing urbanization with the urban population projected to increase to 73% in 2020, up from 62% in 2000, can UMNO prevent a slide in urban Malay votes? What made the urban Malays desert UMNO? This question needs to be addressed. For the MCA and MIC, it was clearly their worst ever electoral performance ever. In 1969, MCA won 13 out of 24 seats contested (54%), whereas this year MCA only won 37.5% of parliament seats contested. Gerakan was totally wiped out in Penang – its stronghold. The DAP campaigned that a vote for MCA or Gerakan is a vote for UMNO to capitalize on the anger of the Chinese community over UMNO. Hence, the track record of MCA and Gerakan was ignored with an emotional swing against UMNO.

2. What the Election Results Mean

Several broad conclusions can be drawn from the 12th General Election:-

(i) It is a seismic shift in Malaysian politics. A political tsunami as the Star headlines said. The old ways of campaigning may no longer work. Putting fear into voters minds did not work. The use of mainstream media to create spin or to demonise the opposition was detested by urban voters and had a counter-effect instead. From feedback, many urban voters were turned off by the spin especially in NST and Star.


(ii) The victory of DAP, Keadilan and PAS in many areas showed that voters do not buy the argument that the Chinese won’t support PAS and DAP won’t get Malay votes. As Dr. Farish Noor reported from the PAS Headquarters in Kota Baru on Saturday night (polling night), Kelantan PAS supporters cheered when the DAP gained control of Penang. So the notion Malays won’t support DAP was debunked that night in Kota Baru.


(iii) Makkal Sakhti (People Power), the cry of HINDRAF, caused a tidal wave of support from the Indian community towards the opposition. This seismic shift of Indian voters contributed to the defeat of many Barisan Nasional candidates, not only MIC candidates.


(iv) The Barisan Nasional’s brand of race-based politics is no longer an attractive proposition to voters. Chinese voters deserted MCA and Gerakan. Indian voters swung away from MIC. Many Malay voters switched to Keadilan, making Keadilan the biggest opposition party with 31 parliament seats. The Opposition parties won, not on race-based issues but across a range of issues that cuts across ethnic lines. The MCA and MIC lost whilst trying to portray themselves as defenders of their race. UMNO lost ground to Keadilan even with Anwar calling for an end to NEP. Is this then, a new paradigm for Malaysian politics that Malaysian voters are more taken in by wider national issues such as corruption, crime, cost of living, social justice and human rights which cuts across all ethnic groups rather than narrow ethnic issues that favour any particular race? Even MCA championing the cause of Chinese schools didn’t get much support from the Chinese community. But, PAS delivered votes to DAP and Chinese voters supported both PAS and Keadilan. Should MCA remain purely a Chinese party when it lost more Chinese votes to the DAP or should it become a multi-racial party and widen its appeal to non-Chinese? This has set the stage for a new era of multi-racial politics in Malaysia, perhaps the beginning of a two-party system which is healthy in any democracy.


(v) The loss of Penang, Kedah, Selangor and Perak can perhaps be partially attributed to complacency in the Barisan Nasional camp. Over-confidence in a proven track record may be another factor. In Penang, the non-Malay voters were unhappy with Gerakan for being unable or unwilling to stand up to UMNO. However, the Opposition’s ability to capture, in particular, Penang and Selangor, the jewels in the crown so to speak, and even Perak to a lesser extent, will enable DAP and Keadilan to attempt to provide a new model of governance, which if they succeed, could further strengthen their grips on these states in the next General Elections and extend their support in other states like Negeri Sembilan (remember earlier point: Barisan Nasional only have 4 seat majority in Negeri Sembilan). However, if the DAP and Keadilan mess up, they will lose their opportunity and the voters in the 3 states Penang, Perak and Selangor may revert to the Barisan Nasional. It is however, unlikely DAP and Keadilan will squander their chance. It is left to be seen if the new State Governments in Penang, Perak and Selangor can deliver. If so, expect them to control these states for at least two terms if the state governments are administered well with good governance, accountability and transparency.


(vi) The point has also to be made that never in the history of Malaysia has the Prime Minister ever lost his own home state. In Penang, UMNO/Barisan Nasional only retained 2 parliamentary seats, that of the Prime Minister and Second Finance Minister Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop. The 12th General Election by any reckoning is UMNO’s worst-ever performance, worse than in 1969 and 1999.

3. What Caused the Swing to the Opposition

The political tsunami was brought about by various factors, foremost of which is the perceived arrogance of power. All racial groups – Malays, Chinese and Indians have the perception that the Barisan Nasional did not hear or listen to the voice of the people. The Barisan Nasional mishandled the Bersih and HINDRAF protests. This show no tolerance for public assemblies and no outlet for grievances which resulted in the aggrieved parties voting against the Barisan Nasional in the ballot boxes. The Barisan Nasional’s over-confidence and poor intelligence failed to identify growing anger and frustration of the people. The Prime Minister’s challenge to Opposition supporters not to demonstrate but to take it to the ballot box also made many fence sitters and opposition sympathizers to vote for the opposition. The Barisan Nasional failed to effectively read the mood on the ground. Many urban voters in particular the fence sitters were put off by the propaganda, spin and one-sided coverage on TV and in NST and Star.

A contributory factor could be internal bickering over the choice of candidates within the Barisan Nasional component parties not only in UMNO but also in MCA and Gerakan. Apart from the above, other factors also contributed to the unprecedented swing in support to the Opposition. These can be attributed as the 9C’s:-

(i)                 Change : A massive mood swing brought about by the opposition’s promise of change and reform.

(ii)                 Crime : Growing anger at the seeming inability of the Federal Government to tackle crime effectively.

(iii)               Cost of Living : Rising frustration over increases in the cost of living.

(iv)              Corruption : Growing perception that corruption has worsened over the past four years. (v)               Courts : Disgust over the Lingham enquiry and concern about judicial independence.

(vi)              Convergence of Issues : All these issues coming to a head at the same time and perception that government is not listening or effectively addressing them. There is really no one single big issue but a convergence of issues that caused people to be dissatisfied and angry with the Barisan Nasional.

(vii)             Communications Technology : The power of the internet and blogs to provide alternative information, that is downloaded, printed and distributed even to kampungs and new villages. With the spin in NST, more people trust the blogs more than the mainstream media.

(viii)            Credible Leadership : For the first time, the Opposition was able to present credible leadership and credible alternatives. The Anwar factor is pivotal. More than the 1998 reformasi campaign this year is much more an Anwar-coordinated campaign. DAP, Keadilan and PAS put up young, credible candidates. Lim Guan Eng, a Monash economics and accounting graduate, taking charge of Penang instead of his father Lim Kit Siang provided a younger and less belligerent face to the electorate backed by credible candidates like Prof. Ramasamy, Lim Chin Tiong and Jeff Ooi.

(ix)              Campaign Strategy : The Barisan Nasional’s campaign strategy was much of the same. The old school approach – some carrots and sticks. It offered development on the one hand, it threatens on the other, warning the Chinese and Indian communities that they will have no representation in government. The Chinese and Indian voters didn’t buy this argument this time. At one point in Penang, feedback from many Chinese voters is they don’t mind not even having a Chinese Chief Minister to teach the Barisan Nasional a lesson. Promises and fear didn’t work this time. UMNO also took Malay voters for granted. On the other hand, the Opposition’s strategy was low-key, humble and non-threatening. PAS didn’t speak of an Islamic State. DAP didn’t campaign to capture Penang as was the case during Tanjung I, II and III. All DAP asked for was to deny Barisan Nasional two-thirds majority both in Penang and in Parliament. This softer approach compared to Kit Siang’s aggressive style in 1990, 1995, 1999 won DAP many sympathetic votes. The use of blogs as alternative media was also highly successful.

For the Chinese voters, memories don’t fade easily. Often politicians tend to think people have short memories. But the Chinese voters are still upset and aggrieved over the waving of the keris incident at UMNO Youth Assemblies and the racial rhetoric in the 2006 UMNO General Assembly. Chinese voters also perceived MCA and Gerakan to be too subservient to UMNO. For the Indian voters, HINDRAF was a key factor. The power of Makkal Sakhti (People’s Power) is real and translated into votes for the Opposition throughout the country where there are sizeable number of Indian voters. For Malay voters, Anwar provided an alternative leadership. He read the Malay mood well. To the Malay voters in Anwar’s campaign speeches, the NEP because of its over-obsession with Bumiputra equity, benefitted only UMNO Puteras and didn’t benefit the ordinary people in the rural heartland. UMNO Youth was also perceived to be brash and arrogant.

4. Looking Ahead

What the 12th General Election provided is a timely wake-up call to all political parties. They need to change, reform and deliver. For the Barisan Nasional, it means reinvention to stay relevant. For the Opposition in control of the 5 State Governments, it means the need to deliver what they promised. Can they work together? The question, looking ahead, is how UMNO will react. Will it be magnanimous and learn the right lessons? Will it change and reform from within and lower racial rhetoric to win back non-Malay support or will it up the ante to become even more ultra-Malay to retain whatever Malay support it still has? Will UMNO remain united and cohesive or will there be a scramble for positions in its coming General Assembly and party elections? The internal dynamics in UMNO in the lead up to party elections need to be watched.

For the Opposition, the key question is whether the new State Governments in Penang, Perak and Selangor can perform and deliver and meet the expectations of the people? Will there be a witch-hunt against Barisan Nasional supporters? Will they be able to cooperate and work closely together? Will they gain the support of civil servants? Will they be able to cooperate and work with the Federal Government? What will be the impact on Government-Linked Companies controlled by or connected to these state governments? For the MCA and MIC, the question is whether they should continue to narrowly fight for Chinese and Indian interests or should they reinvent themselves to become multi-racial parties like DAP and Keadilan and champion wider national issues such as corruption, human rights, judicial independence and economic opportunities.

For the Gerakan and PPP, the key question is whether they should continue to exist and if so, what is their niche in Malaysian politics? Should they bring about the merger of smaller parties in the Barisan Nasional including those in Sabah and Sarawak? Will the 2008 Election lead to the emergence of a two-party system in Malaysia? For the Prime Minister, this is an opportunity to clean house. To listen more to the voice of the people and not to be disconnected to the feelings on the ground. We have in Pak Lah a decent man, a dedicated and pious Muslim. He should use his strength to reinvent himself and renew UMNO and Barisan Nasional. Credit ought to be also given to the Prime Minister for providing more democratic space and a fairer, freer election as well as for his stoic acceptance of the democratic voice of the people, and for not reacting ala the midnite snatch in Sabah in the mid-1980’s or having an Operasi Lallang or May 13/NOC type reaction. There is clearly a need to review certain National Policies that causes unhappiness and decisiveness. Will the Barisan Nasional leadership, be able, perhaps more willing to rise to the occasion to bite the bullet?


In the final analysis, despite the massive swing to the opposition, the Barisan Nasional still remained in office at Federal level and has a comfortable majority to provide continuity and political stability. This analysis provides some key facts and pose some key questions that need to be pondered over in the days and months ahead. Whatever it is, Malaysian politics post March 8, 2008 will not be the same again. It is time for a new beginning. A new era has begun. More importantly, to note that the morning after, most surveys showed that many Malaysians from all races and different walks of life felt good over the election outcome. Dated: 13th March 2008





By Asli

A nation divided, a country devastated

Times have changed and are fast changing even in ultra-traditional societies. The lessons we are drawing from even recent episodes as in the likes of Egypt Springs is most edifying for the selfless and wise.

The well worn cliché ‘a nation divided is a country devastated’ has sprung back with profound meaning in this century. It applies very aptly to Malaysia.

Today we are witnessing the nation heading down a slippery slope on all four frontiers of governance, namely the political, social, economic and environmental parameters. Political party survival has taken precedence over all else and it is clearly becoming an ‘at all cost, by any means’ war cry and battle strategy.

Religion is not spared. Race is not spared. Sex is not spared. Institutions are not spared. Ethics is prostituted. Justice is clouded. And how long can the main stream media continue to orchestrate to the whims and fancies of those embroiled in winning at all costs?

Chop! Chop! Chop! Separate them...
Meanwhile the world is being swept without warning by financial tides of devastation; weather havocs that predict imminent food crisis; and the rise of civil society to fight the 21st century’s worst enemy namely corruption and political tyranny. These, the governments around the world – including even our neighbors like Thailand, Philippines, and Indonesia are better braced to combat as they have no political party survival wars to be preoccupied with. Neither do they subscribe to the stone-age ‘kill at all cost’ mantra.

But in our own yard here, just look at the volume of files mounting within the Palace of Justice as thousands of reports are lodged against corruption and misuse of power. Look at the breaking news every day. Listen to the talks at warongs. Scan the online forums.

Look at the way politicians from BN are spending money; or how about their families and spouses?

Look at the way the government denies brutality inflicted on its own citizens (Bersih 2.0), only to be exposed by the international media.

Look at the scandals that keep surfacing one after another – scandals that not only involve Malaysians within its borders but also those that have global implications involving international players. Do not forget the many episodes of custodial deaths and how the cases are being battled and dragged in court.

Look at our daily news rations. What do all these tell us?
Indeed this nation is being divided left, right and centre in the name and want for power and control. The victims are the knowing and unknowing rakyat of today those who are yet to be born.

The leaders are not interested in knowing that a nation divided is a country devastated. Who cares anyway? “If this country crumbles, I have my safe haven on the Gold Coast” seems to be the hidden assurance amongst the powers that be.

Two sets of everything
Take a look at all the social pages of glossy magazines that are spilling over in Malaysia. What do you see?

No different. One set of laws for the knowing and unknowing rakyat and another set of freedom for the rich, famous, well heeled and power brokers.

Yes, the fact that some lone and brave voices with still some conscience and integrity left behind are stepping forward from behind the curtains of the ruling BN to state the truth about this nation’s governance, is a crystal clear indication that this country is in a perilous state of affairs.

While the world is collaborating and partnering with all of its political parties within each nation, ours is one that is going after the opposition’s throat. While others around the globe are re-focusing on the four crucial parameters of politics, social, economic and environment to be better prepared in protecting its citizens against the ravages of weather, corruption, abuse, power and control, and financial uncertainty, we are saying “everything is okay” while we are dead bent on dividing the nation along race, religion, politics, social, economy.

Therein remains the assessment that Malaysia is on the highway of being a devastated country.






J. D. Lovrenciear, is a reader of Malaysia Chronicle

Only “Neo Democratic Revolution” can bring down UMNO regime

What do you do with a political party that has been in power for 54 years and ruling with an iron fist though they successfully portray their regime a caring one??

Every Malaysian knows that UMNO’s rule is an evil regime. I say UMNO because it is UMNO that rules and dictates in the 12 member coalition. They are well trained by the British in divide and rule policy.

Divide the rakyat into fragments. Divide the opposition into fragments. Cause fear amongst the Malays that the Chinese are out to take power in the Malay land. Cause fear amongst Muslims that the Christians would rule and that is the end of the Muslim monarchy. Cause fear that the Indians are linked to LTTE. These fears is enough to send ripples among the monarchs that if they do not back UMNO, their Sovereign power would be vanished. In fact many do not recognize this was exactly what UMNO used to intimidate the Rulers pre independence in 1957. The Malay rulers were “blackmailed” that they would lose power under British rule as happened to the Princes in Indonesia and India. Thus the Rulers were willing to surrender their sovereign power to UMNO to save themselves as early as 1955 substituting the Resident Generals to Menteris Besars. The British played along, as they knew it was easier to control the UMNO boys who were educated in England. The Malay downtrodden looked at the educated UMNO boys as their savoir. This in turn served the British, as their business interests in the then Malaya would be protected.

So how do we bring down this regime?? Only waves of Makkal Sakthi – People Power can change this. We have seen how this worked to a certain degree in 2007. Two major people uprisings shook the Government. It is now time for all stakeholders to plan and strategize. The Bersih rally on July 9th may be smaller in numbers compared to 2007. Does that mean the power of wave is weakened? Would Bersih alone do the magic??

Bersih is all about free and fair elections. With this should come larger wave of neo democratic revolution! The mindset of the people has to be revolutionalised! The true power lies in the mind of the people. If all Malaysian minds can be awakened from within that democracy is their birthright and not the privilege of few, then truly a neo revolution of people’s power can be a reality.

A complete overhaul in the mindset of opposition leaders is needed. The people need to be convinced of what they would receive out of the neo revolution. Mere rhetoric’s of “CHANGE” is not adequate.

The people would appreciate if some of the following can be implemented;

- Equality in the true sense and respect for human dignity.
- Equitable distribution of the country’s wealth to all its citizens
- Religious freedom in accordance with Universal principles.
- Respect for Individual rights and civil liberties
- Dismantling of all racist policies.
- Overhaul of the Judiciary which has been manipulative and tempering the judicial system.
- Overhaul the corrupted Police force, which play hand in glove with the underworld and hold the country at ransom in the name of National security.
- Allocation of sufficient funds to prevent brain drain and give equal opportunities to professionals to excel and contribute to the country’s wealth.

Now wait a minute. Is the above possible in Malaysia? PAS would not agree to religious freedom according to International standard for fear of losing the Malay-Muslim support. PKR would not support it either.

What about equality? Dismantling racist policies? Does that mean dismantling of Article 153? No no that is not possible as it would offend the Malay heartland.

Revamping the Judiciary and Police force???
Respect for Individual rights???
No lah this is Malaysia. Malaysians would not accept the idea. It’s not our culture!! All these are not possible in this bolehland??

So where do we stand. What change do we seek?

Well this is my answer to politicians.

They have to start thinking out of the box.

Religious freedom according to Universal principles can be implemented without upsetting the majority Muslims if they set off advocating the fairness principles advocated in Islam. PAS and Muslim clerics must develop the courage to speak openly.

Equality can be implemented without upsetting Article 153. All it needs is cracking the head. It would be a win win situation for all.

Overhaul Judiciary- openly say you would rid Judges who are not fit and corrupted. That would gain people confidence and send shivers to the immune in the Palace of Justice. That would encourage and boost the few Judges who are fair and release them from their shackles.

Will the people buy this??

All Malaysians are fair-minded, caring and potentially given very much to sharing and sharing alike. Never under estimate them. They can be easily awakened so long as politicians are sincere and truly desire change. The Malaysian mindset is ready for purification after 54 years of manipulations. They are courageous and looking out for true audacious leaders. Waves of awakening will eventually come from all corners - Malays Chinese Indians, Kadazans ibans Orang Aslis Civil Servants Trade Unions Businessmen. This wave will not only hit the shores of Kuala Lumpur but also erupt from every state, every towns and districts every Kampungs and Tamans.

Be bold. Never look back. Just move on a true and sincere agenda for change and the rakyat will be behind this great movement of “Neo Democratic Revolution”.





P.Wathyamoorthy
Chairman - Hindraf

Don't Change Your Country, Change Your Government - GO GE13

This country is at its worst since Merdeka in terms of education, human rights, corruptions while the institutions are not performing their duties, without fear or favor, entrusted upon them but to abide by the calls of the ruling elite.

We see how this country fared from being the best in Asia to become the worst in the bottom half. All along what we can see is that the government is simply happy to be the best among the worst but not striving to gain the best among the best status.

Other than the economic disaster, a real threat of being bankrupt by 2019, racial and religious issues are just waiting to explode, if the government is still reluctant to face and deal with it head on but allowing it to simmer, all in the good name of sensitivity.

Each Prime Minister, upon taking reign will always come out with their own individual slogan calling for these and that but at the end of the day, it failed miserably, the situations get worst economically, on racial disunity and religious intolerance, the institutions becoming just "yes man" to the power that be.

All these slogans, be it economy or unity plans has one thing in common, they are all crafted out based on political impudent. I have yet to see one that is successfully implemented or sustainable over a reasonable period of time. All we can see are billions of ringgit lost through leakages and corruptions, these are the only plans that are successful and sustained over all these years since independence.

The present PM's economy plans and his unity call of 1Malaysia are superb, but just like previous PMs initial euphoria, they will not take roots but will taper off after winning each general election or a new PM takes over.

I fully agree that subsidies have to go but not when these savings are not put into proper use or for the benefits of the rakyat, instead into ego and pride monstrous projects. Spending millions to engage foreign consultants are an insult and show disrespect of our own rakyat's capability. For all we know there may be leakages and corruptions along the way.

Without looking into and rectifying these glaring issues, such as, maintaining the 'ketuanan melayu' mentality, discrimination, adulterated education system, allowing hidden hands to sow racial hatred and religious intolerant with impunity, censoring of freedom of speech and democratic process, maintaining inhuman acts such as the ISA, OSA plus other outdated acts, incapable of serious fight against corruptions and the institutions acting and behaving above the law, all the PM's plans and promises will simply not work.

The very sore thing about the ruling government, by allowing all these to continue, is, they are treating the rakyat as fools. They are not sincere in whatever they said or promises but only with superficial grant to bait for gullible voters to vote them in again and again.

Thousands upon thousands had left this country and thousands more will be leaving, simply because they are not being able to attain and achieve what a normal citizen in any country would have.

One thing the rakyat always forget is that, they have the power and mean to elect a clean and good government that will abide by the oath taken, guided by the law and Constitution and governed the country without fear or favor.

As what YB Hannah Yeoh tweeted, why do you need to change your country when you can changed the bad under performing government that are tainted with racist, arrogant and corrupt leaders.
You are migrating because the other country is offering you what you cannot get as a citizen from your own country. Fair enough, but, did it occur to you that if you stay back, help to fight the change for a better government, you might find that your future may be better and brighter than the country you intended to migrate to.

So, use your voting power to take back your country and demand what belongs to you as a citizen of this country.

Nothing is ever too late, if we have the heart and mind to see it through. The 13th GE is the best opportunity for us, to see the change that we had yearned for all these years.
Young people, don't lose hope. Don't change your country, change your government! Together, we can DO IT

It is a clever plot to keep the non Malays shackled to their subservient and submissive position to maintain the indefensible dominance of the Malays

First, the British adopted the conventional method of structuring the population Federation of Malay according to its broad racial groupings as Malays, Chinese and Indian and Others.

The Reid Commission provided temporary advantage to the Malays to equalise their economic standing in the community. The Malays wanted this provision of temporary advantage to become permanently entrenched and this is how they went about it cleverly.

First the Malays reinforced the capsulation of Malaysians into their respective racial boundary as Indians, Chinese and Malays. The state recognised individuals not as individuals but as members of racial grouping.

Secondly a system was reinforced to strengthen and fortify these ethnic boundaries (non-Malay communities).

The ethnic communities were tricked to elect their national leaders who will be compliant to the wishes of the domineering Malays.

The Ethnic leaders were bribed with enormous wealth and left unchecked, on condition these ethnic leaders called on the tribal loyalty of the racial grouping to maintain peaceful compliance to the wishes of the Malays for permanency of their privileged unconstitutional status beyond the expiry of the period that was envisaged by the Reid Commission.

The ethnic leaders were happy to assist the Malays to suppress the rights of their non Malay communities, so long as these ethnic leaders continued to receive the state largess, titles, recognition, The masses were fooled into a state of apathy by distraction to cultural activities and temple worship facilities. Their cultural and customary traits were called upon to prevail to maintain tribal loyalty to its leadership which in turn did the bidding of the Malays.

The statutes and the Constitution was amended without protestation to reinforce the dominance of the Malays.

The leaders of the Indians and the Chinese helped to screw their own kind while collecting personal rewards for keeping their own kind suppressed.

This scheme of things began to crack, when HINDRAF emerged to demand their human rights, civil liberties, the fair share of the national wealth and equity in treatment. The Malays with their simple mind could not handle HINDRAF as the new force, so it used brutal force to reign in the leaders of this new socio-economic political force.

HINDRAF has done the right thing to going back to the origin of the problem, the British, to seek relief while the HRP is chipping away at the fortress of racism that was illegally cemented by the Malays.

Surely the fortress will crumble one of these days. The leaders of the ethnic community like Chua and Samy Velu and that of minion race based parties will fade away into oblivion. It now requires of the resilience and determination of the few dedicated HINDRAF members to persist on their human rights as individuals with the collective strength of one voice.

The rights to practice communities’ cultural values and traits are private affairs of the community and the state should not be allowed to intervene for social control. It is our human rights, civil liberties, equitable rights to national wealth that we should demand from the British and the Malays.




By Robert K Chelliah

Zaid Ibrahim Blasts Election Irregularities in Malaysia

The April 25 by-election, he says, was rife with election abuse

Zaid Ibrahim, the Malaysia opposition coalition standard-bearer who lost a by-election last Sunday to P Kamalanathan, a Malaysian Indian Congress spokesman, coalition, has issued a blistering statement charging the national ruling coalition with "blatant bribery starting from…party workers right up to the Prime Minister himself."

Zaid, a prominent Kuala Lumpur lawyer and onetime justice minister under former Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who left the United Malays National Organisation to join the Parti Keadilan Rakyat headed by opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, called on international observers to monitor future elections in the country. The opposition lost the race in the Hulu Selangor constituency northeast of Kuala Lumpur by 1,725 votes.

Other observers said both sides had used the power of government to attempt to influence the results. The Pakatan Rakyat coalition, composed of Parti Keadilan, the ethnic Chinese Democratic Action Party and the Islamic fundamentalist Parti Islam se-Malaysia, won control of the government in Selangor in the 2008 national election. Certainly in the past, UMNO has shown no hesitation at promising contracts to likely voters, used government-owned transport to move voters to the polls and taken many other steps to seek to ensure victory although vote-counting has largely remained clean and fair.

Kim Quek, a Pakatan Rakyat spokesman, charged in his own message that Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak "made innumerable on-the-spot grants of cash and promises of goodies (many were conditional upon a Barisan Nasional win) that ran easily to hundreds of millions of ringgit during that compact campaign period. These included the construction of a university and several schools, an expressway interchange and many other infrastructures, several low-cost housing projects, upgrading of mosques and temples, grants to community guilds and associations, cash payments to individuals etc."

In particular, Quek wrote, Najib himself handed RM5 million (US$1.56 million) in cash to 10 100 rural dwellers being resettled by Malaysia's Federal Land Development Authority. The settlers, Quek wrote, were among victims of a failed project committed to a private developer 15 years ago.

Zaid's loss was a setback for the Pakatan Rakyat coalition.which has been suffering increasing attrition as party functionaries leave and return to the UMNO, from whence many of them had come before the 2008 election. Zaid was being seen as the logical successor to Anwar if the opposition leader goes to jail in what has become known as Sodomy II after a former aide charged him with sexual perversion.

Zaid charged that voters' names had been removed from electoral rolls, that others had been intimidated, bribed or given other inducements to influence their choice. He said his legal team would file an election petition against the poll, which took place in the Hulu Selangor constituency northeast of Kuala Lumpur. He said he would also sue the country's election commission.

"The conduct of free and fair elections is the constitutional duty of the Election Commission," Zaid wrote. "I maintain that they have violated that duty in the recent by-election. They have allowed intimidation, false information, and unfair and illegal electoral practices by the Barisan Nasional machinery without any attempt to stop them. In fact, it was obvious to me that the Election Commission was on the side of Barisan Nasional and wanting Barisan Nasional to win."

He said he also intends to file suit against the UMNO-controlled Utusan Malaysia newspaper for calling him a kaki botol or drunk. "I was never an alcoholic," he said. "Whatever I consumed was no more than whatever (former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad) and other UMNO leaders had consumed. The Election Commission should not have allowed for such a malicious and false campaign."

The opposition, he said, would launch a "Pakatan International Support group" in London in July to seek international support for free and fair elections in Malaysia. He invited overseas Malaysians to provide information to other countries and international organizations on what he described as election excesses in the country.




AsiaSentinel.com

By-election Defeat for Malaysia Opposition

Najib's policies appear to be ratified by Malay voters.

Malaysia's opposition Pakatan Rakyat has been defeated in a northeastern Selangor by-election that had been billed as a referendum on Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's economic and social policies.

Zaid Ibrahim, a one-time justice minister turned possible successor to the embattled Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, lost the seat to P Kalamanathan, a Malaysian Indian Congress functionary by a relatively healthy 1,725 votes.

The Hulu Selangor race appears to have been the hardest fought and perhaps most significant of the 10 by-elections since the opposition Pakatan Rakyat broke the national coalition's two-thirds hold on the Dewan Rakyat, or parliament in March 2008 national elections and it has raised speculation that Najib believes his strengthening coalition will be able to call national elections in 2011. Most of the previous by-elections took place in safe constituencies where the incumbent had either died or resigned. In Hulu Selangor, Zainal Abidin Ahmad, a Parti Keadilan Rakyat member of parliament, had died on March 25.

While Kalamanathan's 1,725 margin reversed the previous defeat, however, UMNO officials predicted a 6,000 vote margin, perhaps out of bravado. In previous elections, the Barisan pulled victory margins of as much as 10,000 in the constituency. But a win is a win and probably an indication of a rising trend.

Kalamanathan, who was personally selected by Najib against the wishes of MIC head S. Samy Vellu, won 24,997 votes against Zaid's 23,272. The result reduces the opposition's membership in the Dewan Rakyat to 76 against the Barisan Nasional's 138. It was the second straight by-election win for the Barisan.

Voting was heavy early in the Hulu Selangor constituency, a variegated district to the northeast of Kuala Lumpur, with an eventual turnout of 75.8 percent, election officials said. The contest for the seat, in which both sides have spent state funds heavily and often, and each accused the other of such offences as drinking beer and faking college credentials, was also viewed by analysts as a test of whether Najib has been able to rebuild the scandal-wracked Barisan and whether the Pakatan Rakyat's ability to rule the populous state it won in 2008 had found resonance with the voters. Najib appeared three times in the constituency to urge voters to return to the Barisan.

The central lesson of the race appears to have been the division of the electorate along ethnic lines, with the Chinese, who make up 26 percent of the electorate, going solidly for the opposition and Malays and Indians swinging back to the Barisan Nasional, the national ruling coalition. Zaid appeared to be leading initially as votes in the urban areas -- Chinese strongholds -- were counted first. However, as the ballots started to trickle in from rural Malay voters, the count swung back to Kalamanathan.

Najib, who came into the premiership a year ago dogged by scandal and with only a 44 percent approval rating, has now improved his numbers to 68 percent across the country. He has worked assiduously to heal the fractured racial divisions in Malaysia, especially with the Indian population, who make up about 8 percent of the electorate. His 1Malaysia campaign, as it is known, is aided by a US$23 million contract with US public relations giant APCO. The Chinese remain largely disaffected, turned off by factional political infighting and scandal in the Malaysian Chinese Association.

Najib has been aided by a recovering economy, with rising exports expected to push gross domestic product back to 4.5-5 percent in 2010. Some analysts express concern that employment is rising only marginally. However, his so-called New Economic Model, designed to replace the 40-year-old New Economic Policy of affirmative action for ethnic Malays, has stirred concern in the Malay community that they will be forced to give up subsidies and other privileges to the wealthier Chinese.

With Anwar caught in the coils of a long-drawn-out sexual abuse trial that has been nicknamed Sodomy II, Zaid, a highly respected lawyer who was appointed by former premier Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as a minister in the prime minister's office to attempt to clean out Malaysia's scandal-wracked judiciary, was perhaps the opposition's best hope to lead if Anwar is convicted. As an UMNO cabinet official, Zaid stirred the outrage of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad by saying the government should apologize for his firing of the Lord President of the Supreme Court, Tun Salleh Abbas, in 1988. After criticizing the arrests of three individuals - Democratic Action Party MP Teresa Kok, editor Raja Petra Kamaruddin and journalist Tan Hoon Cheng under the Internal Security Act in September of 2008, Zaid was forced to resign and he left the party soon after.

Lim Kit Siang, the head of the DAP, sought to put the best face on the defeat, telling his supporters that the loss was narrower than expected and that Zaid will live to fight again another day. Nonetheless, the defeat still leaves the Pakatan Rakyat struggling to find a leader with the charisma to replace Anwar if he goes to jail in the long-drawn-out sexual abuse trial. Anwar spent six years in prison on similar charges after a 1998 trial that was universally condemned as concocted to drive him out of politics.






AsiaSentinel.com

Malaysia's Disastrous Capital Flight

Money leaves the country on an unprecedented scale

Churches are not the only thing to have been going up in flames in Malaysia. Take a look at the nation's foreign exchange reserves. They fell by close to 25 percent during 2009 according to investment bank UBS even though the country continued to run a huge surplus on the current account of its balance of payments.

Says UBS: "Question: which Asian country had the biggest FX losses in 2009?" The answer is Malaysia and by a very large margin; we estimate that official reserves fell by well more than one quarter on a valuation-adjusted basis". It describes the situation as "bizarre" and contrasts Malaysia with other countries with large current account surpluses – Thailand, China, Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong – which have seen their reserves increase – as should be expected.

In short there has been an exodus of money from Malaysia on a scale which surpasses that which occurred during the Asian crisis. Nor is this just a mirage. The decline is also reflected in a sudden decline in base money supply – even while, thanks to Bank Negara, broader M2 has continued to grow modestly.

Who is responsible for this massive outflow? And where has it gone? The questions cannot be answered from the data and probably will not be by a government that knows its own state-controlled enterprises, headed by Petronas, may probably be responsible for part of it. The more certain reason however is the outflow of local private capital has been taking place on an unprecedented scale in response to political instability, massive official corruption and discrimination against non-Malays.

This capital bloodletting has as yet attracted little attention because Malaysia's foreign debt levels had declined dramatically since the Asian crisis and its reserves reached very healthy levels. So the outflow has not disturbed the financial markets, and Bank Negara has easily been able to keep interest rates low and the currency strong.

But unlike 1998, when the exodus of hot foreign money was a major contributor to the crisis, foreigners cannot be blamed. There is little speculative interest in the ringgit and the Malaysian bourse has rather fallen off the map as far as foreign institutional money is concerned. The BRICs, India, China, Russia, Brazil have taken the merging market lead once dominated by Southeast Asia.

Nor is there much evidence that the Middle East money which was supposed to be flowing into Muslim Malaysia, into holiday apartments or Johor's massive Iskandar development zone, has been much in evidence. Malaysia's one recent success, the development of its sukuk (Islamic bond) market may have caused more capital outflow than inflow. At any rate any overall net inflow of foreign capital whether into bonds, equities, factories or real estate has been dwarfed by the exodus of Malaysian money.

The latter is reflected in the weakness of private sector investment, which now trails public investment. Indeed it explains why the economy remains weak despite very healthy prices for most of Malaysia's commodity exports. The nation has been running a current account surplus of more than 10 percent of gross domestic product for the past decade and hit about 17 percent of GDP in the year just ended. Initially this surplus was needed to pay down debt accumulated during the mid-1990s Mahathir boom years and to rebuild foreign exchange reserves to healthy levels.

But subsequently it became simply a consequence of the weakness of private investment. Domestic investors were discouraged by the corrupt and warped system and foreigners moved to China and elsewhere. GDP growth has become ever reliant on government stimulus – again racially biased in its allocation -- financed by a persistently large budget deficit.

Meanwhile, publicly controlled capital has been rushing overseas. Petronas has been spending its billions in profits around the world as it attempts to become a major global player – at the expense of Malaysian citizenry in general and the oil and gas producing states in particular. Other government-controlled entities such as Malayan Banking Bhd have been bidding top dollar for foreign assets – such as Bank Internasional Indonesia.

Often with the exodus of money goes an exodus of talent as highly skilled persons disadvantaged by race or, as in the case of some Malays, disgusted by local corruption or primitive religious authorities, take themselves and their capital to Australia, Canada, India, China, etc.

The 2009 reserves loss may have had some specific cause which will not be repeated. But it has merely served to underline a dismal trend which has been in evidence for the best part of a decade. Malaysia has so far been saved from itself by the commodity price gains of the past five years – with even the late 2008 collapse now largely reversed. Oil and palm oil may be off their peaks but both are now double their prices of five years ago.

It is better not to imagine what will happen to Malaysia if prices collapse to 2004 levels and stay there. Better now to address the real reasons behind capital outflow and lack of private investment.




AsiaSentinel.com

Malaysia's Pussycats in the Year of the Tiger

The country's women need some empowering.

While around the world women's achievements in fields such as medicine, the arts, politics and film are celebrated, in Malaysia women are apparently a problem for men. The secretary-general of the Congress of Unions of Employees in the Public and Civil Service (Cuepacs), Ahmad Shah Mohd Zin, complained recently that too many women were in decision-making roles in the administrative and diplomatic service. Is Ahmad Shah afraid his own job might be taken over by the fairer sex?

Incredibly, the National Population and Family Development Board's message, reported in mainstream papers on March 11, was to make more babies and not put off marriage. Apparently, fertility rates had dropped from 3.4 in 1995 to 2.2 in 2007. Why is Malaysia obsessed with quantity and not quality? Or rather, why are men fascinated with size? Has it to do with what's in their pants? Are women only good for procreating? If those in senior civil-service positions perform well, then does it matter if they wear a skirt or wear trousers? If smaller families enjoy a good standard of living, are happier, can communicate better, have children with access to education, then are these of little or no consequence? If a woman delays marriage to grab opportunities that will eventually benefit her family, is that wrong? Maybe men have greater difficulty in appreciating women's capabilities and determination? Stories of the abuse of women -- sexual assaults, low pay and abandoned wives, feature in the news daily.

Women may have made their presence felt in the public sector, but contrary to what the Cuepacs secretary-general says, they do not dominate it. Statistics on Women, Family and Social Welfare 2009 show that there are only two female secretaries-general out of 24 ministries (8.3 percent), 12 female director-generals out of 70 departments (17.1 percent) and 11 female chief-executives out of 71 federal statutory bodies (15.5 percent).

In politics, males have been acting with increasing incompetence and immaturity. Men like Zulkifli Nordin and Ibrahim Ali, the leaders of Malay nationalist organizations, feel the need to inflame, incite and instigate with their racist rhetoric. One hopes a capable woman in a similar situation would have appealed to a person's innate good qualities, to inform, improve and inspire.

Where women are concerned, a dichotomy exists. They are told of the need to breed more, and yet more babies are abandoned. In reported cases of illicit sex, the women are whipped and humiliated in the national press, but the men's role is diminished and hardly mentioned. In high profile divorce cases, the women are portrayed as gold-diggers but the thousands of men who fail to pay maintenance to their ex-wives and children escape justice.

A Women's Aid Organization survey revealed in 1989 that 1.8 million or 39 percent of women over 15 were beaten by their husbands or boyfriends. Yet, only 909 women made a police report.

Modern Malaysia has more educated women who are also major or sole breadwinners. Although it ranks 77th in terms of gender gap in educational attainment, there exists a wide chasm in economic participation and political empowerment. Cultural upbringing digs deep into women's psyche and they have difficulty extricating themselves from outdated beliefs. They cling to the notion that husbands or boyfriends automatically qualify as the head of the household, to bully, dominate and control them.

Gender-equality is rarely practiced in Malaysia. When Manohara Odelia Pinot, the royal Indonesian teenage bride, sought refuge in Singapore, alleging abuse at the hands of her husband, her pleas for help were ignored. The Deputy Prime Minister, Muhyiddin Yassin, said that the Malaysian government "did not want to get involved." or "be dragged into this", and "to leave it as it is".

Any allegation of violence has to be investigated. No one is above the law. Nor should there be two sets of rules to cover royalty and the masses. The DPM's conflicting messages only encourage discrimination against women. His statements contradict the Government of Malaysia's stand on women's equality. (National Policy on Women 1989, UN Fourth World Conference on Women 1995, Action Plan for Women in Development 1997, formation of Women's Affairs Ministry 2001).

Both palace and politicians have devalued the role of women in the home and in politics. Violence against women is a crime and laws do exist to protect the rights of vulnerable women. But the laws that promote gender equality are few and the ones that guarantee protection against discrimination are weak.

Women's representation in parliament falls short of the 30 percent target in the 1995 Global Platform for Action, although women comprise half the total population and 40 percent of the workforce. When it comes to formulating laws pertaining to women (eg divorce, property, and tax), men neither want to accommodate women's views nor relinquish power. They possibly fear working with women. Instead of striving for the common good of women and society as a whole, men demand that decision-making be left to them.

Malaysian female politicians are allowed to debate a proposed bill in parliament, but are banned from voting for what they feel is the right decision, or what their conscience dictates. They are forced to toe the party line and act subservient. Incredibly, politicians like Bung Radin who insult them in parliament, are not censured.

Malaysia's current female politicians are disappointingly of the wrong calibre and range from timid to tainted. The Perak BN senior exco member, Hamidah Osman said that females could not become chief ministers because the minister, in the course of her duties, would have to meet religious officers and the Sultan. Hamidah's other claim to fame is her derogatory comparison of Indians and snakes that earned her the pseudonym ‘snake woman'. But women can just as easily betray their party. When Hee Yit Foong defected from the Pakatan Rakyat party, her action helped precipitate the downfall of the Perak government. She remains one of the most reviled women in Malaysia today and is also known as ‘frog' or ‘traitor'.

The list is not limited to peninsular Malaysia either. In Sarawak, Fatimah Abdullah, Assistant Minister in the Chief Minister's Department, failed to speak up for Penan girls who were raped and sexually exploited by the timber loggers. Nor is the list exclusive to politicians. Wives of senior politicians have also been known further their husbands' careers using creative methods.

While it is the responsibility of all politicians to advance the rights of women, the female representatives themselves need to be prickly to promote equality and justice for their sex. They need to demonstrate commitment and passion. And women in Malaysia, regardless of their race or religion, must show their determination to save this nation by making a stand. Sometimes it is not the other sex that we have to worry about but one's own. Women's contribution can have tremendous impact on progress and growth. But then, where are the women of note in Malaysia?

Might Malaysia's problems be solved by a woman's long-term vision? If a mother is the glue that holds a family together, why can't a woman be the person that cements communities together? A mother usually considers all her children, with their different foibles, equally deserving of her love. So why can't a woman lead Malaysia out of its depressing state?

It won't be an overnight transition as the resistance to the leadership of women would be fierce. But few people realize that the windscreen wiper was invented by a woman named Mary Anderson in 1905. It was probably her predilection for clear vision through glass, or her fastidiousness with clean windows, that made her invent them.







AsiaSentinel.com

Malaysia's Brain Drain - It's Not Just Politics and Racial Discrimination.

Malaysia's brain drain appears to be picking up speed. According to a recent parliamentary report, 140,000 left the country, probably for good, in 2007. Between March 2008 and August 2009, that figure more than doubled to 305,000 as talented people pulled up stakes, apparently disillusioned by rising crime, a tainted judiciary, human rights abuses, an outmoded education system and other concerns.

The general assumption is that Chinese and Indians form the majority of those abandoning the country of their birth because ethnic Malays consider them pendatang – aliens in a Malay land, regardless of how long they have been in the country. However, increasing numbers of Malays have already emigrated as well, or are seriously thinking it, dismayed by corrupt practices as well as the rigid confines of Islam and the rise of fundamentalism embodied in the revelation on Wednesday by Home Minister Hishammuddin Tun Hussein that three women had been caned in Kajang Prison in Selangor on Feb. 9 for having had illicit sex under shariah law.

In 2000, according to figures compiled in 2007, 40 percent of Malaysian emigrants headed for Singapore – at the same time Singaporeans are headed somewhere else. By one estimate, (Singaporeans Seek Asylum Elsewhere, Asia Sentinel, Jan. 7) the number who put the Lion City behind them is as high as 15 percent of annual births. In 2006, the Transport Minister, Raymond Lim, expressed concern that 53 percent of Singaporean teens would consider emigration. One website survey put Singapore's average outflow at 26.11 migrants per 1,000 citizens, the second highest in the world - next only to East Timor (51.07).

Of the other émigrés, 30 percent go to OECD countries (Australia, New Zealand, the United States, Canada and Britain) 20 percent to Asian countries (Brunei, Philippines, Indonesia) and the rest of the world (10 percent). Malaysian Employers Federation executive director, Shamsuddin Bardan, said in an interview that 785,000 Malaysians are working overseas. Unofficially, the figure is well over 1 million.

Nor are people all that is leaving. Asia Sentinel reported on Jan.11 (Malaysia's Disastrous Capital Flight) that there has been an exodus of money from Malaysia on a scale which surpasses that which occurred during the Asian crisis. The decline is also reflected in a sudden decline in base money supply – even while, thanks to Bank Negara, broader M2 has continued to grow modestly.

A major problem is the flight of graduates. As early as 2004, former Premier Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was becoming concerned, pointing out that as many as many as 30,000 thought to be working in foreign countries, many of whom had held scholarships in top universities from the Malaysian government but chose to stay overseas at the end of their studies. Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad demanded that other countries pay Malaysia for having seduced them to stay, " since, by right, the graduates' training and knowledge should be called intellectual property."

The typical reasons are well-documented: improved employment and business prospects, higher salaries, better working environments, greater chances of promotion and a relatively superior quality of life.

Three Malay women put a personal face on statistics in conversation with Asia Sentinel, sharing their decisions to emigrate. Two are graduates of overseas universities, the third is from a local school. Their decisions to leave were made, they say, after a lot of soul searching. But for these women, money and economic incentives were not the end-all. Their names have been changed to protect them.

Anita claims to have left because of her sexuality. She graduated from a university in the United Kingdom but continued with a post-graduate degree course. At the end of her studies, she worked in a multinational corporation in London and is now a department head. She was recently married, in a civil ceremony, in the UK. A Malay, Anita is naturally Muslim. Her partner is another woman, Nadia, an Iraqi Jew. They met as undergraduates.

For a decade, the two made the annual pilgrimage to Malaysia to visit Anita's ageing parents, Anita says. When in Kuala Lumpur, they are regular patrons of lesbian joints in Bangsar. After the Malaysian National Fatwa Council issued an edict banning lesbianism in 2008, Anita travelled alone. Nadia dislikes the risk of being 'caught,' The clues to their sexuality are their short cropped hair, Doc Marten shoes, preponderance of masculine clothes and, on closer inspection, their identical wedding rings with each other's names inscribed. Anita is in self-imposed exile because her partner will not be allowed to reside in Malaysia.

Although male homosexuality is illegal in Malaysia and sodomy incurs a punishment of 20 years jail, Malaysia's civil code does not ban lesbianism. Malaysian men are just so big-headed that they cannot imagine any woman not wanting to sleep with a man.

"It is unacceptable to see women who love the male lifestyle including dressing in the clothes men wear," said Abdul Shukor Husin, the Fatwa Council chairman. Harussani Idris Zakaria, the mufti of Perak, says that the council's ruling was not legally binding as it had not been passed into law. He wants tomboys to be banned because their actions are immoral. "It doesn't matter if it's a law or not," he says,

In 2000, Malaysia had around 80,000 official expatriates. By 2008, this figure had shrunk to 38,000 as the collapsing global economy cut into trade and thus trade and Malaysian exports. When Bibi worked in an electronics factory in north Perak, little did she foresee marrying her expatriate quality control engineer. After his conversion to Islam and their subsequent marriage, he attempted unsuccessfully to gain permanent residence. He claims to have spent a small fortune on lawyers, on 'proof' and photographs for the application process, and several trips to the immigration offices to be 'verified'. He claims that one low ranking government official even offered him a birth certificate for RM60,000, as a pre-cursor to a 'red' identity card, which would help facilitate the PR status.

When Bibi's husband's work permit expired, he attempted to form a trading company. He travelled to the border every few months to renew his immigration-social visit pass, while he explored this avenue. He was ineligible for a sole proprietorship and although he could form a limited company with 51 percent bumiputra ownership, he found that for one reason or another, it was not viable. Local partners wanted maximum profits for little or no work. A Caucasian, he was seen as a cash cow, he says.

In addition, the Perak town they lived in was very provincial. Had he lived in Kuala Lumpur or Penang, he could be anonymous, like the expatriates married to Malay women in these cities. As an expat convert in his local town, the Malays expected him to uphold Malay values and scrutinized his every move, right down to his religious obligations. He was disillusioned with living in a goldfish bowl and both he and Bibi left for Europe.

According to one local daily, the number of Malaysian researchers, scientists and engineers working overseas exceeds 20,000 with 40 percent of them in the United States and 10 percent in Australia. When Ida graduated from Australia with a chemical engineering degree, she worked in a chemical plant in Selangor. Her friendship with a chemist blossomed into love, with talk of marriage. There was one problem - Anthony was a Catholic. He dutifully presented himself at the mosque for agama lessons in preparation for his conversion. The imam never appeared for their pre-arranged appointments. Frustrated with being let down repeatedly, he stopped going. His lucky break came when he was offered a job in a neighboring country. Ida joined him. She was free from parental and family pressures, he from the religious zealots. They married. He retained his faith, she remained a Muslim. They started a family and have since emigrated to New Zealand. Recently, she embraced Catholicism.

Malaysian emigration has critical policy implications. There are questions over what will happen when overseas students receive employment offers in the country where they are studying, when skilled people leave Malaysia, when pensioners retire abroad (the silver economy) and the nation registers an increase in unskilled foreign workers but a decrease in skilled expatriates.

The challenge for policymakers is to harness the economic and political potential of this largely ignored diaspora. There is no point pretending Malaysia does not have a serious problem. The incentives to reverse the brain drain and attract those who are abroad must be reviewed, as they are currently ineffective. For many like Anita, Bibi and Ida, it is not just politics and racial discrimination but also religious and social pressures that drive them away.





By Mariam Mokhtar
Asia Sentinel.com