مهاتير محمد's Blog, page 55

WATER FOR SINGAPORE

 

1. I would like to thank the visitor to my blog who pointed out that the terms of the agreement to supply raw water and receive treated water to and from Singapore actually favours Malaysia.  I agree.  But I am talking about revision in the price of raw water since 3 sen per 1000 gallons is ridiculous today.  It would be even more ridiculous in the decades to come.  Hence, the need to renegotiate.  According to the present agreement, if Malaysia sells 1,000,000 of raw water it should be paid 3,000 sen or RM30.00.

2.  Malaysia can buy 12% of the raw water treated by Singapore at 50 sen per 1000 gallons i.e for 120,000 gallons, Malaysia has to pay RM60.00 for this.  But the cost of treating water is RM1.09 (say RM1.10)

3.  The savings for Malaysia is therefore 60 sen per 1000 gallons equals to RM72.00 for 120,000 gallons.

4.   Since 3 sen is ridiculous, supposing Malaysia wishes to ask for 6 sen per 1000 gallons, an increase of 100%.  It can only do so if Singapore agrees.  It can be assumed that Singapore would want to increase the price of treated water.  It may ask for the same quantum i.e a 100% increase to RM1.00 per 1000 gallons.

5.  For 120,000 gallons Malaysia will have to pay RM120.00.  The cost of treatment for 120,000 gallons is 1.10 x 120 = RM132.00.

6.  The benefit for Malaysia would be reduced to RM12.00 due to the increase in price.  If there is negotiations then Singapore might be persuaded not to increase or to increase at a lower rate.  But this will not be the end.

7.  Johor charges Malacca 30 sen per 1000 gallons.  If we charge the same to Singapore would it raise the price above the cost of treatment?  If it does than it would be better for Malaysia to have its own treatment plant.

8. That is why negotiations are necessary from time to time.  We should not allow ourselves to be short-changed over the next 57 years to 2060.

9.   Malaysia should learn to include exit clauses when entering into agreements.  It should always remember that over time money depreciates i.e prices increase.

 

Water For Singapore

Water For Singapore

1. I would like to thank the visitor to my blog who pointed out that the terms of the agreement to supply raw water and receive treated water to and from Singapore actually favours Malaysia.  I agree.  But I am talking about revision in the price of raw water since 3 sen per 1000 gallons is ridiculous today.  It would be even more ridiculous in the decades to come.  Hence, the need to renegotiate.  According to the present agreement, if Malaysia sells 1,000,000 of raw water it should be paid 3,000 sen or RM30.00.

2.  Malaysia can buy 12% of the raw water treated by Singapore at 50 sen per 1000 gallons i.e for 120,000 gallons, Malaysia has to pay RM60.00 for this.  But the cost of treating water is RM1.09 (say RM1.10)

3.  The savings for Malaysia is therefore 60 sen per 1000 gallons equals to RM72.00 for 120,000 gallons.

4.   Since 3 sen is ridiculous, supposing Malaysia wishes to ask for 6 sen per 1000 gallons, an increase of 100%.  It can only do so if Singapore agrees.  It can be assumed that Singapore would want to increase the price of treated water.  It may ask for the same quantum i.e a 100% increase to RM1.00 per 1000 gallons.

5.  For 120,000 gallons Malaysia will have to pay RM120.00.  The cost of treatment for 120,000 gallons is 1.10 x 120 = RM132.00.

6.  The benefit for Malaysia would be reduced to RM12.00 due to the increase in price.  If there is negotiations then Singapore might be persuaded not to increase or to increase at a lower rate.  But this will not be the end.

7.  Johor charges Malacca 30 sen per 1000 gallons.  If we charge the same to Singapore would it raise the price above the cost of treatment?  If it does than it would be better for Malaysia to have its own treatment plant.

8. That is why negotiations are necessary from time to time.  We should not allow ourselves to be short-changed over the next 57 years to 2060.

9.   Malaysia should learn to include exit clauses when entering into agreements.  It should always remember that over time money depreciates i.e prices increase.

 

THE TRANS PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP

An edited version of this article appeared in the New Straits Times of July 12, 2013

1. The secretary to the Ministry of Trade and Industry avers that trade negations must be done in secret, I suppose by the officers concerned. There should apparently be no public debate or even within the Government.

2. I don’t think it is such a good practice, if indeed that is the practice. Let us see the record of trade and other agreements negotiated by the Malaysian Government. They do not seem to favour Malaysia much. In fact they seem to result in Malaysia accepting unfavourable terms.

3. Firstly let us look at the water agreement with Singapore. Malaysia agreed to sell raw water at 3 cents per 1000 gallons. In return Malaysia can buy 12 per cent or less of the treated water for 50 cents. If the rates are to be revised both countries must agree.

4. If Malaysia raises the rate to 6 cent per 1000 gallons (i.e. 100 per cent) then Singapore can raise by the same factor to 1 dollar per 1000 gallons of treated water. This is not going to benefit Malaysia. And so we never tried to renegotiate the prices.

5. The first agreement lapsed in 2011 and we did not renegotiate at all. The next agreement will lapse in 2060. So we will be getting 3 cents per 1000 gallons of raw water when the cost of living has probably gone up many-many times.

6. To avoid Singapore revising the price of water if we raise the price of raw water, Johor was given enough money to build its own treatment plant. Not having to depend on supply from Singapore, we could raise the price of raw water without Singapore raising the price of treated water.

7. I am told that Johor still needs to buy treated water from Singapore. I really do not know why. So the price has not been renegotiated and I suppose will not be renegotiated until 2060.

8. Today the Singapore Dollar is 2 ½ times the value of the Malaysian Ringgit. At the time of the agreement it was one to one. Are we receiving payment in Singapore Dollar or Malaysian Ringgit? Or is this a secret also?

9. Frankly I don’t think we thought very carefully when we negotiated. Incidentally Johor sells water at 30 cent per 1000 gallons to Melaka, i.e. 1000 per cent higher than for Singapore.

10. Then there is the purchase of the F/A-18 fighter aircraft. Actually the Government wanted the MIG-29. Somehow part of the fund was used to purchase the F/A-18. I suppose the people who made this decision know why they must have the F/A-18.

11. Unfortunately the agreement to purchase did not include the source code. Without the source code the F/A-18 can only fly on missions approved by the United States. Until then these very expensive fighter planes can only be used for show at LIMA. Very expensive toys.

12. Then there is the AFTA, the Asean Free Trade Area. We agreed that cars with 40 per cent local contents qualify as national and tax-free entry into ASEAN markets. Forty per cent local contents are easily achieved by cars from outside ASEAN. This means the Japanese, Korean, Chinese and European cars can get ASEAN countries’ national status merely by being assembled in ASEAN countries together with batteries, tyres and a few other components.

13. We produce the Proton in Malaysia with 90% local contents. Naturally our costs are higher and cannot compete with non-ASEAN cars assembled in ASEAN countries. While these cars flood the Malaysian market, hardly any Proton is seen in ASEAN countries.

14. The negotiators may think they negotiated a good deal but I just don’t think so. We are simply opening our markets to countries with closed markets.

15. But to make matters worse, while Proton must comply with Malaysian safety and other standards, the imported cars are given exemptions from most of these. If Proton wishes to export to the countries of the manufacturers, it must comply with all their standards. So far we cannot export to Japan, Korea and the European countries. This is how good the agreements we have entered into.

16. We lost Pulau Batu Puteh but we cannot build the bridge or remove the causeway, or settle the provident fund issue. But we have given up our railway land worth billions to Singapore for practically nothing. And now we must ask Singapore’s permission to build our high speed train.

17. Look at all the agreements we have entered into and you will find practically none of them favours us.

18. Now we want to swallow the American conceived TPP, Trans Pacific Partnership. This is another attempt by America to let their huge corporations penetrate the domestic markets of the small countries, in particular Government procurements.

19. When the GATT (General Agreement on Trade and Tariff) failed they invented WTO (World Trade Organisation) for the same purpose. That also failed. They then invented APEC. Still they cannot achieve their objective. They introduced bilateral free trade agreements. Then they promoted a Globalised World, a world without borders in which their money can go anywhere, destroy economies and then pull out. In case we have forgotten they did this in 1997 – 8.

20. Still they cannot get at Government procurement. And now they invented TPP, a partnership of unequal, of the strong to take advantage of the weak.

21. This is going to be legally binding. If we breach the agreement, their corporations can sue the Government for billions. I have my doubts about our ability to convince the international arbitrators or courts. We cannot even convince the World Court over Pulau Batu Puteh.

22. They will have the best lawyers, lots of them. We will exhaust all our funds to pay our less experienced lawyers. At the end we will lose and pay indemnities and fees running into billions. And we will continue to pay until we comply. And when we comply we will lose more money.

23. We have a domestic problem and we have to solve this problem. They don’t care. Anyone who talks about the New Economic Policy (NEP) is labelled racist by our officials. When the currency rogues attacked us the purpose was to gain control over our economy. We resisted that because we were still free then. But after we sign the TPP we will be bound hand and foot. No more capital control. We will be colonised again. President Sukarno was right about neo-colonialism.

24. I know MITI is already set to agree to the TPP. It will not entertain any counter arguments. It wants to do this secretly. We don’t punish people who make agreements detrimental to the interest of this country. So what is there to lose.

25. This is my country as much as it is the country of the officials and politicians. If people secretly do harm to my country I have a right to complain.

26. We talk a lot about transparency. Let us see transparency regarding the TPP negotiation. The October 2013 ultimatum should be ignored. And let China also be included.

RACIAL POLARIZATION

1. After Parliament was dissolved on the 13th April 2013, I was interviewed by a BBC journalist. He appeared quite convinced that race-based parties such as those in the National Front would be rejected by a more liberal electorate which believes in democracy, freedom and non-racial politics. Also the idealistic young would reject the BN.

2. I had to disagree with him as I believed that racial polarization in Malaysia had become more pronounced now than ever before. I may not always be right but after 60 years involvement in Malaysian politics I felt strongly that the race factor will continue to dominate the politics of the country.  The quality of the candidates or parties, the ideologies and the desire for change will always be secondary to race.

3. The election results showed that I was right. The DAP playing on racial sentiments drew the Chinese away from BN by depicting the MCA as lackeys of UMNO. The DAP won 38 seats, reducing the MCA’s seats from 15 to 7. The Gerakan won one seat out of two. All the DAP Chinese contested in Chinese majority constituencies.  A few of the MCA, Gerakan and MIC candidates contested in Malay majority constituencies.

4. Although the DAP claims to be multiracial, it is in fact a Chinese party with mainly Chinese members and leadership. When it held elections to its Central Committee recently other than Karpal Singh all the members elected were Chinese.

5. Hatred of the Malays was whipped up through the slogan “Malaysian Malaysia”, implying that Malaysia is for the Malays only while other races were discriminated against and alleged to be second class citizens.  Advocating meritocracy, the extremists Chinese in the DAP charged the BN Government  of discriminating in favour of the Malays even though they were inferior and less qualified for places in the universities, awards of scholarships, contracts, licences and positions in the Government.  The Malay leaders were not as able as the non-Malay leaders who possess greater merit.

6. Whenever Government policies such as the NEP were defended, the defenders whether in the Government or NGO’s are labelled racist.  The Malay parties in the election pact in Pakatan were tolerated because they were useful for election purposes.

7. If more proof is needed of the role of Chinese racism in the 13th GE, the demonstrations accusing the BN of fraud and cheating in the elections, despite being organised by Anwar and the PKR, are largely attended by Chinese, especially the young. Within the Country and abroad, Chinese youths wearing black shirts and masks made up most of the demonstrators. Usually Malays make up the majority of the demonstrators.  The lack of respect for the national flag was shown by Chinese young people in Taiwan holding it upside down. Although DAP and PKR participated in these demos, PAS members were noticeably absent. In fact PAS leaders dissociated themselves from the agitation to overthrow the Government through street demos ala Arab Spring. The protests seem to be mainly a Chinese affair.

8. The indisputable fact is that the DAP has succeeded in destroying the collaboration or sharing between the different races as exemplified by the BN coalition. The Pakatan is not a true coalition. It is simply an election pact between the parties opposed to the BN. This pact clearly benefited the chauvinist Chinese in DAP most, while PAS the most Malay of the Pakatan parties benefited the least, winning only 21 seats against DAP’s 38 and PKR’s 30.  Actually although PAS contested in more constituencies than DAP, it lost two seats more than in 2008.

9. If today the schism between the races is deeper it is because the DAP reject the Malay/Chinese/Indian “kongsi”. The DAP wants the Chinese who already dominate the economy, to dominate Malaysia’s politics as well. It is clearly racist and reject inter-racial sharing of power and wealth as advocated by the BN. Racial polarization has become more pronounced as a result.  It will become more so in the future.

UMNO DAHULU DAN SEKARANG

1. Pada 11hb. Mei 2013, UMNO merayakan hari penubuhannya yang ke 63 dengan sembahyang dan tahlil, ucapan bersemangat dari Presiden Najib Tun Razak dan majlis makan malam. Tetapi UMNO pada 2013 ini bukanlah sama dengan UMNO 1946.

2. Pada 1946, pengasas UMNO yang berkumpul di Johor Baru bersemangat untuk menyelamatkan bangsa Melayu dari kehilangan bangsa mereka, dari kehilangan tanahair mereka, dari menjadi rakyat sebuah tanah jajahan British dan hilangnya Melayu di dunia.

3. Perjuangan pemimpin dan ahli pengasas UMNO pada masa itu ialah untuk bangsa, agama dan tanahair. Tidak ada tujuan lain yang menggerakkan mereka, sudah tentu tidak ada kepentingan diri atau niat untuk jadi pembesar negara merdeka dengan upah yang lumayan.

4. Oleh kerana itu mereka dihormati, dialu-alukan dan disokong oleh hampir semua orang Melayu. Mereka adalah pejuang dan jaguh dan orang Melayu datang berduyun-duyun untuk menyertai parti UMNO yang ditubuh oleh mereka.

5. Maka bersatulah Melayu, tanpa mengambilkira pangkat dan darjat, tanpa mempedulikan berpelajaran Melayu, Inggeris atau agama. Mereka semua Melayu samada dari negeri-negeri yang berlainan, dengan raja yang berlainan, atau apa-apa lain yang membezakan mereka.

6. Dan berbaris padat dan rapatlah mereka untuk perjuangan yang suci, perjuangan untuk menyelamatkan bangsa mereka, agama mereka dan negara mereka. Mereka tidak takut, tidak gentar dalam menghadapi kuasa besar British.

7. Dan berjayalah mereka dengan menewaskan Malayan Union, usul satu penjajah terkemuka, satu dari pemenang perang besar dunia. Dan terdirilah negara bangsa Melayu yang merdeka yang dikenali secara rasminya Persekutuan Tanah Melayu. Nama Federation of Malaya ialah terjemahan kepada Bahasa Inggeris dan dianggap oleh orang Melayu sebagai bukan nama rasmi.

8. Itulah UMNO enampuluh lebih tahun dahulu. Mereka disanjung, didukung oleh semua yang berbangsa Melayu di negeri-negeri Melayu dan di mana-mana ada orang Melayu.

9. Tetapi tidak pada hari ini. Sekarang UMNO tidak lagi dipandang tinggi dan tidak lagi disokong seperti dahulu. Sesungguhnya ramai orang Melayu meluat dengan UMNO, anggapnya tidak lagi relevan dan perlu ditolak pun.

10. Kenapa?. Kerana UMNO tidak lagi berjuang untuk bangsa, agama dan tanahair. UMNO ternampak dan memang pun benar, berjuang untuk kepentingan orang-orang tertentu dalamnya dan ahlinya sahaja. UMNO berjuang untuk jawatan dan pangkat, untuk memperkayakan diri, untuk sagu hati, untuk poket sendiri.

11. Untuk ini mereka berusaha mengurangkan kemungkinan diri mereka dicabar, kurangkan kemungkinan diganti oleh sesiapa yang lebih layak. UMNO adalah hak ahlinya, hak pemimpinnya yang sedia ada dan bukan hak orang Melayu. Setelah mereka mendapat tempat jangan benar orang Melayu lain, terutama yang memiliki kebolehan tertentu, menyertai UMNO. UMNO adalah untuk pemimpin dan ahli semasa, dari ketua cawangan kepada ketua bahagian. UMNO tidak perlu tambahan ahli, tidak perlu penyertaan sesiapa lagi kerana ahli yang sedia ada perlu memelihara habuan mereka. Jika terlalu banyak ahli, habuan perlu dikongsi. Dan habuan yang dikongsi tentulah tidak sebanyak sebelum berkongsi.

12. Apa itu perjuangan untuk bangsa, agama dan tanahair! Bukankah yang sudah ada dalam UMNO, sebagai pemimpin atau ahli biasa terdiri dari bangsa Melayu, yang beragama Islam. Perjuangan untuk diri mereka bermakna perjuangan untuk bangsa mereka, bangsa Melayu, agama mereka, agama Islam. Oleh itu perjuangan untuk bangsa, agama dan negara sedang diteruskan, tanpa penyertaan Melayu lain.

13. Kesannya ialah hari ini ahli tidak bertambah selaras dengan pertumbuhan jumlah orang Melayu. Dan mereka terutama yang berkebolehan, yang berbakat tidak dibenar masuk UMNO lagi.

14. Yang boleh menyertai hanyalah yang kurang berkebolehan disbanding dengan yang sudah ada. Oleh kerana penyertaan dalam UMNO mestilah melalui cawangan, yang boleh masuk UMNO ialah yang kurang berkebolehan dari ketua cawangan.

15. Ketua cawangan manusia biasa yang boleh diserang  penyakit, bahkan boleh mati pun. Satu hari ketua cawangan terpaksa lepaskan jawatannya. Penggantinya tentulah orang yang memiliki kebolehan yang kurang darinya. Dengan itu kebolehan ketua cawangan akan merosot sepanjang masa, tiap kali pengganti mengambil alih.

16. Dan ini akan terjadi dalam keseluruhan parti. Semakin lama semakin kurang pemimpin UMNO yang berbakat. Semakin lama semakin kurang ahli yang berbakat dan layak untuk menjadi calon dalam PRU. Calon payung terjun yang berbakat akan dikalahkan.  Dengan itu pemimpin Kerajaan juga akan terdiri dari yang tidak berkebolehan.

17. Di mana pergi mereka yang berbakat ini?. Mereka pergi ke mana mereka di terima, tentunya parti lawan.

18. Melihat UMNO hanya berjuang untuk diri sendiri semata-mata, dan tidak lagi untuk bangsa, agama dan tanahair, orang Melayu tidak lagi nampak kenapa mereka harus sokong dan jayakan semasa PRU orang yang utamakan kepentingan diri sendiri sahaja. Jika ada sahaja parti lain, mereka akan sokong parti itu. Hanya jika parti lain lebih buruk baharulah sokongan kepada UMNO diteruskan. Inilah yang berlaku pada PRU 13.

19. Mungkin kita boleh tepuk belakang kerana UMNO masih menjadi parti yang menang terbanyak dalan PRU 13.  Tetapi ini bukan kerana orang Melayu masih sokong UMNO.  Sebenarnya kemenangan UMNO dalam PRU 13 disebabkan mereka tidak ada pilihan.  Mereka amat takut kalau-kalau Anwar Ibrahim menang bersama dengan DAP.  Akan hancurlah harapan orang Melayu sama sekali.  Seburuk-buruknya UMNO, ia masih berbau Melayu, masih lebih mungkin memelihara kepentingan orang Melayu.  Justeru itu tidak ada pilihan bagi orang Melayu jika tidak sokong UMNO.  Namun demikian dalam PRU 14 UMNO tidak boleh harap keadaan ini berterusan.  Jika UMNO tidak bersihkan dirinya dari rasuah dan kepentingan diri, orang Melayu mungkin mencari jaguh yang lain.

20. Demikianlah riwayat dan sejarah sebuah parti politik yang lupakan usul-asal dan sebabnya ia ditubuh. Demikianlah berakhirnya perjuangan yang lari jauh dari matlamat asalnya. Dahulu lain, sekarang lain.  Sejarah dan kecapaian dahulu tidak akan meraih sokongan selama-lamanya. Dahulu dahulu, sekarang sekarang. Hanya berharap kepada kata-kata hikmat Hang Tuah, “Tak akan Melayu hilang di dunia” tidak mencukupi. Mungkin Melayu tidak akan hilang di dunia, tetapi apakah jenis Melayu yang tidak hilang ini. Apakah mereka terdiri dari pencuci kasut, pemandu kereta, kuli yang terbongkok-bongkok menyembah bangsa lain yang menjadi Tuan mereka. Dan apakah nasib UMNO? Ia akan jadi cerita dongeng dalam buku kanak-kanak dizaman akan datang.

21. Inilah masa depan yang menunggu UMNO. Inilah masa depan sebuah parti yang cemerlang tetapi sudah hilang kegemilangannya. Inilah masa depan bagi yang tidak mahu sedar dan tidak mahu membetulkan diri.

22. Kata seorang penulis sajak di zaman dulu, “tidak ada yang lebih menyayat hati dari melihat bangsa ku dihina dan ditindas oleh orang”.

 

BRINGING DOWN GOVERNMENTS

BRINGING DOWN GOVERNMENTS

1. Street demonstrations can bring down Governments. This we know from the Arab Spring. But we should also know that setting up a new Government to replace the old Government is not as easy.

2. There will always be people who will not agree with the new Government, no matter if the Government is democratically elected or not. The losers in the bid for power will always accuse the winners of cheating and frauds of all kinds. They will demand for new elections, or a re-count or whatever.

3. If their demand is not agreed to then they will take to the streets in continuous and even violent demonstrations, supplemented with strikes and sundry disorders. They know that if the demonstrations are big enough, the police cannot act against them. If the police try, they will resist and become violent. If the police react with violence than their foreign backers will accuse the police of brutality.

4. In many instances the police had to withdraw or they may be directed to withdraw. They become disinclined to carry out their duties. Some people would take advantage of this by committing minor crimes. The people would feel insecure.

5. If on the other hand new elections are held, and the former losers win, the new losers will accuse the winners of cheating, of fraud etc. They will hold street demonstrations and strikes and do everything possible to bring down the Government. And so it would go on.

6. The net result would be continuous turmoil in the country. There would be no growth. Poverty will spread. The country may have to beg for aid or borrow. In the end it loses its independence.

7. But of course this is a small price to pay for the right to bring down governments through democratic street demonstrations.

8. Perhaps it would be better if governments are chosen through street demonstrations. It would probably be less fraudulent.

SHARING

This article appeared in the New Straits Times of April 30, 2013

1. Malaysia has enjoyed more than half a century of peace and stability and high growths under BN coalition Governments. The seizure of power by the Malay majority upon independence as predicted by foreign observers and some locals did not happen.

2. Instead under the Tunku they promoted a sharing of power and wealth between the three major races through a coalition, the Alliance. The Alliance won 51 out of 52 of the 98 Federal Legislative Council seats contested in 1955. The Tunku as Chief Minister agreed with Sir Cheng Lock Tan’s request and gave one million citizenship to unqualified Chinese and Indians, diluting the Malay majority from 80% to 60%.

3. In 1963 Singapore joined the new state of Malaysia. The PAP did not believe in sharing power. It promoted meritocracy, rule by the elites, by suggesting that Malaysia was not ruled by the cleverest and the most qualified but by Malays. This was intended to stop Chinese support for the MCA and antagonise them against the Malays and UMNO.

4. In 1964 elections the PAP contested with the Malaysian Malaysia slogan to reflect its meritocratic creed. It won only one seat. The Chinese in the Peninsular, under the MCA rejected the PAP.

5. The people of the Peninsular, in rejecting the PAP demonstrated their belief in the concept of “kongsi” or sharing espoused by the Alliance. Singapore and its chauvinistic meritocrats had to leave Malaysia.

6. But a Trojan horse was left behind in the form of a political party named DAP. The similarity of name is not accidental for the DAP was to continue the fight for a meritocratic Malaysian Malaysia. The fight against “kongsi” between the races was to continue.

7. Despite a claim that the DAP is multiracial, its leadership and the overwhelming majority of its members belied the claim to this day. The strategy was to antagonise the Chinese against the Malays by suggesting that the Chinese were second-class citizens.

8. This campaign was quite subdued when the Barisan National Government won strong support from people of all races in Malaysia. But as soon as the Government appeared to be weak the DAP extremists were let loose and the attacks against the Malays became blatant to the point of claiming that the Malays are as much newcomers to Malaysia as the Chinese and Indians. There should therefore be no special treatment for them. The DAP conveniently forgets the special treatment accorded to the Chinese and Indians in Malaysia.

9. The growth and prosperity of this multiracial country depend largely on Sino-Malay cooperation or kongsi. The Barisan National exemplifies this kongsi spirit. To break this kongsi the DAP must antagonise the Chinese against the Malays.

10. Through all the elections in Malaysia the people of Johore have personified the kongsi principle. In every election the Malays would support the MCA Chinese and the Chinese would support the UMNO Malay candidates resulting in Johore delivering 100% BN victories.

11. Now Kit Siang has decided it is time to break up the kongsi. True the Chinese majority in Gelang Patah is smaller than the other constituencies Kit Siang had contested. But Kit Siang hopes with the support of PAS he can split Malay votes, so as to defeat BN. Now UMNO is contesting Gelang Patah with little hope of getting Chinese support.

12. Kita Siang does not agree with the Islamic state and Islamic laws proposed by PAS but that party’s ability to break Malay unity in Johore would benefit DAP. Kit Siang knows that PAS would never be strong enough to impose its version of the Islamic laws in Malaysia if Pakatan wins.

13. Kit Siang is more wily than any of PAS’s leaders. He also knows that PAS needs the support of the Chinese in order to defeat UMNO. He holds the trump card in any “pakatan” of the opposition.

14. Johore is a Barisan National bastion. If it is broken then he could put an end to the MCA’s cooperation with UMNO under the old “kongsi” or sharing concept. Instead there would be meritocracy in everything where the winner takes all and the devil takes the hindmost.

15. A win for Kit Siang will be victory for racism and rule by the elites as is found in a nearby country. It will spell the end of good relations in Johore between the races.

16. Victory for Ghani Othman will mean a sharing of power and wealth of this country between all races and tribes in multi-racial Malaysia.

LIBEL

This article appeared in the New Straits Times of April 28, 2013


1. The DAP’s Kit Siang has learnt a lot from Anwar Ibrahim, the PKR leader. When unable to counter a critic, silence him by threatening to take libel action in court if the statement is not withdrawn. A long drawn hearing in the court with many postponements, will relieve Kit Siang from having to answer his critic.

2. Now he wants to sue me for calling him a racist. I have been called a racist and an ultra hundreds of times. I never sued anyone. I am a politician and ours is a democratic nation. I believe in free speech. If my political opponents call me names, I can reply or I can do something to prove them wrong.

3. I was called a Malay ultra when I became the Deputy Prime Minister. Yet in the 1999 Elections the Malays did not support me. It was Chinese votes which gave me a two-thirds majority. Incidentally Kit Siang and Karpal Singh, the loudest in calling me a Malay racist, lost in that election.

4. I reiterate that Kit Siang is racist when using the Malaysian Malaysia slogan and calling for meritocracy.

5. In blog.limkitsiang.com an article by Lee Hwa Beng states “This shows MCA won mainly in mixed seats where there are fewer Chinese voters while it lost in the Chinese majority seats.

6. One can deduce therefore, that the MCA won with the support of Malay rather than Chinese votes.” It is all about race and it belies the claim that race and religion are no longer issues in Malaysian politics.

7. The conclusion of the writer is that the DAP won only where the Chinese are in the majority.

8. The MCA is not racial because it is supported by Chinese, Malays and Indians. If the DAP does not play on its Chineseness, it cannot win. That is why Kit Siang chooses Gelang Patah where 53% of the voters are Chinese. By contesting there, Ghani is going to prove that Johore Chinese care for the friendship with the Malays. This was so in the past, when the Barisan Nastional won in that constituency, when Johore scored 100% victories.

9. Kit Siang’s article claims that Gelang Patah is a microcosm of Malaysian society, because it has 53% Chinese, 33% Malay and 12% Indian. Does this really represent a microcosm of Malaysian society? Gelang Patah is in fact not even the norm in Johore, much less in Malaysia. If he had said it is a microcosm of the urban society, I would agree, certainly not the racial mix and distribution in Malaysia.

10. In another of blog.limkitsiang.com article by Sakmongkol, the heading speaks for itself.

11. It says “Lim’s return to Johore emboldens the Chinese.”

12. Again the emphasis is on race, the Chineseness of Gelang Patah which causes Kit Siang to choose Gelang Patah. The writer went on to say that “We (Kit Siang is DAP”) have a chance to wipe out the MCA (a Chinese party which believes in kongsi with other races of the Barisan Nasional). Further it averred that the DAP does so to replace the MCA as the party of choice for the Chinese. Again the emphasis is racial, on the choice of the Chinese alone and not on Malaysians. MCA is pictured as the lackey of the Malays. What is the DAP going to be in Pakatan, the kingmaker, the master. In Malaysia no one race can rule this multiracial country, by proxy or otherwise.

13. Further on it says, “Kit Siang’s return to Johore is giving meaning and purpose to the Malaysian Chinese.”

14. What about other Malaysians? Don’t they count? Aren’t they deserving of a share in the power and the wealth of this multiracial nation?

15. In everything written about Kit Siang, there will always be reference to Chinese racial issues. Malay issues such as their poverty, their need to be more involved in the economy of the country, merit no analysis and support from Kit Siang.

16. That is why I called him a racist. I will not be intimidated by his threat to sue me. I know it is cheap for him. When Anwar lost in his RM100 million suit against me, he had only to pay cost of RM70,000. Had I lost I may be bankrupted.

17. Karpal knows this very well and knows about delays in court proceedings. The prospect of silencing me must look very attractive and politically smart. But I will not be silenced. If politicians fear being painted in their true colour, then take up some less challenging jobs.

THE POLITICS OF RACE

This article appeared in the New Straits Times of April 25, 2013
1. In Malaysia there is not a single political party which can claim to be truly multiracial. All of them are strongly dominated by one race or another.

2. The only party which is nearest to being multi-racial is the National Front. Although it is a coalition of parties but it functions as a single party with every race in Malaysia represented equally in its central council irrespective of the size of the component. In addition the component parties all use the same symbol during elections.

3. Its policies are accepted by all the component parties, unlike the Pakatan where each party has its own objectives and policies. The BN has a distinct leader acknowledged by every party and the Governments it forms have Ministers and Deputy Ministers from all the component parties.

4. There are other symbols of the unity of the Barisan Nasional such as the BN song and BN manifestoes.

5. Although the original coalition is between race-based parties as are some who joined later, a number are non-racial constitutionally.

6. The original coalition was enlarged when parties from Sabah and Sarawak joined it upon the formation of Malaysia. It is noteworthy that the PAP of Singapore did not join the coalition.

7. After the riots of 1969 opposition parties such as Gerakan, SUPP of Sarawak, PPP of Perak and even PAS joined the coalition. PAS later left the BN. At one time the BN had 14 parties representing every race and tribe in Malaysia.

8. Obviously it was difficult to get every party to accept all the policies or objectives of the coalition all the time. PAS and Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) left because of disagreement with the decisions made by the centre. Still a majority of the parties stayed with the coalition, and continued cooperating in the Governments and during elections.

9. The basis of this cooperation is the principle of sharing; of give and take and of a willingness to sacrifice and concede so as to stay together. This willingness to sacrifice and to share is what makes the BN unique.

10. In the BN no party is able to get all that it considers its entitlement. Consequently no party is absolutely happy with the BN. This is good because all have to make some sacrifice.

11. If any party in the coalition is absolutely happy then one can be sure that something is wrong, that that party has not made the required sacrifice.

12. By the same token as the parties in the coalition represent the different races or tribes, then under BN rule no race will be completely satisfied. It is here that the opposition finds a chink in the BN armour. They will point out and play up the dissatisfaction of the particular race, completely ignoring the sacrifices made by the other races.

13. The attack by the opposition parties is usually racist in character, trying to shame the component racial party for not demanding and getting everything for their race. That each race must make some sacrifice so as to keep the coalition viable is ignored.

14. They also ignore the balanced provisions in the Federal Constitution. When Malay is made the national language, the other languages can be spoken and used except in official documents. When Islam is made the State religion, the constitution provides for the other religions to be practised freely.

15. The so-called Malay privileges are balanced by privileges given to the other races to retain their cultures and languages and use their own languages as medium of instructions in state-supported schools. This has never been found in other countries, developed or developing. In all these countries only the national language is official and is the medium of instruction in schools and in universities. In fact in a neighbouring country with a largely Chinese population, Chinese language schools and universities were disallowed. So this support for non-national languages and schools constitute a privilege not accorded by any other country in the world.

16. In the affairs of the BN, the willingness to share and sacrifice has enabled it to keep the many parties representing the different races together for more than half a century. The racial riot in 1969 convinced many that the coalition would break up. Some even suggested that the Malays would seize power and install a totalitarian Government. But instead the Malays and other members of the Alliance invited all the opposition parties regardless of race or principles to join the new coalition named the Barisan Nasional or National Front. This new and bigger coalition went on to win every federal election with good majorities and was able to maintain peace and stability and develop the country beyond the dream of most Malaysians.

17. Although the BN stayed in power at the national level, it lost many Parliamentary state seats to the opposition. The 2008 Election saw five states falling into opposition hands. Had the BN cheated at elections this would not be the result. As we all know in totalitarian states, the Government party invariably won 99 per cent of the seats every time. This has never happened in Malaysian elections.

18. It is clear that in Malaysia, even though multi-racial parties cannot truly be formed, but multiracial cooperation through a coalition of race-based parties is possible, viable and sustainable. In fact the opposition finally decided to copy the BN formula. However, the cooperation among the opposition partners does not amount to a true coalition. It is only meant to avoid their parties from contesting against each other during elections. The parties retain their identities and their symbols. There is no common platform or objectives. The cooperation is friable and indeed in the present elections they are not able to avoid contesting against each other. Should the opposition Pakatan win, the Government they form would not be stable and would be incapable of deciding on the numerous unpopular policies and laws that a Government is expected to adopt or enact.

19. For as long as the different races in Malaysia insist on their identification with the different countries they came from, a non-racial party cannot be viable or accepted in Malaysia. The BN pre-election coalition model is the only sustainable model until such time when the different races identify themselves completely and exclusively with Malaysia.

20. Looking at the many countries in the world where democracy has brought only divisiveness and violence Malaysia is lucky to have found a formula for the different races to work together, to be stable and to achieve remarkable progress.

GELANG PATAH

1. Kit Siang is going to contest in Gelang Patah.

2. Why Gelang Patah?

3. Obviously it is because Gelang Patah has a Chinese majority.

4. Obviously Kit Siang is going to play on Chinese sentiments.

5. Johore has been an Alliance/Barisan Nasional stronghold ever since independence. The three races there have been supporting each other in elections. They do not have strong racist feelings.

6. But Kit Siang is going to bring about conflict and antagonism between the races, to wage the Chinese to dislike and hate the Malays.

7. The slogan of the DAP is Malaysian Malaysia, a slogan used by the PAP in the 1964 General Elections. The slogan implies that Malaysia did not belong to all Malaysians equally. It belongs to the Malays.

8. The PAP intended to get the Chinese not to co-operate with the Malays, to end the Sino-Malay “ kongsi” of the Tunku in the Alliance Party.

9. Kongsi means not taking all our entitlements for ourselves but sacrificing some so others may get their share.

10. The PAP rejected this “kongsi” principle demanding that everything be based on merit. When Singapore left Malaysia the DAP, the PAP Trojan horse, took up the Malaysian Malaysia slogan. The intention was to draw away Chinese support from the MCA and abandon the kongsi concept with UMNO and the Malays. The meritocracy promoted by the DAP will mean diminishing opportunities for the Malays in education and in business. This will result in the Malays becoming less and less qualified and poorer. Meritocracy is not about sharing but about the winners taking all.

11. When Kit Siang decided to contest in Chinese majority Gelang Patah it is because he wanted the Chinese there and in Johor to reject working together and sharing with the Malays.

12. An unhealthy racial confrontation would replace Sino-Malay cooperation which has made Malaysia stable and prosperous. That cooperation will end when Kit Siang wins Gelang Patah. Even if there will not be violent clashes as seen in many countries where people are divided by race or religion, but confrontation between the three major races in Malaysia will be disruptive and will not be conducive to the development of Malaysia.

13. For this reason the decision of Kit Siang to contest in Gelang Patah will be the focus of the 13th General Election in this country.

14. Will the DAP end Malay-Chinese friendship and cooperation in Johor or will “kongsi” remain the bases of race relations in Johor and in Malaysia?