TR EMERITUS

By Lim Siow Kuan, Malaysian Correspondent As the purported date for the takeover of the Malaysian federal government by opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim looms nearer, Singaporeans must be wondering what a Pakatan-led government in Kuala Lumpur have in store for them. Anwar has vowed to replace the 4 decade old New Economic Policy (NEP) which he claimed benefitted only a select group of well-connected Malays at the expense of the needy with his Malaysian Economic Agenda (MEA) espousing a more equitable distribution of the country's wealth. In a report published by online news portal Malaysiakini, Anwar Ibrahim reiterated he would dismantle the controversial New Economic Policy (NEP) if he seizes power. Needless to say, the country's Chinese and Indian minorities who have long suffered under the discriminatory practices of the NEA rush to throw their support behind Anwar's Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) en masse. What surprises political observers is that the Malay ground not only accepts but embraces Anwar's radical concept as well as evident by his resounding victory in the recent Permatang Pauh by-election where 70% of the electorate is Malay. Will Anwar, once a firebrand Islamic radical and an architect of Malaysia's Islamization in the 1980s and 90s, really do away with a race-based affirmative action plan which has served his community's interests over the year ? While Anwar's political pedigree as a former Deputy Prime Minister and Deputy President of UMNO may have casted doubts in the minds of his allies (the secular Democratic Action Party and the Islamic PAS) initially, he appeared to have won them over with his consistent message that the time has come for a new dawn in Malaysian politics, one which emphasized on unity, meritocracy and justice.  He inspired many with a proclaimation to be a leader of all Malaysians: "Anak melayu saya, anak cina saya, anak India saya" (the malay is my child, the chinese is my child and the indian is my child) The reinvention and rehabilitation of Anwar Ibrahim into a Malaysian leader for all Malaysians regardless of race had propelled him to the brink of becoming Prime Minister, a post which has since deluded him since he was sacked from government rather unceremoniously 10 years ago. Riding on mass support from the Chinese and Indians as well as a tectonic shift in the Malay mindset especially amongst the young, his opposition coalition, the Pakatan Rakyat won an unprecedented 82 seats in the March General Election, denying the ruling Barisan Nasional its traditional two-thirds majority in Parliament. As Malaysia celebrates its 51st Merdeka with renewed hope for a long-waited political revolution, few on both sides of the causeway would have remembered the call for a "Malaysian Malaysia" was first made by Singapore's Mr Lee Kuan Yew in the 1960s when Singapore was still part of the Federation. In a speech to the Malaysian Parliament, Lee articulated strongly against a discriminatory race-based policy at the expense of the ethnic Chinese and Indian minority long before the NEP was formulated and implemented in the 1970s and Anwar Ibrahim's plans for a new MEA: "Of course there are Chinese millionaires in big cars and big houses. Is it the answer to make a few Malay millionaires with big cars and big houses? How does telling a Malay bus driver that he should support the party of his Malay director (UMNO) and the Chinese bus conductor to join another party of his Chinese director (MCA) - how does that improve the standards of the Malay bus driver and the Chinese bus conductor who are both workers in the same company? If we delude people into believing that they are poor because there are no Malay rights or because opposition members oppose Malay rights, where are we going to end up? You let people in the kampongs believe that they are poor because we don't speak Malay, because the government does not write in Malay, so he expects a miracle to take place in 1967 (the year Malay would become the national and sole official language in Malaysia). The moment we all start speaking Malay, he is going to have an uplift in the standard of living, and if doesn't happen, what happens then? Meanwhile, whenever there is a failure of economic, social and educational policies, you come back and say, oh, these wicked Chinese, Indian and others opposing Malay rights. They don't oppose Malay rights. They, the Malay, have the right as Malaysian citizens to go up to the level of training and education that the more competitive societies, the non-Malay society, has produced. That is what must be done, isn't it? Not to feed them with this obscurantist doctrine that all they have got to do is to get Malay rights for the few special Malays and their problem has been resolved " Lee's fervent belief in a fair and just government for all Malaysians led him to cross swords with several radicals in UMNO leading to the eventual expulsion of Singapore from Malaysia in 1965. Lee made no secret of his bitter anguish and disappointment when Singapore gained independence: "For me, it is a moment of anguish. All my life, my whole adult life, I believed in merger and unity of the two territories." 43 years later, while the NEP has created a new middle class of Malays in Malaysia, it is not exaggerating to say that Singapore has benefitted from it as well. As a result of marginalization of the Chinese under the NEP which denied their smartest students places in universities and careers in the public sector,  many Malaysian Chinese flocked to Singapore in search of a betterr future to study and work making invaluable contributions to the island's developement and progress into Southeast Asia's richest country today quite not unlike the French Hugenots' migration to Britain in the 18th century. Linguistically and culturally close to their brethen in Singapore, Malaysian Chinese generally have few problems assimilating into Singapore society with many of them becoming leaders in various fields. Almost half of Singapore's post-independent cabinet are born in Malaysia including Minister of Finance Goh Keng Swee and Minister of Law E W Barker. Singapore's current Health Minister Mr Khaw Boon Wan was born in Penang and Ho Ching, recently voted in Forbes as the World's No 8 most powerful woman, hailed from Kuala Lumpur. The constant efflux of Chinese from Malaysia to Singapore and other parts of the world had led to decline in the ethnic Chinese population on the peninsula from 30% in 1965 to less than 25% now. What if these Malaysian-born Chinese currently working in Singapore chose to serve their land of birth instead of us ? It does not take an economist to realize that Malaysia will be a more potent competitor to Singapore. In recent years, Malaysia has demonstrated its desire and ambition not only to catch up with Singapore, but to overtake us as the economic powerhouse in the regioin. The expansive new KL International Airport has already pipped Singapore's Changi Airport to the title as the world's best airport, The port of Tanjung Pelapas at Johor has emerged as a potent threat to Singapore's previously indisputable position as a strategic port of call in the Straits of Malacca. As Malaysia continues its painful transformation from an agricultural to a knowledge-based economy, the NEP has become its Achille heel in its quest to surpass Singapore. Not only Anwar, but many Malay leaders including the NEP's chief architect, ex-premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad have realized the increasingly irrevelance of the NEP in today's rapidly changing world. Young, educated and urbane Malays who are products of the NEP itself have also spoken out against it and appear receptive to a complete revamp of the entire system as evident by Anwar's stunning electoral gains. The last Malay leader to espouse an equal Malaysia for all races is none other than UMNO's founder himself, Tun Onn Jaafar. He did not receive any support from his fellow Malays and was consigned to the political dustheap. Anwar Ibrahim may stand a better chance this time to convinced his community that Malaysia is ready for change. Anwar's proposed plans to abolish the NEP together with a budget to to cut down the deficit, lower taxes and fuel prices, stimulate investments and adopt open tenders for government contracts will undoubtably enhance Malaysia's competitiveness and in a way a subtle threat to Singapore's economic dominance in the region. Carefully and meticulously implemented, it may even stem the present brain drain to Singapore and reverse it. Malaysia, with its plentiful land and relative low cost of living has the potential to offer a higher quality of life than Singapore's cramped and hectic lifestyle. While it remains to be seen if Anwar's repeated claims to topple the Malaysian government by 16 September 2008 will materialize, Singaporeans should start bracing themselves for an impending economic tsunami to arrive across the causeway sooner rather than later. Malaysia has finally come of age after 51 years. The Malays, who have gained the most from the NEP are ready to give up their long assured special privileges in exchange for a more transparent, accountable and efficient mode of governance which will put Malaysia in good stead to challenge Singapore in the long run.  Read More →

By Fang Zhi Yuan According to a report published by The Malaysian Insider, more than 90 per cent of young voters aged 21 - 30 voted for Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in the recent Permatang Pauh by-election. One key reason for Anwar's empathic victory over his Barisan Nasional (BN) opponent lies in the fact that young internet savvy voters obtain their news chiefly from the pro-opposition alternative media which are seen as more credible than the mainstream media controlled by the ruling party. They simply do not buy the dirt that BN has heaped on Anwar through the mainstream media. Young educated and urbane voters are also more concerned about good governance, human rights and democratic ideals than basic bread-and-butter issues. In spite of feeable attempts to engage young voters, the ruling Barisan Nasional has failed miserably to win them over. What they don't realize is that younger Malaysians will only support a political party which shares their aspirations, not one that continues to lecture them. In Singapore, the recent furore over People's Action Party (PAP) MP Lee Bee Wah's perceived high-handness in a media interview to replace the Singapore Olympic Table Tennis Team manager and coach so soon after winning the silver medal in Beijing marked only the tip of the ice-berg of a groundswell of discontent building up against the ruling party. Many are quick to point out that Mrs Lee's attitude reflects the typical modus operandi of the PAP - insensitive, callous and arrogant. Some even called her to step down as a Member of Parliament. Youth and Sports Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, perhaps realizing the political repercussions of a protracted saga moved in quickly to smoothe the flames with a rare public apology by Mrs Lee. However, irreversible damage has already been done, making another dent at the PAP's image and reputation as an overbearing authoritarian control freak. Decades of one-party rule without the presence of an opposition to provide a counterbalance has made the ruling PAP complacent and out of touch with the ordinary citizenry. Singaporeans, especially the young are getting increasingly restless, disgrunted and peeved at the current state of affairs. Like our Malaysian counterparts, we yearn for the competency, accountability and transparency (CAT) as espoused by Penang Chief Minister Mr Lim Guan Eng in the formulation and implementation of government policies. We hate to be lectured repeatedly by the PAP and have unpopular policies forced down our throats without any proper consultation such as the GST hike, annuity scheme and rise in Ministers' salaries. The PAP must have realized that it is entering a new era where perceptions of the populace is easily shaped and influenced by the online media, hence its recent token move to liberalize the political landscape to allow political podcasts and public protests at a designated area. The Malaysian government had a meeting last week to discuss the impact of the new media on their continued stranglehold on power. The conclusion is sombre: by the next GE, there will be 2 million new voters, most of which will vote for the opposition. If the Barisan Nasional continue to ignore this emerging trend, they will be voted out of the government in the next GE. I am sure our astute PAP leaders are not ignorant to this unsavory fact. Unfortunately, there is no real risk of the PAP losing power in the near future as compared to its Malaysian counterpart because there is no Anwar Ibrahim in Singapore to unite the weak and fragmented opposition. Without an united opposition to galvanize Singaporeans long fed up with the PAP, it is highly unlikely the PAP hegemony will be broken. The "largest" opposition in Parliament has only 2 seats out of which one is a "gift" bestowed by the PAP on the "best loser" during the last GE. The de facto opposition "leader" Mr Low Thia Kiang of the Workers' Party (WP) was widely discredited as being a Trojan horse in the opposition, offering only feeble opposition to the PAP while legitimizing its' dubious "mandate". (WP's organizing secretary Yaw Shin Leong admitted to voting for PAP during the last GE and is proud of it) On the other hand, the real voice and conscience of the opposition, Dr Chee Soon Juan of the Singapore Democractic Party (SDP), is banned from electoral politics for the foreseeable future due to his status as a bankrupt. Even if he is free to participate, his popularity and electability with the pragmatic Singapore voters is a suspect as a result of a decade-long media campaign to demonize him. (SDP's vote of shares has been sliding since 1991 when it won an unprecedented 3 seats in Parliament). Singapore's long-suffering opposition icon Mr Joshua Benjamin Jeyaretnam who formed the Reform Party this year, is already 84 and there are valid concerns on whether his health permits him to contest in the next GE. The political situation on the ground for Singapore's opposition is grim. Without a viable alternative coalition in the mould of Malaysia's Pakatan Rakyat (consisting of three opposition parties - Parti Keadilan Rakyat, Democratic Action Party and Parti Islam SeMalaysia), Singaporeans will have no choice but to continue to vote for the PAP though deep down inside their hearts, they have little enthusiasm or belief in a future dependent on the PAP running the country. I for one, cannot fathom why the opposition parties in Singapore just simply cannot stand together on the same platform in the spirit of solidarity against the PAP while Mr Anwar is able to weave together quite a formidable coalition from disparate parties such as the secular Democratic Action Party (DAP) and the Islamist Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS). Singaporeans have become depoliticized over the years of adversarial politics promulgated by the PAP. Even the PAP acknowledged it had problems recruiting new members into its ranks let alone the already decimated opposition camp which continues to be helmed by a few senior leaders hailing from the 1970s and 80s. Apathy breeds disillusion and disillusion eventually leads to despair. While many are resigned to their fates, more and more Singaporeans especially the upper-middle class are opting to vote with their feet - by taking their money out of PAP-controlled CPF to start life afresh in a new land. (Well, why should they allow their hard-earned money to be misused to bail out ailing US banks without their consent?) Mr Anwar Ibrahim's call for a second Merdeka has inspired countless of young Malaysians to join his cause. At this juncture in time, the Pakatan Rakyat is on the threshold of seizing power in the federal government. In Singapore, where the local population is increasingly becoming diluted, marginalized and even oppressed by an uncontrolled influx of foreigners, this second Merdeka continue to be a distant dream. Meanwhile, the wait for Singapore's Pakatan Rakyat to liberate the masses from the clutches of a draconian autocracy remains as forlorn as ever.  Read More →

By Fang Zhi Yuan The Singapore media, ranked  147th by Reporters without frontiers on its latest Press Freedom Index, is constantly being ridiculed and villified by its detractors for being a stooge of the PAP government, in short "The PAP Times". Not only does it churns out daily PAP propaganda to poison and brainwash the minds of Singaporeans (I admit that I am one of its "victims" for the last 18 years before the advent of the internet) to mould them into "obedient, subservient and unthinking citizens", it is also an indirect conduit for the PAP to monitor the sentiments on the ground through the ST Forum. Though we know the PAP is an arrogant political behemoth which will never admit its mistakes, it is actually more adverse to public opinion than we have thought. To put it succinctly, it knows cleverly when to "steer the wheel according to the winds". When it knows it is running against the mill, it will not hesitate to fine-tune, tone down and moderate its rhetoric and stance. The recent IBA's critique of Singapore's human rights record is a slap on the face of the PAP which had spent much time and resources courting the organization. Though it carried a robust defense to exonerate itself through the state media to the extent of dismissing them as a "Western conspiracy to do us in", it is well aware that in this digital era where information is widely availabe at the click of a button, most Singaporeans especially the young IT-savvy, remains unconvinced by its desperate attempts to redeem its bruised credibility, if there is any left in the first place. As such it is not surprising to see a subtle yet significant shift in the state media's stance on human rights. Initially it tried perhaps too hard to propagate the PAP's view that human rights is a western fallacy that is inapplicable and irrelevant to the Singaporean context amid some blatant character assassination. Now it appeared to have taken a more conciliatory and balanced approach bereft of the usual political rhetoric as evident by two articles published in the Straits Times today. In "Human rights: Not whether, but what to debate", Chua Mui Hoong (the sister of the "Dr" Chua Lee Hoong, the self-proclaimed psychiatrist who diagnosed Dr Chee to be suffering from a personality disorder) tried to put things into perspective by arguing that the two opposing prevailing views of human rights are not mutually exclusive of each other and it is more productive to look at its content and relevance to Singapore. She even offered a mild rebuttal to the PAP's rigid hardline attitude towards foreign criticism: "But this assertion of sovereignty over political discourse should not close our minds to what has merit in foreign criticism of Singapore." The next article "The biggest conundrum in Singapore politics" by Li Xueying bears uncanny similiarities to a communist-style self-confession of faults in which she outlined quite frankly the major grouses and grievances against the PAP such as gerrymandering, GRC, use of HDB upgrading as an electoral carrot and the PAP's restriction on civil and political rights. She even chided PM Lee for not moving faster in his promise during his swearing-in speech to liberalize the political landscape. The last paragraph strikes me as holding out an olive branch to Dr Chee: "After all, ultimately, everyone is battling for the same team: Singapore". I are glad that the PAP is aware of the widespread discontent and resentment on the ground against its political high-handness and repression. However, plain empathy alone is still not enough to win back the hearts and minds which have been lost. Unless the PAP reforms itself and the system it entrenched its power in, it is not inconceivable that Singapore ends up being the First World's Zimbabwe one day. The subliminal shift of the state media to a more middle ground is an indication that the PAP is not so monolith and rigid after all. There are liberals in the party who do not agree with how things are done currently. They are acutely concerned about how Singapore's image and standing in the international community had taken a battling lately. A first world economy is not commensurate with a third world political system. To the younger generation who are educated and widely traveled, it is not enough just to have basic economic rights such as a roof over our heads. We want equal civil and political rights as rightful citizens and owners of this land to participate in the running of our nation. We do not want to be told all the time by the PAP that only its decisions are right for Singapore and nobody else's. Does the post-65er MPs in the PAP really understand our concerns, needs and expectations ? I doubt so. Maybe there are some with a reformist streak, but they will be powerless to effect any meaningful changes in the presence of a certain octagenarian. Therefore, I do not expect any paradigm shift in the PAP's mindset on the whole though the subtle shift in the official stance do suggest there is some introspection in the PAP on recent developments so far. It is time the PAP and the state media stop treating Singaporeans as idiots with no minds of their own. The more it tried to impose its views on us, the more peeved we will be and eventually it will lose its credibility and clout completely if not already so. Let us get this clear that Singapore is built by countless of people - our grandfathers and grandmothers, with their blood and sweat, not by the PAP or one individual. We are not indebted to the PAP forever. We want the best for Singapore and if this involves reforming the entire political system and tossing out a rotten decadent political entity incapable of keeping up with modern times, we should do so without any reservations. Enough is enough. Tak Boleh Tahan !    Read More →