It is a Malaysian tsunami not Chinese tsunami, based on new aspirations and reality reflected in GE 13 outcome

BN fared worse this time around compared to 2008. The number of its parliamentary seats dwindled to 133 from 140. As for state legislative assemblies, the figure was even less impressive with 275 compared to 306 previously although the ruling coalition managed to recapture Kedah and legitimise its control over Perak.

For the first time since the 1969 general election, BN garnered less popular votes than the opposition. I agree with debaters who asserted that this is not a “Chinese tsunami” given the fact that the BN’s performance had also worsened in Malay majority states such as Terengganu.

“Please accept the results.” That was the closing remark of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, in his media conference when accepting the Barisan Nasional’s victory in the 13th general elaction at the Umno headquarters in Kuala Lumpur.

Briefly, my preliminary observation is BN cannot be proud or, more so, swollen-headed with its achievement because prior to this it had boasted openly about winning big and securing a two-third majority in the Dewan Rakyat and recapturing states held by the Pakatan Rakyat.

Instead, its achievement is worse than in the 2008 GE because the PR had succeeded in penetrating Johor and won more seats in Sarawak – two states deemed as BN’s fixed deposit – and won additional seats in state legislative assemblies nationwide.

Although the PR had failed in its “Ubah” and “Ini Kalilah” campaign to wrest control of the Federal Government, the pact had nevertheless expanded its presence to all states.

BN had successfully recaptured Kedah and defended Perak, but failed in its attempt to win back Selangor and Kelantan although its propaganda machinery had given the impression that Selangor was already in its hand and there were hopes of winning Kelantan.

With regard to Selangor, its defeat is a major slap in the face for being so boastful.

Penang needs no mention. Both the Gerakan and MCA were totally destroyed.

The bait Najib put before the Chinese produced no results. They openly rejected BN.

Najib was stunned by the outcome and promised changes to Umno. But the poor showing compared to 2008 has made his position vulnerable.

Also, is the outcome of this general election a “tsunami Cina” (Chinese tsunami) as Najib had described them or were they the manifestation of something more significant i.e. a large number of voters no longer accept the BN and the BN-led government as it exists today?

Is it not possible that this is not a Chinese tsunami or ethnic chauvinism but instead a Malaysian tsunami that is based on new aspirations and reality, especially among the young voters?

Although BN has recaptured Kedah, its strength in all state legislative assemblies had fallen.

It almost lost Terengganu as well as surrendered many seats to PR in all states.

On the PR side, it must accept the choice of voters and any dissatisfaction and dispute must be settled in accordance with laws and regulations, and not via street protests.

Wallahualam. – Akadirjasin.blogspot.com/akadirjasin.com.
> A. Kadir Jasin is Editor-in-Chief of magazine publishing company, Berita Publishing Sdn Bhd

Related posts:
Update Malaysian election GE13 ressults 
Malaysian Chinese tsunami !
The Chinese in Malaysia want an honest relationship, a genuine partnership

Malaysian Chinese tsunami !

Barisan Nasional keeps its hold on power thanks to the Malay breakwater that held back a Chinese wave that swept over the country. 

A CHINESE tsunami swept over the country last night. It ripped through all the seats that had a significant Chinese electorate and devastated Gerakan and MCA in the peninsula and SUPP in Sarawak.

The tsunami was basically about the Chinese electorate going for change. The result was that the DAP emerged the big winner, making new gains everywhere, including in Johor.

But it was evident that the Pakatan Rakyat slogan of “ABU, or Asalkan Bukan Umno (Anything But Umno)” had also resonated with the urban populace in general because Pakatan regained Selangor with a two-thirds majority.

The Chinese tsunami also helped to carry many of the PKR candidates in many of the mixed seats.

However, the tsunami could not quite make it to Putrajaya.

At about 1am, a solemn-looking Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak announced that Barisan Nasional had a simple majority to form the government.

At press time, Barisan had attained 133 seats, still short of the 138-seat majority won by his predecessor Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Najib was clearly disappointed but he spoke in a calm and steady voice as he urged everyone to accept the election result as part of the democratic process.

The Malay electorate, especially those in the rural states, continued to back Barisan. It is a small consolation to Najib that the Malays have returned to Umno in a significant way.

The Malay wall held back the Chinese tsunami and Barisan won back Kedah. It also held on to Perak, which was a subject of speculation until close to midnight.

At press time, Barisan won Perak with 31 state seats against 28 by Pakatan. But Pakatan continued to dominate in Penang with an increased majority.

PAS managed to hold on to Kelantan with a much reduced majority, which showed that Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat's appeal as a religious figure still commands support in the state.

As predicted, PAS won the least seats among the Pakatan parties and DAP is now the dominant party in Pakatan with the most number of seats. It can also lay claim to having defeated a top Umno leader, namely former Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Ghani Othman in Gelang Patah.

The Pakatan wins also mean that Johor and Sarawak are no longer the fixed-deposit states for Barisan.

The zero sum game of politics means that DAP's gain is MCA's loss because both parties contested in Chinese-majority seats. MCA won only seven parliamentary seats, far short of the 15 that it won in 2008.

MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek tweeted late last night that the party would not be accepting any government posts.

This was in keeping with the pledge made that the party would not accept posts in the Government if it did not do better this time.

A big question mark hangs over the future of MCA as well as Gerakan and SUPP and they will have to do much soul-searching after this.

The Chinese rejection of Barisan is a big blow to Najib, who went out of his way to persuade them to come along on his economic and political transformation journey.

The Chinese have rejected a moderate and inclusive leader, who has made more overtures to the Chinese than any other Prime Minister before him, and Najib and his coalition will have to reassess all this in the months to come.

There will also be soul-searching on the part of PAS, given its loss in Kedah and the defeat of several of its top leaders, including its deputy president Mohamed Sabu in Kedah and vice-president Salahuddin Ayub in Johor. Another vice-president, Datuk Husam Musa, lost in Putrajaya.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the election result is that the ruling coalition is dominated by Umno and the Malays while the opposition Pakatan is dominated by the Chinese-based DAP.

The impact of this will become clearer as the dust settles over the most closely-fought election ever.

Comment
By Joceline Tan
The Star/Asia News Network

Related post:

Update Malaysian election GE13 ressults

Malaysia's future lies in Malaysian hands! Electoral system for GE13 ready now?

FINALLY, the curtain has been drawn and the ball is at our feet to decide the destiny of our nation over the next five years.

 The much-awaited announcement on the dissolution of Parliament was made at 11.30am yesterday, exactly four years after Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak took office as the sixth Prime Minister of Malaysia.

Although everyone waited for the dissolution for quite some time, I think the Prime Minister waited till this day to complete his four years of premiership. And of course, he had a lot on his agenda to be completed especially the Janji Ditepati tour and all his other innovative and transformative plans.

Whether the polls were called last year or not, it’s the prerogative of the PM of the day to call the shots and he had done it well within the stipulated period. He had until April 28 to do so.

Polling should be held within 60 days and my guess is it will be held within 30 days and let’s hope the voters will make good use of this opportunity to elect the right people to run the country.

Our future lies in the hands of 13 million voters and everyone should exercise their vote with utmost sincerity. Whichever divide we support, let’s be rational and civil about it.

At the end of the day, we are talking about our nation, our beloved Malaysia.

I am not propagating whom you should vote for but vote you must, professionally and wisely.

Do not be misled and succumb to empty promises.

We need a leader who is truly a Malaysian at heart, one who cares for the rakyat. Reject the extremists.

As the Prime Minister has said, do not derail Vision 2020. Whoever comes to power should focus their attention on achieving the developed status of our country.

Vision 2020 is not only Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s dream but the dream of all Malaysians.

Policies and plans laid out for the betterment of the country should be complemented. One should always put the nation above self.

To all the parties, especially Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat, I hope that common sense will prevail before, during and after the polls.

Let’s hope and pray the run-up to the elections will be fair and clean and at the same time the parties concerned will act maturely and ethically.

At the end of the day, common sense should prevail and chaos after the elections should not be an option.

All parties should accept the decision of the voters and the verdict gracefully.

To the winners, syabas and to those who failed, I wish you the best the next time around.

Do not underestimate the intelligence of the voters. We are no more the katak di bawah tempurung - simply put, naive.

We, the rakyat, are very well-informed and would not be easily swayed by sweet talk or fiery speeches. We only want the truth and the best from our elected representatives.

JAYARAJ KGS Sitiawan - The Star

Is Malaysia’s electoral system ready for GE13? 

One of the special features in Malaysia’s multi-ethnic society is the still predominantly race-based party system. UMNO, the long term dominant ruling party was founded in 1946 as a reaction against the granting of citizenship to Chinese and Indian immigrants upon independence. 

With a possible, some say probable, watershed and regime change for Malaysia’s increasingly competitive political system in the pipeline, it is useful to look into the election system and its mechanisms. The media, fascinated with personality clashes, campaign highlights and the outcome of elections, don’t look too often into details of the electoral law. And most voters don’t care much whether the ruling governments tweak the rules in their own favour, most often by changing the boundaries of precincts more or less unnoticed – the old, widespread, and popular gerrymandering. Malaysia is not alone here, but the discrepancies in the electoral size of constituencies in favour of Malay and against Chinese areas have been “adjusted” frequently and helped the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) to safeguard its dominance over the last decades.

One of the special features in Malaysia’s multi-ethnic society is the still predominantly race-based party system. UMNO, the long term dominant ruling party was founded in 1946 as a reaction against the granting of citizenship to Chinese and Indian immigrants upon independence. The defensive attitude of the Malay (then shaky) majority, understandably insisting on political dominance in their own homeland, led to the formation of other ethnic-based political parties. UMNO, in a successful move to broaden its support base since 1974, managed to co-opt the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC),  the Malaysian People’s Movement Party (GERAKAN) and a number of parties in Sabah and Sarawak into the National Front (Barisan Nasional / BN) coalition (now altogether 13 parties), which enjoyed a huge majority in Parliament until 2008.

Irregularities in most general elections until now have been reported quite regularly. The long list reaches from vote buying, stuffing of ballot boxes, bussing of voters to other constituencies and multiple voting, “phantom voters”, “imported voters”, “missing voters”, manipulated voters lists, to granting citizenship to illegal immigrants (mainly from Indonesia and the Philippines). The latter is now one of the major arguments to attack UMNO and Prime Minister Najib Razak for this citizenship for votes trick. Najib, who has promised his followers to win back the coalition’s two-thirds majority, seems to struggle for political survival now, if rumours and polls are a reliable indicator.

The Barisan Nasional has been only nominally multi-racial but cemented in reality the Malay dominance and privileges (with quite a number of affirmative action measures), which nearly guaranteed so called “safe deposit” constituencies especially in rural areas. Pretending that the Malay political dominance was under threat has always rallied Malay voters behind the ruling coalition. And to make things even more difficult, the competition of the Islamic Party PAS often forced UMNO to demonstrate its religious credentials. With the resentment against this concept among non-Malay minorities (at least about 30%) growing with the frustration about strings of prominent corruption-scandals, it was a logical strategic move for opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim to form a multi-racial party, the Peoples’ Justice Party or Parti Keadilan Rakyat in 2003. Anwar, after being sacked from UMNO and his post as Deputy Prime Minister in 1998, accused under dubious circumstances of corruption and sodomy and imprisoned, is back on the political scene since 2008 and the probable Prime Minister if his opposition “Peoples’ Pact” (Pakatan Rakyat / PR) wins the upcoming election. The Pakatan Rakyat is not without internal problems given the diversity of its members, namely the Malay Islamic rival of UMNO, Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) and the Chinese Democratic Action Party (DAP). However, given the erosion of the Barisan Nasional component parties Gerakan (officially multi-racial but predominantly Chinese and the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), Pakatan Rakyat seems to be a very strong challenger to the ruling coalition.

Inherited from the British colonial master, Malaysia has adopted a clear-cut first-past-the-post majoritarian election system which has helped to keep UMNO and its BN component parties in power so far. The Barisan-coalition contesting the elections practically as one single party gave few choices to the voters and made it more than difficult for opposition parties to make inroads… until 2008 when more voters were fed up with arrogance of power and all too visible corruption. The majority of the BN in 2008 was clear, with 140 seats against 82 for the opposition, which is four times their previous share. But in relative vote shares it was as narrow as 50.27% against 46.75%. And nota bene: in the first-past-the-post electoral system relatively small changes in voter preferences can change the outcome dramatically.

By Wolfgang Sachsenroeder, New Mandala  

Related post:

Malaysian race/religion based politics is dangerous!

26 Mar 2013

Malaysian race/religion based politics is dangerous!

Generation Election 13: ‘Victory’ at any cost?

 

Pilihanraya Umum 13 PRU 13 General Election 13  

The DAP strategy of targeting MCA candidates could make the Chinese community the unwitting victim.

THE 2008 general election was significant as a “political tsunami” – the Opposition achieved its best ever gains, with the promise of an emerging two-coalition system.

That election would have been even more historic had it also achieved what many thought it would: end communal politics for good.

But it failed miserably, with no political party blameless. Perhaps it was too much to expect qualitative change in addition to quantitative change (seat numbers in state assemblies and Parliament).

Communal politics has been a bane of this country for as long as there have been elections.

That remains a fundamental reality into the foreseeable future.

For Barisan Nasional (and its predecessor the Alliance) as well as the Op­­p­o­sition, race-based politics is practised if not always acknowledged. It takes far more to turn that around than many have imagined.
Whether party membership is defined by ethnicity or not, one race or another dominates and characterises each party.

Parties that are multiracial in theory are just less transparent in their ethnic politics.

However, what turns an unfortunate situation tragic is when those parties most vehement about having “turned the corner” of communal politics are also doing the most to perpetuate it.

PAS as the Islamist party has set new standards in trying to ram Islamist-style restrictions down the throats of all Malaysians – Muslim and non-Muslim. It now does so with more gusto and less hesitation.

PKR as another Muslim and Malay-majority party chooses indifference and complacency in the face of the PAS onslaught.

It has even supported the idea of turning Kelantan into an Islamic state.

The DAP prefers silence and inaction amid PAS’ swagger. Elsewhere it would wield its non-Muslim credentials, sometimes to the point of playing the Christian card.

None of this helps to tone down Malaysia’s sweltering communal politics. And since this reinforces the problem in Pakatan itself, it could prompt more of the same in Barisan as well.

The DAP’s latest move sees party adviser Lim Kit Siang contesting the Gelang Patah seat in Johor. It would be the latest “stop” in a long and roving parliamentary career.

MCA, which has half (seven out of 15) of its parliamentary seats in the state, sees Johor as its stronghold.

MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek condemned this as DAP’s strategy of “Chinese killing off the Chinese”.

Both Chinese-based parties are natural rivals whose mutual rivalry has now reached a new high.

DAP leaders may dismiss this alarm as predictable melodrama, but it contains a hard kernel of truth.

The DAP’s drive for power is not above pitting Chinese candidates against other Chinese candidates, which is likely to reduce further the number of ethnic minority MPs.

Johor is also Umno’s home state. There is virtually no prospect of the DAP snatching the state from Barisan.

However, DAP efforts to unseat MCA parliamentarians in Johor could produce a strong Malay-based Umno in the state government contending with a Chinese-based DAP in the Opposition.

That would be bad and dangerous for politics, race relations and the Chinese community’s representation in governance. It would be a regression, precariously setting an unhealthy precedent.

In recent years Malaysian political discourse became more multiracial as both Government and Opposition coalitions became more racially mixed.

With both Barisan and Pakatan led by Malay-majority parties, political differences were distanced from racial differences.

In the absence of thoroughly multiracial politics, that seems the next best option. The prospect of political fault lines coinciding with ethnic fault lines, raising the possibility of an ethnic conflagration as in 1969, has thus become more remote.

But the risk of returning to such political volatility remains. Respon­sible leaders of every party need to be cognizant of these realities.

Besides, the cause of shedding the racial element in party politics cannot be furthered by recourse to more racial politics.

Under a veneer of multiracial rhetoric, the DAP has been known to practise communal politics in its seat choices and allocations.

Lim’s foray into Gelang Patah to battle the MCA incumbent there is the latest example of this approach. Instead of creating a more multiracial two-coalition system, this communal cannibalism could promote an unhealthy and perilous two-race system.

Apparently, the DAP’s objective is simply to unseat MCA candidates, seen as soft targets since 2008, regardless of the cost to the people. That can only come at the expense of deepening racial politics in electoral outcomes.

Perhaps the DAP’s Chinese candidates are thought to have better chances in challenging MCA’s Chinese candidates than Umno’s Malay candidates. But that is still a tricky calculation depending on the circumstances at the time.

Thoughtful and responsible leaders may not consider that a risk worth taking, much less a cost worth paying.
 

BEHIND THE HEADLINES  By BUNN NAGARA

Related posts:

Malaysian Chinese at a Political Crossroads forum; Chua-Lim Debate, all hype but no climax 

Is the Two-Party-Sytem becoming a Two-Race-System? Online spars started ahead of tomorrow Chua-Lim debate!  

Malaysian Chinese Forum kicks off with a bang; Chua-Lim showdown!  

Malaysian Politics: Chua-Lim Debate Sets New Standard 

Sabah's invaders from the Philippines only flog a dead horse!

EVEN though foreign insurgents make a historical claim to Sabah, the facts of history refute it.

AS Malaysian troops and police continue mopping-up operations to flush out straying remnants of the Lahad Datu standoff, partisans on both sides trade emotive claims and insults.

Analysts, meanwhile, weigh the terms in historical documents like “rent”, “lease” and “cession money” to determine Sabah’s actual status. But not only are these documents read differently in translation (English and Sulu), the terms are also interpreted differently.

It makes more sense to focus on the events and circumstances of history. The known facts reveal at least 16 reasons why the Filipino Sulu claim to Sabah is unwarranted and unworthy of consideration.

First, today’s Philippines as a modern nation state and a republic by definition abrogates a former sultanate whose territory it occupies and whose sovereignty it denies.

The Republic of the Philippines has no claim to Sabah of its own. The on-off claim, originating from Sulu sovereignty made by certain quarters, is only a private matter of some revisionist individuals.

The second reason is that the Sulu Sultanate no longer exists, since there was no provision even for a constitutional monarch. Any claim requires a claimant and the property/territory in question, whether anyone else has effective control and ownership over it.

If the claimant or the territory does not exist, the claim cannot stand. The insurgents and their leader Jamalul Kiram III are only pressing a notional claim, since they cannot represent a defunct entity.

Third, there is no agreed rightful heir to the last Sultan of Sulu, even if an heir were to press the claim. Jamalul’s claim to be that heir is disputed by nearly a dozen other hereditary “royal” personages.

Another reason for rejecting his claim to Sabah comes with denial of his claim to the throne: 10 other “heirs” had renounced all claim to Sabah in 2007. Nine did so in a signed statement, and Rodinood Julaspi Kiram II in a separate declaration.

It does not matter whether Jamalul was among the nine. If he was, he had unlawfully reneged on the signed agreement, and if he wasn’t, he is outnumbered and is challenged 10 ways.

Fifth, when Spain took over the Sulu Sultanate as part of the Philippines, it left North Borneo (Sabah) in British hands. Spain disrupted the Sultanate by removing 18-year-old Sultan Jamalul Kiram II in 1886, replacing him with a rival, only to “reappoint” him six years later.

Britain made North Borneo a protectorate in 1888. Under Spain, the Philippines and most of the Sulu Sultanate with it were going in one direction, while North Borneo and the British went in another.

Eventually, the sultanate was divested of political and administrative powers until it exercised authority only over religious matters. No effective, functioning sultanate existed any more.

Sixth, the death of Sultan Jamalul Kiram II in 1936 saw no successor, since he died childless. His younger brother and anointed successor, Mawalil Wasit, died the same year before he was crowned.

Thus ended the Royal House of Sulu’s lineage. After Spain passed the Philippines, including the territory of the former sultanate (excluding North Borneo) to the United States, the US officially abolished what remained of the sultanate in 1936.

Eighth, the British North Borneo Company also ceased payment to the sultanate that year, indicating that the business sector had considered the 1878 agreement voided. (Payment later resumed only after relatives of the deceased sultan brought the matter to court.)

Ninth, President Manuel L. Quezon of the (then) Commonwealth of the Philippines declared in 1936 that Jamalul Kiram II was the last Sultan of Sulu. To emphasise the point, Quezon said the Philippine government would no longer recognise a Sulu Sultanate.

Britain had been exercising increasing proprietary moves over North Borneo, earning two rebukes from the US (1906, 1920). Britain ignored those reminders and annexed North Borneo in 1946, turning it into a crown colony.

Whatever the moral issues there, it again spelled the end of any vestige of Sulu royalty. For London, it was a justifiable move since it had taken over all the legal obligations of North Borneo.

Tenth, there was no question later (in the 1960s) about Sabah having to obtain independence from Britain. This underlined the fact that Britain was the sole governing authority up to that point.

Then as Sabah’s independence and the Cobbold Commission’s findings led to the scheduled formation of Malaysia on Aug 31, 1963, agitation flared from the Philippines. The date was postponed to Sept 16, such that Sabah was an independent entity for 16 days, ending any remaining claim from an extinct sultanate or the Philippines as belonging to it.

Twelfth, the very act of freely becoming part of the Malaysian federation negated all further claims on the territory by foreign partisans. The new state of Malaysia in its present form is recognised in all international organisations, including the United Nations and Asean, of which the Philippines is also a member.

Although former President Marcos tried to retake Sabah in the 1960s, the claim was later abandoned. At the Second Asean Summit in Kuala Lumpur in 1977, Marcos declared that the Philippines was taking concrete steps to end the claim.

Later, as Marcos’ rule clearly became a dictatorship, he made Punjungan Kiram “interim sultan” for Sulu. But this candidate ran off to Sabah, preferring to be a Malaysian instead.

Marcos then “appointed” Punjungan’s son Jamalul Kiram III successor to a non-existent sultan. This instigator of Lahad Datu is not only a dubious candidate since he is not the son of a sultan, but his claim to authority comes from a discredited and ousted dictator of a republic.

Not least, when President Corazon Aquino’s post-Marcos government planned a new Philippine Constitution in 1987, Malaysia lobbied for wording to end the disturbing claim to Sabah for good.

This would replace “historical right or legal title” with “over which the government exercises sovereign jurisdiction” (i.e. the status quo), which was accepted after the third reading in Congress.

So for Philippine citizens to invade Sabah to lay claim to it clearly violates their country’s Constitution. President Benigno Aquino III’s prosecution of these criminals is fully in accordance with the law.

It is also said that no rightful Filipino claim to Sabah exists because as a country, it had not consistently engaged in the activities of a de facto power there. Not only that, there has also been no consistent Filipino claim to Sabah.

Behind The Headlines by BUNN NAGARA

Related posts:

Sulu history and the Chinese

The former Sulu Sultanate, a foreign problem in history that became Sabah's   
The Sultan of Sulu reclaims eastern Sabah, MNLF among invaders 
Stop paying quit rent to Sultan of Sulu, it’s time to close the chapter   
Filipinos’ Sulu militant group in Sabah must leave Malaysia today

Dr Mohamad Tajuddin holds memories of unity

Being the only Malay among a class of Chinese students holds special memories of unity.

IN these months of Merdeka and the formation of Malaysia, I wish to pay tribute to my old school, SMJK Hua Lian in Perak.



Why was my school experience so special? I was the only Malay boy in a sea of Chinese students, yet I felt no racial or religious pressures. I sailed through four years of education making friends, having fun and learning lots of things from my mostly non-Malay teachers.

While I take a few moments to recollect some incidents, why don’t we also take this time to ask just what is wrong with our country – to the point that racial and religious mistrust still prevails after half a century.

My childhood days from Standard One to Six were spent at the police barracks in Butterworth, Penang, where I would walk about half a kilometre every day to St Mark’s Primary School. My childhood friends at the barracks were mostly Malays, but there were several Chinese boys and the two sons of a burly Sikh sergeant major.

My father was only a police constable with the rank of “private” despite his 30 years of service. Mother tells of his reluctance to move too far away from his family in Pantai Besar and Batu Kurau (both in Perak), which resulted in his stagnant position. Though my father was educated only up to Standard Three, he could scold me effortlessly in Queen’s English!

But the most important thing that I remember is that he NEVER uttered a single harsh word against any Chinese or Indian, unlike the fathers of my friends. He had many Chinese friends whom he visited occasionally, with me tagging along on his Vespa.

At St Mark’s, I had many friends who were Indians, Sikhs and Chinese. I remember one particular boy, the “soft” kind who was always jeered at for being feminine. We both got on well because of our one common interest – Enid Blyton story books! We would exchange comics and books all the time.

At the police barracks, I flew kites and played gasing, football and hide-and-seek among the wreakage of armoured police vehicles.

One day, I was greatly saddened to learn that my father was retiring from the police force and that we had to move to Taiping. The family moved in June of 1976 to the police barracks in Taiping. At 14, it was difficult to make friends at the barracks, so I was hoping it would be better in the new school. Little did I realise that my life was about to take a sharp turn.

There was no school that offered Industrial Arts in the English medium of instruction. St George’s Institution was agriculture based and King Edwards was commerce based. We finally found a school … next to the oldest prison in Malaysia. SMJK Hua Lian at Jalan Lumba Kuda had two sessions and 99.7% of its 2,000 students were Chinese!

I had been in Form 2A in St Mark’s, so when I transferred to Hua Lian, the headmaster asked which class I wanted to be in. I asked if there were any other Malay boys and if so, in which class? He said yes, but the two other boys were in Form 2D1 – the last class with the naughtiest students! I said okay and stepped into the most interesting period of my school life.

Try to imagine me at 14, a scrawny, bespectacled four-foot-something guy amidst burly Chinese five-footers who were all a year older than me as they had been to Remove class. I was an “A” student among those who got Cs and Ds. Every time the teacher stepped out to go to the toilet during the monthly exams, the whole class would crowd around me for answers to all the subjects, except my weakest subject, Mathematics.

I excelled in English and Bahasa Malaysia (BM) and it was wonderful to see pandemonium breaking out among my classmates whenever it was announced at assembly that I had obtained the highest marks for English in the whole form, beating those nerds from 2A1 (all boys) and 2A2 (all girls). My old form teacher was all smiles when he told the class that he was pleased to have at least one student who passed all his subjects.

Two recollections are worth highlighting here. Once, a Malay teacher who taught BM was so incensed with some students for being rude to him that he threw everyone out of the classroom and we had to stand in the hot sun for the whole period. That included me. It wasn’t fair because I was always a “teacher’s pet”. So there we were, all 42 of us, being stared at by the girls in 2B2, 2C2 and 2A2.

The other thing that has stayed with me is how my Chinese friends loved to gamble. They would bet almost every single day on Malaysian football, sports or even whether it would rain that day. Once I saw a boy win RM1,000 in a football pool! I rarely saw a RM50 and had never even seen a RM100 note. My mother gave me RM10 a month as allowance but she cooked and packed food for me every day.

I was moved up to 3B1 after that year and left my colourful friends at 3D1. After the LCE exams (the equivalent of SRP today), I was placed in the top science class, which was co-ed. One thing about Hua Lian – I had never had any puppy love problems because of the racial difference. I was not interested in the girls and I was not much to look at anyway.

For me, the most memorable thing about being in 4Sc1 was that we put up a play during Teacher’s Day and was asked to restage it in front of the whole school.

Another fun thing was that I joined the Police Cadet Force with my tall Chinese friends, about 40 of us. We learnt to march and practise arms drill and withstand the verbal abuses of our drill masters. With our smart uniforms, and knowledge of security details during special occasions in school, we impressed the girls – one of the perks of being in that hot and sweaty, brown get-up.

In 5Sc1, we had a lot of class parties. I had never been to a party before, especially one with a mix of boys and girls. My Chinese friends were very tolerant of my faith and endeavoured to make sure all the food was “halal”, or so they told me. I had absolute faith in their sincerity. We played games at these parties and joked around. It was great fun and I had never felt accepted as much before.

The other great thing was the formation of the first ever multi-racial sepak takraw team. I loved the game and played the “killer” position. There were only three other Malay boys in school and we had to find five Chinese boys because of the compulsory three-team rule. We sought good football players and basketball players as takraw requires agile footwork, springing and ball-handling.

We managed to form the team and went on the inter-school competition league. We went up against three schools and, of course, lost all the games. But everywhere we went, we were the talk of the day as no one had ever seen a Chinese-Malay takraw team.

I was one of the top 10 students in the MCE examination (the equivalent of SPM), securing 6As. I was the only Malay candidate in the Science stream and all my Chinese and Indian teachers were most proud of me. I was the only one who had scored a distinction (A2) in the Overseas English Exam, finally beating that lanky nerd of nerds, the head prefect.

After a short stint in Lower Six, I left to study in the United States for six years on a government scholarship. By then, most of my friends had gone to Canada, Britain or Australia, sponsored by their parents. Some who did not make it to Lower Six or the local universities had to look for work.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all my Hua Lian teachers from 1976-80 for their dedication and commitment. I used to joke that I was the best and worst Malay MCE student because I was the only one.

My Chinese friends and I studied, played (I never gambled although almost all my friends did), partied, took part in sports, marched in the cadet corps, went girl-watching at the Taiping Lake Gardens, had ice kacang at the Larut Matang Supermarket and talked about our future.

I sincerely believe that if narrow-minded politicians were to leave our multi-racial communities alone, we would probably live in better harmony than we do now. I not only survived, but thrived, at SMJK Hua Lian with my Chinese friends and teachers.

Happy Malaysia month!

By PROFESSOR DR MOHAMAD TAJUDDIN MOHAMAD RASDI

Source: The Star/Asian News Network 

Stop playing race game in Malaysian politics

The country has changed so much since 1969 that to keep using the argument that we are on the verge of race war is rather obsolete.

I WAS wondering when it was going to happen; when certain quarters were going to dust off that old chestnut of May 13, 1969, and use it as a political tool.

It all seems terribly coincidental that as the general election draws nearer, suddenly race riots get inserted into political speech, and a movie about May 13 is apparently waiting to be released.

The country has changed so much since 1969 that to keep using the argument that we are on the verge of race war is rather obsolete.

Let’s look at some facts. Firstly, the vast majority of the Malaysian population were not even born in 1969.

This means that first-hand knowledge of that terrible time is simply not part of most of us. Without that emotional connection, I believe that younger Malaysians are willing to question the feasibility of such a thing happening again.

And really, could it? In 1969, the politics of the nation was so very clearly divided along racial lines. The Opposition was not united as it is today. PAS won 12 seats, DAP 13 and Gerakan 8.

They were not part of a coalition and each stood on its own, therefore it was possible to play the race game because, in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor in particular, the Opposition had the face of “the other”.

Today, with the Pakatan coalition in existence, the Opposition is a much more complex animal. If the Opposition wins, how can the race card be played when two of the component parties are so predominantly Malay?

Let’s take a look at recent events that has got some powerful people’s knickers in a twist.

In particular the Bersih demonstrations of 2007, 2011 and 2012. The demographics of these events were multi-ethnic and became even more multi-ethnic with each progressive one.

By the time of this year’s Bersih demonstration, the make-up of the people who took part was much closer to the make-up of the country as a whole. However, the predominant ethnic group was still Malay.

This goes to show that the political divide, not of political parties but of ordinary citizens, can no longer be conveniently divided along ethnic lines.

Significant numbers of Malaysians, regardless of their background, can be united when they have a common political goal, in this case clean and fair elections.

Furthermore, ethnic Malays can be vocally unhappy with the status quo. In the present-day scenario, it is ridiculous to say that the politics in Malaysia is simply a matter of Malays versus Non-Malays.

And let us look at the 2008 elections. The results were unprecedented and surprised most people. I remember that night very well, as the results became clear that Barisan had lost their two-thirds majority and five state governments.

I decided to drive around Kuala Lumpur, just to see what would happen. And what happened? Nothing.
The streets were quiet. No celebratory parties, no processions, no fireworks; nothing.

The Opposition and their supporters on the streets were as muted as the Barisan and their supporters.

No gloating, no taunting, no excuses at all to provoke a reaction from the supporters of the powers-that-be.

I am certain that if a similar result is achieved in the next elections, the same would happen. There will be no provocation from the opposition and their supporters.

That is not to say there will not be any trouble. Recent events in this country have proven that there are gangs of thugs who are willing to be violent for political purposes.

The thing is though, I believe that the Malaysian public are not going to rise to the bait.

I fervently hope we will show them that we are better than them, we are nobler than them and they are nothing but hooligans with delusions of grandeur.

No, the danger that faces this country will not come from race riots.

If we have trouble in Malaysia, it will be if there is a prolonged disrespect for true democratic principles.

If the election process is not transparent and fair, if the result of a clean election is not respected, then and only then should we start to worry.

BRAVE NEW WORLD

By AZMI SHAROM

The modern day slacker

It is this type which frustrates the hardworking Malays, who have worked so hard to bust the myth of the lazy Malay, the subsidy-mentality-bumi, and gives them a bad name.

YOU would have known at least two of this type: the young Malay boy in his late 20s to mid-30s who has the potential, but for no reason at all, seems intent on ruining his life, by simply being lackadaisical and complacent. He is the slacker.

It is this type which frustrates the hardworking Malays, who have worked so hard to bust the myth of the lazy Malay, the subsidy-mentality-bumi, and gives them a bad name.

The latter, who come from various economic backgrounds, burn the midnight oil at their corporate jobs. Some take on another as a side income or work at two jobs.

Their partners or spouses are equally as hardworking, but when drawn into conversation about the idle Malay boy, both will throw their hands up in the air.

Talk to non-Malay professionals and they say nonchalantly, “That’s what you get when you hire these Malays.”

A successful bumi businessman told me once that he hires only young non-Malays, because he had been duped too many times by the boys he wanted to help.

These boys, who seem to be mushrooming by the day, are articulate, and do keep abreast of current events. Interestingly, these boys mainly come from working class backgrounds.

They’re not unintelligent. Have a chat with them – they can be so perceptive that you wonder why they are not in politics or a think-tank. And yet, they are in debt, and seem to relish in their financial piccadiloes; when they are offered opportunities, they take and screw them up halfway.

The reasons are unbelievable: I broke up with my girlfriend. I don’t have money. I don’t have the ilham. My friend owes me money. I owe myself money.

However, despite their apparent flaws, they complain about how the world owes them a living. The government should give me a grant. The government owes me a living because I’m Malay and poor.

People don’t like me because I’m not connected. Girls don’t want to date me because I’m poor and directionless.

Granted, some do try. But they look for short cuts.

Some of them become the “shadows” of the bodyguards, the lesser datuks and proxies to the middleman to the PA to the right-hand man of the “Man Himself”, in vain hopes for a small cut.

If they are lucky, they take back RM5,000. They create small enterprises and mark up costs that defy business logic, that in the end they have to close shop.

The opportunities are already there. Yes, our education system is not perfect, but many have come out from it better and richer.

I also do not deny that working or doing business is not easy either. Yet there are many Malaysian success stories.

Blame the NEP if you want, but the truth is, many have also thrived sans it. Some packed up their bags and moved abroad without a degree or connections. The Internet is at your disposal – for all this talk about not having money, a good number of these boys have a working computer. Mac, no less. So work from home.

Work with clients from everywhere! A friend once hired a Nigerian student in Nigeria to create his website. That young boy from the sticks of Nigeria delivered a really swoosh website within a month.

When asked why they are so dismissive of politics and youth activities, they can tell you, “It’s a waste of time. We’re not America. There’s a tradition of activism there, not here. Besides, we’re the grassroots. The government should take care of us and provide us with incentives.”

How can any government do so, and why should it? This is not about opportunities but attitude!
There is already a social and economic imbalance which will worsen.

Many marriages break down, and some of the increasing reasons I hear from my syariah lawyer friends are that these boys are complacent and do not contribute to the marriage financially.

They do not pick up the slack at home by being the housekeeper, and expect the wives to fund two families. Theirs and his.

Some resent their wives’ successes and create problems. Some of them bring their debts into the family equation.

Economically, if more and more of these youths opt to be slackers, the country’s GDP will go down greatly and crumble into a declining and worsening economy.

The divide between the haves and have-nots will widen. The gender imbalance is already there: More young (Malay) women are in tertiary institutions and working very hard.

Quite a number have told me they fear marriage because they do not want to be beholden to a spouse who cannot contribute to a marriage.

At this juncture, this begs another question.

Why are a good number of young and working class Malays complacent? Sometimes, I feel that the foreign workers deserve citizenship because they work and somehow manage to save for their families back home.

They live in the most deplorable living conditions, and some worse than the shacks I have seen in my kampung.

The question should no longer be about whether Malay youths are politically apathetic. The question should be how to make these boys work and be motivated.

It is a study I greatly welcome and would like to do.

A WRITER'S LIFE By DINA ZAMAN