An Accurate Knowledgeable Foreign View

This is rewritten comment after having some second thoughts on my part. I still fully agree with what Mr Malott has to say. What I need to say here is that I am presently most disappointed and upset that the pm who used to be popular with many Malaysians of all races as a liberal minister, is these days seen to speak and act extremely, departing even more radically from his predecessors. It is confusing: is he kow-towing or pandering to the extremists to grasp on to power? Is there no courageous Nelson Mandela's and the late Tunku Abdul Rahman's compromising spirit in the country's leadership anymore? What does the future hold for Malaysians who are not privileged Malays?

Not for PM to say one religion superior to another


By John Malott

Bernama recently commented that I have “gone off the rails” because of my Feb 8 op-ed in the Asian Wall Street Journal.

To prove its point, the news agency gave just two examples. First, that I was wrong in saying that Malaysia’s needs to grow by eight percent annually over the coming decade to achieve Vision 2020 and higher income status.

In my defence (Who’s off the rails, Bernama? Part 1), I revealed the source of my ‘error’ – a speech and report from Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak.

Bernama also took me to task for saying that racial and religious tensions in Malaysia are higher today than when Najib (right) took office and are worse than at any time since the riots of 1969.

It pointed out that one week after my article appeared, Najib attended a meeting of the Malaysia Interfaith Council to commemorate World Interfaith Harmony Week.

My crystal ball obviously was out of order, because I did not know that the prime minister would attend that meeting and express his support for the group’s work. Bernama is right; he should be praised for doing so.

But Bernama’s crystal ball also was out of order, because it did not know that just four days later, Najib would undercut his good deed when he warned against religious pluralism and said that other religions are not equal before Allah.

Asma Uddin, a Muslim attorney in Washington, who is the editor-in-chief of Altmuslimah, has pointed out that there are four different views of religious pluralism among Muslims.

A few, she says, see non-Muslims as the enemy. Others view non-Muslims as people to whom the message of Islam must be preached.

Still others see people of other faiths as deserving of tolerance and mutual respect, while still believing that Islam is superior to other religions. Another group goes beyond mere tolerance and believes that other faiths are equally valid theologically to Islam.

With his comments that other religions deserve respect but are not equal before Allah, Najib appears to hold the third view – that Islam is superior to other religions.

When Islamic scholars and a government think tank said the same thing last December, (Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department) Nazri Aziz (left) disagreed and said, “I cannot accept [that]. I believe Islam does not ask you to say things like that.”

Nazri told The Malaysian Insider, “You should have enough faith to be confident of your own beliefs and not belittle the beliefs of others. It all comes from inferiority complex.”

But it’s OK for the prime minister to say that Islam is superior, says Rev Thomas Phillips, president of the Malaysian Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism. Followers of every faith believe that their religion is the best, he says, and the prime minister is just taking a theological stand.

Phillips is correct that the leaders and adherents of every religion believe that their faith is better than all others. In 2006, Pope Benedict XVI asserted that Christianity is superior to other faiths, and within Christianity, Catholicism is superior to Protestantism.

Even within Islam, there are disagreements. Malaysia recognises only the Sunni form of Islam, and last December religious police arrested over 200 Shiites who were praying on the Day of Ashura.

But the prime minister of 1Malaysia is not a theologian or religious figure. He is the leader of the government. The constitution simply says that “Islam is the religion of the federation;” the constitution does not say that Islam is superior to all other religions.

It says that other religions “may be practised in peace and harmony”. In asserting his views on what should be left to religious leaders as a theological issue, Najib, who says that 1Malaysia’s goal is to enhance the nation’s unity, has demeaned the religious beliefs of 40 percent of his fellow citizens who are not Muslim and told them that they are not equal before God.

Jakim to explain

The prime minister reportedly said that he will call on government Islamic agencies such as Jakim to explain the issue of religious pluralism to Muslims.

But even before it could try to explain the issue, Jakim has been told by the Prime Minister’s Office that its first act is to identify groups in Malaysia and overseas that are trying to promote pluralism, so it does not take root and “destabilise the country”.

Jakim, of course, is the agency that has been on a crusade against Valentine’s Day and issued the guidelines that Hardev Kaur enforced when she “recommended” that crosses be removed before the prime minister came to the Catholic archbishop’s Christmas Day open house.

Those guidelines even said that Muslims should not attend events where people wear “red costumes like Santa Claus or other garments that reflect religion”.

That is the first time I have heard that a Santa Claus suit is a religious garment.

As for Valentine’s Day, Jakim’s head Wan Mohamad Sheikh Abdul Aziz (right) said that it “is associated with elements of Christianity”, and “we just cannot get involved with other religions’ worshipping rituals”.

Here’s a message for Wan Mohamed: When I give my wife chocolate and roses on Valentine’s Day, it’s about my wife, not Jesus.

When Jakim – an arm of the Malaysian government and part of the Prime Minister’s Department – displays this level of ignorance, it casts doubt on their ability to provide guidance and educate Muslims about other peoples’ religions.

It also demonstrates the need for a genuine interfaith dialogue in Malaysia.

When he attended the Interfaith Council gathering, Najib said its discussions should be kept private because they are too sensitive for public debate.

Perhaps what is needed is the opposite. If religion is a sensitive issue, then why are people like Siti Nor Bahyah allowed on the airwaves to disparage other religions? Why does Wan Mohamed utter the words “Christianity and vice activities” in the same sentence?

Is it not possible to conduct an informed interfaith dialogue in public in order to strengthen understanding and reduce religious tensions in Malaysia?

Does Najib really believe that Islam is superior to all other religions? Would he really be offended if he entered a room where a crucifix is displayed?

In my Wall Street Journal op-ed, I said that Najib and his government are doing and saying these things to shore up their political base in the Malay community. And I stand by my opinion.

——–

JOHN MALOTT is a former US ambassador to Malaysia.

An Insightful A(H1N1) Commentary

The following commentary was recently made by an astute journalist.
I'm impressed and would love to join in the fray and share constructive opinions about the state of current affairs in Malaysia as well.

I hope Malaysians will kick the "tidak apa" attitude and act fast at all times before everything shuts down with a pandemic that goes "amok".

Whose fault is it that leads to the high mortality?

(By LIM SUE GOAN/Translated by SOONG PHUI JEE/Sin Chew Daily)
2009-08-13 14:13

The influenza A (H1N1) mortality rate in Malaysia is close to 2% instead of the 0.1% to 0.4% as estimated by the Health Ministry. It reflects an unusual phenomenon. Without finding out the crux of the problem, assuming that 5 million of people are infected, probably 100,000 of them will die, instead of 5,000 to 28,000 as estimated by the World Health Organization (WHO).

If we compare to other countries, we can see the inadequacy of prevention and control in Malaysia. Vietnam reported 1211 confirmed cases with one death and the mortality rate of 0.08%. While Hong Kong reported 5991 confirmed cases with four deaths and the mortality rate
of 0.067%. Australia reported 27,663 confirmed cases with 95 deaths and the mortality rate of 0.34%. Even Singapore that found death cases earlier than Malaysia, reported only nine deaths.

The Health Ministry believed that the domestic confirmed cases are far lesser than the announced amount, and said it should be multiply by 20 to get the correct data. But if we compare it to other countries calculated based on the announced confirmed cases, their rates are
still lower than ours.

"Many people complaint that government hospitals have been reacting too slow to the influenza..."

Why was our death toll increased to 44 people within three weeks after the first death case reported on 22 July? And why are we having over 200 new cases each day, causing the epidemic to fall out of control?

Such a high mortality rate might be caused by a variation of the virus, weak immune system of Malaysians, poor public health system and ability to deal with an emergency. The former two causes have very low probability. If there is a variation or a new virus, the Health Ministry would have recognized it through the autopsy reports. And no matter how weak is the Malaysians immune system, it would not have killed six to eight people every day. The key should be the public health system and the mobility of medical personnel.

Hong Kong, Japan and Australia no longer take the quarantine measures, but they are still having a low mortality rate because of their sound public health systems in which their medical personnel treat the high-risk patients first.

Many people complaint that government hospitals have been reacting too slow to the influenza, including spending a lot of time waiting for tests and long testing time. Many patients might have missed the golden time for treatment during the waiting period and died.

In addition, during the early stage, the government treated the epidemic with neglect, low efficiency and it did not see it as a serious infectious disease. If the government has held a large-scale awareness and hygiene campaign, including stopping assemblies, the
epidemic would not have lost control.

The people lost the sense of crisis because the government did not propagate it through the media at that time as they took into account the impact of it on the national economy, especially on tourism.

Such a serious epidemic has tested Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak's governing philosophy of "people first, performance now". The government must take urgent measures and emergency means, including having early school holiday and a general mobilisation of medical
resources, to prevent the spread of the influenza. Any hesitation will further push up the death toll.

Congrats, Mr. P.M.-to-be!

As much as I try to be a fair-minded blogger and not subjective, I'm taking this opportunity to offer my congratulations to the next incoming Malaysian Prime Minister, Datuk Sri Najib Razak.

As an ethnic Chinese, I do share some trepidation (Man, gotta check this spelling-I sense it's not right... will correct it later!) as to what policies he would follow and as a history lover, a sense of deja vu can almost be felt when it is recorded in the annals of Malaysian history as to how his father abruptly became the Prime Minister, taking the reins of power from (yes!)a liberal Prime Minister- cum- founding father of Malaysia, the late Tunku Abdul Rahman.

Here now is an intriguing insightful article by Khoo Kay Peng that I found in the Malaysian Insider-another 'Think out of the box' blog. It somewhat sums up all my thoughts about the change of guard in our Malaysian political scene.

By the way, I'm still trying to say I'm been objective as a Barisan man by having this article here.

Speaking or writing, that is, of objectivity, I may offer my good honorable buddy Nicholas Bawin of Party Keadilan, in the name of fair-play, some useful test-proven FREE 666 tips in playing the political game in a more fairer way (on a more level field? Haha) and yes, a ghost of a chance for the PKR candidate to win Batang Ai, however unlikely as it is, considering the awesome war chest (including brilliant and shrewd minds) that Sarawak's ruling Barisan has.

How about a friendly get-together sometime in Kuching, bud?

The prospect of Umno under Najib - Khoo Kay Peng
MARCH 26 - Najib Razak, Sharizat Jalil and Khairy Jamaluddin are going to form the leadership backbone for Umno. Can their leadership provide a new impetus for the party's revival? Can Umno help to rejuvenate other BN component parties?

There are several issues which the new leadership must address quickly:

1. The party is suffering from a serious perception deficit. It is known for being a bully, a rule bender, rowdy, autocratic and feudalistic. The party does not mind manipulating religion, race and recently the monarchy to satisfy its political agenda.

One of the biggest challenges for the party under the new leadership is to prove to us that it is ready and capable of governing a multiracial society. An Umno which caters for only the Malay community may help to extend the lifeline of the party but not the coalition's. Can Najib convincingly rebrand his leadership to appeal to all Malaysians? Can his leadership be current and flexible enough to win over the waning support of young Malaysians?

2. Umno new leadership is the most controversial in the party's history. Najib is entangled with several allegations. Two veteran leaders, Dr Mahathir and Tengku Razaleigh, had urged the new president to come clean on the matter.

Ku Li told The Malaysian Insider, "(He) should take the witness stand to clear his name or take legal action against the growing number of foreign publications linking him with the murder of Altantuya Shariibuu and the purchase of submarines.

He "should finally face these suspicions and implied charges, submit himself to legal scrutiny, and come clean on them.'' Meanwhile, Khairy was implicated in the last general election as one of the main causes of BN's stunning defeats.

A number of BN leaders had quietly singled him out for arousing the anger of non-Malays. The two leaders have a lot of work to do to repair their public image.

3. Under Najib leadership, will his reforms plan suffer the same fate like Abdullah's?

Several actions taken by the Umno led government do not augur well for his leadership e.g. arbitrary use of ISA against civilians, Perak power grab, dubious decisions taken by public institutions against the opposition, action taken against bloggers, police interference in politics and others.

His leadership has given us a perception that Umno is not committed to promote and defend the rule of law, the federal constitution and the democracy system.

What is Najib's focus and priority?

The interest of this nation or his own political dominance? Malaysians do not like to be kicked around anymore. My sense is that many Malaysians despise unfairness and arrogance.

4. Is Umno willing to share more power with other component parties? These political parties can no longer hide that they are not consulted in policy formulation and decision making within the government. Most of these parties are reduced to making statements in the media.

If the trend continues, expect very little to change in BN. The progress of this country must involve more than just Umno leaders. The party does not have the capacity to single handedly pull this nation out of the current economic dilemma.

The talent pool needs to be enlarged. Is the party willing to consider meritocracy over ethnicity?

5. The current perception today is the party is outdated and does not understand the needs and
wants of a multi-racial nation. Does the party understand what are the key success factors of a society increasing threatened by complex global challenges?

The plate is full for the new Umno leadership. It takes a superhuman performance of the leaders to rebuild and regain the confidence of Malaysians towards the party.

We are at the twilight of a race-based political model.

Revoke Media Ban, Malaysia.

It is outrageous to Malaysians that a democratic state like Malaysia would enforce a ban on the healthy discussion in the mainstream press on such an important issue as the political system of its country. This is particularly disturbing considering that the evidence and facts are overwhelmingly clear to many Malaysians that Malaysia is founded by the sports-loving Tunku with several other multi-racial persons as a secular nation. A discussion is needed as the future of our children and grandchildren are at stake here in this nation. Why are the views of the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister ONLY PERMITTED to be published by the main stream press and heard by the people in a democracy? I don't buy it that a healthy discussion of the issue will disturb the peace. In any debate, it is when the side that has something to hide or is afraid to lose the argument that it attempts to muzzle its opponent with myriad of excuses. It rings an alarming bell like the bad old days of the repressive Cold War Soviet Union and its citizens lived in fear of its cruel oppressive Secret Police, the KGP. It is hard to believe Pak Lah or 'Mr. Nice Guy' would go back on his words about greater freedom for all when he first became the Prime Minister. At the moment I do not want to think of sinister motives by those in authority who make such untruthful 'Islamic State' statements. The following article is extracted from Malaysiakini, dated 20/7/07. Revoke media ban on Islamic state debate

Jul 20, 07 4:11pm Adjust font size:

Opposition leaders today roundly criticised the ban imposed by the Internal Security Ministry on all mainstream media against publishing any news on the issue of Malaysia being an Islamic state. In separate statements, PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang blasted the government for barring the media from reporting the debates on the theocratical status of the nation. The issue arose on Tuesday when Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak said Malaysia is an Islamic state and not a secular one while carefully assuring members of minority faiths that their rights will be protected. He said the mainly-Muslim Malaysia has never been a secular nation as the government has always been driven by the fundamentals of Islam. This was immediately opposed by various quarters, including BN senior partner MCA, who argued that historical facts and documents showed that Malaysia was a secular state, just as espoused in the Federal Constitution. Following this, the Internal Security Ministry's publications control and Al-Quran texts unit decided to ban any publication of discussions on the matter as such discussions would cause "tension". The ministry however ruled that newspapers can still publish statements from Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Najib on the country being an Islamic state. Authoritarianism Reacting today, Wan Azizah said the ban harmed the development of the nation and its people who are attempting to grow into a mature liberal democracy. "A country, which allows only the voice of the prime minister and his deputy to be reported on national policies and matters of public interest, is in grave danger of tilting towards authoritarianism," she said. She added that all official announcements and pronouncements from the government and its officials must be subjected to public scrutiny. "This is a fundamental aspect of any democratic system," she said, adding that the ban should be revoked and the media returned the right to "facilitate responsible public discussions and views on this matter". Lim also agreed that the solution was not to ban the media and deny Malaysians the right to speak up. "This is a cowardly and undemocratic act, the gravest blow to press freedom in the 45 months of Abdullah premiership," he said. He added that the clamp on the media was also a disservice to the integrity of the Merdeka social contract agreed by the forefathers of the major communities as the basis of nation building – a secular Malaysia with Islam as the official religion. He said that Najib should retract his statement and that the Cabinet should reaffirm the Merdeka social contract that Malaysia had never been conceived as an Islamic state but as a secular state with Islam as the official religion. "The question all Malaysians are entitled to a clear and unequivocal answer is whether the upcoming 50th Merdeka anniversary celebrations is for Malaysians to commemorate 50 years of a secular Malaysia or to mark its official end and the beginning of an Islamic state?"

Najib's Rewriting Malaysian History

That's right-that's what he's doing by claiming Malaysia is an Islamic state. It would be interesting to hear what our beloved founding father and great horse-racing lover, the late Tunku Abdul Rahman have to say if he were alive today about Najib Razak's
outrageous statement. He has forgotten our Malaysian history and the social contract that was honed by Malaysia's multi-racial races. There's no mention of an Islamic state or a theocracy. Here's the latest uncensored news response from Malaysiakini dated 18/7/07 following his provocative statement.

I will neither celebrate Malaysia Day again nor touch a Malaysian flag if this so-called 'Islamic state' nonsense is the dark backward tunnel this country is heading down.

Najib's 'Islamic state' remark draws protest

Fauwaz Abdul Aziz Jul 18, 07 4:21pm

The assertion by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak yesterday that Malaysia is an Islamic state has drawn flak from various quarters. Malaysia is not, and was not meant to be, an Islamic state, said members of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST). They urged the “government, the judiciary, and all Malaysians” to respect the social contract formulated in 1957 that balanced the citizenship rights of minority communities with the special privileges accorded bumiputeras. That agreement is now being changed “surreptitiously” by certain quarters within the government and the judiciary, jeapordising the fundamental liberties of all Malaysians, said MCCBCHST president A Vaithilingam. “There have been numerous statements by our politicians and judges that Malaysia is, and was always meant to be, a secular nation. “In this sense, secular undoubtedly means a country where religion, religious principles and religious dogma do not influence the business of governance,” he added in a media statement. 'We are concerned' Speaking at an international conference on the challenges of globalisation facing Muslim countries, Najib said Malaysia has never been a secular nation as the government has always been driven by the fundamentals of Islam. "Islam is the official religion and we are an Islamic state," he told reporters after officiating the conference. "But as an Islamic state, it does not mean that we don't respect the non-Muslims. The Muslims and the non-Muslims have their own rights," he added. Expressing doubts about this, Council of Churches Malaysia general secretary Hermen Shastri said non-Muslims’ objections to Najib’s statement derive not only from its departure from the Federal Constitution but the boost it would give to proponents of the Islamisation process. “We are not happy because we don’t know what this means going by what is happening in society today,” he said when met at his office in Petaling Jaya today. “This includes cases involving the dissolution of marriages, custody over children, the claim over bodies of the deceased, and the acts of vigilantism committed by religious officials bent on policing morality,” he added. Shahstri said it’s one thing for ordinary people to say Malaysia is an Islamic state, but when top government officials such as Najib says this, “we are concerned.” Stick to the constitution Meanwhile MCA also joined in the fray in disputing Najib’s pronouncement. The party’s Secretary General Ong Ka Chuan said that all historical documents pertaining to the formulation of the federal constitution and the formation of an independent state indicated that Malaysia was a secular state. “This was the consensus and social contract agreed upon by our forefathers,” he said in a statement. He said that documents prepared by the British authorities before granting independence to Malaysia in 1957 clearly stipulated that “the members of the Alliance delegation...had no intention of creating a Muslim theocracy and that Malaya would be a secular state”. Chinese-based MCA is the second largest coalition partner in the Umno-dominated ruling BN coalition. Another MCA leader, MP for Kota Melaka Wong Nai Chee said Najib’s interpretation was not in accordance with the spirit and intent of the federal constitution. “The fact that we have Muslims being the majority does not in itself make Malaysia an Islamic state. Rather, Malaysia is a secular state with the majority being Muslims,” he said. Opposition leader Lim Kit Siang yesterday said Najib had cast a dark cloud over the 50th Merdeka anniversary celebrations this year with his statement. “It would appear as though the Merdeka social contract becomes a political pawn when political parties or individual political leaders find it expedient to manipulate and exploit it to shore up their political support,” he said.