Winds of change

Along the way, however, something happened. And this something happened in November 2007. On 10 November, the Malays and Chinese got together under BERSIH to fight for clean and fair elections. Then, two weeks later, the Indians united under HINDRAF to protest the raw deal they had been getting over 50 years since Merdeka.

Raja Petra Kamarudin



Ever since the break up of the Roman empire one of the constant facts of political life in Europe has been the emergence of independent nations. They have come into existence over the centuries in different forms, different kinds of government, but all have been inspired by a deep, keen feeling of nationalism, which has grown as the nations have grown.

In the twentieth century, and especially since the end of the war, the processes which gave birth to the nation states of Europe have been repeated all over the world. We have seen the awakening of national consciousness in peoples who have for centuries lived in dependence upon some other power. Fifteen years ago this movement spread through Asia. Many countries there, of different races and civilisations, pressed their claim to an independent national life.

The wind of change is blowing through this continent, and whether we like it or not, this growth of national consciousness is a political fact. We must all accept it as a fact, and our national policies must take account of it. (Excerpts of Harold Macmillan's Winds of Change speech made to the South African Parliament on 3 February 1960)

********************

The Barack Obama forces don’t seem to understand that they’re sailing against the wind, that they’re not supposed to be able to capture the Democratic nomination for president. The fight for the nomination, one of the best political dramas in decades, has always resembled a contest between realists and dreamers. The realists will tell you that there is a quality of protesting too much in the ritual chant of “Yes, we can!” that erupts so frequently at Obama rallies.

For months the realists have been arguing, in effect: No, he can’t. The most forceful arguments of the realists tend to take place in private, and centre on the ageing elephant in the living room: race. Their contention is that the country has come a long, long way, but that it is not yet ready to cross the finish line by installing a black man in the White House.

There are many variations on this theme. The realists (and they are not all Hillary Clinton supporters, by any means) will point out that there is still a great deal of racial prejudice in the U.S., and thus a substantial percentage of whites who will not vote for a black candidate for president under any circumstance.

Senator Obama, they note, is also struggling in his quest for Hispanic votes. There are also many white Democrats who say they would vote for a black candidate but are afraid their vote would be futile this year because not enough other whites have shown a willingness to vote for Senator Obama. They point out that he has not won a majority of the white votes in any of the contests thus far.

These voters will tell you that this year’s election is too important to take such a risk. Their view is that after eight years of George W. Bush, another four or eight years of Republican rule would be catastrophic. Added to these daunting challenges, the realists say, are all those voters who are not prejudiced but genuinely feel that Mr. Obama is not the best choice for president. After all, his résumé is thin, he’s not the best debater in the world and Hillary Clinton has demonstrated beyond a doubt that she is smart, tough and fully capable of being president.

“I look at the numbers, and they tell me he can’t win,” said a Democratic analyst, who asked not to be identified. “But then I look at the polls and the enthusiasm he is generating, and he seems to be closing in on Hillary by the hour.”

The easiest way to understand what is going on is to step across the generational divide. The realists tend to be older and come out of a political and racial experience that is often completely alien to Mr. Obama’s most fervent supporters, who tend to be younger. During a series of interviews on the campus of Stanford University, students expressed great interest in the election but seemed unconcerned with such factors as Mr. Obama’s race or perceived electability.

“The students like him because he’s a fresh face, a personality with fresh ideas,” said Julia Liebner, a human biology major. “Hillary may do great things for the country if she is elected, but I think the kids are responding to Obama’s more hopeful message and his idea of bringing people together.”

Ben Fried, who was interviewed as he straddled a bicycle under a sky that threatened a downpour at any moment, said that he had participated in many conversations about the election and that race had not been a factor in any of them. “I would just say the kids like Obama,” he said.

(Elizabeth Currid, a young, urban planning professor at the University of Southern California, told me recently: “This is a generation that really embraces diversity and equality.”)

A handful of interviews on a college campus is hardly a scientific survey. But well-educated young people are the distilled version of Mr. Obama’s supporters, and it’s a fact that younger people in the U.S. have had it with the bitterness, divisiveness and ineffectiveness that make government and politics in their eyes seem so unsavoury. They are in a better place than their elders on race. They are not shouldering the resentments of years and decades past. They are not parsing the differences between the Clinton and Obama health proposals, or obsessing over who would do better against John McCain. They are just fed up with the status quo, and they want change. And they’ve found a rock star who embodies their desire.

The advantage in this race is still substantially with Senator Clinton. The realists are not crazy, after all. But neither are the dreamers. Winds change. If you’re sailing against the wind today, it may be different tomorrow. And there are few things more powerful than the winds of history. (Winds of Change by BOB HERBERT, The New York Times)

********************

Yes, the winds of change are blowing throughout Malaysia. Everywhere you go, people are talking about change. Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is asking the voters to give Barisan Nasional five more years. But what Najib does not seem to comprehend is that the voters have already given Barisan Nasional the five years he is asking for. They gave it in March 2004. In fact, Malaysia has been having the same government for the last 50 years since Merdeka. But the five years since Abdullah Ahmad Badawi took over as Prime Minister in 2003 have come to nought. Abdullah did not deliver everything he promised in his 2004 Election Manifesto. In fact, he did exactly the opposite of what he promised. And don't think that the voters have not noticed.

Abdullah launched the Rancangan Malaysia Kesembilan (RMK9) or Ninth Malaysia Plan awhile back. But not one of his grand plans have taken off. Sure, some projects are being implemented. But these projects are mostly carry-forward projects of the RMK8. These are projects which were not completed in time during the last Malaysia Plan, the RMK8, and only now are seeing fruition. If anyone can be credited for these projects then it would have to be Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, as these were conjured during his tenure as Prime Minister. In that sense, it is Mahathir and not Abdullah who is developing Malaysia, in spite of the fact that Mahathir is no longer the Prime Minister.

Back in 2002, soon after Mahathir announced his retirement, I wrote that one day we will look back on the 'good old days' and remark that, on hindsight, Mahathir is by far the better Prime Minister. That, I added, would be a bleak day for Malaysia when even Mahathir begins to look better than Abdullah.

I have always been a Mahathir critic. I have never denied this and I make no apologies for it. But my criticism is based on my ideals of a transparent government, a civil society, freedom of choice, an unshackled and independent media, and all those which many would label as 'western' values. But there is nothing 'western' about these values at all. They are universal values which are compatible with Islam or any other religion for that matter. No religion in existence would dispute opposition to discrimination, oppression and repression. The very foundation of Islam and all the major religions is justice. So how could what I hold dear be considered 'western' when all the religions emerged in the east, none in the west?

Abdullah's RMK9 is going to cost RM200 billion. Where Malaysia is going to find the money to fund these RM200 billion worth of projects is not clear. Then, even before any of these RMK9 projects can see maturity, Abdullah criss-crosses Malaysia to launch his so many 'Corridors'. These so-called Corridors are going to cost the nation in excess of RM1 trillion. Abdullah, the Sixth Prime Minister, is going to spend more money than that spent by the first five Prime Ministers combined. What Abdullah is going to spend over ten years will far exceed what was spent over 50 years before this. But it is not Abdullah who is going to pay for this spending spree. It will be us, the Rakyat, who will be made to pay. And just as I am sure that my name is Raja Petra Bin Raja Kamarudin, I am equally sure that the Rakyat will certainly be made to pay.

Abdullah's landslide win in the 2004 general election has given birth to an arrogance. Never before has the ruling coalition performed that well. Even the great Mahathir was not able to duplicate this. This 92% mandate from the Rakyat is interpreted as a blank cheque with a 'Double Zero' licence, a licence to kill, thrown in. No country gives its government 92% of the seats in Parliament unless the Rakyat believes in it without question and with no conditions attached.

2004, however, is not an accurate yardstick to measure one's popularity or gauge the Rakyat's support. The people had had enough. They wanted change. And they gave Abdullah his 92% victory with change in mind. They wanted to see a new Malaysia. They wanted to see a different government. They wanted to see an improvement over 22 years of Mahathir. But this did not happen. Don't even talk about improvement. Even if things stood still, that in itself would have been bad enough but acceptable nevertheless. But in Abdullah's case, things actually went into reverse. Matters became worse, not just remained the same, and certainly very, very far from better.

The Rakyat's clamour for change is not enough to tip the scales though. Just because the Rakyat have had enough is not sufficient to influence the election results. Malaysia's Elections Commission has transformed vote-rigging and gerrymandering into an art form. Electoral boundaries and constituencies have been drawn up to give the ruling coalition an unfair advantage. Malays, Chinese and Indians never vote en bloc. So, in the absence of block-voting, one set of voters can be played against the other. When the Chinese swing to the opposition, the sentiments of the Malays can be played up and the Chinese 'threat' can be bandied about to 'unite' the Malays under Umno. This has always worked in the past and there is no reason it can't continue to work. The same goes when the Malays swing to the opposition like in 1999. Then the Chinese can be subtly 'persuaded' to vote government by constantly raising the spectre of 'May 13'. Then, to complete this very delicate 'balancing act', the Indians will deliver the crucial 'deciding votes'. Traditionally, 90% of the Indian voters vote ruling party. This has always been so and there is no reason to believe it can't continue to be so.

Along the way, however, something happened. And this something happened in November 2007. On 10 November, the Malays and Chinese got together under BERSIH to fight for clean and fair elections. Then, two weeks later, the Indians united under HINDRAF to protest the raw deal they had been getting over 50 years since Merdeka. No one expected the large turnout and mass support, not the BERSIH organisers nor the people behind HINDRAF. Somehow it just happened. The timing was right, though by accident rather than by design, and the Rakyat rallied behind BERSIH and HINDRAF.

Then the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) did something no one thought it would do. It sat down to discuss the possibility of offering the five HINDRAF leaders under ISA detention, now popularly known as the HINDRAF 5, seats to contest under its party banner. Two of the HINDRAF 5 are DAP members so DAP was not about to allow what are currently the most popular Hindu activists in Malaysia to get 'stolen' by an Islamic party. Before you could scream MAKKAL SAKHTI, the HINDRAF 5 were offered seats under the DAP banner. PAS had to be contented with having an Indian female lawyer as its candidate in Johor. In one swoop, PAS erased the negative image that the Barisan Nasional controlled media had been painting it with. This was not only a woman but a Hindu to boot and she was a candidate on the PAS party ticket.

Barisan Nasional was caught off-guard. The old strategy used in undermining PAS can no longer apply. Sure, it may be only one Hindu candidate, and one swallow does not make a summer. But, over the last few days, HINDRAF activists have been riding around town wearing PAS T-shirts and holding PAS flags high above their heads. Never mind that DAP and not PAS is contesting that particular seat. The HINDRAF supporters just want to demonstrate their love for PAS even though they are doing so at a DAP ceramah.

Barisan Nasional is now in a daze. Sure, they have gerrymandered the seats well. They have carved out the electoral boundaries to take into account the racial make-up. And they have also 'injected' new 'voters' and transferred postal votes to those constituencies where the opposition is strong. But this strategy only works if the margins are small and if the Malays and Chinese vote opposite to each other and if 90% of the Indian voters play their traditional role of 'king-maker'. If, however, the Malays, Chinese and Indians all vote opposition as one united voice, then many seats will be lost which may result in Barisan Nasional finally losing its two-thirds majority in Parliament, not to mention a few states thrown in as well.

But this, and this alone, is not enough. In 1969, the opposition garnered 55.1% of the votes but still the ruling party got in, though minus its two-thirds. In 1999, the opposition garnered 46% of the votes and still the ruling party got in, and with a two-thirds majority on top of that. Since 1969 and 1999, the Elections Commission has 'fine-tuned' the gerrymandering so that the opposition will need 60% of the votes to form the government, and even then it is not sure if it will form the government with a two-thirds majority. That is what the opposition is up against. So, even if the Malays, Chinese and Indians unite as a solid front, it will still not be enough. There must be one more factor thrown in, the faktor dalaman or internal factor -- the element of sabotage within the ranks of Barisan Nasional.

Annuar Musa is not going to be the Menteri Besar of Kelantan if Umno wins that state. Instead, Awang Adek will be that Menteri Besar. So Annuar Musa will do his best to ensure that Umno does not win Kelantan.

Idris Jusoh has dropped several Terengganu warlords. These warlords would rather see PAS win Terengganu just for the satisfaction of 'paying back' Idris Jusoh for dropping them. Hundreds of supporters of these 'retired' warlords have held demonstrations in front of Idris Jusoh's residence and the police had to be called in to break up these 'illegal assemblies' that, for this first time, were organised by Umno against Umno.

Shahidan Kassim was dropped from the candidates' list and thereby would have to retire as the Menteri Besar of Perlis as well. He stormed into Abdullah's office in Putrajaya and only after the seventh attempt was he able to meet the Prime Minister. Under immense pressure and Shahidan's threat of handing the state over to the opposition, Abdullah relented and reluctantly gave him back his seat. This upset Umno's Secretary-General who had been trying to get rid of Shahidan because of his many sex scandals, the latest involving a very young girl who was forced to have an abortion to get rid of Shahidan's baby she was carrying.

Shahidan retaliated by declaring that he would give the Parliament seats to the opposition “so that I would not have to see their fucking faces for the next five years.” The about-to-be-killed-off aspiring Parliamentarians in turn want to make sure that Shahidan never gets to continue as the Menteri Besar of Perlis -- and, even if he does, it will not be for more than two years. And Najib's response to all this is that Umno will take action against all those Umno members who sabotage the election. What more could Najib say after declaring that he is just fed up with the infighting in Kelantan which has dashed Umno's hopes of winning back that state?

The Chinese voters in Penang want to give the Parliament seats to the opposition but they are not sure whether they should do the same with the state seats. Maybe the opposition should be sent to Parliament while the state is safely retained in the hands of Barisan Nasional. This is the dilemma facing the Penang Chinese. They are worried if they give the state to the opposition then Penang, for the first time, might see a Malay Chief Minister. Anwar Ibrahim has overcome this fear by promising that, if the opposition manages to grab Penang, the opposition will appoint a Chinese as its new Chief Minister.

But this still does not address the other fears. What about development? For sure Penang will face what Kelantan is now facing if the opposition forms the new state government. The opposition will now have to work very hard in convincing the Penang voters that Penang is already so developed, in fact overdeveloped, that maybe some of the development should be scaled down as there is a limit to what the island can support. Penang is already getting too congested because of the development that many now prefer to stay out of the city or out of the island altogether just to get away from the maddening crowd. What more development does Penang need? What it needs, instead, is a scaling down so that Penang can revert to being the Pearl of the Orient which it once was but no longer is.

In the other states as well the infighting is intense. Whether Barisan Nasional, in particular Umno, closes ranks these next six days is left to be seen. If it does, then the opposition will be given a run for its money. If not, then the opposition may yet come in with at least 60 Parliament seats plus a state or two. But the opposition would need 75 seats to deny Barisan Nasional its two-thirds majority in Parliament. How would it do this? I suppose many within Umno too would like to know the answer to that question so maybe I should stop here for now lest I reveal too much which will allow Barisan Nasional time to pre-empt our moves.

In the meantime, you voters should not worry too much. Just take a look at the two videos here and make sure you come out to vote come 8 March 2008.