The Ugly Malaysian

My wife and I voted in Subang USJ and we both voted for an Indian man and a Chinese girl. We did not vote for them because they happen to be an Indian man and a Chinese girl. We also did not refuse to vote for them because they happen to not be Malay and Muslim.

Raja Petra Kamarudin

In the old days it used to be called The Ugly American. Today, it is The Ugly Malaysian, at least as far as this country is concerned.

Malaysians, just like Americans, are racists; there is no doubt about that. But while Americans will accept the fact that they are racists, Malaysians will deny it and instead will claim to be very tolerant of the other race or races.

You can always tell when a person is a racist from the opening statement when a Chinese says “I have a lot of Indian friends”, or a Malay says “I used to mix with Chinese at school”, or an Indian says “Actually, Malays in the kampong are very nice people”, and so on. This is the Malay, Chinese and Indian way of giving their 'stamp of approval' to the other race. Why do you need to emphasis the word 'Malay', 'Chinese' or 'Indian'? Is this your way of showing tolerance? Does the emphasis on race mean you are 'tolerant' of those not of your race? Is this to give an appearance of magnanimity or generosity on your part? See what a great guy I am. I tolerate the other races. Sheesh.....as if I need anyone to 'tolerate' me.

Look at Malaysiakini's latest report on the Selangor State EXCO line-up. Malaysiakini reported that out of the ten EXCO Members, six are going to be non-Malays and four of them women. Who the hell cares whether six are non-Malays and four are women? Are these people being chosen to run the state because of their race and gender? Should they not be chosen because of their qualifications and capabilities? Who are these six non-Malays and four women anyway? Are they the best of the lot? Will they outperform and outshine the previous Khir Toyo administration? Are we going to see Selangor grow and prosper by leaps and bounds? Is Selangor going to be paradise on earth?

Who cares? What matters is that six are going to be non-Malays and four are going to be women. That is what matters and that is what is going to guarantee a great future ahead of us. The calibre of the ten EXCO members was buried in the consideration of race and gender. That is the main focus and that is what appears to be the deciding factor. Woe to this country when race and gender override all other factors.

Are Malaysians ready for an all-women EXCO line-up? What if all ten EXCO Members are women? If all these ten women are the most capable of the lot and none of the men can better their credentials would this be so bad? Should not that be what matters? What if all ten EXCO Members are Chinese, or all ten Indians, or all ten Malays? Would this be so bad as well? No, Selangor is 52% Malay and 48% non-Malay. Furthermore, 52% of the voters are women and 48% of the voters men. So the ten-member EXCO line-up must reflect this racial and gender breakdown. Oh? Is that so? Well, since 40% of Malaysians are non-Malays and 51% are women, how can we have just one Prime Minister who is a Malay man? What about the 40% non-Malay Malaysians and the 51% women Malaysians? A Malay man Prime Minister means that the 40% non-Malays and 51% women are 'not represented'.

This argument of 'equal' representation according to race and gender is ridiculous. This means gays and lesbians plus Portuguese, Ibans, Dayaks, Kadazan, Sikhs, Ceylonese, Siamese, Javanese, Bugis, Burmese, Vietnamese, etc. can demand and should also be given 'representation' in the government since they too are Malaysian citizens. If men and women are a criteria, then gays and lesbians should equally be a criteria. And if Malay, Chinese and Indian are considerations, then 'others' not Malay, Chinese and Indian should also be considerations. Or are the minorities not important, as Nazri Aziz said a few months ago?

It is most upsetting to read news reports, even by those 'alternative' and more progressive sources like Malaysiakini, play the racial card. It would have sufficed if Malaysiakini had reported that ten EXCO Members (though it was wrong as it is actually nine) had been decided without stressing on the six non-Malays and four Malays (which is again wrong). What is the purpose of bringing to the readers' attention the race of the EXCO Members and stress on the fact that six are non-Malays and four Malays (which in the first place is wrong)?

This has been what has delayed the swearing-in of the EXCO members although the elections were held two weeks ago. It was because of how many Malays and how many non-Malays should be in the EXCO line-up. Furthermore, the three opposition parties that had agreed to form the new coalition government in the state could not agree on a 4:4:2 or 5:3:2 or 4:3:2 formula. That one extra EXCO seat resulted in a 'deadlock' of sorts. Who cares who gets that one extra seat? I don't! Most of the voters don't! But the three opposition parties do and what the political parties want count, not what the voters want?

You see, the state is 'owned' by the political parties, not by the rakyat. It is the political parties that won the election, not the rakyat. The rakyat do not matter. What the political parties want does. When the political parties came before the rakyat during the election campaign, they spoke about Barisan Nasional's racist policies. They asked the rakyat to reject Barisan Nasional because Barisan Nasional stands for racism.

The opposition parties campaigned on a platform of non-race-based politics. They argued that we are all Malaysians, one nation of Malaysians, not a nation divided by race. Malays, Chinese and Indians are one, they screamed. Let us unite. Let us look at each other as brothers and sisters. Never mind who you vote for. Never mind if the candidate is Malay, Chinese or Indian. Never mind if the political party the candidates represent is DAP, PKR or PAS. Just vote opposition. Just vote any race. Just vote any political party. But after they win they argue about which race, which political party, which gender, and what the sexual preferences of each candidate is in deciding how to form the government.

When the rakyat chose the government, race, religion, gender, and whatever else, were furthest from their minds. They did not care which party you were from. They did not care which religion you believed in. They did not care whether you are Malay, Chinese or Indian. They voted for you regardless whether you are man, woman, or gay man/woman. Do you think they now want to split hairs over just one seat because the politicians want a Malay, Chinese, Indian, man, woman, etc., majority?

Just form the government and form it quick. While you haggle, valuable information and crucial evidence are disappearing. So what if we get an extra Malay, or extra Chinese, or extra Indian, or extra man, or extra woman, or whether that extra seat is Siamese and gay to boot? Did not DAP, PKR and PAS scream that it does not matter whether it is a white cat or a black cat, the most important thing is that the cat can catch the mouse? Now that you won our votes, you forget about this black cat and white cat crap. Now that you are in power, you are fussy about the colour of the cat and argue about what God that cat believes in and whether this cat comes with a pussy or a dick.

Aiyoh, what is wrong with these politicians? Barisan Nasional and Barisan Rakyat are both the same. At the end of the day, party interest comes first. At the end of the day, your race and religion matter. The 'one-Malaysian' and 'all are brothers and sisters' is only raised during the election campaign and when they want our votes. After that, they put that all away into the closet, to be raised only during the next election campaign.

My wife and I voted in Subang USJ and we both voted for an Indian man and a Chinese girl. We did not vote for them because they happen to be an Indian man and a Chinese girl. We also did not refuse to vote for them because they happen to not be Malay and Muslim. We voted for them because we support the opposition. And their race, religion and gender did not matter one bit when we voted for them. Why, then, should it suddenly matter now? That is what baffles me about the Malaysian mind.

MIC Will Sink Or Swim With BN, Says Subramaniam

KUALA LUMPUR, March 22 (Bernama) -- The MIC will sink or swim with the Barisan Nasional (BN), said Human Resource Minister Datuk Dr S Subramaniam.

"As far as the MIC is concerned we are very clearly with the BN. Live or die, sink or swim, MIC stands with BN. We have been together for so many years and we have the strength to go through this struggle," he told reporters after launching the Temple of Fine Arts' "Pesta Ria" here Saturday.

He said that he expected BN politcians to have principles and not be easily swayed to cross over to opposition parties especially with Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) de factor leader openly inviting them to jump ship.

On his new post as Human Resource Minister, he said that he looked forward to solve problems pertaining unemployment especially amongst the Indian community.

"Through the Ministry, I plan to ensure that Indian youths get the right kind of training so that they will be in high demand in the market place," he said.

As for human rights issues concerning foreign workers voiced by Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) and the Malaysian International Federation For Human Rights (FIDH), the minister said he was aware of their recommendations made on Friday.

"We will be looking into this issue. For these workers, it is our responsibility to give them good and fair working conditions and ensure that they get their due rights," he said.

Dr Subramaniam added that with regard to India's concern about the welfare of its foreign workers within the country, a memorandum he was preparing on the matter was in the final stages.

Investors find Opposition open for business

KUALA LUMPUR, March 22 – For the past week, businessmen from government-linked chiefs to those who run the country’s small-and-medium sized industries have been making a beeline for the 26th storey of the Komtar building in the heart of Georgetown.



Their date was with Penang’s new chief minister Lim Guan Eng and they wore anxiety on their sleeves. Anxiety because they were moving into unfamiliar territory, dealing with a greenhorn chief executive of a loose alliance with little experience in governing a state, let alone the country’s manufacturing hot spot. Halfway into the meetings and the fear is replaced by hope.


Lim Guan Eng, they found out, is hungry for investments.


He wants the Federal Government to fast-track the Second Penang Bridge, continue with plans to build the monorail and pump more money into the state. He promises businessmen that tenders will be more transparent and that as long as their projects bring benefit to Penang, they will be given the red carpet treatment.


Says an executive of a government-linked company: “There was no hesitation on the CM’s part to listen to our ideas for development.’’ Similarly, another businessman who met Kedah’s PAS Menteri Besar last week said that the 60-minute session was spent on discussing projects and not on religious do’s and dont’s.


It is still early days but there is less trepidation that the Malaysian economy will grind to a halt now that 5 states are under the control of PKR-DAP-PAS.


To be sure, investment banks are still taking a wait-and-see approach, wondering how the BN-controlled federal government will deal with the states, especially with daily stories of potential defections and questions on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s longevity in the top job.


But there are several reasons why it could be business as usual around Malaysia.


The federal government will not shut off the pipeline to these states. Selangor alone contributes 30% of the country’s Gross Domestic Product. Abdullah cannot hope to get 6% national growth this year if they stop infrastructure projects or choke off investments to the state.


As S. Jayasankaran of the Singapore Business Times wrote: “Even if Mr Abdullah was pushed aside, no new prime minister would dare exclude the 5 Opposition-held states from development… cutting them off would imperil the national economy.’’


For the Opposition, keeping investors happy and the wheels of the economy moving will decide if their stay in power is going to be a touch and go affair, or something more permanent. There is little doubt that Malaysians are excited by the prospect of a 2-party system developing but all ideals will be junked if talk is the only currency flowing in Kedah, Penang, Perak, Selangor and Kelantan.


That is why PAS’ Husam Musa has been telling his party men to go easy on strident talk and focus on making things easy for businessmen. The PKR-DAP-PAS alliance hope that if they reduce opportunities for corruption and remove administrative humps, even the doubters will be won over by the time the next polls are held.


Another lubricant for business as usual is the royalty.


The royal households in Selangor and Perak are business-friendly and have interests in a wide range of areas. They would frown on any move by the new governments to allow politics to bring trade to a halt in their states. For example, the new Selangor MB Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim has signaled that the water transfer project from Pahang to Selangor will go on unimpeded.


Still, a few curveballs could throw off even the best-laid plans. A slowing world economy would be bad news for one of the world’s leading trading nations. Also, some of the biggest problems with Malaysia’s delivery system have been linked to its 1 million civil servants. No doubt that there are different political masters in 5 states but the same public servants who were impediments to change are still occupying the same places.


How Lim Guan Eng, Khalid Ibrahim and friends deal with these little Napoleons will be interesting. For the time being, though, even some of the country’s best-known businessmen are willing to give the new boys in power the benefit of doubt.


One of Malaysia’s most prominent businessmen has been telling friends this week that it had become impossible to deal with avaricious Umno politicians in the last few years. They demanded a bigger slice of any project and had become so arrogant.



He is looking forward to dealing with less “demanding’’ politicians in the 5 states. – THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER

Ku Li's plan unfolds, Mahathir weighs in, 60 divisions needed, Anwar watches

KUALA LUMPUR, March 22 – A few days after the March 8 election, a group of writers were invited to a meeting attended by several Umno veterans. Top of the agenda was a discussion on the performance of Umno and the Barisan Nasional. The main conclusion reached was the need to force Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to stand down as president of Umno and Prime Minister of Malaysia.



They knew that the Umno Supreme Council would stand by their leader and would shoot down any plan to change horses mid-stream. They know that the longer Abdullah stays in the job, the more difficult it will be to set a timetable for his departure. So they opted for appealing straight to the small man on the ground, a strategy that worked well for the Opposition in the run-up to the election.


The strategy: To ride on the anti-Abdullah sentiment in the party, create a wave of discontent within the rank-and-file and make it untenable for him to stay on.


The veterans were united by their disdain for Abdullah’s leadership of the party; by their view that he and his son-in-law Khairy Jamaludin should be blamed for allowing Anwar Ibrahim back onto the main stage of Malaysian politics and for a bunch of other personal motivations.


This plan is unfolding right now, led off by a letter which Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah wrote to all divisions and branches. In that letter, the Gua Musang MP sketched the changed political landscape, the unprecedented gains by the Opposition. He did not blame Abdullah directly for the polls debacle, but made it clear that the job of making important decisions affecting the party did not fall on the shoulders of a few.


He urged party members to push for a special meeting on May 11 where the electoral performance and the future of Malays would be discussed. As expected, the plan has been shot down by many of the power brokers in the party, including many of the Mentris Besar, Wanita Umno, Supreme Council members. They are not in favour of a special meeting so soon after the polls, knowing that with nerves so raw and anger ripe any discussion could turn into a bloodletting session. Some of them also smell a ruse.


They believe that Ku Li and Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad are taking advantage of the anxiety in the party to weave themselves back into the main picture.


So it was of little surprise when Dr Mahathir threw his support behind Ku Li’s proposal for a special meeting. Within party circles, they know that the battle lines are drawn – on one side will be Ku Li, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Tan Sri Sanusi Junid and other veterans and on the other side will be Abdullah, Najib and the Supreme Council.


The challengers know that they have no chance with a head-on clash or conventional battle with the council. That is why they have to whip up ground sentiment through the Internet and create so much hate and anger against Abdullah that the will of the rank-and-file will be unstoppable.


But why is the special meeting on May 11 so important for Ku Li and friends?


One, it will allow party members to state the reasons for Umno’s poor performance and say what they feel about the leadership. It would be untenable for Abdullah to remain at the top if the anger against him is overpowering.


Two, and perhaps more importantly, the gathering could pave the way for some landmark changes to the party constitution, including removing a requirement that anyone wanting to contest the position of the party president obtain at least 60 nominations. This clause was inserted during Dr Mahathir’s time to combat money politics.


If this requirement is removed, Ku Li and others will throw their hat into the ring and challenge Abdullah.


If the status quo remains, anyone with an eye on the presidency will have a gargantuan task obtaining close to 60 nominations from the 210 divisions. Dr Mahathir said as much yesterday after a book launch in Kuala Lumpur. “You need about 60 brave divisions, ‘’ he said. In 2004 when Ku Li challenged Abdullah, he only received one nomination.


Dr Mahathir also said that he would support the idea of a limited term for the Umno president, provided it did not mean passing on the job from president to son-in- law, referring to his nemesis, Khairy. For Ku Li, Mahathir and friends to get their way, they will have to crank up the anti-Abdullah campaign and isolate him from the rest of the party structure.



It is a high-stakes gamble which will put Umno in a tailspin for some time. Watching and savouring this battle is the Opposition. Anwar Ibrahim knows that as long as Umno is in infighting mode, the party will not be able to chart any plans to stop his advance. – THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER

In The Name Of Security

Counterterrorism and Human Rights Abuses Under Malaysia’s Internal Security Act

Summary

To bring these terrorists through normal court procedures would have entailed adducing proper evidence, which would have been difficult to obtain.
—Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir, October 2001

Nearly one hundred men currently languish in Malaysia’s Kamunting detention center—some have been there for more than two years—without being charged with a crime or any prospect of a trial. Almost all are accused of being involved with organizations implicated in terrorist activity.

While in detention, detainees report that they have been mistreated, some subjected to sexual humiliation, others slapped and kicked. All were held incommunicado for several weeks after they were first detained. Family members report that detainees showed signs of more extensive physical abuse when they first were able to meet with them.

These men are being held under Malaysia’s Internal Security Act (ISA), a form of administrative detention that permits the government to detain individuals without charge or trial, denying them even the most basic due process rights. The ISA allows the government to hold detainees for two years after arrest, and then renew this period indefinitely without meaningful judicial approval or scrutiny.

The ISA has long been used as a blunt tool to stifle political opposition to the government. In 1987, then Prime Minister Mahathir used the ISA to save his own political career, ordering the arrests of scores of politicians in the wake of a vote-rigging scandal that had placed his continued tenure as prime minister in serious jeopardy. In 1998, former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim initially was held under the ISA after his falling out with Mahathir. In 2001, the government detained under the ISA ten prominent political activists who planned protests over the continued detention of Anwar, who by that time was serving a fifteen-year sentence after trials marred by serious rights violations.

The very existence of the ISA and its draconian provisions has acted as a crude form of censorship of political activities and expression. Its past use as a political weapon by the government casts doubt on the Malaysian government’s claim that the ISA is now being used as a necessary measure in the “war on terror” and not for political purposes.

Malaysian human rights advocates have for many years campaigned for the repeal of the ISA. In the past they could rely on support from the United States to challenge the government’s use of the ISA. Since the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, however, the U.S government has not only been conspicuously quiet about the ISA, but has even expressed support for its use against terrorist suspects.

As made clear by the scandal surrounding abuse of detainees by United States forces in Iraq, a story that was breaking as this report was being finalized, abuses flourish in detention facilities where strong pressure on interrogators to come up with information is coupled with weak or nonexistent oversight mechanisms. Malaysia’s ISA, a law that allows individuals to disappear into a legal black hole and emerge only at the whim of those in power, invites such abuse.

This report—based largely on interviews with recently released ISA detainees, family members of detainees, lawyers, and aid providers, as well as affidavits written by detainees and smuggled out of Kamunting—documents violations of the rights of alleged militants held under the ISA since August 2001.1 Because access is severely limited, the extent of abuse is unknown. It is clear, however, that detainees have been abused during interrogation, that they have been subjected to prolonged detention without trial, and that they have been regularly denied access to counsel.

This report also details attempts by authorities to manipulate detainees and their families so that they do not avail themselves of what limited judicial remedies are available. Detainees were able to meet with lawyers and family members only under constrained circumstances. Prior to the meetings, detainees were told to urge their wives and children not to get a lawyer or to talk to the press or human rights groups. They and their families were warned that making legal challenges to their detention would result in longer and harsher sentences and conditions of detention. When they ignored these warnings, prison officials either hindered or completely blocked meetings between detainees and their lawyers. Fearful of damaging their prospects for an early release, many detainees did not contact lawyers, delaying by several months any legal challenge to their own detention.

Neither the men nor their families have any idea when they will be released. While the detainees fight for their day in court, they have already been tried and convicted in the press. Because much of the Malaysian media is heavily controlled by the government, Malaysian newspapers have, almost without exception, reported on the detentions as though all of the allegations made by the government have already been proven, and have often failed to print information or allegations that cast doubt on the cases or present government actions in a negative light.

Who They Are{mosgoogle right}

The current wave of ISA arrests began in August 2001, when the Malaysian government detained a group of ten alleged militants. The Malaysian government claimed that the detainees were members of a group it called Kumpulan Militan Malaysia (KMM, or Malaysian Militant Group), which according to the Malaysian authorities wants to overthrow the government and set up an Islamic state. Eight of the ten men arrested were members of Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS, or Islamic Party of Malaysia), Malaysia’s largest Islamist opposition party. Those arrested included Nik Adli, a PAS member and the son of senior PAS cleric Nik Aziz, PAS youth wing leader Noorashid Sakip, and PAS Youth committee member Mohamed Lothfi Ariffin. The detainees were held without charge and, under the ISA, were denied access to counsel. Domestic and international observers criticized the arrests as politically motivated. They were seen as the latest attempt by then-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed to weaken the surging PAS in the lead-up to regional elections in 2002 by linking it to radical Islam. In the wake of the arrests, the U.S. government criticized the Malaysian government for once again detaining individuals without trial under the ISA. But the U.S. stance changed after September 11, 2001, when it became supportive of the use of the ISA against alleged militants.

The pace of arrests increased after the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. In October 2001, the Malaysian government detained an additional six individuals, five of whom were teachers in religious schools, on the grounds that they too were members of KMM.

Ultimately, more than one hundred individuals have been detained on terror-related grounds under the ISA. A handful have been released, leaving a total of roughly ninety in custody at the time of writing. Of these, approximately seventy are alleged to be members of Jemaah Islamiyah (JI, or Islamic Community), a militant group purportedly seeking to create an Islamic state encompassing Malaysia, Indonesia, and parts of the southern Philippines. JI has been accused of carrying out the bombings in Bali and Jakarta in Indonesia in 2002 and 2003, which killed more than two hundred people. Seventeen other detainees are alleged to be members of KMM. One alleged member of the Filipino group Abu Sayyaf, implicated in bombings in the Philippines, is being held at Kamunting as well.

Five detainees are members of the “Karachi 13.” Pakistani authorities detained thirteen young men and boys, the youngest of whom were under sixteen at the time of arrest, in Karachi, Pakistan, in September 2003. They were not alleged to have engaged in any illegal activity, but were arrested on the claim that they were being trained to engage in future terrorist activities. They were arrested by Pakistani security forces, held incommunicado and interrogated by Pakistani and U.S. security personnel, and then shipped to Malaysia. No charges have been brought against any of them. Without judicial recourse, the future of these young men, like the other ISA detainees, is now subject to the whims of the executive branch of the Malaysian government.

Human Rights Watch recognizes the obligations of the Malaysian government to protect its population from terrorist attack and to bring those responsible for engaging in such attacks to justice. There are serious and credible allegations that some of the September 11th hijackers used Malaysia as a transit point and that some of the alleged perpetrators of the bomb attacks in Bali and Jakarta spent considerable time in the country.

But the Malaysian government has yet to demonstrate that any of the individuals it has detained have actually engaged in any illegal activity. More importantly, it has not shown that the investigation, arrest, and detention of alleged militants could not be handled through normal criminal procedures that include proper procedural safeguards to protect the rights of the accused. Without these safeguards, the Malaysian government cannot be sure that all of the men it has captured are in fact dangerous individuals planning to carry out attacks, or whether it has locked up men whose only crime was an interest in a small group of charismatic Muslim clerics.

Human rights protections can be harmonized with state security, but there is no indication that Malaysia has made any efforts to do so. A cornerstone of international human rights law is the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial before one’s liberty is taken away. With its broad use of the ISA and its refusal to bring these cases to trial, Malaysia has turned these principles on their head.

The Impact of the Guantanamo Bay Detentions

Although literally halfway around the world, the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay looms over the men held under the ISA—not so much the facility itself, but its symbolic value expressing a new acceptance of human rights violations in the name of fighting terrorism. Some ISA detainees have been told that they would be sent to Guantanamo if they failed to cooperate. Others were told that they shouldn’t complain about their detention under the ISA because, if they were released, U.S. authorities would pick them up and take them to Guantanamo, where they would face an uncertain future far from home.

Guantanamo and the U.S.-led “war on terror” influence ISA detainees in other ways. For decades the ISA has been regularly and harshly criticized by the U.S. for being part of a larger apparatus of repression. That the United States has not challenged the detention of these men under the ISA is a testament to the significant erosions in respect for international human rights norms since the attacks of September 11th. Discussing the ISA, a senior State Department official told Human Rights Watch that the U.S. government would take up cases such as those described in this report if the level of treatment was “worse than Guantanamo.”

The refusal of the U.S. to speak out against the ISA’s provisions and the detention of individuals without charge or trial reflects the reality of international relations in the post-September 11th era: the United States is reluctant to speak out on human rights violations that occur as a putative part of the U.S.-led “war on terror,” while many governments use the threat of terrorism to justify their own, longstanding practices of systematically violating basic human rights norms.

Recommendations

Human Rights Watch calls on the Malaysian government to immediately charge or release all ISA detainees and to thoroughly investigate widespread reports of threats, coercion, and abuse in detention. Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, who won election in March 2004 and has expressed interest in improving Malaysia’s human rights situation, should take urgent steps to abolish or amend the ISA to bring it into conformity with international human rights standards. Indefinite detention without trial cannot meet such standards. It has no place in the legal system of a country that in so many other fields has made gigantic strides in recent years.

Human Rights Watch calls on the governments of the United States, the European Union, Japan, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to press for the elimination of the ISA in Malaysia.

As a crucial step, the U.S. should stop overlooking or even supporting the Malaysian government’s use of the ISA on the ostensible grounds that it is cooperating with the U.S. in the “war on terror.” Cooperation between the U.S. and Malaysian governments on counter-terrorism must only be carried out in accordance with the basic human rights obligations of both countries. Malaysia has cooperated closely with the U.S. over the past two years, sharing information gleaned from interrogations of ISA detainees with U.S. government officials and, on at least two occasions, allowing U.S. government interrogators direct access to ISA detainees.

The U.S. has rewarded Malaysia’s cooperation on anti-terrorism handsomely: bilateral relations, which suffered as a result of Malaysia’s lackluster human rights record, have dramatically improved, and U.S. criticism of Malaysia’s human rights record, once highly vocal, has been muted. The United States should publicly and privately resume the principled position it has historically taken with Malaysia over the use of a law that is anathema to human rights principles.

[1]This report does not address the handful of individuals detained under the ISA on allegations of involvement with Shi’a Muslim religious groups, smuggling, or counterfeiting, all cause for ISA detentions in recent years. Given the consistency of treatment of individuals detained under the ISA, however, many of the concerns raised in this report would also apply to these other cases. Because of concerns for the safety and liberty of individuals who cooperated with Human Rights Watch, we have withheld the names of some interviewees.

The countdown begins

Whoever crosses the finishing line first with 112 Members of Parliament wins. And it could be Anwar or it could be Tengku Razaleigh. If it is Anwar, then Barisan Rakyat will form the new government, and if it is Tengku Razaleigh, then Barisan Nasional will remain in office.

Raja Petra Kamarudin

OPPOSITION READY TO FORM GOVT

Anwar says it's possible with BN defections

Malaysian opposition chief Anwar Ibrahim says he is moving towards forming a new government with the help of defectors from the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition.

"I don't know how soon we can form the new government, but we are moving in that direction," said the former Deputy Prime Minister, who was sacked and jailed a decade ago.

This comes as the opposition alliance said Anwar's wife, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, will be the opposition leader in Parliament, holding the post until her husband formally returns to politics.

A corruption conviction prevented Anwar from contesting the elections, but the ban will end in the middle of next month.

Dr Wan Azizah has said during the polls that she was her husband's proxy. She is expected to vacate her parliamentary seat after next month so that Anwar can contest a by-election there.

Anwar is expected to win easily and to officially take over the helm of Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR).

Dr Wan Azizah is officially the head of PKR, but Anwar is its de facto leader in his capacity as its adviser.

The post of the opposition leader in Parliament was previously held by the Democratic Action Party (DAP). But in the recent elections, PKR emerged as the largest opposition party - winning 31 seats to the 28 for DAP and 23 for Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS).

The opposition alliance of PKR, DAP and PAS seized more than a third of parliamentary seats and four more states from BN.

Anwar said coalition lawmakers from Malaysia's eastern states of Sabah and Sarawak on Borneo island had contacted him to discuss switching sides. The power bloc there could unseat the government if it changed hands.

"The MPs from there have come here to see me," Anwar said, adding that he was in no hurry to become the next Prime Minister, but that the opposition would already be in power if the polls had been clean and fair.

"I am maintaining that if there was no fraud in the election, we would have won. If we had 2 per cent more votes, we would have formed the new government," he said.

Anwar said Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's future was in jeopardy and that the ruling United Malays National Organisation was affected by infighting and looming defections.

Abdullah has dismissed Anwar's plans and refuted opposition claims that ruling party members want to defect after the election debacle. - AGENCIES, 20 March 2008

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

One day after the 8 March 2008 general election, Anwar Ibrahim flew to Sarawak and the following day he stopped over in Sabah before coming back to Kuala Lumpur. And the two-day flying visit to these two East Malaysian states was certainly not to catch up on the latest Iban or Dayak cultural shows. The three opposition parties had just swept 82 of the 222 Parliament seats plus now had control over five states and all it needed was another 30 seats to form a federal government with a simple majority of 112.

Sabah and Sarawak, which have a combined 53 seats in Parliament, make sense because about 80% of these seats are in non-Umno Barisan Nasional component members' hands. The opposition had made little in-roads in East Malaysia or else the opposition would by now have formed the federal government. One million 'new' voters from Indonesia and the Philippines ensured that Sabah would not be to PKR what Kelantan is to PAS.

There is little love-lost between East Malaysians and Umno. East Malaysians view Umno as a parti penjajah or a colonialist party. Many regret the move to allow Umno into Sabah, and although Umno is not quite in Sarawak yet, the many Umno flags flying all over the state give the impression that it is a matter of time before Umno moves into Sarawak as well. This 'visible' presence of Umno make Sarawakians very nervous and if they have to leave Barisan Nasional just to keep Umno out they would do just that.

“Kita orang Umno juga tidak suka Umno,” said one Sabah warlord who is an Umno division chief and a Member or Parliament. “Kita meyertai Umno kerana Umno berkuasa di Sabah tetapi kita harap Umno akan jatuh supaya kita boleh kembali ke parti asal.”

This sums up the sentiments of even those who can be viewed as Umno 'strongmen' in Sabah. “Saya mahu bertanding di atas tiket PKR tetapi Anwar Ibrahim beritahu kami jangan tinggal Umno untuk sementara waktu. Anwar suruh kami bertanding di atas tiket Umno dan kemudian, sekiranya pembangkang menang cukup kerusi, barulah kita keluar Umno dan menyertai pembangkang.”

Yes, there were many planned defections before the 8 March 2008 election but Anwar told them to stay put in Umno and Barisan Nasional and make sure that they win their seats first. Only if the opposition wins with a large enough minority and all it needs are those few extra seats to form the government should they leave the ruling coalition and join the opposition.

This was certainly a sound strategy because Sabah and Sarawak can always play the role of king-maker. And, considering that Sabah and Sarawak control about 24% of the seats in Parliament, they would be a most powerful king-maker indeed. And if Anwar agrees that Malaysia shall have two Deputy Prime Ministers and one of the two shall be rotated between Sabah and Sarawak, this would be enticing enough for the 50 odd Parliamentarians from Sabah and Sarawak to cross-over to the opposition to enable it to form the new federal government.

But Sabah and Sarawak are not the only discontented group. Even if just half the Sabah and Sarawak Members of Parliament cross-over this would be good enough. Thus far it is rumoured that 23 Barisan Nasional Parliamentarians have already agreed to cross-over. This means Anwar needs just seven more Parliament seats to form the federal government. And it will not be that difficult to find seven discontented Parliamentarians from amongst the 90 or so remaining from Peninsular Malaysia.

Anwar's job is cut out for him and he does not have to try too hard to find these discontented Parliamentarians. Umno President and Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is on self-destruct mode and his own moves are helping Anwar by the day. It makes one wonder whether Abdullah is intentionally shooting himself in his foot to make Anwar's life as easy as possible. Could Abdullah be secretly helping Anwar to take over just so that another nemesis, previous Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, fails in his effort to help Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak take over?

It is no secret that Mahathir wants Abdullah out and that he plans for Najib to take over. It is apparent that yesterday's Cabinet reshuffle was a cleansing exercise to rid the party of the Mahathir-Najib elements. But what this has achieved instead is to create many powerful enemies within the ranks of Umno who, before this, played low-key for fear of losing their positions but now no longer have anything left to hold them back. Abdullah would have been best-advised to keep his friends close and his enemies even closer the way Mahathir normally does. Now, Abdullah has isolated and antagonised his enemies and has allowed them to regroup into a golongan kecewa or discontented lot.

In the run-up to the 8 March 2008 general election, Abdullah and Najib made a pact whereby 60% of the candidates will be Abdullah's men while 40% will be Najib's. Then, on the eve of Nomination Day, Abdullah deviously amended the candidates' list and kicked out Najib's men. Najib was caught with his pants down, not to forget Rosmah's twisted knickers as well.

Now, the golongan kecewa no longer need to pretend that they support Abdullah just to protect their positions. They can now openly side with the anti-Abdullah faction. After all, they have nothing to lose any more, anyway.

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah is not sitting pretty as well. Since 2006, he has been holding secret meetings with Mahathir to explore the possibility of getting support from the Grand Old Man of Malaysian politics in his bid to mount a challenge for the Umno presidency. Mahathir is not against the idea of Tengku Razaleigh taking over but he wants Najib to be part of the equation. Maybe Tengku Razaleigh takes over for one term and then Najib takes over from there.

But Najib is a liability and Tengku Razaleigh does not feel that this running-mate will augur well for his image. Najib is carrying just too much baggage which will be very difficult to whitewash. So, the almost two-year negotiations with Mahathir has not gone any further than how it first started. Tengku Razaleigh can, of course, declare Mahathir as irrelevant and he can mount his bid with or without Mahathir's endorsement. This is not Tengku Razaleigh though. He would like to mount his challenge but he would like to do it with Mahathir's blessing. He may have his differences with Mahathir but he would not like to belakangkan the man who has been Prime Minister for 22 years and who was in fact the founder of Umno Baru, the party that Tengku Razaleigh intends to take over.

Mahathir is member number one and his wife, Tun Dr Siti Hasmah Ali, member number two in the members' registration list. This should account for something. Mahathir, therefore, should not be left out in determining the new power structure of Umno. How to get Mahathir to agree that he takes over from Abdullah but not with Najib as the number two and as the successor-in-waiting? This was Tengku Razaleigh's dilemma the last two years in his long-drawn negotiations with Mahathir.

But the time for negotiations has ended. Before the 8 March 2008 general election, Razaleigh had the luxury of time. After all, the party elections will not be till August 2008. But the way things are going, Abdullah may not last till August 2008. So Tengku Razaleigh has to move now or else, yet again, miss the boat.

Yesterday, in Kota Bharu, Tengku Razaleigh announced that he is going to make a bid for the Umno Presidency, which will then automatically make him the Prime Minister -- if Barisan Nasional can hold on to its 140 seats in Parliament. If he did not make this announcement then there is a possibility that no less than 30 Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament will cross-over to the opposition and the Barisan Nasional government will have to make way for the new Barisan Rakyat government.

The race is on and the countdown begins. Abdullah may not last till August 2008. Some have even boldly predicted that Abdullah may not last 30 days. Whether this is clairvoyance or wishful thinking we will of course know in time. But one thing is for sure, both Anwar Ibrahim and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah are in a race to see who will cross the finish line first and become the new Prime Minister of Malaysia.

Both Anwar and Tengku Razaleigh are acceptable to PAS and DAP. PKR, though, would prefer Anwar while many in Umno do not want to see Anwar become Prime Minister. So while both Anwar and Tengku Razaleigh are fishing in the same PAS-DAP pond, Anwar will have to look at PKR and the non-Umno Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament for support while Tengku Razaleigh will depend on the Umno Members of Parliament.

Whoever crosses the finishing line first with 112 Members of Parliament wins. And it could be Anwar or it could be Tengku Razaleigh. If it is Anwar, then Barisan Rakyat will form the new government, and if it is Tengku Razaleigh, then Barisan Nasional will remain in office. The earliest possible date for the challenge would be when Parliament convenes on 5 May 2008. If 112 Members of Parliament support a vote of no confidence on the Prime Minister then the Agong will have no choice but to appoint a new Prime Minister from amongst the 222 Members of Parliament. It is as simple as that. But whether they can get 112 Members of Parliament to do just that and which of the two, Anwar or Tengku Razaleigh, would lead that motion of no confidence is something we shall all have to bite our fingernails and wait to see what happens.

To the party members, it will make a a big difference as to whether Anwar or Tengku Razaleigh heads the new government. To the non-partisan voters, though, it does not matter which scenario prevails because both will bring about reforms. Anwar's agenda for reform is well-documented and needs not be repeated here. Tengku Razaleigh, however, is an unknown commodity and certainly quite an attraction to those who wish for changes but are not quite ready for a paradigm shift just yet.

Humans, just like all mammals, are creatures of habit and are resistant to change. Sure, the system has failed and it needs changing. But how much of a change should they risk? Should they go for an absolute change and take their chances with a Barisan Rakyat federal government of should they keep Barisan Nasional in office on condition that there is a leadership change?

Many want to first see how the five states under opposition control perform before opting for a complete change. Let them run these five states for five years and let us see whether we can trust them with the job of running the country, appears to be the popular sentiment. Not many are adventurous enough to dabble with the unknown. And it is not known yet whether Barisan Rakyat is capable of running the country. So Tengku Razaleigh as Prime Minister appears to be more comforting to most Malaysians than an opposition Anwar Ibrahim.

If Abdullah stays on then there would be no choice in the matter. If the only way to get Abdullah out would be to kick out Barisan Nasional then so be it. But if there is an alternative, and if this alternative involves a leadership change within Umno and Barisan Nasional, and if this new leader is the likes of Tengku Razaleigh, then this would be a 'gentler' and safer change than a paradigm shift.

Whether Anwar gets to form the new federal government will all depend on Tengku Razaleigh. If Tengku Razaleigh makes his move and appears to have some chance of success, then the people will wait and see what happens. But if Tengku Razaleigh does not make his move or appears to have no chance in hell of toppling Abdullah, then the people will look to Anwar for this change. And that is why, yesterday, Tengku Razaleigh was forced to announce his decision to challenge Abdullah. Now, Tengku Razaleigh has offered Malaysians two options instead of just one, Anwar Ibrahim. If Tengku Razaleigh had kept quiet and had waited until August to make his move, it may be too late. By then Anwar may already be the new Prime Minister of Malaysia. And as for Najib, well, he can always lead the Barisan Nasional golongan kecewa club which has grown very large indeed.

May 13? What May 13?

Another issue that is utmost sensitive to Malaysians, in particular to the non-Malays, is talk of May 13. Rest assured this will be one subject that will also be exploited to the hilt. As it is, the Umno-owned newspapers are already classifying the results of the March 2008 general election as a repeat of the May 1969 general election.


Raja Petra Kamarudin

Keng Yaik criticises DAP's stand

Gerakan adviser Datuk Seri Dr Lim Keng Yaik said he could not understand why DAP supports a menteri besar from Pas for Perak when Pas' objectives for a theocratic Islamic state remains unchanged.

His comments came as the new Perak menteri besar, Pasir Panjang state assemblyman and Perak Pas liaison secretary Muhammad Nizar Jamaluddin was sworn in before the Regent of Perak, Raja Dr Nazrin Shah, at Istana Iskandariah in Kuala Kangsar yesterday.

He blamed the younger party leaders in DAP for going against the principles set by older party stalwarts.

"Karpal has said 'over my dead body' before when Pas propagated its Islamic state policy.

"Immediately after the naming of a Pas menteri besar for Perak, DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang called for the boycott of the swearing-in ceremony by its party members.

"Why are they now supporting a Pas menteri besar?"

He added that it did not matter if it was the Perak royalty's choice, since the consensus was in the hands of the state assembly members.

"They could have pulled their weight and opposed it even though the palace picked Muhammad Nizar. Instead, they went ahead and supported it."

On another note, Dr Lim said he was surprised to hear comments by Pas vice-president Datuk Husam Musa that the opposition party was confident it could soon set up an Islamic federal government and that there was growing support among the Chinese and Indians for the party's political struggle.

"I find it hard to believe that the Chinese and Indians in Perak want this.

"I will fight against this policy till the very last, in keeping with our objective as a party which cuts across all racial lines." - NST

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

NST Editorial: Accepting the people's verdict

IN conferring on the rulers the right to appoint as menteri besar a member of the state legislative assembly who is likely to command the confidence of the majority of that body, the state constitutions seem to make it quite clear that the rulers have to accept whichever single party, or coalition of parties, that commands a majority in the state legislature.

In normal circumstances, the sultan has no choice but to appoint the person who is in the best position to receive the support of the majority in the state assembly. However, circumstances have been far from normal this past week.

In the case of Perak, it stems from the inconclusive outcome of the March 8 polls, in which no single party emerged with an outright majority. In the case of a "hung assembly" like the one in Perak, there was an element of choice because it was not clear who could command a majority and there appeared to have been three people who could claim to do so. In the event, the Regent of Perak performed his constitutional duty as a disinterested arbiter with dignity and distinction.

While the developments in Perak have been an electoral and constitutional rarity, the situation in Terengganu and Perlis should have been clear-cut cases where there should not have been any doubts about what needs to be done.

As it happened, it was the challenge to the custom that the national party leader has the final word on the appointment of the menteri besar, not a defiance of the constitution, that appears to have created all that uncertainty in Perlis. It is fundamentally a problem for the party. In any case, this is a matter of convention, rather than law, which does not have to be accepted without question.

The same cannot be said of the formal constitutional rules that define the ceremonial and official duties of the rulers. The written constitutions set out the limits to the discretionary power of the rulers in appointing a menteri besar.

Whatever their personal preferences and assessments, and whether or not they regard that person as the best man for the office, they are bound by the constitution to choose the individual most likely to command the support of the state assembly. As constitutional monarchs, they should not be dragged into political disputes.

Certainly, they have every right to be consulted on the appointments. But the rulers cannot arbitrarily make and unmake governments. This right properly belongs to the rakyat.

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

Pas should give up its avowed aim to turn the country into an Islamic state if it came to power, DAP national chairman Karpal Singh said yesterday.

Karpal said Pas should be realistic. "The Federal Constitution, clearly reflects that Malaysia is a secular state, not an Islamic state."

Karpal, who welcomed the clarification by Pas vice-president Husam Musa that his party would not be setting up an Islamic government at the federal level, added: "I call upon Pas to publicly state that Malaysia is a secular state."

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

A couple of days after the initial shock of Barisan Nasional's 'defeat' in the 8 March 2008 general election had worn off, Umno held a post-mortem at its headquarters. The meeting was chaired by Umno's Secretary-General and the purpose of the solemn gathering was to find out what went wrong.

In a pre-election meeting in Sabah a few weeks earlier, Prime Minister and Umno President Abdullah Ahmad Badawi told the gathering of Umno chiefs that 'this election is going to be the first election in 50 years since Merdeka that the voters will vote based on candidates'. The voters will decide who to vote for based on the background of the candidates and not based on which party the candidates represent, argued Abdullah, so the candidates Barisan Nasional fields is going to be a very important element.

That has now been proven terribly wrong. If you consider some of the candidates that the opposition fielded, you can't help but wonder, out of 26 million Malaysians, or at least 15 million Malaysians of voting age, aren't there any other suitable candidates they could find? To be fair though, overall, many of the opposition candidates are more capable and more qualified that the Barisan Naisonal candidates. But there are a handful who leave much to be desired. Surprisingly, however, these 'lesser' candidates managed to beat the higher-profile Barisan Nasional candidates.

This election was not about the candidates at all. It was not even about the strength of the opposition parties. It was about 'anyone but Barisan Nasional', as Hishamuddin Rais put it. But who was the one who gave Abdullah this misinformation? Was this a deliberate attempt to mislead Abdullah? It appears like there are certain elements within Umno, or probably within the intelligence agencies, who wanted to lead Abdullah up the garden path. Abdullah's reading of the voters was totally off. Barisan Nasional made a tactical blunder and this blunder was because of the misinformation that was presented to it.

PAS, however, appears to be more savvy and in touch with the ground. It knew that Kedah, Penang, Perak and Selangor would fall and it transferred many of its key players to these four states. It also knew that Terenggnu was an uphill battle so PAS advised its candidates to forget about Terengganu and instead focus on Kedah, Penang, Perak and Selangor where they would be assured of winning. PAS also knew that it would gain more ground in Kelantan and that Kedah would be added to the states under PAS control. That was why it was ready to form the government even before Malaysians took to the polls, and which is why there was little delay in forming the new governments in these states. If anyone was caught off-guard it was DAP and PKR, and of course Barisan Nasional.

DAP's Lim Guan Eng did not have such optimism and he almost did not contest in Penang. He was very undecided and only after persistent coaxing from his many supporters in Penang did he eventually take the plunge -- but even then not really knowing whether he was committing political hara kiri by contesting in a state they were not sure whether they would be massacred or emerge the victor. His wishy-washy decision to contest in Penang paid off though and now he is the Chief Minister of that state. The same went for Karpal's Singh's son, Gobind Singh Deo, who almost contested in Johore -- whereby if he had he would not, today, be the Member of Parliament for Puchong, Selangor (or a Member of Parliament at all for that matter). Comparing PAS to DAP, PAS knew exactly which seats in which states to contest whereas DAP was wishy-washy and kept changing its mind many times, not really sure which was the best decision to take.

This is probably because of the different aspirations of PAS and DAP. PAS contests the elections with intent to form the government whereas DAP just wants to deny Barisan Nasional its two-thirds majority so that Malaysians can enjoy the benefit of a strong opposition. Yes, PAS wants to be the government whereas DAP just wants to be a strong opposition, but still an opposition nevertheless. This is the difference in 'culture' between PAS and DAP. And PKR, of course, just wants to ensure that Anwar Ibrahim becomes the next Prime Minister of Malaysia by any and all means possible.

It is very difficult to reconcile the three different 'cultures' of PAS, DAP and PKR. But, today, their paths have inevitably crossed and, whether they like it or not, their fortunes are intertwined and just as inseparable as Siamese triplets. They need one another to be able to have a big enough majority to form the government in most of the five states the opposition now controls so they need to continue being Siamese triplets or die.

But the problem is, PAS, DAP and PKR do not share the same brain. Because of this, each thinks differently. What a dilemma they face when their hearts beat as one while their heads tell them opposite things.

And this is what the government-controlled mainstream media is going to exploit to the hilt. Since PAS, DAP and PKR share the same heart but think differently, can they drive a wedge into the three and cause their hearts to separate as well? If this can be done, then the opposition coalition will collapse because once their hearts move away from one another the coalition will certainly die an untimely death. Reading the above news reports from the mainstream media tells the whole story. Keng Yaik is raising the spectre of Islam and is attempting to put DAP on the defensive. NST's editorial slams the Rulers in a hope that the hate campaign will escalate. In short, Islam is bad, the Chinese have sold out, the Malays are losing out to the Chinese, and the Rulers need to be put in their place.

It started with The Star reporting Husam Musa as having declared that Malaysia will be turned into an Islamic State once PAS gains control of the federal government. That is at least what the heading in the news report said although if you read on you will not find any mention of it in the news item. What The Star hoped would happen is that Malaysians would read the heading without actually reading the news report and based on this heading alone the non-Muslims will rise up in anger.

The government knows that some DAP leaders always react to mainstream newspaper reports in spite of most Malaysians no longer believing what the government-controlled media says. And, true to form, Karpal Singh did react and demanded that PAS make a public declaration that Malaysia is a Secular State and will remain so.

Instead of demanding that PAS make this public declaration, it would make more sense if Karpal takes a deep breath, count to ten, and then come out with his rebuttal of the news report by the MCA-owned newspaper. Being a prominent lawyer and long-time politician who never asks nor gives his adversaries any quarters, Karpal could have easily torn The Star to pieces.

I have personally seen Karpal in action in both the courts and Parliament and he could have easily ripped The Star into a million pieces even while sitting in his wheelchair. But he did not do that. Instead, he aimed his sights on PAS whereas he could have aimed it at The Star and this is exactly what the government spin machinery anticipated he would do and he did as anticipated.

Karpal could have brilliantly argued, as he always brilliantly argues in court and Parliament, that PAS contested merely 65 Parliament seats and won less that half the seats it contested. It would need at least 150 seats in Parliament to amend the Federal Constitution of Malaysia to allow it to transform Malaysia into an Islamic State. Alas, Karpal did not do this and instead demanded that PAS declare they harboured no ambitions of transforming Malaysia into an Islamic State.

If Karpal had 'defended' PAS by rebutting The Star report and by declaring the news report as a pack of lies, the perception created would be that DAP and PAS are of one heart though they may think differently. Now, the opposite perception has been created and Barisan Nasional knows that if it mentions 'PAS' and 'Islamic State' in the same breath that would get the DAP leaders hot around the collar.

The opposition, in particular DAP, has to know how to separate fact from spin and not react too fast to any mainstream media spin. Even before the five opposition-led state governments could take their oath of office, a plan was hatched to sabotage the state governments and drive a wedge into the fragile opposition alliance. All Barisan Nasional needs is for just one of the three opposition coalition members to break away and the state government of Perak and Selangor would fall. And this will ensure that the disgust of the voters will achieve the rest come next election when the other states would be given back to Barisan Nasional as well, save maybe for Kelantan.

Another issue that is utmost sensitive to Malaysians, in particular to the non-Malays, is talk of May 13. Rest assured this will be one subject that will also be exploited to the hilt. As it is, the Umno-owned newspapers are already classifying the results of the March 2008 general election as a repeat of the May 1969 general election. Though the newspapers did not quite say so, a 'whispering' and SMS campaign has been launched to give an impression that a similar 'post-1969' remedy to the ruling party 'defeat' is in the cards.

The police have responded by warning the public that any 'rumour-mongering' of race riots a la May 13 will be severely dealt with. Actually, not many Malaysians have heard this rumour. However, since the police 'warning', many who were not aware of this rumour have now been made aware of it. And Malaysians are such. Rumours are believed because most rumours in Malaysia have in the end proven to be fact. When Abdullah denied the rumour that Parliament would be dissolved and the following day he did just that, that proved rumours are not rumours but fact. When Abdullah denied he was getting married and soon after that Malaysia was entertained to the thrills of a 'first family' wedding, that too proved rumours are not rumours but fact. So, all you need to do is to deny the rumour of an impending race riot and most Malaysians would rush out to buy extra stocks of rice and sardines.

It is easy to fool Malaysians into believing rumours. Just spread the rumour far and wide and get someone in authority to deny it. Thereon the rumour becomes the gospel.

The opposition is no help either. All this talk of 'no to an Islamic State' and 'no more NEP' are stuff discontentment is made of. After all, it is not the government that is saying all this but the opposition itself. Therefore, all they need to do is raise issues like Muslims are restless and Malays are unhappy and this is all it takes to start the rush to stock up with rice and sardines.

But 1969 was different. In 1969, opposition meant Chinese and Indians and ruling party meant Malays. So, if you separate Malaysia into opposition and ruling party, then the country gets separated into non-Malays and Malays as well. Therefore, when the ruling party loses and the opposition wins this also means that the Malays lose and the non-Malays win. This is a perfect formula for racial conflict.

Today, ruling party and opposition can no longer be separated by race. It was the non-Malays who suffered most in the recent general election when the ruling party got trounced in many states. And the opposition that trounced it is a mix of Malays, Chinese and Indians. The ruling party loss was not a Malay loss and the opposition win was not a non-Malay win. In fact, four of the five opposition-led states have Malay Menteris Besar. How can you say that the Chinese won these states? Furthermore, in states like Selangor and Perak, Chinese votes alone could not have delivered the states to the opposition. The Malays and Indians helped as well. It was either a partnership of all races or nothing at all.

The Malays realise that with the fall of the five states they have lost nothing. The Chinese and Indians also realise that the Malays are very important to the cause and that a unity of all races is crucial to an opposition win. Furthermore, Malays, Chinese and Indians all realise that state governments can only be formed and kept in place if PAS, DAP and PKR stay united and don't break up. It is not to the interest of the Malays, Chinese and Indians to start anything. Anyway, there is no reason to start anything because no one has lost out in the new formula.

And this is where the Mamaks come in. Mamaks are Indian Muslims. Some years back, the Indian Muslims and Indian Hindus in Penang clashed over the proximity of a temple and a mosque which both sides alleged was 'disturbing' them. Resulting from this misunderstanding, some bloody clashes erupted which threatened to turn into a blood bath such as what we have frequently-enough witnessed in India. Anwar Ibrahim was forced to personally go down to the ground to prevent what was about to turn into another 'May 13'.

Last Friday, 1,000 or so Mamaks organised a demonstration in front of the Penang State Government headquarters. They were upset that a 'Chinese' Chief Minister had announced the end of the New Economic Policy in Penang. The Malays were not upset. The Malays did not come out to protest. In fact, PAS even endorsed the announcement and said that it agreed with the proposal. But the Mamaks were upset and they demonstrated their displeasure last Friday.

The Mamaks want the government to pass a law that makes calling them 'Mamak' illegal. They want laws passed so that those who continue calling them Mamaks can be sent to jail. And they want a new law passed to declare all Mamaks as Malays and to call them Malays and not Mamaks from thereon.

The Mamaks, therefore, have to demonstrate that they are more Malay than the Malays and more Muslim that the Arabs. And to prove this they came out to demonstrate against Lim Guan Eng's announcement that the NEP in Penang would end even if the Malays themselves could not be bothered and even if PAS supports Guan Eng's announcement. In a nutshell, the Mamaks are ashamed that they were born as Indians and insist they be classified as Malays.

But the Malays will not respond to the Mamaks' call to take to the streets, in particular the PAS and PKR Malays. In fact, the only reason the PAS and PKR Malays come out is to ensure that the Mamaks do not run riot and start spilling Chinese blood. Yes, May 13 can never happen again in spite of the rise of the Mamaks. The Malays will ensure that no wannabe Malay Mamaks will upset the peace, stability and tranquillity that exists between the Malays, Chinese and Indian Hindus. As for the Indian Muslims.....well, they need to earn their Malayness so allow them this little sideshow to enable them to go to the government and say, “Are we Malay enough for you now?”