The Other Side Of Hindraf

In the midst of focus on ISA detentions and the banning of Hindraf, many are unreservedly supporting them driven by the emotion that ISA arrests cause. By now, the reasons that shot Hindraf into prominence have been either forgotten or considered not important anymore and the issue is being politicized instead. No doubt ISA arrests of anyone whether Hindraf’s leaders, Raja Petra or the countless other unsung individuals languishing in Kamunting should be condemned and we ought to support all efforts to free these people.

However we need to take stock of the causes of the Hindraf leaders’ current predicament by doing an objective analysis of their activities so that any decision whether to support or condemn them is educated, devoid of emotion and free from manipulation whether by politicians in the BN or Pakatan and NGOs.

The crux of Hindraf’s grievance is that Indians have been deprived of their right to economic prosperity in Malaysia and that the Hindus’ freedom of religion is being curbed. For a start, the focus on Hindu rights by using the Indian platform raises the question on whose cause Hindraf is really championing i.e. whether Hindu or Indian as large segments of Indians in Malaysia are not Hindus but either Muslim,Sikhs or Christian.

No doubt segments within the Indian community, like other minorities in Malaysia, are facing genuine economic issues and deserve help and intervention from the Government. Whilst these economic issues are not unique to the Indians, the specific challenge Indians experience is the mass dislocation from plantations with the Government failing to provide support to minimize the personal difficulties and social problems that such large scale disruptions cause.

However, Hindraf has encapsulated the genuine cries for help within a catalogue of grievances and accusations against the authorities, either cunningly calculated to smear the Government abroad or alternatively in a manner that shows Hindraf’s own inability to actually understand and articulate the causes of the Indian’s woes and more importantly, prioritize those that have a better chance of being addressed by the Government.

Hindraf accuses the Government of ethnic cleansing and genocide by citing the Kg Medan skirmish and cases of deaths of Indians in incidents handled by the police. Hindraf’s leaders being mostly lawyers surely understand what ethnic cleansing and genocide entail and that the number of deaths of Indians cited whilst questionable and even if correct is not even a tiny shade of the atrocities witnessed in Cambodia, Bosnia, Rwanda etc. Of course that does not mean that we should not regret these deaths but the issue is really that these are related to crimes involving the individuals. The police handling of these cases has been the subject of much debate and it is important to note that the police’s behavior has been the same in pursuing criminals like the Chinese triads in the 1970’s and 1980’s and currently Indonesians and Malays as well. So the issue is really about the Police’s behavior and not about the government having a grand strategy to obliterate Indians in Malaysia. The accusation of ethnic cleansing by the Government is thus not only mischievous but also wicked and calculated to cast Malaysia into disrepute in the international arena.

Hindraf claims that the Government is systematically denying Hindus the freedom to practice their religion by citing the 80 odd temple demolitions over the years. Hindraf however fails to provide the context that there are 17000 Hindu temples in Malaysia and that they key issue is that many are at odds with local planning regulations and in many cases also need to make way for development as the plantations within which they are sited are being redeveloped.

For quite some time now, the Malaysian Hindu Sangam has been talking about proposing an approach to regulate the development of Hindu temples but nothing much has been achieved and Hindraf itself appears to be at odds with others within the community on this issue. No doubt the Government’s passive stand on this matter has not helped but the community itself needs to be clear and realistic on its expectations. In particular the demand that every temple be relocated or preserved irrespective of the present size of the community in the locality is not realistic as mass migration of Hindus due to redevelopment of plantations has caused the population of Hindus in the vicinity of many temples to decline significantly.

Hindraf has cleverly avoided placing the Hindu temple issue in Malaysia in perspective considering that minorities including Hindus and Muslims elsewhere such as in Singapore, USA and Europe etc not only do not have such an extensive network of places of worship but Muslims in particular are widely stigmatized by society. Hindus in Malaysia are not beset by such concerns and Hindraf needs to be honest and acknowledge the that the degree of freedom Hindus have in Malaysia is unparalleled.

In pursuing its agenda, Hindraf has on occasions suggested that if their demands are not met, Malaysian Indians could potentially emulate the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka and become terrorists. If Hindraf is responsible and sensible, it would realize that it is extremists amongst Tamils in Sri Lanka that have brought upon untold suffering for the community there and that no sensible Malaysian Indian should even think about emulating the LTTE.

Hindraf’s leaders are also arrogant and think that they are king makers in Malaysian politics. After routing the MIC in the last general elections, they made numerous demands for positions in Pakatan Rakyat governments and when not all could be fulfilled, Hindraf threatened to withdraw support. The PKR MP Manickavasagam recently threatened to resign from the party over the demolition of the Hindu temple in Ampang.

Further, Hindraf has sued the British government over their purported failure to protect the rights of Indians in Malaysia. Yet at the same time, Hindraf is seeking the British Prime Minister’s help to solve their problems in Malaysia and their leader is seeking asylum there. By suing the British Government, Hindraf is biting the very hand that they are asking to feed them!

In a nut shell, Indians do have problems but this is not unique to them but also applicable to many minorities including Bumiputras, largely due to issues related to the New Economic Policy and the Government’s poor handling of ethnic relations. It is certainly laudable for Malaysians including Hindraf to take up this cause but the approach needs to be governed by integrity, wisdom, responsibility and a sense of reasonableness. Thus far Hindraf’s leaders have not passed this test and they are misleading Indians into blindly supporting them. All Hindraf has achieved is highlighting their issue but they have no chance of delivering solutions. Indians would be well advised to look for new leadership who are not only wiser and mature but responsible enough to adopt strategies that have a better chance of success.

Pak Lah Deserves Credit

My first assessment of Pak Lah as a leader of Malaysia was when he was delivering the traditional prime minister’s Hari Raya Aidil Fitri address to the nation over TV soon after taking over from Dr Mahathir in October 2003. Pak Lah’s speech was refreshing as he chose to celebrate the occasion in the true sense of community building that Aidil Fitri is intended to be and not use it as yet another occasion to spin politics like what Dr Mahathir used to do. Soon after that Pak Lah came out with a raft of promises that created a sense of optimism amongst Malaysians and he went on to win an unprecedented victory in the 2004 general elections. The 2004 victory however proved to be hollow as hardly five years later he was delivered an unprecedented loss in the March 2008 general elections and has now been driven to retire rather unceremoniously.

So has Pak Lah really failed Malaysians as a leader? The answer to this question really depends on how we choose to measure his success.

As for me, the measures that I use to assess Pak Lah’s performance as a Prime minister include those related to where Dr Mahathir, to put it charitably, had little interest in. True, Dr Mahathir managed to develop the Malaysian economy and create recognition abroad, albeit not always positively. During his tenure, Dr Mahathir was all too consumed about economic development and which was to be implemented according to his interpretation of what the country and people needed with scant attention to engaging the many stakeholders in this country who were often considered as an impediment to progress. To Dr Mahathir, the legitimacy of his style of governance was to be tested at the ballot box both national and UMNO. Having won an election however flawed the process and size of victory was, he assumed that he had complete authority to manage the country with no room and tolerance for competing views including civil society, political opposition and institutions like the judiciary. Further, the economic largesse of this country belonged to those who had voted for the Barisan Nasional and to those in positions of power in UMNO and their key allies in the BN.

The results of Dr Mahathir’s economic policies and style of governance are at best patchy. There are indeed successes but also significant failures with the size of the latter increasingly eclipsing the former towards the end of his administration. Not to forget, corruption and wastage with neither a sense of remorse nor intent to overcome. Add to this, a talent vacuum not only to succeed him but also at many echelons of the political leadership of this country and his recent statement that all the aspirants for the post of UMNO deputy president other than Muhyiddin Yassin are ‘jokers’ is an indictment of his governance of UMNO. In short, Dr Mahathir left behind a legacy of having contributed to the prosperity of Malaysians during his tenure but a governance system and policies which ironically threatened the sustainability of the very economic development that he was and continues to be preoccupied with.

It was thus indeed courageous and honest of Pak Lah to recognise, accept and lay bare the many aspects of governance and economic management that needed to be overhauled and fixed failing which we risked not only losing all that we had achieved but also missing out on opportunities. The ensuing baring of the closet with the skeletons spilling out into the open whilst ghastly was something that was necessary to show Malaysians the criticality of the crisis facing this country. Not many politicians would have dared to expose such shortcomings of a predecessor who whilst no longer in power, had left behind not only an ideology but also a whole network of people who not only still swore allegiance to him but also revered his persona. Pak Lah could have chosen to sweep things under the carpet and live in denial but he did not and that in itself is an act of leadership.

However, the issues recognised by Pak Lah were not new but things that have been aired and debated for years by stakeholders outside the administration such as the political opposition and civil society which Dr Mahathir considered not credible and worthy of engagement. Pak Lah’s contribution was thus to give credibility to these issues and it made a big impact on the voter’s minds who have been conditioned to think that UMNO/BN are saintly and can only do good. No doubt the proliferation of cyber media tremendously altered perceptions of Malaysian voters but the fodder was provided by the gamut of issues which were not only denied but recognised overtly and subtly by Pak Lah. Whether Pak Lah’s action was yet another aspect of his inaptitude is irrelevant as the result is that the ground was made fertile for the emergence of strong and credible alternative competing political forces in Malaysia.

Pak Lah’s failure to deliver his promises is not surprising. In any case, not many serious critics of Malaysian politics expected that he could do so anyway, not because of a lack of resolve and sincerity but the lack of aptitude and gumption on his part to effect the change in the face of powerful resisting forces. His agenda for change thus remained propaganda spewed by his sycophants and spin masters to sustain their relevance in his administration. Whether Pak Lah gets a chance to deliver his promised reforms during his remaining days is no longer relevant, for even if he does, there’s not much optimism that these reforms would be implemented by the new administration. Instead these new pieces of legislation could yet become new legal tools to be selectively used for political expediency, a hallmark of the BN. Bear in mind that Malaysia has one of the best set of laws in the world but it is poor and selective implementation that creates injustice and mars our reputation.

The responsibility and hope to bring about significant change in Malaysia thus resides with forces outside UMNO and BN be it politicians or civil society. Pak Lah’s contribution to this would have been giving the stamp of approval on the case for change from within UMNO/BN and Malaysians should give him due credit because it is no mean feat given the constraints he has worked within and the herculean challenge that he dared venture into. Credit however should not be to the extent of idolizing him as ‘Bapa Demokrasi’ as proposed by Koh Tsu Koon for it would be the continuation of yet another unhealthy aspect of UMNO/BN culture which hero worships its leaders. Objective analysis would show that all of our leaders have had their share of successes and failures and glorifying them would deny future generations the right learning opportunities that history can provide.

Ramadhan In The Desert

It’s the time of the year again, the most significant month in the Muslim calendar when Muslims observe the fast from dawn to dusk for twenty nine or thirty days, depending on when the moon for the next month of Syawal is sighted. More significantly for me, it is the second Ramadhan in this bustling Arabian Gulf country which is developing at breakneck speed, rolling out projects to supply energy to the world and sort of trying to catch up, if not overtake the rest of world in terms of transforming its landscape with all the icons of modernity commonly seen as symbols of progress and prosperity.

In a few years from now, it is the Arabian Gulf countries which will boast the latest icons in the world, where the fantasies of engineers, architects and contractors are being turned into reality here in one of the most arid deserts in the world. A manifestation of the frantic pace of activity is the evidence that a quarter of the world’s construction tower cranes are currently operating in the Arabian Gulf, not to mention its voracious appetite for steel and cement.

Ramadhan this time around and for the next several years coincides with the summer season in the Arabian countries, a result of the peculiarity of the Muslim calendar which is ten days shorter than the Gregorian calendar. The timing of Ramadhan relative to the Gregorian calendar thus continues to advance every year. Whilst Ramadhan in the last couple of years occurred during the milder winter period, it is now progressing smack into the summer and once again gives credence to its meaning in Arabic where the word ‘Ramad’ means an extremely hot month. The significance of this in the Arabian Gulf countries is that fasting in the summer months is a lot more challenging than during winter and can at times test your faith to the limit, more so if the nature of your work requires you to spend significant periods of time exposed to the sun.

To the uninitiated, summer in the Arabian Gulf countries is nothing like a typical balmy English summer where temperatures average 20 degrees Celsius with a lot of rain. Instead, summer here, typically from May to September, is rather challenging with temperatures above 45 degrees Celsius and humidity levels reaching 75% at times. Add to this, periodic episodes of severe dust storms which last for days at a stretch and you have hot, humid and dusty days to contend with. The degree of discomfort outdoors is beyond description and you need to experience it to really appreciate how kind mother-nature is to countries such as the likes of Malaysia.

It is during Ramadhan especially this time around that one begins to appreciate the blessings of having a job that confines yourself to the comforts of a comfortable air conditioned office. That unfortunately is not the privilege of a large segment of the millions of people currently working in the Arabian Gulf where large numbers of them are deployed on construction sites and other service sectors which require working outside in extreme weather conditions.

Ramadhan and Eid-ul-Fitri which comes at the end of the month long fasting is also a period which Muslims spend with their families. That again is another privilege that only a limited number of high paid expatriates in the Arabian Gulf enjoy. A majority of expatriate workers in the Arabian Gulf being blue collar workers and laborers live here as bachelors and can look forward to home visits back to their countries only once every three to four years. In between home visits, the only contact these men have with their family back home is a telephone call and even that is relatively expensive on the normal telecoms service. So every Friday, the off-day, hordes of these men flock at places like internet cafes and others that offer cheap phone services to call back home.

Iftar or the break of fast time sees hordes of men making a bee line to the many places where sumptuous food is offered free by many generous well endowed persons to the hungry and thirsty who are just waiting for that call to the dusk prayer which marks the end of fast for that day. Notwithstanding the fact that food is plentiful, it is not unusual to see many a hungry man rushing and guarding his food as if that would be the last ration before famine sets in, something reminiscent of scenes at Malaysian public festive open houses. Such is human nature where the grab for food and water is a behavior that transcends nationalities!

Prayer time at the mosques, especially during Ramadhan sees huge congregations of people of diverse nationalities so much so that a mini United Nations convention can be held on these occasions. At these prayer congregations, men stand in rows next to each other transcending nationalities and their current stations in life. It would not be unusual to find an immaculately dressed man in his flowing white robes complete with head cover and smothered in aromatic oriental perfume on your one side but yet have a another man dressed in his smelly sweat drenched work clothes standing on your other side. That is the beauty of the mosque which is but the only real level playing field that one can find in life.

Ramadhan would be nothing but a daily ritual of thirst and hunger if one does not take the opportunity to reflect deeply about one’s life experiences both spiritual and worldly with the accompanying resolution to do better. This Ramadhan I am moved to reflect upon the fortunes of the millions of less privileged expatriate workers who are destined to spend a lifetime away from their families in far-away lands to earn a living to support themselves and their families who ironically barely exist in their lives. These are courageous men who have the tenacity to cross oceans in search of a living forced by the lack of jobs in their economically and socially challenged countries. It makes me wonder if such a situation would arise in Malaysia, which increasingly looks likely and if faced with such circumstances, whether Malaysians will have the skills, psyche, courage and tenacity to seek their fortunes overseas. More importantly, will Malaysians join the ranks of the privileged or less privileged expatriates?

For how long can we believe the lie that ‘semuanya ok’ in Malaysia and that our politicians are acting in the best interest of the rakyat? I am convinced that the time would come, sooner rather than later when Malaysians would have to join our fellow nomadic cousins in search of fortunes wherever they exist and that will have to include abroad. That however requires a totally different set of skills and mindset which our education system unfortunately does not adequately equip our youth with. Thus in reviewing the policy of teaching Mathematics and Science in English, politicians who are advocating for a change of one of the better policies of the Mahathir era will only be jeopardizing the future well being of our children.