The unstopple Anwar: Najib Teeny Weeny Approach Won’t Do called on the government not to hoodwink the people by hijacking aspects of his party’s new economic agenda
June 28, 2009 · Leave a Comment
ANWAR: NAJIB TEENY WEENY APPROACH WON’T DO
BY TERENCE NETTO@WWW.MALAYSIAKINI.COM
PKR ADVISER ANWAR IBRAHIM TODAY CALLED ON THE GOVERNMENT NOT TO HOODWINK THE PEOPLE BY HIJACKING ASPECTS OF HIS PARTY’S NEW ECONOMIC AGENDA AND MOCKED WHAT HE SAID WERE HALF-COCKED REVISIONS OF REPRESSIVE STATUES LIKE THE INTERNAL SECURITY ACT.
“EITHER THE GOVERNMENT GOES THE FULL DISTANCE BY IMPLEMENTING POLICIES THAT ALLEVIATE THE PLIGHT OF THE MARGINALISED SUCH AS WHAT THE OPPOSITION HAS BEEN CALLING FOR OR IT IS BUSINESS AS USUAL,” SAID ANWAR IN REMARKS MADE TO MALAYSIAKINI AFTER A MEETING OF HIS PARTY’S CENTRAL LEADERSHIP COUNCIL AT ITS HEADQUARTERS IN KELANA JAYA.
THE MEETING WAS HELD PARTLY TO PREPARE THE TOP TIER OF PKR LEADERSHIP FOR THE WORST-CASE SCENARIO SHOULD HIS TRIAL FOR SODOMY BEGINNING IN A FEW DAYS EVENTUATE IN ITS ADVISER’S INCARCERATION. AFTER THE MEETING, THE PKR SUPREMO ADDRESSED A HOST OF NATIONAL ISSUES IN A RAPID-FIRE MANNER AT THE END OF A WEEK THAT BEGAN WITH HIS BROKERING AN AGREEMENT WITHIN PAS ON DESISTING IN ITS PLANS FOR UNITY TALKS WITH UMNO AND RENEWING COMMITMENT AMONG PAKATAN RAKYAT’S PARTNERS – PAS, PKR AND DAP – ON A DECLARATION TO REPLACE THE BN AT THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION.
ANWAR SAID THAT THERE WAS NO POINT IN BN’S “PICKING ONE PLANK OF OUR AGENDA AND THEN ANOTHER JUST TO SEE IF THEIR POPULARITY RATINGS GO UP”.
IMPROVE TEACHING OF ENGLISH FIRST
THE PKR SUPREMO ALSO CASTIGATED THE GOVERNMENT’S DECISION TO REQUIRE STUDENTS TO PASS ENGLISH IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A MALAYSIAN CERTIFICATE OF EDUCATION (SPM). “THIS IS LIKE PUTTING THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE,” CRACKED ANWAR ABOUT THE RECENT ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE EDUCATION MINISTER THAT A PASS IN ENGLISH WOULD BE MADE COMPULSORY AT SPM LEVEL FROM NEXT YEAR. “
IN THE FIRST PLACE, THE POLICY OF TEACHING SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS IN ENGLISH IS FOUND TO BE AN ABJECT FAILURE, PARTICULARLY IN RURAL SCHOOLS AND IN THE DEEP INTERIOR. NOW THE GOVERNMENT COMPOUNDS THEIR BETRAYAL OF BAHASA MALAYSIA AS THE NATIONAL LANGUAGE WITH A REQUIREMENT THAT WOULD FURTHER BURDEN DISADVANTAGED PUPILS,” HE SAID.
“THERE IS A DEFINITE NEED TO IMPROVE THE STANDARD OF THE TEACHING OF ENGLISH AND ITS FLUENCY AMONG STUDENTS IN SECONDARY AND TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS. BUT BEFORE THE RESOURCES TO ACHIEVE THAT ARE IN PLACE, A MOVE TO MAKE A PASS IN ENGLISH COMPULSORY AT SPM LEVEL WOULD AGGRAVATE THE PRESENT FAILURE OF THE POLICY TO TEACH SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS IN ENGLISH,” ANWAR ASSERTED.
“SCIENCE AND MATHS MUST BE TAUGHT IN BAHASA MALAYSIA IN NATIONAL SCHOOLS AND IN MANDARIN AND TAMIL IN VERNACULAR SCHOOLS,” HE DEMANDED.
IS NAJIB A CHINESE AGENT NOW?
COMMENTING ON PRIME MINISTER NAJIB ABDUL RAZAK’S ANNOUNCEMENT THAT A NEW CATEGORY OF MERIT-BASED SCHOLARSHIPS WOULD BE CREATED NEXT YEAR FOR DESERVING STUDENTS, IRRESPECTIVE OF RACE, ANWAR SAID: “THE PKR POLICY HAS BEEN IN FAVOUR OF AID TO THE DESERVING AND THE UNDERPRIVILEGED IRRESPECTIVE OF RACE. NOW THE BN WANTS TO HIJACK OUR AGENDA. WHEN WE ANNOUNCED OUR AGENDA, I WAS DERIDED AS A CHINESE AGENT, EVEN A JEWISH CONSPIRATOR, AMONG OTHER THINGS.”
“I WONDER WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO CALL NAJIB NOW THAT HE APPEARS TO BE TAKING A LEAF OF OUR BOOK,” SAID ANWAR. HE SAID THE GOVERNMENT’S ANNOUNCEMENT THAT LEGISLATION LIKE THE ISA WOULD BE AMENDED WAS EYEWASH.
“THEY SAY THEY ARE GOING TO CHANGE OR MODIFY THIS AND THAT BUT IN THE CRUNCH, IT WILL BE SEEN THAT THERE ARE NO MAJOR CHANGES. REALITY DOES NOT MATCH THE RHETORIC,” COMMENTED ANWAR.
PKR ADVISER ANWAR IBRAHIM TODAY CALLED ON THE GOVERNMENT NOT TO HOODWINK THE PEOPLE BY HIJACKING ASPECTS OF HIS PARTY’S NEW ECONOMIC AGENDA AND MOCKED WHAT HE SAID WERE HALF-COCKED REVISIONS OF REPRESSIVE STATUES LIKE THE INTERNAL SECURITY ACT.SPEACH BY ANWAR IBRAHIM AT “BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES IN THE MUSLIM WORLD” CONFERENCE IN WASHINGTON DC, JUNE 26 2009.
Ladies and Gentleman, respected guests, friends and colleagues from the United States and throughout the Muslim world.
I must apologize to the organizers, US Chamber of Commerce, CIPE, US Muslim World Engagement Project and to the guests attending today that I cannot be with you in person.
I have fond memories of the time I spent in Washington DC. This visit would have offered a much anticipated opportunity to visit friends and colleagues. However, as you may know, I have a rather difficult time dealing with the Malaysian Courts. No matter how we demonstrate their inadequacies in trying to prosecute against me they remain relentless in their resolve to inconvenience me. Consequently, I must make a series of previously unscheduled appearances in Court this week.
The stakes are high, so high indeed that we are once again witnessing the emasculation of the judiciary at the hands of the Executive. It is clear that the strategy is to have me incarcerated in order to stem the tide for greater freedom and democracy but I can say for sure that they are mistaken.
May I begin by saying that commerce and enterprise have been one of the primary mechanisms through which the Muslim world has engaged its neighbors to the East and West. Muslim traders and businessmen were among the primary agents of what we can accurately describe as globalization in the early centuries of the advent of Islam. While these early Muslims were possessed of a certain zeal to spread their newfound faith, one cannot deny the skill with which new trade routes were established to connect the rapidly growing empire.
Ibn Saghir observed that as early as the middle of the 8th century faraway outposts on the edge of the Sahara were trading regularly with merchants from Basra, Kufa and Khorasan – at that time this distance was nothing short of epic. I would mention further that Ibn Saghir also noticed the regular interactions between Muslim and Jewish traders at the time.
Southeast Asia is a telling example of a faraway land populated with diverse religions that was transformed into a major hub of Islamic civilization, not by military confrontation but rather through trade, commerce and the peaceful proselytizing of sufi saints.
The great European trading cities like Venice were frequent ports of call for traders from the Muslim world and great cities like Cairo and Istanbul were places of frequent mixing and intermingling. The focal point of the Muslim world and its spiritual center, Mecca, was as much a place of spiritual repose and retreat as it was the meeting point for caravans from East and West. Once a year this gathering would become the locus of exchange of goods and ideas and news and information from all points in the Muslim world and beyond. Amidst the commercial activity were profound exchanges of philosophy and metaphysics and debates that cross and intersected religious divides.
President Obama, in his historic Cairo speech earlier this month, alluded to the intellectual indebtedness of Europe to the Muslim world. There is no doubt that Renaissance Europe owes much of its antecedents to the transmission of knowledge in Muslim Spain and North Africa in the cities of Toledo, Granada and Fes – which themselves represented a thriving economy as well as a pre-Columbian conduit for exploration to the New World.
This historical legacy underscores the need for a forum such as this in which views can be expressed with forthrightness and sincerity. Our goal is in clear sight. Our objective today is to consider the historical moment in which we live – a global recession of epic proportions; a Muslim world in transition and flux, and an American administration truly committed to engagement and understanding.
Credit is due to President Obama for his efforts to begin a rapprochement with the Muslim world. His initial pronouncements to close Guantanamo Bay, end the war in Iraq and assert his administration’s efforts towards a resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict were received with cautious optimism.
The address in Cairo along with his visit to Turkey in April asserted his belief that America and the Muslim world can be partners not only in ensuring greater security but also in pursuing a common agenda. We are not talking about merely tolerating the differences in culture and religion or merely respecting the divergent views and perspectives but this is a common agenda defined by common and shared values of freedom, human rights and the pursuit of a meaningful and purposeful livelihood.
In this agenda, there should be no color bars, no geographical boundaries and no linguistic and religious divide. Nevertheless, reality does bite hard – and the administration has faced obstacles in each of these major endeavors. Skeptics will be quick to point out that thus far everything has been mere rhetoric. They say this administration won’t be much different from the previous. However, we say that it is premature to draw conclusions on eventual outcomes.
As a matter of fact, I remain optimistic that if America can find credible partners in the Muslim world with which to pursue this agenda the possibilities for charting a new course are immense.
The recession which has spread around the world has highlighted the fundamental weaknesses inherent in our traditional financial systems. The ripple effect of the collapse on Wall Street last fall with economies around the world has also laid waste to the notion of firewalls protecting certain areas.
It is true that the decoupling school of thought was fast becoming the new mantra of progress particularly for the emerging markets until of course the financial meltdown jolted everyone back to their senses. But we should not look at this financial crisis only in a negative light. On the contrary, it is abundantly clear that the ties that bind people around the world are strong and can be harnessed even during these contractionary times.
Promoting stronger commercial relationships between these two worlds must be punctuated with an unrelenting commitment to good governance and transparency. It is not simply the realm of government to achieve these objectives. In fact, no matter how much governments impose legislation on ethical practices, these rules only have a transformative impact on the way business is done if there is a competitive advantage to be gained.
Rather it is increasingly part of the competitive forces driving investment and strengthening shareholder value to engage in responsible business practices. Saudi Arabia and Jordan have taken a lead in this respect, commissioning intensive research into responsible competitiveness within their own kingdoms. Other Muslim countries ought to consider similar strategies in their efforts to attract investment from abroad that is increasingly concerned with issues such as climate change, sustainability and fair labour practices.
Underlying these responsible practices are credible institutions which adhere to the rule of law and nurture the development of healthy and vibrant civil societies. For businesses to operate efficiently courts must only be impartial and fair but must also be seen to be so in their adjudication of disputes. For corruption and the abuse of power, be it corporate or government, the media must be free to report and analyse the actions of those who wield power. Free and fair elections are only the starting point for democracy; as fundamental as they are, they are just one piece in a larger puzzle. This means that governments in the end must reflect the hopes and aspirations of their people.
can najib and his love birds can stop anwar now? that wiil be his pipped dream
NAJIB’S CROONING OUR TUNE NOW, SAYS ANWAR
by Adib Zalkapli
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today questioned the sincerity of the prime minister in announcing a new merit-based scholarship programme obviously aimed at winning back Chinese voter support from Pakatan Rakyat (PR).
“Last time, when I said it, I was called a Chinese agent. Now that Najib has said it what are you going to call him? Is he now a Chinese agent and traitor to the Malays?” said Anwar sarcastically when asked today about the new scholarships to be based purely on merit.
The Opposition Leader has been frequently labelled a “traitor” and “Chinese agent” by UMNO leaders since he launched PR’s reform agenda. Anwar’s PR has successfully used its Ketuanan Rakyat, or supremacy of the people, slogan to differentiate itself from UMNO’s Ketuanan Melayu, or supremacy of the Malays, rallying cry which has caused concern even among non-Malay Barisan Nasional (BN) parties.
But Najib, in a speech to Chinese political and community leaders last night, pledged to set up a new “National Scholarship” based entirely on merit, and also indicated his administration’s willingness to eventually drop the racial quotas in more sectors of the economy. The prime minister’s remarks suggesta concerted effort is finally being made to hijack PR’s more multi-racial platform.
Najib’s pledges on reform seem to also suggest that he believes he can control the potential backlash from Malays while wanting to convince the non-Malays that, even if they have misgivings about UMNO and BN, they should have faith in him. Anwar appeared to acknowledge the threat from Najib today, and claimed the prime minister had only partially adopted the opposition’s agenda but failed to emphasise on protection for the poor.
“When we proposed something, it has to help people regardless of race but at the same time we will protect the poor, that is our approach,” he added.
Fethullah Gulen–Turkish Scholar
FETHULLAH Gulen. Very few among us would have come across this name. He is supposed to be the world’s top public intellectual. A poll conducted by a magazine in 2008 placed the Turkish scholar above hundreds of others. Now, if you think only politicians, millionaires and film-makers are being determined by their ranking, think again. Even intellectuals are now subjected to Internet balloting. What next, an SMS vote?
According to the magazine, of the 500,000 people who voted online, Gulen was chosen the top intellectual. Hey, contemporary intellectuals ought to join a reality show considering the popularity test they have to go through. World Intellectuals instead of American Idols, anyone?
Well, the word “intellectual” in itself is contentious. Who are they? Someone refers to himself as a “Kuala Lumpur intellectual” in a seminar not too long ago, raising eyebrows, of course. Nobody seems to agree on who qualifies as an intellectual, yet he or she is mindful of being labelled one. Someone says an intellectual is one educated beyond the bounds of common sense. Another cynically defines an intellectual as one who believes that ideas are of more importance than values, that is, to say their own ideas and other people’s values.
So who are they? Paul Johnson, dubbed “a conservative historian” by some, wrote Intellectuals some 19 years ago. He gave a thrilling portrayal of “great minds” that have shaped the modern world. He unveiled, warts and all, philosophers, thinkers and writers as disparate as Karl Marx, Henrik Ibsen, Leo Tolstoy, Bertrand Russell, Edmund Wilson, Jean-Paul Sartre, Ernest Hemingway and Norman Miller. These intellectuals are brilliant, yet vaingloriously flawed. His verdict: “Not only should they be kept away from the levers of power, they should also be objects of particular suspicion when they seek to offer collective advice.” Hear, hear!
Little wonder intellectuals were eyed with suspicion and scorn through the ages. Many were even burned on the stake for being perceived as clever. In the oral tradition of old Singapore, a boy, Hang Nadim, was killed by the king after jealous court officials realised he was too brainy.
In the history of mankind, many intelligent people endured torture and humiliation. The discourse among intellectuals is viewed as a snobbish attempt to understand the ordinary. France is a nation that values intellectuals and artisans as much as they hate them. Andre Malraux famously said: “In France intellectuals are usually incapable of opening an umbrella.”
Back in 2005 in this column, I wrote about a local wise man who argued that to qualify to be a “learned one” (intellectual?) he or she must do two things: read the entire Encyclopedia Britannica and all the journals published by the Malaysian Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (MBRAS). We are talking about 33,000 pages of text for the Britannica and materials dating from 1877 for MBRAS. Any takers?
So, who are actually the “public intellectuals”? Could there be “private intellectuals”? Or those geniuses who read more and more about less and less and devour every conceivable knowledge there is in the world yet out of the intellectual radar? Could there be intellectuals who are by nature “un-intellectual”? Do you need to go to the finest universities in the world or land a plum job in academia to be one? Are they truly the thinkers for the masses or merely talkers par excellence? Remember, one of Shakespeare’s characters said, “talkers are no good doers”. Or should one be labelled intellectual by a body of “professional intellectuals” — just like that governing doctors, engineers, lawyers or surveyors?
Not too long ago, a menteri besar in his quest for intellectual immortality designated a housing estate for the ilmuan, loosely translated as “ones with knowledge”. Imagine an enclave where only the learned roam. I wonder what the subject of their encounters will be. I am sure it won’t be gossip about politicians and starlets. They must talk about some extremely serious stuff beyond the comprehension of lesser mortals like us. However, the idea did not materialise. Those who were given the keys to the housing estate quickly returned them upon hearing chuckles and sneers behind their backs. Intellectualism entails snobbishness and a sense of elitism. It is, sadly, intellectually incorrect to claim to be one.
Why was Gulen picked as the top public intellectual in 2008? The magazine hailed him as “an inspirational leader who encourages a life guided by moderate Islamic principles”. He is said to be “a Turkish cleric who represents the modern face of the Sufi Ottoman tradition” and “who influences Turkish politics through links with the AK party”.
The fact that the top 10 public intellectuals came from Muslim countries raised interesting questions. Linguist and political activist Noam
MIT’s Noam Chomsky
Chomsky was at number 11 and the former vice-president of the United States, Al Gore, was at number 12. Fareed Zakaria, the respected editor of Newsweek International was at number 17. Only three from Southeast Asia and Oceania made it to the list, one of them Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore. Social scientists, economists, philosophers, scientists and journalists made up the bulk of the list. Now, we can argue who should be included or who should not. Some of the names omitted were not acceptable, some included raised troubling doubts.
On March 6, 2005, this newspaper highlighted a study by Dr Deborah Johnson, then a fellow at the Institute of Civilisation and the Malay World (ATMA) of the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia. She was looking at intellectualism in the Malay world and Malaya/Malaysia. The title of her work is Malaysian Intellectuals: A Genealogy of the 20th Century Discourse. She identified at least 10 groups of individuals where intellectualism was in evidence. Among them were the nationalists, students, women and those in the arts and academia.
A towering intellectual among film-makers, the little known Michelangelo Antonioni, once said that he would rather be the hero of the few enlightened ones than a prophet of the clueless masses. Oops! That is snobbery. In his case, he would never play to the gallery. The quality of his work is inversely proportional to the number of its audience. He wouldn’t mind that at all. Are those the true colours of an intellectual?
MIT’s Noam Chomsky
Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment