Keadilan's (and Malaysia's) Shining stars

Keadilan’s (and Malaysia’s) Shining Stars
M. Bakri Musa
www.bakrimusa.com


Great organizations have great leaders. Everyone recognizes that. Less appreciated is that to maintain its greatness an organization must actively nurture its next generation of leaders. Failure to do so would doom the organization.

The late Tun Razak was acutely aware of this crucial aspect of leadership. In his frequent visits to the districts he was always on the look out for talent. On spotting one, he would bring that promising individual back to headquarters for what we would call today “fast tracking.” Likewise Jack Welch, the legendary chief executive of GE. Whenever he toured the various units, he would ask those divisional heads to name two or three of their promising underlings. He would then ask those managers what they were doing to nurture the talents they had under their wings.

As a corollary to my observation, you can tell much about the potential for future greatness of an organization by looking at its next tier of leaders. It is for this reason that I am bullish on the future of Keadilan. The party is blessed with an abundance of young talent.

Currently in the news is its chief strategist, Rafizi Ramli. It is a measure of the caliber of the young leaders in Keadilan that Rafizi’s rising status does not diminish the other shining stars. Nurul Izzah Anwar, Nik Nazmi Ahmad and Sim Tze Szin are among the many stars that glitter Keadilan’s sky. That augurs well for the future of not only Keadilan but also the nation.

The challenge for current Keadilan leaders is to keep these bright stars shining, for they in turn would attract others into their orbit. Bright talents attract other even brighter ones. They are not like dim candles; the only way to make a dim candle shine brighter (or appear so) is to snuff out the other candles. Bright stars welcome competition, for together they form an even brighter galaxy to light up the evening sky.

Except for Tze Szin, now Penang state assemblyman, I have never met the others. I knew Tze Szin when he was a graduate student and later an engineer in Silicon Valley. His quiet, unassuming but effective leadership clearly shone even then. I recognized his exceptional qualities when he sought my advice on attending an American law school. Such an enquiry from an American would not have surprised me, but for someone from Malaysia who had been brought up under our regimented education system with its trademark forced early streaming, that reflected a mind capable of extraordinary thinking, unencumbered by traditions and expectations. Even more remarkable was the fact that he already had a graduate degree in engineering at the time!

Tze Szin aspired to play a major leadership role and knew the supremacy of the rule of law; hence his interest in pursuing law. I assured him that one need not have to be trained as a lawyer to appreciate this fact. On the contrary we have many examples of those formally trained in law and yet would later be as leader its greatest abuser. Philippines’ Marcos was not the only example, though he was easily the most egregious.

I knew Nik Nazmi, a King’s College honors law graduate, through his book, Moving Forward: Malays of the 21st Century. In my review of that volume I wrote, “At the risk of discomfiting Nik, I am tempted to compare his book to one written nearly 40 years ago by another not-so-young politician. It is not so much a comparison as a contrast. Where Mahathir’s The Malay Dilemma is shrill and emotional, Nik’s Moving Forward is cerebral and rational. While Mahathir irritates, Nik Azmi persuades; while Mahathir excoriates, Nik conciliates. Nik beckons us to share his dreams of Malaysia.” Mahathir on the other hand, imposed his on us. Nik is now a state assemblyman in Selangor.

I judge political leaders not by their soaring rhetoric or oratorical flourishes but on the merit of their ideas and the clarity of their thinking. Nik Nazmi is definitely a promising political leader.

As for Nurul Izzah, she, like Nik Nazmi, is barely 30 and already a Member of Parliament. She won it on her first try at elective office, trumping a veteran and then-popular woman minister. It is to be noted that Lembah Pantai, Nurul’s district, comprised the University of Malaya campus and the upscale Bungsar area. Meaning, her well-educated and sophisticated constituents were swayed less by titles and promises, more by substance and capability.


A Young Tun Razak

Then there is Rafizi Ramli. If there is one person who has caused the Barisan government much embarrassment today it would be Rafizi. If Barisan, specifically UMNO, were to do badly in the next general elections, much of the credit would have to go to him, specifically his dogged pursuit of the National Feedlot Corporation scandal involving the family of Women’s Minister Shahrizat Jalil as well as UMNO and the Barisan government.

Rafizi’s tenaciousness matches his meticulousness in his pursuit of that national mess. Then in a brilliant display of strategy, he released the details in tantalizing bits and pieces, lulling his opponents. Shahrizat, her family, and UMNO leaders fell right into his trap.

When the first brief details were revealed, NFC officials quickly responded with their vigorous denials. Then having successfully lured them into the trap, Rafizi pounced upon them by revealing even more facts, forcing them to essentially recant their earlier denials. Continuing to underestimate Rafizi, they put forth another vigorous line of defense, only to be demolished by yet another revelation from him. Rafizi made them appear unbelievably stupid, embarrassingly incompetent, or both, quite apart from possibly breaking the law.

When Rafizi released the fact of the purchase of luxury condos, NFC officials initially denied it in and tried to gain the offensive by belittling Rafizi, only to quickly backtrack when he released even more specific details. This time they tried to rationalize the purchase as prudent “investment” decision!

The NFC managers were not the only ones snared by Rafizi. The Chief of Police initially dismissed the allegation only to backtrack and reopen the investigation. This time those wise investigating officers went public with their recommendation that NFC officials be charged for criminal breach of trust, essentially preempting his superiors who might be tempted to whitewash his work.

All these conflicting accounts prompted Law Minister Nazri to tell NFC officials to essentially shut up, a very unusual advice from a typically babbling politician.

Rafizi’s biggest trap was to trigger Shahrizat’s filing a defamation suit against him. In a civil suit, in contrast to a criminal one, both plaintiffs and defendants are subject to cross examinations. Now Rafizi will have a forum where those involved would have to testify under oath and in open court. This libel suit may prove to be the most effective way to expose the corrupt nexus of politics, government and business that so blighted our nation over the decades.

In terms of amount, at RM250 million this NFC scandal is but small change as compared to Bank Negara’s foreign exchange debacle or the current Port Klang Development scandal, for example. What it lacks in monetary value however, is more than made up by the sordid details that would be exposed, especially the unbelievable greed and pure hubris of those UMNO Putras.

Rafizi Ramli very much reminds me of a young Tun Razak. Like him, Rafizi is from a village in east coast Malaysia (Trengganu for Rafizi, Pahang for Razak). Both were top students at Malay College, and both were sent to Britain on a scholarship to pursue professional studies, law for Razak and engineering for Rafizi. Again, both had promising careers before giving them up for politics. Razak could have been the first “native” Governor-General of British Malaysia. He gave that up to join UMNO at a time when there was no promise of success or material rewards. Rafizi had a “fast track” career in Petronas and could have been its future CEO but gave that up to join Keadilan at a time when the party had no political power.

Razak’s formidable adversary was the white-skinned, deeply-entrenched colonial-minded British; Rafizi’s was equally formidable – those brown-skinned, deeply-entrenched feudal-minded warlords in UMNO masquerading as Malay nationalists.

It would be easy to dismiss Rafizi as another freelance muckraker or to call him names, as Women’s Minister Sharizat did. It would be worse to underestimate him, as many in UMNO are. Those involved in this shameful greed of the NFC scandal would be better off answering the specifics exposed by Rafizi, and do so without insulting the intelligence of Malaysians.

Rafizi could not have secured those details and documents without the help of “insiders.” That they have chosen to entrust him reflects their confidence in him. That is the measure of this bright young man.

Rafizi Ramli, Nik Nazmi, Tze Szin and Nurrul Izzah are not only Keadilan’s shining stars, they are also Malaysia’s. It is young leaders of their caliber who will guide Malaysia to a bright future.

Raking In The Bounty of FELDA's IPO

Raking in the Bounty of FELDA’s IPO
M. Bakri Musa
(www.bakrimusa.com)


In the run-up to the Initial Public Offering (IPO) of FELDA Global Ventures Holdings (FGH), there is little, in fact no discussion on how the exercise would benefit FELDA settlers. Surely that should be the foremost consideration. The only criterion upon which to judge the wisdom or success of any FELDA initiative, including this proposed IPO, would be to assess its impact on the settlers.

Instead the focus has been on bragging rights, as with trumpeting FGH to be the biggest IPO for the year, among the top 20 on the KLSE, and the world’s biggest plantation company. Such milestones are meaningful only if achieved as a consequence of the usual business activities and not through fancy paper-shuffling exercises. Apple recently surpassed Microsoft in market capitalization, but that was the consequence of Apple’s much superior products like iPads, iPods, and iPhones. Contrast that with earlier achievements of such now-defunct financial giants as AIG and Lehman Brothers that were based on fancy “financial engineering” instead of solid products and services.

Instead of delineating the potential benefits that would accrue on the settlers from this IPO, its proponents are content with dismissing the critics and imputing evil motives on their part. There are legitimate concerns that this exercise would prove to be nothing more than yet another fancy scheme for the politically powerful to cash out on a lucrative but under-priced government asset. We already have many ready examples of such greed.

Consider the National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) “cowgate” mess involving considerably much smaller sum of money. Despite the presence of high government officials on NFC’s board to safeguard the government’s interest, NFC’s senior managers still managed to subvert those publicly-subsidized loans to purchase luxury condominiums totally unrelated to the company’s activities. This oversight failure reflects both the incompetence of the government’s representatives in discharging their fiduciary responsibility, as well as the lack of integrity on the part of NFC’s management.

Such despicable omissions and spectacular failures are not unique only to NFC; they are endemic in government-linked corporations. Thus Malaysians have good reasons to believe that FGH would be no exception once the money starts rolling in.

It also does not escape the public’s attention that the man helming FGH, and thus whose hands would be at the till once the billions start pouring in from the IPO, is one Isa Samad, a former UMNO Vice-President. Not any VP however, but one who was found guilty by his party of “money politics” and subsequently suspended. UMNO is no paragon of virtue; to be found guilty by it would be akin to being called a slut by hookers. You have to be disgustingly gross.

It would be easy to blame Isa Samad. The bigger question, and one that has yet to be answered, is why did Prime Minister Najib choose such a shady character to helm this major corporation? That is as much a reflection of Najib as it is on Isa.

Peruse FGH current corporate structure. It has nearly over a hundred subsidiaries, associated companies, and joint ventures, many with overlapping functions, markets and products. Those units are created less in response to commercial needs, more to create opportunities for senior civil servants to be appointed to the many governing boards, and thus garnering extra income in the form of directors’ fees, in addition to their regular civil service pay. Ever wonder why these GLCs lack effective oversight and our government departments are shoddily run? You would think that their regular government jobs, diligently executed, would keep them fully occupied.

A more sinister reason for these GLC directorships is that they are an effective trick to trap the loyalty of civil servants. Be too critical of the idiotic ideas of your political superiors and you risk being left out on those lucrative board appointments. With Isa Samad, it is also a case of Najib buying Isa’s silence, for reasons best known only to the pair.


Corrupting A Noble Initiative

FELDA was the crown jewel of Tun Razak’s imaginative rural development scheme. It was to provide land to otherwise landless villagers, the equivalent of land grants homesteading to early American settlers. The other reason was to encourage Malays to undertake an internal migration of sorts by uprooting them from their tradition-bound villages to begin a new life unencumbered by prevailing non-productive cultural practices.

With the expertise of and financing from the government, those villagers would develop hitherto virgin jungles into productive rubber and palm oil plantations, with those settlers eventually getting title to their holdings. At about 14 acres each, those units were definitely economically viable. To make sure that those lands would survive the next and subsequent generations and not be endlessly subdivided, the settlers had to agree to dispense with their usual Islamic inheritance practices. Meaning, the property would be inherited by only one of the children.

The surprise was the absence of howling protests from the ulama to this clear departure from Islamic inheritance practices as everybody saw the wisdom of the move; to maintain the economic viability of these holdings.

If this IPO were to enhance the condition of the settlers, then it should be supported. FELDA is meant to serve the settlers, not the other way around. Isa Samad had it backwards when he dismissed the concerns of the settlers as voiced through their cooperatives.

In response to the settlers’ concerns, Isa suggested a portion of the proceeds be placed in a “Special Purpose Vehicle” specifically to meet their needs. Unfortunately he did not provide the specifics. Consequently this SPV risks degenerating into yet another honey jar to be passed around among the politically powerful bears.

In my forthcoming book, Liberating the Malay Mind, I put forth ideas on how to maximize the use of these GLCs in improving the lot of Bumiputras. The focus should be on investing in people – human capital – not companies. Companies are subject to business cycles; they can also be ruined by incompetent and corrupt managers. All you would be left with then are worthless stock certificates. Where is Bank Bumiputra today? Malaysia Airlines is in no great shape either, despite the billions expended through SPVs and other accounting gimmicks.

Invest in our people instead; the skills and knowledge they acquire would stay with them to benefit society through good and bad times. Thus I suggest selling these GLCs and putting the proceeds into an escrow account for the sole purpose of investing in and developing Bumiputra human capital.

Bringing the issue specifically to FGH, I would commit a third of the IPO proceeds to a special fund to be used to develop the human capital of the settlers and their children. That money would be used to air-condition their schools, build adequate laboratories and libraries, and to bring qualified teachers especially in English, science and mathematics. If you want the children of those settlers to be other than penorakas (homesteaders), the best route would be to provide them with superior education. That means their schools and teachers should be among the best; today they are among the worst.

I would use the funds to enrich the curriculum as with providing music classes. I would go further and provide free musical instruments and after-class music lessons, modeled after Venezuela’s highly successful El Sistema initiative. New York is modeling a similar Harmony program with its low-income students, and this week those students had the thrill of their lifetime when their orchestra was conducted by Placido Domingo. Gustavo Dudamel, the young conductor of the Los Angeles Philharmonic Orchestra, is a product of El Sistema, a tribute to Venezuela’s investment in human capital.

Similarly I would use the IPO funds to mechanize the operations on these plantations. Today palm nuts are still harvested in the same labor-intensive and back-breaking ways as they were 50 years ago; there is little innovation or mechanization. I fail to see why FELDA engineers could not design harvesting machines and trucks with hydraulic lifts like those used by utility repair workers to fix broken lines. Only through mechanization could the workers’ safety and health could be assured, and their productivity enhanced.

If through this IPO the lives of those FELDA settlers and their children were to be made better, then the initiative would find many ready supporters. What many fear is that this IPO would prove to be nothing more than a windfall for the likes of Isa Samad so they could acquire their luxury condos, fancy cars, and trophy wives.

Grounding These High-Flying Kampong Malays

Grounding Those High-Flying Kampong Boys



M. Bakri Musa





As I reflect on the many sordid scandals that have blighted Malaysia over the years, I am struck by one sobering observation. That is, the principal players are Malays like me, and of my vintage.



There are exceptions, of course. The mega-ringgit Port Klang Free Zone Development is one. Then there was the Malaysian Chinese Association’s Deposit Taking Cooperative debacle of the mid 1980s. So as not to slight the Indian community, there was the equally ugly affair of MAIKA, the investment arm of the Malaysian Indian Congress.



In East Malaysia there was the Chief Minister of Sabah, one Osu Bin Haji Sukam, who skipped on his multimillion-pound gambling debt incurred in a London casino. His Haji father would roll over in his grave on that one. On a far grander scale with respect to sheer avarice and outrageous obscenity would be the still-to-be-fully-accounted glutton of another chief minister, this one of Sarawak. Purists may argue that these two characters are not Melayu tulen (“pure” Malays), so I will not focus on them.



That would still leave me with plenty of loathsome characters with whom, embarrassingly, I share far too many ready commonalities. Meaning, among others, we were poor, from the kampong, and the first in our family to go to college.



Stated differently, in an unguarded moment, scratch a bit and our “kampongness” would ooze out of our pores. I could readily swap old familiar stories with these high-flying former kampong Malays, of having to light pelita (kerosene wick lamps) in order to study at night, of hauling water in pails hung at the ends of a bamboo pole painfully strung across the shoulder, and of back-breaking plowing of rice fields with our primitive cangkul (hoe).



Those are not just distant hazy memories. Every time I visit my kampong, I am painfully reminded of this harsh reality.





The Laggak (Swagger) of These Malays



I meet many of these high-flying Malays when they visit America on their taxpayer-paid junkets; you could not have guessed their humble origins from their laggak (swagger).



One official stayed at the presidential suite of a five-star hotel, the sort usually reserved for President Obama. She then had the audacity to complain that her car in which she was driven in was not the latest luxury model! As for her flight, it was first class all the way.



Recently Prime Minister Najib stayed at a $20,000-a-night penthouse suite of the Darling Hotel in Sydney while his wife splurged on a $100,000 shopping spree in a single day. Even if those figures were in our devalued ringgit, that would still be obscenely extravagant. Najib’s wife denied that Australian report, but having seen her behaviors while visiting America, I believe the Australian account. Najib’s predecessor was even more indulgent, what with his fondness for custom-made, ultra-luxury, Airbus and yacht!



Najib and his wife, self-styled Malaysia’s “first couple,” compare themselves to our sultans, who in turn model themselves after the British and Saudi monarchs. More the latter as the House of Windsor is now much more restrained; not so the House of Saud, still amply funded by their overflowing oil wells. Ours are fast drying up.



With such extravagances at the top, no wonder lesser kutus (characters) try to outdo each other. Consider one Khir Toyo, a former dentist. Thanks to a liberalized legal definition, this son of a Javanese immigrant is now Melayu tulen. He fancied himself a shrewd businessman who could drive a hard bargain and thus secured for himself a mega-mansion at half-price! The only problem was that his “victim” was someone who did considerable business with Selangor while Toyo was its Chief Minister.



It was of course no shrewd bargaining, merely of, as Prime Minister Najib would inelegantly but nonetheless accurately put it, “Gua tolong lu, lu tolong gua!” (You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours!). A more appropriate term would be extorting, but then this Khir Toyo was a product of our all-Malay education system and had only recently learned English; hence his inability to discern the not-so-subtle difference between negotiating and extorting.



Too bad this Toyo did not use his negotiating prowess to secure for Selangor similar lean contracts! Thank God that he is now a former chief minister! He would still be Chief Minister if Barisan Nasional had won the last election. This point is worth pondering come the next general elections.



The latest but by no means most egregious example of these sordid scandals involves the National Feedlot Corporation, tasked with spearheading a meat-production industry to help poor rural dwellers. At least that is the rationale, hence the generous government low-interest loans.



The principal there is one Dr. Salleh Ismail; he is now more known as the husband of a federal minister. Many Malays who reach the top today are not known for their brilliance; they may have degrees but often from third-rate universities or even blatant degree mills. Imbecility is the norm at the highest levels. Salleh however, is the exception. He is one of the early Malay PhDs in science, and not just any doctorate but one from Cornell. He is precisely the sort of Malay the government should be rewarding. So I have no problem with his getting the cattle project instead of some incompetent UMNO operatives or science-illiterate retired civil servants. Nor do I quibble with his putting his children on his company’s payroll; after all it is his company.



As with any project, the best way to get the best candidate or price would be through competitive bidding. Today, there are many more qualified Malays with proven entrepreneurial flair especially in this field of rearing animals. Many also have proven research expertise directly in the area. The likes of Salleh Ismail are no longer a rarity.



My greatest disappointment is with Dr. Salleh using taxpayer-subsidized loans to buy luxury condominiums. The irony of his getting special Bumiputra discounts! Dr. Salleh is of course free to do what he wants with his personal assets. Equally if not more reprehensible would be the responsible ministers and treasury officials; they should have disbursed the loan conditionally and in phases, upon proof of satisfactory performance.



This “cow gate” scandal pales in comparison to an earlier and much more expensive one involving Tajuddin Ramli and Malaysia Airlines. Like Salleh, Tajuddin is the son of a villager from Kedah, a predominantly Malay and very poor state. Like Salleh, Tajuddin too still has many poor relatives back in the kampongs. You would think that the memories of their still miserable relatives in the kampong would put a damper on the laggak of these high-flying Malays.





Shaming By Showing Them Up



Dr. Salleh is from Kelantan. I was on vacation there once and witnessed the appalling poverty that tugged at my sensibilities. I wonder whether Salleh feels that way too when he visits Bacok; those villagers could well be his cousins, once or twice removed. He could have invested in building homes for them and his would-be franchise farmers instead of splurging on luxury condos. He would then be hailed a hero instead of yet another spouse or relative of an UMNO minister hogging the public trough.



To develop our society we must give young Malays, especially those from the kampongs, a first-class education that would prepare them for the best universities, the kind that Dr. Salleh was privileged to partake. That is our only hope. Yes, some will forget their humble origin and be consumed with their newly-acquired luxury tastes, courtesy of Ketuanan Melayu of course. However, there will more than a few with enough conscience; their modest behaviors would then shame these high-flying pseudo-sophisticated kampong Malays with their taxpayer-supported laggak.



There is a viral video on the Internet showing Gary Locke, the current American Ambassador to China, carrying his own luggage and ordering his coffee at an airport cafe. Locke is an American Chinese, but his very American style – singularly lacking in pretensions – is causing much discomfort among Chinese officialdom.



We have many brilliant and unassuming former children of the kampongs. They are doing their best under very trying circumstances for our nation. I am humbled and more than just a bit embarrassed in their presence. Unlike Dr. Salleh or Khairy, these Malays are not married or related to top UMNO operatives. Many would consider that plain unlucky, but those smart dedicated Malays feel otherwise. They consider themselves lucky to be spared the corrupting influences around them.



In my forthcoming book Liberating the Malay Mind, I profiled a few of these admirable individuals. One in particular, Professor Badri Muhammad, deserves special mention. Like Dr. Salleh, Badri was also from a village in Kelantan and obtained his PhD (Dalhousie, in chemistry) a few years earlier than Dr. Salleh. Badri’s legacies however, are not luxury condominiums or multimillion-ringgit companies, but his children, biological as well as academic, the many undergraduates and doctoral candidates he inspired and guided. Yes, his biological children too have done well, sporting degrees from top universities, including one, Adam, a Carnegie Mellon PhD in engineering.



Here is another significant difference; despite Badri’s modest academic income, he was able to give his children a superior education sans JPA, MARA, or other Ketuanan Melayu crutches. Contrast that to one Rafidah Aziz, also of my vintage. Like other UMNO officials, she too had her share of scandals. On a visit to America many years ago she bragged about her daughter getting a MARA “scholarship.” Tiada maruah! (No sense of shame.)



With characters like Dr. Salleh, Tajuddin Ramli, Rafidah Aziz and Khir Toyo, it is tempting to indict Malays of my generation. However, I am certain that Malays like Badri are not the exceptions. There are for example Syed Mokthar Albukhary and Zaid Ibrahim; both were named as Asia’s philanthropic heroes by Forbes magazine a few years ago. Syed Mokthar gave generously to causes like education while Zaid has dedicated a home for the disabled in Kota Baru.



You do not realize how slothful you look until you are in the company of the well-groomed. Thus we need more Malays like Syed Mokthar, Zaid Ibrahim and my recently-departed dear friend Dr. Badri Muhammad to shame and bring to the ground these high-flying former kampong boys and girls, as Ambassador Locke is now doing to Chinese officials.

Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #100

Chapter 12: A Prescription For Malaysia

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister


May 13, 2002


The Next Young Mahathir

Today you are busy attending to the nation’s business. Rightly so, but I do hope that you ponder these questions and answer them in your memoirs. Subsequent generations need to learn the lesson. In the remaining years you must concentrate not on party or policy, but on personnel. You once quipped that you would like to be succeeded by your clone. Alas, there is no young Mahathir out there. Sadly, this more than anything else is the most glaring failure of your leadership.

Finding the next cadre of leaders will not be easy. While previous generations were inspired by the struggle for freedom, no such inspirations exist now. Today’s young Mahathirs, if they have not already succumbed to the lures of the First World, are busy pitting their talent in the highly lucrative private sector. You must make a personal and concerted effort at talent scouting. Fortunately, again thanks to the successes of your very policies, there are many capable Malaysians. Finding them would not be difficult, but enticing them into public service would be the challenge. There will be a few who, having reached the peak of their career and having put aside a comfortable nest egg, would consider public service a noble calling. Grab them. Under your masterful tutelage, these fast learners would grasp the political skills soon enough. You will also find them to be a different breed from the ones currently serving you.

Should you restrict yourself to your party, there will be slim pickings. Your track record at talent scouting thus far, to put it charitably, is less than spectacular. You had better luck recently with your choice of a new chief justice in the person of Dzaiddin Abdullah. That one wise pick did more to enhance the judiciary than all your speeches. This should remind you of the importance of personnel.

The legacy of a parent is their children; a leader, his successor. There is ample time yet for you to enhance your legacy and with it, to secure the nation’s future.

You have repeatedly grumbled on the lack of Malays in business, and just as predictably, you have denigrated Malay aptitude for and competence in commerce. I again respectfully suggest that you have it all wrong. Malays are indeed shrewd businessmen, Malaysian style that is. The role models you have provided them have been the Halim Saads and Tajuddin Ramlis. These individuals are handsomely rewarded not for their expertise or entrepreneurialism, rather on their coziness with you. Other budding entrepreneurs learn quickly that to succeed, they too need not pay attention to their clients and customers but suck up to the politically powerful. The road to riches in Malaysia is not through creating and building, but getting the right contacts and contracts. You have created a class not of builders and creators, but of rent collectors and economic parasites.

You frequently lamented to the faithful on the evils of money politics. You have now finally admitted the obvious: UMNO is corrupt to the core. It is no longer only a political party, but a massive and insatiably greedy patronage system. The most comical if not bizarre episode was when UMNO Vice President Muhammad Taib too, condemned corruption. This from a man who was caught with millions in cash in his back pocket! Next you will have Mona Fendi [the woman who killed a senior politician out of greed and lust] lecture us on personal morality! Do you ever wonder why such messages fall on deaf ears?

You were shocked that in the last election [1999] only non-Malays appreciated your brilliant stewardship. Malays were, to paraphrase you, stupid, forgetful and ungrateful. It finally dawned on you that your party has lost the support of Malays. It took you and your fellow party leaders this long to appreciate this fact, as the loss was not reflected in the number of parliamentary seats your party won. You were shrewd enough to spare your party a humiliating thrashing through smart political maneuvering. You wisely called the election just before thousands of newly registered young and disillusioned voters became eligible. Others may carp but I salute your brilliant political move. Such tricks however, only work once.

It is my contention that Malays voted for PAS not because they were enamored with that party or that they were impressed with its leadership, rather they were fed up with the corruption (or money politics, as you euphemistically phrase it) of UMNO.

The next election will be different. If your party does not change radically there will be an implosion. Although I predict that your party will again return to power, it will be denied its two-thirds majority. UMNO will suffer the humiliation of winning fewer seats than PAS. To add insult to injury, your home state of Kedah will fall to PAS. To rub salt on a raw wound, your long-held Kubang Pasu seat, should you not contest it, will also go to the opposition.

Nothing would please me more than to be proven wrong. Perversely the 9/11 terrorists’ attacks on America could prove to be your and your party’s savior. No, it has nothing to do with your swift condemnation of those abominable acts—you were absolutely right in quickly denouncing those despicable terrorists—rather it has everything to do with the unbelievably stupid reactions of the leaders of PAS. I have never been impressed with the senior leadership of that party, and their behavior following those horrible tragedies merely confirmed my worse suspicion of them. I have every reason to believe that they will continue their present pattern. But it would take more than the floundering of PAS to reverse the fate of your party.

Malaysians have changed and you can rightfully claim credit for many of those changes. But you are now like an insecure mother who does not notice the subtle changes in her brood, and continue to force-feed them the same pablum to her fully grown children. And when they protest or rebel, she puts on a guilt trip about being ungrateful. Wise parents recognize that the chidings and reprimands that work in childhood are counterproductive on teenagers and grownups.

Instead of continually berating us, I suggest that you provide us with the necessary ladders and safety net. With enough ladders our people will climb up without your having to exhort them. With an adequate safety net below they will be further emboldened. But do not repeat the mistakes of Western democracies by making too elaborate a social safety net. Too comfortable a safety net and it becomes a hammock, and Malaysians would then succumb to our own version of the “British disease” of social welfarism rampant during the pre-Thatcher era. In many ways our special privileges are doing that now to Bumiputras. The programs are becoming too cushy; they lull instead of invigorating Malays.

As for ladders, an effective one would be an excellent school system and relevant curricula. We must make all our young fluently bilingual, science literate, and mathematically competent, whether they want to be an alim or a scientist.

You have concentrated on physical infrastructures in the past. Now I implore you to emphasize our most precious assets – our people. You are mighty proud of our airport being among the best, we should likewise aim for our universities and schools to be the same.

You never miss to take foreign visitors to see your new pride and joy, the Petronas Twin Towers. Sadly, the only thing Malaysian about that monument is the land on which it is built. Everything else, from the design to the laying of the bricks, was done by foreigners. Wouldn’t it be nice if our universities and research centers too were of such eminence that foreigners would want to visit them?

You have repeatedly reminded us of Allah’s bounty on our land. Not only are we spared many of nature’s calamities, we are also blessed with some of the richest resources. Our warm waters and pristine beaches are the envy of the world; they would be prime tourist destinations especially for those from the West. You repeatedly sent trade missions to the West to drum up potential investments. But we cannot begin to attract tourists or investors if we continually denigrate their culture. We have enough problems of our own culture; there is no need for us to lecture others. Besides, they have their own critics who are much more eloquent and effective. Quit worrying about the degeneration of the West and concentrate instead on reversing the deterioration of Malaysia.

So the next time you address us, consider this. If you think that we have not changed under your leadership for the past twenty years, it is unlikely that we would ever do so in the few remaining years you have. Relent. Encourage us instead; it might just work. Do not besmirch your wonderful legacy by having us remember you as other than an esteemed leader.

Respectfully,


M. Bakri Musa


[This concludes the serialization of my book, Malaysia in the Era of Globalization, published in June 2002.]

Malaysiain the Era of Globalization #99

Chapter 12: A Prescription For Malaysia

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister

[Please note: There was a typo in the preceding installment. The date should be May 13, 2002.]

May 13, 2002


Embracing Globalization

I totally disagree with your characterization of globalization as a vehicle for Western hegemony or that it would destroy our way of life. We are more likely to maintain and indeed enhance our culture and heritage if we are successful economically. If we were to be marginalized economically, our culture and language too would suffer the same fate. If we do not climb on the globalization train now we will be left far behind. Individually, we are more likely to be tolerant and altruistic when we are prosperous and affluent than if we are poor and struggling. This applies to government as well.

Yes, globalization carries its own risks and problems. There are many shoals and reefs in the ocean of globalization. The best way to handle that is to train our citizens to be better sailors and navigators, not to remain in port. To extend the maritime metaphor, yes there will be swells and storms out there; our crew must therefore be adept at trimming the sails and battening the hatches.

You justify harsh and restrictive rules like the ISA on the fear that our present stability is fragile, and that with minor disturbances we would regress. I cannot blame you for having this attitude. One needs only look at previously prosperous and stable societies now reduced to their backward status through social unrest. In the 1950s Lebanon was the crown jewel of the Middle East. Its American University in Beirut was the breeding ground for fertile Arab intellectuals and scientists. A generation later, the very survival of that nation is in doubt. Yugoslavia only recently hosted the glittering Winter Olympic Games at its breathtaking mountain city of Sarajevo; today that nation no longer exists.

I am cognizant of those realities; nonetheless we cannot launch into the next trajectory of development unless we change our precepts. If we constantly fear of falling back, we will never be able to scale the top of the mountain. As the late Malay scholar and philosopher Hamka succinctly put it: Takut gagal adalah gagal sejati (The fear of failure is the real failure).

The next phase of progress requires a whole set of different skills and assumptions. What once worked will no longer be so, indeed they well become obstacles. Special privileges may have once been successful in improving the lot of Bumiputras, but clearly that program has now “maxed out.” Unchanged it will be more hindrance than help.

At the 2001 Annual UMNO General Assembly you once again saw fit to publicly castigate and upbraid Malays for not measuring up. You sermonized, cajoled, begged, and even cried to make us change our ways, but in the end none of that worked, or so you believe. After leading us for over two decades you still feel that we have not changed or successfully adapted to modern ways. At that assembly you used exactly the same derogatory language against us as you did thirty years earlier in your book, The Malay Dilemma.

All too often when your policies fail, your knee-jerk reaction is to immediately blame the people. You never cease to derogate us. Not once do you pause to ponder that may be, just may be, it is your policies and strategies that are wrong. Had you done so, your policies would have been more imaginative, their implementations more creative, and the results more to your expectations.

Contrary to your perception, we Malays have changed. If I may respectfully suggest, it is you who have not. You still insist on leading us in the same old ways. Excuse my brazenness; I suggest that instead of continually berating and scolding us, you try a different tack. Liberate us. Give us more freedom to be ourselves. Grant us our merdeka (independence). You have tried everything else and in your estimation, they have failed. Empower us instead.

There will be some of us who will make mistakes and fall by the wayside, but I can assure you that many more will succeed. When they do, reward them appropriately, not so much to encourage them (success is reward enough, they do not need a pat on the back from politicians and leaders) but to encourage others to emulate them. Make them the new role models and national heroes. For those unfortunate few who fail, if you cannot offer them encouragement, then just shut up. Let their failures be reminders to them and to others.

All too often you have rewarded mediocre Malays. You are easily mesmerized by their glibness, mistaking that for courage and wisdom. You listen only to those who are eager to tell you what you want to hear. You have been had. I need not remind you of the agonizing pain your many chosen “entrepreneurs” and budding “leaders” have caused you and the nation.

Had you cast your net far and deep, you could have avoided this predicament. We will never know where and when the next spark of genius will arise. One thing we do know from experience: Malay leaders right from the sultan in Hikayat Abdullah’s times are poor spotters of talent. Unfortunately, you are no exception.

Your own considerable leadership capability was long ignored. Indeed there was a time when you were considered a disruptive element, or worse, a derhaka (traitor). Only the wisdom and foresight of your predecessors Tun Razak and Hussein Onn saved you. Had the Tunku been as ruthless as you are today with your opponents, your fate would have been far different. More significantly, so too would the nation.

While your fawning ministers and supporters may still dutifully praise you when you castigate and chastise us, I am deeply offended. Significantly, the rest of Malaysia merely yawned, they have heard those same lectures once too often. What is particularly galling is that while you continually badger us to change, you yourself are stuck in your own feudal mentality and kampong (village) ways. While you with nauseating frequency exhort us to be thrifty and frugal, your own ostentatious lifestyles and other vulgar displays of wealth grate on us. Your “People Palace” at Putrajaya makes the White House a mere mansion.

You hector us to be berdikari (self reliant), but your kin and kind are the first to hog the public trough. You decry “money politics;” alas, UMNO degenerated into its present graft-ridden and patronage-laden culture while under your watch.

Malaysia enjoys unprecedented economic growth and spectacular improvement in its standard of living under your leadership. With prosperity comes greater tolerance. Under a different set of circumstances, our race alchemy could have easily exploded into another Bosnia. Instead, Malaysia today is a model plural society, a tribute to your stewardship. These together with your economic management (recent economic setbacks notwithstanding) are worthy achievements with few comparisons. No leader could achieve such extraordinary feats without the implicit trust and consent of his followers.

Such consent and trust however, are not without limits. And having experienced such superlative achievements, Malaysians would not now settle for mere satisfactory performances. Expectations have rightly risen. Unfortunately you do not sense this and continue to preach the same sermon.

Yet I do not give up hope. It is within you to make changes when you feel you need to. Who would have thought a Malay ultra (chauvinist) of the 1960’s would now command such wide and genuine support from non-Malays? You have successfully nursed the nation back to its economic health. And you did so by bravely defying the conventional wisdom. Your earlier defiance of the “Washington consensus” and advice of eminent economists brought much condemnation and ridicule; your later success, much praise and yes, also awe. I too revel in that reflected glory of your success.

You remind me of the brilliant surgeon who skillfully managed the life-threatening complication in his patient. Every one was suitably impressed and in awe of his virtuoso performance. That is until someone one quietly asks that basic question, “Doctor, how did your patient get that complication in the first place?”

Yes, you saved the nation economically. And yes, Malaysians are grateful for your brilliant deeds. Much as I praise your successful salvage operations, the gnawing questions remain. How could a mere currency speculator nearly cripple the country’s economy?


Next: The Next Young Mahathir

Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #98

Chapter 12: A Prescription For Malaysia

An Open Letter to the Prime Minister


May 13, 2000


Dear Yang Amat Berhormat Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, MBBS, SPMJ, DSDK, DP(Sarawak), DUPN, DKNS, SPCM, SPDK, SPNS, SSMT, DUK, DK(I), PIS, DK(Perlis), FICS(Hon), SSAP, DK(Kelantan):

I do hope that I have all your titles correct and honorifics up to date. It was so much easier in the old days when you were simply Dr. Mahathir! You seem invigorated lately by the West’s belated recognition of your considerable leadership qualities. While President Bush and others may have been slow in recognizing your talent, rest assured that for many Malaysians, your place in our history books is secure.

No segment of the populace has benefited more from your able leadership than Malays. It must therefore pain you immensely to see in the twilight of your career to have Malays turning against you. You may eerily wonder whether your fate might be like that of your predecessor, Tunku Abdul Rahman. He led the country peacefully to independence; despite that he was later hounded out of office and then ignominiously ignored. The old man later bitterly lamented that even the nation’s history books did not mention his name in recounting its path to freedom. It would be sad indeed were you to share Tunku’s destiny, a man you so mercilessly tormented 30 years ago. The irony would be providential.

The world has changed since the 9/11 terrorists’ attack, and not just in America. Whereas Americans once severely berated you for jailing those extremists, today those same leaders are lauding you for your decisive actions. You rightly see through their hypocrisy, but this time you were smart enough not vocalize it. Obviously to the West, preventive detention and other flagrant abuses of human rights and due process are fine as long as the targets are anti-Western elements.

On your part, you crow about how America is learning a thing or two from Malaysia by adopting some of the elements of the ISA in its new Patriot Act. I disagree with your assessment. The Patriot Act is meant for foreigners, not Americans; the ISA on the other hand is directed against our own citizens. In your enthusiasm for what you think you can teach America, you have missed this essential difference.

As leader you have given the nation much-needed direction, a vision. Your Vision 2020 aimed at turning Malaysia into a developed and moral society is truly, well, visionary. Unlike many leaders who are consumed with shouting one slogan after another, much like the leader caricatured in Shahnon Ahmad’s short story Ungkapan (Sloganeering), you have backed up your vision with careful planning and concrete proposals. Indeed I would argue, too much planning and too specific a proposal. There are dangers to both. Let me elaborate.

In the mid 1970s the City of Edmonton, Canada, was planning a massive suburban development. The city planners did something unusual. Instead of planning every detail they merely drew up conceptual drawings. They began filling in the details as development progressed. Instead of building expensive sidewalks and pedestrian paths immediately as was the usual practice for example, the planners left empty spaces. A year after the residents had moved in, the natural pathways that they had chosen would become obvious and the city would then pave them. Thus it avoided paving sidewalks that would rarely be used.

The lesson here is that we cannot always anticipate accurately everything; we must therefore be flexible and ready to modify our plans with changing conditions and on the feedback. In short, we should “plan for the unplanned.”

I am skeptical of elaborate plans; the more detailed they are the more detached they would be from reality. I have never been impressed with Malaysia’s multitude of Five Year Plans. They have a faint Soviet odor about them. The Seventh Malaysia Plan that began in 1995 was quickly reduced to irrelevance by the economic crisis of 1997.

It is naïve to think that every governmental activity could be forced into the same five-year time frame. Five years would be an eternity when dealing with Information Technology. On the other hand for education, a five-year span is too short. Policies on such an important issue as education must never be changed on a whim. The same is true of economic and trade policies. Investors want stability when making long-term investments. It would be smarter for each department or sector to have its own short- and long-term plans, with the time frame to be determined independently.

Thus instead of a flurry of meetings consuming the entire government machinery to the exclusion of its regular work and responsibility, have few select committees or commissions to study and recommend what the long-term missions are in specific areas like trade and education, and then develop the short-term plans to reach or achieve those goals in steps.

Having said that, I am still cautious and skeptical of central planning. The problem with Malays today is that our lives have been over-planned. We have been told to this and that, and then later reversed to that and this. In the end nothing works. We were told that our culture and values hinder us in the modern world, and then told to celebrate and hold high our heritage and ideals. We were told to ignore English and to use our Malay language instead, only to be later told on the importance of English. We are urged to pursue the sciences and yet we do not reward those who do take up the challenge. No wonder our people are confused. We have been yanked back and forth too many times.

As I have never believed that a committee or planning commission can achieve anything meaningful, I set forth my own ideas with a view that they would be a starting point for a national dialogue. Over the long term Malaysia must commit to joining the global mainstream, and be an active and contributing participant. We must recognize the inevitability of globalization and the further spread of free enterprise.

We must also recognize that these two trends would continue to evolve. A generation hence they will assume far different and better forms than what they are today. If we do not embrace them now, it would be that much more difficult to adjust later when we would inevitably be forced to join the mainstream.

Additionally we should commit to the ideals of a civil and moral society, and strive to be one. By this I mean a society that values individual rights and freedom; is ruled by law and civil institutions, and respectful of the differences among us. Like globalization and free enterprise, the detailed form and shape of a civil society will continue to evolve, modified by time and culture, but the sooner we embrace the concept the better we will be. It should not surprise us to discover that the ideals of a civil society as envisioned by civil libertarians in the West are also very much the ideals celebrated in Islam.

As a nation we are now closing in on our fifth decade. We have come a long away. We are a far different society today than we were a generation ago, in no small measure due to your enlightened leadership. The assumptions we have of ourselves then are no longer valid today, so too are our policies that were based on those assumptions. We need new strategies to meet fresh challenges.

Without being presumptuous I suggest six specific areas we should concentrate on in preparing our citizens for this new reality.

• Embrace the reality of globalization, free trade, and capitalism
• Enhance the competitiveness of all Malaysians
• Strengthen our laws and civil institutions
• Buttress our social fabric and safety net
• Optimize our natural attributes
• Empower our people

By committing to globalization we are sending a clear message not only to our citizens but also the world that Malaysia is now adopting international or universal standards. We no longer accept that being “good enough for Malaysia” is good enough. We are already doing many of these things. There is however, a significant difference in doing something grudgingly or because we have to, and doing it because we are committed to the ideals. It is all in the attitude, or as we say in our faith, the niat.

Right from the very beginning Malaysia wisely eschewed socialism, although we have not shied away from massive state interventions in the private sector. Initially the rationale was to achieve social and racial equity, but like so many government initiatives, these programs have a life and momentum of their own. Thus even though they have proven to be not the most effective ways of addressing the problems as well as their massive price tags, nonetheless they have persisted and expanded though sheer momentum.

You insist that the “commanding heights” and strategic sectors of the economy be under local or even public control, in the belief that they are too important to be left in the private sector or foreign hands. I disagree. I have no qualms were Malaysia Airlines (MAS) and our giant utility companies like Tenaga Nasional and Telekom Malaysia be controlled by foreigners.

The job of our government should be to ensure that we have enough trained Malaysians to be their executives, professionals, and technicians. There is no point in MAS being government-owned if it is a drain on the Treasury or if its local managers are incompetent. Our precious and limited resources ought to be diverted away from owning these expensive companies and instead directed towards developing our most precious asset: our people. Once we have an abundance of trained and capable personnel then it would be easy for us to start our own local ventures. What you are now doing is putting the cart before the horse. That has never worked and never will.

Your ambitious Multimedia Super Corridor project bogs down for lack of competent personnel. Your preoccupation with and frequent harping on the Bumiputra and non-Bumiputra rivalry is shortsighted and counter productive. We should make all Malaysians competitive. We should look upon each other not in terms of the Bumupitra and non-Bumiputra dichotomy, rather as potential clients, customers, and business partners. We would achieve this best under free enterprise. To a businessperson it does not matter where his profits come from: locally from his own kind or from foreigners.


Next: Embracing Globalization

Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #97

Chapter 12: A Prescription For Malaysia


In 1969, shortly after the traumatic race riot that nearly ripped Malaysia apart, an angry and impatient young politician wrote a most unusual letter to the prime minister at the time, Tunku Abdul Rahman. Written in Malay, the letter used the most polite and deferential language, tone, and form that characterized communications between a peasant and his ruler. It was classic of a feudal Malay society, as Malaysia was at that time. Despite that, the petition could not hide its blunt and trenchant message: The Tunku must go.

Such a frontal challenge to a leader was unprecedented in polite and highly structured traditional Malay society. Malay society prides itself in an orderly and predictable succession. That gauntlet could only have been thrown by someone either unbelievably stupid and reckless or very sure of himself and his assessment of the citizens’ mood.

What galled the Tunku was that the challenger was a low-level politician who had lost his parliamentary seat in the elections that took place just before the riot. Most losers in combat would quietly withdraw to lick their wounds, not come out swinging looking for new adversaries, at least not so soon afterwards! Yet there it was, the impudence and impertinence of a hitherto obscure political backbencher challenging the nation’s revered leader amidst a national crisis! Incensed, the Tunku saw to it that the politician was expelled from the party. Thus was how Mahathir bin Mohamad was stripped of his UMNO’s membership.

It was a tribute to the Tunku’s basic humanity that he did not do more. He could have easily behaved like the usual Third World leader and declared Mahathir “prejudicial to the security of Malaysia,” and thrown him into the slammer. Or worse! Many a Third World politician have met untimely fatal “accidents.” Mahathir in turn was smart enough to lay low and not further provoke the Tunku. If only some of today’s adversaries of Mahathir were as smart!

In the end the Tunku did resign, and the ever-wise Mahathir did not crow. After a suitable grace period in deference to the Tunku’s sensibility, his successor Tun Razak “rehabilitated” Mahathir and soon after, appointed him to the important position of Minister of Education. The rest, as the cliché goes, is history.

Thanks in large measure to Mahathir, today Malay society is less feudal; communications between the rulers and ruled are no longer formal, rigid, or deferential. They are direct and often frontal, dispensing with the ceremonial and reverential language of the past.

Mahathir is no Tunku, but more to the point, I am no Mahathir. I have simply chosen the following format of a letter to the prime minister merely as a literary device to summarize my book. Nothing more and nothing less! Thus I do not expect a Tunku-like response from Mahathir, nor do I await a Mahathir-like fate.


Next: An Open Letter to the prime Minister

Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #96

Chapter11: Embracing Free Enterprise

Encouraging Entrepreneurialism

Starting Small

The remarkable thing about these initiatives I describe is that individually and in the aggregate, they would cost very little. The default rate for such loans is very low, as demonstrated by the experience of Grameen Bank in Bangladesh. But the most important benefit of such a scheme is that it would encourage trade among ordinary Malays and teach them the value of business and free enterprise. This would help eradicate the ingrained mindset of forever waiting for the government or someone else to provide them with a paycheck.

Once we have succeeded in producing such low level entrepreneurs then we could move up the ladder, to professionals and sub-professionals like accountants, lawyers, and engineers. From there, the government could then target the bigger contractors and major players. And with involvement at each level, the government would have better experience in assessing the risks and viability of the various individuals and proposals.

The difference between my plan and the government’s present strategy is that I let the market decide who should get the benefit of government help, not some all-knowing civil servant back in Kuala Lumpur. Further my plan is considerably cheaper and impacts many more people, in contrast to the present where billions are being lavishly squandered on the few. Lastly my plan will produce real entrepreneurs, not the armchair types that the Malay community currently have in abundance.

The remarkable observation about many successful companies of today is that they all started small. HP and Apple Computer were both started by engineers tinkering in their garages. No Washington official earmarked them for success. Grooming entrepreneurs from below would prove more enduring and successful, in contrast to the present strategy of starting at the top.

My point is, we do not know where the next spark will come from. What is important is that we must create the conditions whereby should that spark ignite, it would start a chain of reactions far and beyond. This notion that some high and mighty bureaucrat or esteemed leader sitting in his air-conditioned office in Kuala Lumpur could pick industry winners, is pure bunk. And their track record proves it. The sooner Malaysian leaders disabuse themselves of this delusion the better it would be the nation.

One of the lessons of history is that no society that values order above everything else will encourage creativity among its citizenry. Such societies will be orderly all right, but they will not be creative or blazing new trails. The reverse is equally true, that is, without some degree of order, creativity will disappear.

Earlier I alluded to the history of ancient China. The Chinese of the 15th Century had all the necessary ingredients that could lead them and the world into greater heights and to launch their own Industrial Revolution. They already had blast furnaces and piston bellows for making steel, discovered and used gunpowder, compass, paper and printing. But a mighty emperor ruled them; his edict was law and it could not be challenged. In his wisdom he declared that those were useless inventions and ordered their activities stopped. Being an orderly society, the Chinese meekly complied. Four hundred years later the Europeans would reinvent what the Chinese were doing routinely centuries earlier.

Unlike the Chinese, these enterprising Europeans, unrestrained by a God-like emperor, were able to tinker with their inventions and collectively they ushered Europe into the Industrial Revolution.

Consider the polar opposite of China: Russia immediately preceding the Bolshevik Revolution. The chaos of a dying empire produced a slew of luminaries in both the arts and sciences. In the world of music and arts there were Stravinsky, Tchaikovsky, and Kasimir; in literature Tolstoy, Dostoevski, and Chekov; and science Mendeleyev (periodic table) and Pavlov (Physiology). Living in the chaos of a dying empire and unable to revolt against the powerful Czar, they bravely challenged orthodoxies in their own fields.

Had there been order and the Czar maintained his tight grip, he could have easily squashed these super achievers with their brash new ideas and creations. Creativity thrives in chaos but without some semblance of order, those Russians could not translate their brilliant innovations into a successful economy.

“To advance and use knowledge,” writes Lester Thurow, “a society needs the right combination of chaos and order.” Too much order (China) and you have stagnation; too much chaos (Pre Bolshevik Russia) and you would not be able to capitalize on those inventions. A contemporary example would be Japan (too much order that it stifles creativity) that now remains stagnant after a brief period of advancement, and America that thrives as it has found the right combination of chaos (freedom) and order.

What is true of economic and scientific activities is also true for the arts and other creative endeavors. As noted by my favorite poet Chairil Anwar, “In Art, vitality is the chaotic state; beauty the cosmic final state.”

These same dynamics between order and chaos also operate on the level of the individual: the tension between tradition and rebellion. Einstein’s early life had all the characteristics of a drop out: he quit school, renounced his citizenship, lived at the margins of society, and indeed regarded himself as a gypsy. Those early chaotic days belied his later genius. His General Theory of Relativity, a unitarian concept, ironically brings order to the apparent chaos that is the universe.

Chairil Anwar thrived in the chaotic days of pre-independent Indonesia. His most well known poem “Aku” (Me!) reeks with this fearless expression of rugged individualism and irrepressible yearning for freedom. To quote:

Aku ini binatang jalang (I am but a wild animal
Dari kumpulannya terbuang Cut from its kind
… …
Dan aku akan lebih tidak perduli and I should care even less
Aku mahu hidup seribu tahun lagi! I want to live for a thousand years!)

If there is indeed a Malaysian Chairil Anwar out there today, he would more likely have been kicked out of school; or if he ended up at the local university, he would have been long ago been detained under the ISA. But had he been born in America today, he would have earned millions writing lyrics for some hip hop groups or be lauded as the nation’s poet laureate.

It is for this reason (too much order) that I worry about young Malays attending religious schools. The emphasis there is on blindly following what is already established, with no room for critical thinking and independent thought. Any streak of independence is quickly stamped out. I do not expect to find future agents for change in Malay society to emerge from the present religious institutions.

Malaysia, and the Malay community in particular, has its fair share of the talented and enterprising. In their preoccupation for order and emphasis on conformity, Malaysian leaders are inadvertently snuffing out the independent spirits of their citizens. Progress depends on those daring to challenge the existing order and push the envelope beyond. Malaysian leaders must not only tolerate diversity and differences in opinions among the citizens but also more importantly, encourage and celebrate those differences. We must encourage divergent viewpoints, as we will never know which one will prove to be right. Sadly the leaders confuse unity with unanimity. Malay unity does not and should not mean Malay unanimity.

I look askance at the control freaks currently in charge in Malaysia. They have a penchant for controlling everything and everyone. They would prefer that their followers be like sheep, bleeping to their every command and following them blindly. It is a tribute to the enduring qualities of ordinary Malaysians that they are resisting to the best of their ability to maintain their spirit of merdeka (independence). Some openly rebel and end up being punished; others pay mere lip service to obedience, yet others affect embarrassing obsequiousness to the powers that be.

Events are with the people, not the leaders. With globalization and the spread of capitalism, the pace of these changes will hasten. It is for these reasons that I urge Malaysia to embrace free enterprise enthusiastically. But as Margaret Thatcher wisely observed in her book, Statecraft, there is a difference between doing something for pragmatic reasons (because they work) and doing so out of conviction. Capitalism has proven itself to be the best system to bring the greatest prosperity to the largest number of people. It is also compatible and consistent with our Islamic traditions. Islam began around free markets, and it is time we return to our roots. And do so with great conviction and enthusiasm.


Next: Chapter 12: A Prescription For Malaysia