The Malaysian Malaise: Excerpt #4: Time span Of These Commentaries

 The Malaysian Malaise: Corrupt Leadership, Failing Institutions, And Intolerant Islamism

M. Bakri Musa © 2023

 

Excerpt #4: Time Span Of These Commentaries

 

These essays, written between January 2020 to December 2022, cover the dangerous and politically uncertain period that also coincided with the lethal Covid-19 pandemic. With the better understanding of the virus and with that, effective interventions, the menace is now manageable. Not so for the other Malaysian malaise and maladies.

 

The season began auspicious enough when the long-ruling Barisan coalition was booted out in the 14th General Elections of May 2018. Then in an absurdity difficult to comprehend, the new coalition picked the 93-year-old Mahathir to lead. Nobody gave thought that it was this wily old man who was instrumental for the corrupt Najib Razak becoming Prime Minister in the first place. Instead, everyone now praised Mahathir, giving him full credit for defeating Najib. Nor did anyone ponder the incredulity that if Mahathir could not achieve what he wanted for Malaysia in his earlier 23 years as Prime Minister and when he was much younger, what hope would there be now that he was in his mid 90s, and ailing.

 

Mahathir’s failure during his first tenure was of omission as well as commission. As leader he failed in his fundamental responsibility of grooming the next generation of capable leaders. The abysmal failure of Abdullah Badawi, egregious corruption of Najib, abject incompetence of Muhyiddin, and the bumbling vacuity of Ismail Sabri reflect as much on them as on Mahathir.

 

As for Mahathir’s sins of commission, three stand out. And what a triple whammy! One, he was responsible for the entrenched culture of corruption in UMNO, and thus Malay leaders. He led the party for over two decades, and it bore all his dark traits. Two, he was responsible for the rise of political Islam, and with that, the deepening polarization of Malaysians as well as the degradation of the faith among Malays. Three, he weakened institutions as with the current rotting education system. He deemphasized English together with the concomitant emphasis on religion in national schools. The burden of both is borne by poor Malays.

 

Mahathir’s failure to groom honest, competent Malay leaders has resulted in their being consumed in one intrigue after another to grab and retain power, not to serve the nation as they are clueless in matters of statehood, but for personal gains. Ismail Sabri maintained his support among Members of Parliament only by bribing them with ministerial posts, Ambassadorships-At-Large, and chairmanships of the various government-linked corporations. 

 

The only positive development was the jailing of former Prime Minister Najib Razak for his massive pilfering of One Malaysia Berhad (1MDB–a government-linked company), the greatest (money-wise as well as global reach) scandal that began over a decade ago.

 

As a parenthesis, the United States Department of Justice first filed its civil money laundering charges against Najib (diplomatically dubbed as Malaysian Official 1) back in June 2016. It would be unnecessary to add that Najib’s own Attorney-General, one Apandi Ali, an UMNO operative, had earlier cleared Najib of any wrong doing!

 

Mahathir’s redeeming act during his second term was to co-opt a few outside talents, specifically Latheefa Koya as the new Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief and Tommy Thomas, Attorney-General. Latheefa endeared herself to Malaysians by releasing intercepted phone calls between one Dzulkifli Ahmad, Koya’s immediate predecessor as MACC Chief, and Prime Minster Najib while the former was then a prosecutor in the Attorney-General’s office. Dzulkifli was tipping then-Prime Minister Najib of impending criminal investigations against him in connection with the 1MDB scandal. It was painful as well as deeply embarrassing to hear those tapes. 

 

Thomas recruited outside lawyers to prosecute Najib. That was the right call even though not flattering to those mainly Malay career public prosecutors.

 

Earlier, Najib had forced the early retirement of both MACC Chief Abu Kassim and Attorney-General Gani Patail as the 1MDB crisis was about to blow open. Those two went away quietly. Now that Najib is secure in jail, I hope they will reveal what and when they knew about 1MDB. They owe Malaysians that duty.

 

Mahathir’s one good deed in appointing Latheefa and Thomas was later overshadowed by his aggressively promoting that semburit (anal) character, one Azmin Ali.  Azmin trumpeted having an economics degree from the University of Minnesota, a major public university, but coyly neglected to mention that his was not from its flagship and prestigious Minneapolis campus rather one of its “ulu” branches. His major, economics education, is more a degree in education. “Economics education,” like “industrial economics” (Najib’s major) and “economic history,” is for those unable to handle the rigorous mathematics of the “real” discipline. 

 

In championing Azmin, Mahathir again demonstrated his singular inability to assess talent. Thank goodness, Mahathir’s resignation spared Malaysia the possible leadership of this semburit character.  Mahathir learned nothing from his earlier blunders with Abdullah Badawi and Najib Razak. 

 

 

Mahathir later regretted having appointed Thomas. That in turn exposes a far greater flaw in Mahathir’s character beyond his inability to recognize talents. He considers them threats rather than assets.

 

Next: Excerpt # 5: On My Commentaries

Perfect Poster Boy For Term Limits

The Malaysian Malaise: Corrupt Leadership, Failing Institutions, And Intolerant Islamism

M. Bakri Musa © 2023

Excerpt #3: Perfect Poster Boy For Term Limits

Leaders like Mahathir, together with his ilk like Indonesia’s Sukarno and later Suharto, as well as the Philippines’ Marcos, Sr., show the wisdom of having term limits. Even America, despite the spectacular success of Franklin D Roosevelt and his New Deal, saw the wisdom of the 22nd Amendment - limiting her President to two consecutive terms.

The angst in China today is that Chairman Xi, without doubt a far more effective leader than Mahathir was or could ever hope to be, is now amending the Chinese Communist Party’s constitution to allow for his serving beyond two terms. To the Chinese, memories and evidence of the follies of the Great Helmsman Mao are still fresh on their minds. If Indonesia had not imposed term limits post-Suharto, the republic would not today be blessed with her Jokowi.

The world has seen far too many leaders who have overstayed their welcome, with the Muslim world having a glut of them. Mahathir should have been impeached, investigated, or resigned for his role in the Asian economic contagion of 1997. More to the point, had term limits been operative in Malaysia then, she would have been spared at least the worst of the Asian contagion. In jailing Anwar Ibrahim post-Asian Contagion, Malaysia punished the wrong leader.

Much has been written on the obscene greed and egregious corruption of Najib in his pilfering of 1MDB and other sordid deeds. Less acknowledged is that Najib is the product of Mahathir’s tutelage, his political son. More directly, Mahathir was also responsible for the 2008 removal of Abdullah Badawi and making Najib the Prime Minister.

Najib learned well from his mentor, but not well enough. The only and crucial difference between the two is this. Najib lost the election and was pushed out. With that his many sins were exposed. Mahathir won all his elections, thus his sins and blunders remained hidden. Consider such debacles as the massive foreign exchange loss prior and contributing to the Asian contagion, as well as the earlier equally massive London Tin loss when Mahathir thought that he was smarter than those professional commodity traders and thus could outsmart them. The magnitude of that loss has yet to be accounted. Likewise with the Bank Bumiputra collapse, and many others yet unacknowledged, much less accounted for under his watch.

Economist K S Jomo in one of his many books enumerated Mahathir’s innumerable economic blunders pre-Asian Contagion. Fast forward to two decades later, Jomo was co-opted into Mahathir’s Council of Eminent Persons. So we cannot blame ordinary, less sophisticated Malaysians for having been enamored and taken in by Mahathir this second time around. If Malaysia had term limits back then, she would have been spared these burdens. In short, Mahathir is the perfect poster boy for the campaign for term limits for Malaysia.

Having term limits for leaders is no panacea. For one, Singapore would have been deprived of her Lee Kuan Yew. For another, Indonesia could have benefitted from another term with her Jokowi had there not been term limits.

The American term limits provision has effectively, and unfairly in my view, reduced a single-term president as a “failed one.” Consequently the moment someone is elected , he or she would be consumed with getting re-elected instead of focusing on being an effective leader. Thus the better part of the first year would be consumed with assembling his team; the second, distracted by the midterm elections, and then the final fourth year obsessed with campaigning for re-election. That is the major flaw with the present American system.

One-term President Carter is today revered by Americans, surpassing many of his colleagues who had served two terms. More pertinent, he remains the only President in my lifetime to have kept America from meddling in wars in other countries.

Those considerations notwithstanding, term limits would have spared Malaysia many grand debacles during Mahathir’s second decade and tenure of leadership.

,

Next: Excerpt #4: Time Span Of These Commentaries

Downside To Increasing Civil Service Pay

 Downside To Increasing Civil Service Pay

M. Bakri Musa

 

The recent increase in civil servants’ pay, though long overdue, carries significant but less appreciated downside for Malays. Likewise, the much earlier decision to raise the mandatory retirement age to over 60. As the civil service is overwhelmingly Malay, both moves are seen as yet another manifestation of preferential treatment. I see it as otherwise if not downright counterproductive.

 

This salary raise increases the cost of running the government. As a nation’s finance is finite and a zero-sum exercise, more money for the public sector means a corresponding reduction for the private. However, it is the latter that contributes to economic growth and thus an expanding tax base. 

 

Controlling the cost of government lies less with emoluments, more with rationalizing its role and functions. Government has for example no business running a business. Leave that to the entrepreneurs. Eliminating the Ministry of Public Enterprises would cut government spending considerably while at the same time making it more effective and efficient. America won the most Olympic medals, yet she does not have a Sports Ministry.

 

 Likewise the government’s involvement in religion; faith is a private matter. Besides, Islam does not need defenders. It survived the Mongol invasion; it can do without JAKIM (the Malay acronym for the agency in charge of Islam). Ponder that more mosques are being built in America today and the faith fast expanding, yet she does not have any department of religion, much less that of Islam.

 

JAKIM and similar agencies at the state level and elsewhere are but massive and expensive public works programs for otherwise unemployable Malays. Expanding such agencies would only encourage more Malays to pursue the already glutted Islamic Studies.

 

Ponder the good it would do if those saved funds were instead diverted to providing internet access and equipping science laboratories in rural schools where the students are overwhelmingly Malays. Also, imagine if those JAKIM personnel were deployed to clean parks and roads. That would do society more good, and garner more pahala (good deeds) for the individuals.

 

As income tax rates are progressive, the cost of government is disproportionately borne by the rich, and rightly so. In Malaysia, that means non-Malays. Likewise with tax on goods and services. Meanwhile, increasing civil service pay and having government-linked enterprises both benefit mainly Malays.

 

            Those considerations aside, less appreciated is the negative impact on Malays. In the late 1950s, Tun Razak lowered the civil service optional retirement age to 40 so as to encourage Malay civil servants to leave and enter the private sector. That emboldened young Hanafiah, Raslan, and Mohamad to leave government service to start their accounting firm (HRM) that would later become a major global player. Italy did something similar after the war. In both instances, with the security of a pension, those young retired civil servants could take risks. 

Subsequently many Malay professionals trained under public scholarships would follow suit. 

 

            In the late 1980s when the government could not employ many newly graduated Malays on scholarships because of the economic downturn, that had an unexpected positive consequence. Those young Malays were then forced to enter the private sector.

 

            It is significant that the first Malaysian legal firm to have a major presence outside the country was Zaico, started by Zaid Ibrahim. He was later seduced by politics, an all-too-common weakness of young Malays, and sold his equity in the company. Today he rues that decision! Being an equity partner of a major law firm is far more rewarding (not just money-wise) than being a cabinet minister.

 

            In a recent posting, Zaid suggested that Malays be “forced” into business. Reducing the number of Malays in the civil service would achieve that end; conversely, increasing the pay would increase their inertia to remain in government. The experience of the late 1980s seemed to indicate that Zaid may be on to something. At that time because of economic constraints, the government was forced to break its promise to employ every Malay who had graduated on government scholarship. That resulted in an infusion of Malays into the private sector. That was good for Malays and Malaysia.

 

A slight twice. Many years ago a smart Malay graduate of an elite American university related to me how he had schemed to “bomb” his job interview with the Public Service Commission. He succeeded. Thus freed of his scholarship bonds, he returned to America to land a job with a leading technology company, and no scholarship penalty to pay back! 

 

            You need superior pay to attract talent. You can achieve that without increasing the total cost of government.  Canada’s population is comparable to Malaysia and she has a much larger territory to boot. Yet her Ministry of Finance (edifice as well as personnel) dwarfs that of Malaysia. While Malaysia was crippled by the 1997 Asian economic contagion, Canada withstood the 2008 economic storm that shook America. Yes, Canadian civil servants are very well paid and entry into it highly competitive. 

 

            Raising the mandatory retirement age also carries its own drawbacks, again not much appreciated. By the time they retire, those old civil servants are already set in their ways. Coupled with a generous pension, they have little incentive to venture out. More pernicious, their last year would be consumed lobbying for positions in the many government-linked companies. 

 

            America has for the most part done away with mandatory retirement age, deeming it “age discrimination.” It saddens me to see so many still productive Malaysians years my junior now retired, doing nothing. With Malaysia short of STEM teachers and professors for example, that is a crying shame and a colossal waste of precious talent. Malaysia, in particular the Malay community, cannot afford that.