Categories
Liberty Politics & government

[1804] Of Koh is one of the fathers of doublespeak

In The Malaysian Insider:

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 11 — Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has been dubbed the “Father of Democratic Reforms” by Gerakan president Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon.

In his opening speech this morning at Gerakan’s national delegates conference, Koh said that “as the Prime Minister, Abdullah has initiated reforms for good governance and promoted commitment to integrity. As an advocate for democracy, he has opened up more space for expression to Malaysians.” [Koh dubs Pak Lah ‘Father of Democratic Reforms’. Shannon Teoh. The Malaysian Insider. October 11 2008]

I am wary of doing the same thing.

While it is during the Abdullah administration when the Malaysian society reclaims greater democratic space and effectively larger liberty stolen from it by the state, practically none of it is due to active action by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. The greater democracy is made possible through effort of various individuals willing enough to stand up and stare back at the state when the state stares at them.

PM Abdullah has failed to reform anything. Each reform he initiated is going nowhere due to opposition from within his own party.

It took free individuals to push organic reform agendas by pushing the frontier of an illiberal state away from suffocating free individuals. To have PM Abdullah enjoying the appellation denies the real contributors who stand in the front line to contest against an arm of the state, the police which is more interested in suppressing freedom rather than fighting crime.

Having the PM as the “Father of Democratic Reforms” steals the honor from those who actually fought for greater democratic space, those that fought against the PM as well as the relentless machinery of Barisan Nasional. The victory is of individuals too many to list here and not of an ineffective personality as well as the machinery that maintains deep disdain for democratic space.

If there is anybody that deserves that honor, it should be the individuals who fought for it. We do not have a “Father of Democratic Reform”. We instead have “Fathers of Democratic Reform” and the PM is not one of them.

Dr. Koh is committing doublespeak for suggesting the sobriquet for the PM. Would we thank the Nazis for losing World War II? Would we thank PM Abdullah for losing the war in our backyard?

Categories
Liberty Society

[1796] Mengenai buang negara bangsa untuk nasionalisme yang terluas

Sering kali saya terdengar akan keperluan untuk rakyat Malaysia membentuk satu nasionalisme baru untuk mengatasi cabaran masa muka. Dengan mudahnya, nasionalisme ini mengimpikan satu bangsa yang merangkumi semua rakyat Malaysia, di mana semua memiliki hak-hak yang saksama tanpa pilih kasih. Ramai mengenali nasionalisme baru ini sebagai bangsa Malaysia. Walaupun saya mungkin bersimpati dengan konsep ini berbanding dengan apa yang sedang dipegang oleh pihak yang masih berselindung di dalam sangkar perkauman, saya berpendapat bahawa bangsa Malaysia berada tidak jauh dari tarikh luputnya.

Sebelum kita berbicara tentang mengapa saya berfikiran demikian, kita perlu memahami mengapa bangsa Malaysia lahir. Tidak perlu kita membelek buku-buku sejarah, politik ataupun falsafah untuk memahami perkara itu. Jawapan ringkas tetapi tepat boleh diperoleh dari batu asas kepada pemikiran kenegaraan yang memperjuangkan satu bangsa yang mengandungi pelbagai kaum untuk satu negara; batu asas itu adalah negara bangsa atau nation-state.

Negara di sini bukan yang segera difahami oleh semua. Bahasa Melayu — seperti apa yang akan ditegaskan oleh penyorak-penyorak bangsa Malaysia, bahasa Malaysia atau sekurang-kurangnya pembicaraan popular tempatan yang bersangkut paut tentang kenegaraan — gagal membezakan konsep country (negara, negeri atau wilayah boleh dilukis di atas kertas), nation (negara atau lebih tepat bangsa) dan state (negara sebagai satu institusi) secara memuaskan. Kekeliruan ini menjadikan perdebatan tentang negara Islam di Malaysia berganjak satu perkara yang penting kepada satu pertunjukan sarkas yang tidak bermakna. Susah untuk seseorang itu memastikan sama ada penyokong dan penentang negara Islam berdebat tentang Islamic state atau Islamic country. Ini sendiri membuatkan saya duduk jauh daripada perbahasan mengenai negara Islam di mana para pendebat tidak sedar akan perbezaan penting ini.

Kembali kepada perkara pokok dengan harapan masalah penterjemaah tidak mengaburi apa yang saya mahu kongsi bersama, negara bangsa mengatakan bahawa sesuatu bangsa, satu kelompok manusia yang berkongsi warna kulit, bahasa, agama atau secara amnya budaya, berhak mentadbir dirinya sendiri. Pentadbiran ini direalisasikan dengan mendirikan satu institusi iaitu negara atau state.

Pemimpin-pemimpin Malaya dan kemudiannya Malaysia sendiri cuba mendirikan negara kita di atas konsep negara bangsa, di mana bangsa itu adalah bangsa Malaya (Malayan) and kemudiannya Malaysia (Malaysian). Bagi negara yang berbilang kaum, pelbagai bangsa, usaha untuk mendirikan satu negara bangsa akan bertemu dengan satu halangan yang besar: ketiadaan satu bangsa organik yang merangkumi semua bangsa; ketiadaan bangsa mengiakan negara yang mengandungi pelbagai bangsa organik; tiada bangsa yang organik yang menerima bangsa Melayu, Cina, India dan ”bangsa lain-lain” sebagai anggota dengan yakin.

Mungkin bangsa longgar wujud beberapa dekad setelah imigrasi besar-besaran ke negeri-negeri Melayu serta Borneo berlaku. Pendapat ini bagaimanapun terlampau bersifat subjektif dan sukar dibentuk di dalam minda dengan baiknya tanpa pencanggahan.

Walau bagaimanapun, jika kita melupakan sementara masalah definisi itu dengan semangat pragmatisme, bangsa yang baru itu tidak bernama dan hanya dirujuk sebagai satu apabila negara kita terdiri. Dalam usaha untuk mengesahkan negara ini dari pandangan negara bangsa, konsep kerakyatan tidak mencukupi. Keperluan untuk membentuk satu bangsa tiruan wujud di atas ketiadaan bangsa organik. Oleh itu, bangsa longgar yang tidak bernama itu mula dirujuk sebagai bangsa Malaysia, bersemperna negara Malaysia.

Tetapi, falsafah yang diketengahkan oleh negara bangsa berdiri dengan tanggapan yang satu bangsa itu berhak untuk mentadbirkan dirinya sendiri. Soalan yang perlu ditanya adalah ini: perlukan sesuatu negara itu berdiri dengan bangsa sebagai tunggak asas?

Malaysia sendiri berjaya dibentuk tanpa adanya bangsa yang satu. Penekanan terhadap bangsa Malaysia hanya berlaku selepas terbentuknya negara Malaysia. Ini adalah satu tanda yang mengatakan negara bangsa itu tidak menjadi satu syarat dalam pembentukan negara.

Yang lebih ditakutkan, konsep negara bangsa itu sendiri mungkin akan membawa kepada perpecahan negara. Malaysia mempunyai sekurang-kurangnya tiga bangsa yang berpengaruh besar. Jika konsep negara bangsa dipatuhi dengan taatnya, lambat laun Malaysia akan terbahagi kepada sekurang-kurangnya tiga negara. Ini belum lagi mengambil kira perbezaan agama yang boleh menjadi asas kepada pemikiran negara bangsa.

Di negara-negara lain seperti Perancis, negara bangsa tidak lagi memainkan peranan utama dalam pentadbiran negara. Malah, Kesatuan Eropah sendiri tidak memerlukan satu bangsa luas untuk mengemudi dirinya ke hadapan. Kesatuan tersebut ada masalah-masalahnya sendiri tetapi perlu diingatkan, pembentukan negara itu sendiri memerlukan masa. Apa yang ingin disampai di sini ialah konsep kerakyatan itu sendiri sudah mencukupi.

Tambahan pula, demografik sesuatu negara sering berubah. Pergerakan manusia serta modal yang semakin bebas sering menukarkan kandungan bangsa sintetik seperti konsep bangsa Malaysia itu sendiri. Apabila kandungan bangsa sintetik itu diubah disebabkan pergaulan di antara bangsa-bangsa organik dan lebih penting, para individu, apakah perlu kita mengembleng tenaga sekali lagi untuk mentakrifkan bangsa yang baru? Adakah perlu kita melindungi takrifan bangsa sintetik itu daripada berubah?

Perubahan itu bagaimanapun tidak meminta konsep kerakyatan berubah, jika asas kerakyatan itu bersifat liberal dan buta kepada idea negara bangsa.

Saya sebagai seseorang individu mahu mendekati satu bentuk nasionalisme yang lebih unggul dan luas daripada yang berasaskan negara bangsa. Kita perlu melihat lebih jauh dari konsep bangsa. Ini tidak bermakna kita harus menghapuskan bangsa-bangsa organik. Kita semua adalah seorang individu dan setiap individu itu berhak menentukan cara hidup mereka sendiri dengan syarat tindakan mereka itu tidak merampas hak-hak yang sama yang dinikmati oleh orang-orang lain.

Sebagai satu negara yang kecil, kita harus cergas menerima apa yang terbaik daripada tamadun manusia. Sudah hilang waktu di mana kita boleh melihat kepada kaum kita sendiri untuk mencari kekuatan. Kita harus menjemput mereka yang ingin berusaha untuk membina kehidupan yang terulung walaupun mereka orang asing. Negara atau masyarakat yang mengandungi individu-individu ini akan menaikkan taraf kehidupan masyarakat itu sendiri. Selamat datang diucapkan kepada mereka yang ingin menyumbang dan sanggup menghormati hak-hak individu terhadap kebebasan.

Nasionalisme saya berkisar kepada pembukaan sempadan kita kepada mereka yang terlatih untuk membangunkan negara. Sebelum itu berlaku, kesaksamaan hak-hak terhadap kebebasan perlu dijamin. Nasionalisme ini perlu melindungi semua dengan sama rata, tanpa mengira kerakyatan. Negara yang menjamin semua ini akan menarik yang terbaik di kalangan manusia dan seterusnya membolehkan kita membina satu tamadun yang hebat tanpa sekatan yang terbina atas nama ketakutan.

Konsep negara bangsa merupakan satu sekatan untuk kita maju ke hadapan, jauh meninggalkan yang lain yang masih terkongkong di dalam pemikiran lama.

Saya yakin, inilah nasionalisme yang tertinggi dan terbaik, di mana bangsa itu adalah bangsa manusia. Tidak perlu kita mewujudkan bangsa yang sintetik untuk bersatu. Hanya yang diperlukan adalah kesanggupan untuk kita untuk hormat-menghormati hak-hak asasi individu tanpa memilih kasih.

Nasionalisme yang terluas inilah yang akan mengatasi nasionalisme yang lain.

Baiklah.

Saya mengaku.

Ini sebenarnya menuju ke arah liberalisme.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

Satu versi tulisan ini telah pertama kali diterbitkan di Bolehland.

Categories
Conflict & disaster Liberty

[1795] Of zero tolerance for piracy is the answer

While I am happy to learn that the two MISC ships hijacked by pirates off the Horn of Africa earlier have been freed, the method — USD4 million was reportedly paid — to secure the freedom of the ships as well as its crew is far from ideal.[1][2] There is no guarantee for the episode not to repeat itself.

It seems clear that the pirates based in Somalia are purely in it for the money and are not driven by some ideological struggle. Several other ships from different countries of origin have also been hijacked and the pirates’ demands are clear and consistent. They want money. Indeed, when the pirates hijacked an Ukrainian ship ladened with military equipments, the demand remains the same: money. They are uninterested in the cargo of the ship, at least, so far.[3]

The act of succumbing to the demand of the pirates pays off the pirates’ effort. Piracy of the kind off the coast of Somalia will continue to occur as long as there are profits for them. For them to enjoy profits, their revenue from piracy has to keep coming in while the cost of doing so continues to be under control.

Revenue will continue as long as there are entities like MISC which pay off ransom and cost will continue to be controlled as long as no one fights back.

To stop piracy, piracy has to be turned into an unprofitable industry. Victims need to persistently refuse to meet the pirates’ demands while upholding private property and individual liberty. In other words, there is a requirement to fight back. Failure to fight back increases the cost of trade and affects economic growth.

France so far has been the only state resorting to force against the pirate. Their operations have been successful.[4] The French did request for Malaysian aid in one of its operations but Malaysia turned down due to ongoing negotiation between MISC and the pirates.[5]

There is already a multinational force patrolling the area. Among them are the United States, Russia, Germany and France.[6][6a] There are also talks that South Africa — a regional power — might might be joining the force.[7]

Malaysia had three military vessels active in the area after two MISC ships were hijacked but with the release, the Royal Malaysian Navy vessels are escorting the MISC ships back home.[8]

Being a victim, Malaysia should really join the multinational force to convey to the pirates that Malaysia does not intend to see a repeat of the episode and that Malaysia is prepared to fight back. Presence in the area could also give Malaysian vessels passing through the Red Sea extra protection since we would have a say in the multinational force. Extra attention could be given to Malaysian vessels.

But are the presence of military ships in Somalian waters a violation of sovereignty?

No. These foreign vessels are there because the United Nations Security Council grants permission for foreign warships to enter Somalian waters to fight piracy.[9] In fact, even the de jure government of Somalia allows these foreign vessels to operate in Somalia to fight piracy.[10] This easily alleviates my concern regarding violation of sovereignty.

Whether it is a matter of time before the growing presence of heavily-equipped foreign navies around Somalia will reduce the incidences of piracy there, the state of anarchy is Somalia is beginning to adversely affect the neutral others. No longer countries like Malaysia which are reliant on international trade could sit idly and watch from afar. Active participation in effort to combat the piracy is required; the new Defense Minister which is also the Prime Minister needs to flex some muscle.

The surest way to reduce the threats of piracy is to have international force in Somalia, on the ground, or at least in the ports which these pirates operate from. Effective controls over these ports is a necessity in combating piracy.

Resorting to settlement with the pirates as MISC had done does little in protecting private property and individual liberty for Malaysians as well as for others. In fact, MISC will only establish a reputation of succumbing to ransom demand for itself, possibly making its vessels popular targets in the future. And since the MISC vessels fly the Malaysian flag, the implication is not pretty for any vessel flying the Malaysian flag.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — Hassan slammed Malaysia’s local media for speculating that a total ransom of US$4 million was paid. [Pirates off Somalia free second Malaysian ship. International Herald Tribune. September 30 2008]

[2] — The release of MT Melati Lima on Sept 28 and MT Bunga Melati Dua yesterday brought about relieve and joy to millions of Malaysians and Muslims worldwide, preparing to celebrate Hari Raya Aidilfitri tomorrow. [MT Melati 5 release brings joy and relieve to Rizal’s family. Bernama via New Straits Times. September 30 2008]

[3] — Pirate Sugule Ali told the AFP news agency by satellite phone that his group wanted a ransom of $20m (£11m) and were not interested in the weapons. [Warships surround Somali pirates. BBC. September 29 2008]

[4] — France, which has troops in nearby Djibouti and also participates in a multi-national naval force patrol in the area, has intervened twice to release French sailors kidnapped by pirates.

Commandos freed two people whose boat was hijacked in the Gulf of Aden earlier this month and in April, six arrested pirates were handed over to the French authorities for trial. [US destroyer nears Somali pirates. BBC. September 28 2008]

[5] — KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia’s help was sought by the French navy in Tuesday’s daring rescue of a French couple held by Somali pirates on their luxury yacht in the Gulf of Aden.

The Royal Malaysian Navy, however, had to turn down the request for fear of jeopardising ongoing negotiations to free two hijacked Malaysian vessels — the MT Bunga Melati Dua and MT Bunga Melati Lima, owned by Malaysian International Shipping Corporation (MISC). [France sought our navy’s help. Adrian David. New Straits Times. September 29 2008]

[6] — See Combined Task Force 150 as well as Piracy in Somalia at Wikipedia. Accessed October 1 2008.

[6a] — A Russian warship headed for the seas off Somalia Friday after pirates seized a Ukrainian freighter carrying 33 tanks, munitions and other weaponry, officials said. [Russia sends warship after Somali pirates. Japan Today. September 29 2008]

[7] — Pirate Sugule Ali told the AFP news agency by satellite phone that his group wanted a ransom of $20m (£11m) and were not interested in the weapons. [Pirates die strangely after taking Iranian ship. Andrew Donaldson. The Times. September 28 2008]

[8] — The Malaysian government later dispatched three Royal Malaysian navy vessels – KD Lekiu, KD Inderapura and KD Pahang – to escort MISC ships home. [MT Melati 5 release brings joy and relieve to Rizal’s family. Bernama via New Straits Times. September 30 2008]

[9] — The UN security council has unanimously adopted a resolution allowing foreign warships to enter Somalia’s territorial waters to fight piracy. [Warships to combat Somalia piracy. Al Jazeera. June 3 2008]

[10] — See Piracy in Somalia at Wikipedia. Accessed October 1 2008.

Categories
Economics Liberty Politics & government

[1791] Of popular capitalism is nothing less than a crusade

Margaret Thatcher speaking at the Conservative Party Conference in 1986:

[youtube]kMSGW0otfrs[/youtube]

This Government has rolled back the frontiers of the State, and will roll them back still further.

So popular is our policy that it’s being taken up all over the world.

From France to the Phillipines, from Jamaica to Japan, from Malaysia to Mexico, from Sri Lanka to Singapore, privatisation is on the move, there’s even a special oriental version in China.

The policies we have pioneered are catching on in country after country.

We Conservatives believe in popular capitalism—believe in a property-owning democracy.

And it works!

In Scotland recently, I was present at the sale of the millionth council house: to a lovely family with two children, who can at last call their home their own.

Now let’s go for the second million!

And what’s more, millions have already become shareholders.

And soon there will be opportunities for millions more, in British Gas, British Airways, British Airports and Rolls-Royce.

Who says we’ve run out of steam.

We’re in our prime!

The great political reform of the last century was to enable more and more people to have a vote.

Now the great Tory reform of this century is to enable more and more people to own property.

Popular capitalism is nothing less than a crusade to enfranchise the many in the economic life of the nation.

We Conservatives are returning power to the people.

That is the way to one nation, one people.

Categories
Education Liberty Personal Society

[1783] Of breaking free from a cursed shackle

I experienced a tremendous surge of security today and I have not felt such feeling in such a long time. The only regret I have is that I did not set a higher target for myself. I might have set a goal too low for myself. Ever since graduation a few years ago from Ann Arbor, life has consistently tried to bring me down and the toll it took on my confidence was breaking me. My self-esteem suffered but after a few rallying personal events, I am on my way back up.

I am happy because I am overcoming the shadow of my former self. I am winning against myself.

I have secured my path into the future. That path was in the state of flux previously and I really did not know what I wanted in life. There were too many unknowns to think of, too many factors to consider, too many calculations required. Too many a time, I found myself staring blankly outside to see everything but see nothing.

Now, however, now, the path forward is as clear as daylight and all I need to do now is walk down the lane and never to look back. I have earned a place for a post-graduate work abroad.

If everything goes well for the next few months, I should be out of this country again. The only issue that may pull me back is matter of finance. A back-of-the-envelope suggests I need to raise approximately RM100,000 in the next few months to live comfortably, on top of whatever savings that I have at the moment. Despite the my training, I was surprised of the requirement for additional fund. I had budgeted that I would be able to fund myself through this journey. As it turned out, I have not considered my whole expected expenses in a comprehensive manner. That is my only fear.

Despite concerning regarding the additional money which I need to raise, the fact that I am able to depend on my ability through and through thrills me. It thrills me because this is the chance for me to escape from one criticism which I think is unfair and I extremely deplore.

In A Malaysian Journey, Rehman Rashid writes something to the effect that the Malays are cursed of not knowing whether he had succeed because of his ability or because of affirmative action. My personal experience has taught me the truth of those words. Given my unfriendly position with respect to the flawed affirmative action in Malaysia, my critics have used that very same idea raised by Rehman Rashid against me.

I went to the Malay College and I attended the University of Michigan. While Michigan accepted me based on merit, it is really hard to say if the government scholarship which I received to go to Michigan as well as the somewhat subsidized education which I was obtained at the Malay College was on merit or simply because of the affirmative action. I therefore grappled to answer criticism against my position to the affirmative action.

I cannot live with that. Only the stars know how much I want to silent my critics and a spot in a post-graduate program gives me the chance to do everything on my own, the personal responsibility which I am undertaking, provides everything that I need.  It provides me the hammer for me to use to break free from that curse, once and for all, and more.

I earned my time to bask in the sun and nobody, nobody, can rob me of this. I am now free in one more aspect of my life.