Categories
ASEAN Conflict & disaster

[2083] Of reaction to the death of Noordin Mohammed Top

Death is always unpleasant for life is always too precious to waste. Hence, I greet the death of Noordin Mohammed Top with a kind of bitter sweet feeling. Part of me regretted it while the other half is happy to learn that regional terrorist network has lost an important figurehead.[1]

His ideal is disagreeable and the mean to his end is even more disagreeable. His death is a testament of the idiom those who live by the sword will die by the sword. Noordin chose that path and he knew it. He violated the non-aggression axiom and by doing so, he legitimized effort taken on his life by others hurt by his actions.

I do not know how this may affect terrorist activity in the region but hopefully, it means reduced probability of attacks in Indonesia. I have mentioned that I have high hope for Indonesia to spearhead democratic change in Southeast Asia and become the symbol of aspiration for all liberal democrats in the region. If indeed the death of Noordin leads to a more stable Indonesia on average, then the development of a democratic Southeast Asia — and really, I am first and foremost concerned with democracy in Malaysia — comes one step closer to fruition.

Apart from that, I do hope the death of Noordin would build a new bridge between Malaysia and Indonesia. It is in this sense that I am most glad that Noordin is now dead. The recent spat between Malaysia and Indonesia has been damaging to regionalism in Southeast Asia. His destructive action has been raised by angry Indonesians as a Malaysian product. Malaysia exports terrorism, as some Indonesians accuse Malaysia.

This is most unfair because the Malaysian government and a majority of Malaysians, as I believe, do not support him. Yet, he was a Malaysian and that is undeniable and that is an embarrassing fact for me to admit, especially to foreigners and to my Indonesian friends.

Nevertheless, a torn is now gone.

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

[1] — ASIAN terrorist mastermind Noordin Mohammed Top, the man responsible for plotting the 2002 and 2005 Bali bombings, has been killed during an Indonesian police raid against suspected Islamist militants in Central Java.

Top was one of four people who died during the raid yesterday on a militant hideout near Solo, Indonesia’s police chief, Bambang Hendarso Danuri, confirmed last night.. [Bali mastermind Noordin Top killed in Indonesian raid. The Australian. September 18 2009]

Categories
ASEAN History & heritage Society

[2070] Of Indonesia did not create the tune of Negaraku or Terang Bulan

I do feel that in many cases, general Malaysians do have unfair perception of Indonesia as well as have acted unfairly against far too many Indonesians living in Malaysia. But the current sentiment in Indonesia is bordering a ridiculous level. Silly jingoism is playing out in Indonesia.

In the Jakarta Globe, a state recording executive claims that Malaysia — to use the zeigeist of anti-Malaysia in Indonesia — ‘stole’ the tune of Negaraku from the Indonesian song of Terang Bulan.

An executive of Lokananta, a state recording company based in Solo has drawn attention to Malaysia’s national anthem, ”Negaraku,” claiming that it is suspiciously similar in tune to ”Terang Bulan,” a song written by the Bandung Ensemble and first recorded by Lokananta in March 1956 — a year before Malaysia’s independence was announced on Aug. 31, 1957.

”Terang Bulan is a keroncong song, meant for entertainment. Why did they take it for their anthem?” asked Ruktiningsih, head of Lokananta.

”Does Malaysia really have no dignity at all?”

Keroncong is a melodious musical genre that has its roots in Portuguese music and is usually played on violins, flutes and a small, ukelele-like guitar.

Ruktiningsih said that ”Terang Bulan” was one of 49 Indonesian songs recorded in Jakarta by national radio station RRI on the orders of then President Sukarno in 1956. The songs were later made into a record by Lokananta. [Malaysian anthem actually Indonesian, says record company. Candra Malik. Jakarta Globe. August 29 2009]

Let us disregard the fact that modern Southeast Asian states, Indonesia and Malaysia included, did not exist before about mid-20th century. Let us ignore the fact that the current boundary between the two countries only came into existence in the 1820s by virtue of the 1824 Anglo-Dutch Treaty. Let us ignore that culture spread and shared by lands what are now called Indonesia and Malaysia. Let us ignore too that many Indonesian citizens became Malaysians in modern times and that they too practice their culture, which is more or less similar to Indonesian, bar assimiliation process that occurred while their adopt local practice.

Even after discounting those historical accidents, the insinuation is odd.

It is odd because the tune was first recorded to be heard in Seychelles in mid-19th centry, and first played by the government of Perak as its state anthem in 1888 or 1901 in England. On top of that, the tune was composed by a Frenchman. The Federation of Malaya later decided to modify Perak’s anthem into the federation’s anthem. The anthem continues to act as the national anthem of a larger federation called Malaysia when the 11 states of Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore decided to federate.[1]

Rather than Malaysia internalizing an Indonesian song, the 1956 Indonesia song originated from the same source as Negaraku. If the executive is to define ownership of the tune as the one that first created it, then both Malaysia and Indonesia have no ownership over it. The ownership should belong to that dead Frenchman.

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

[1] — See The National Anthem of Malaysia – Negaraku at Malaysian Monarchy. Accessed August 29 2009.

Categories
ASEAN Conflict & disaster Liberty

[2044] Of a liberal democratic Domino Theory

Indonesia can be an important factor in the creation of a liberal democratic Malaysia.

Its sheer size, its proximity to Malaysia and deep ties that bind both countries prevent any pretension that our developmental path is independently of each other. It is for this reason that recent liberal, democratic, and economic advancements in Indonesia are a cause for celebration among liberals and democrats in Malaysia. For the same reason, the latest bombing in Jakarta should be a source of concern for them.

Indonesia’s transition from an authoritarian state to the most democratic one in the region has been nothing less than impressive. The violent manner of the transition is less than ideal but it was a transition for the better nevertheless. With all else being equal, Indonesians are potentially set to reap the dividend of democratic peace and progress. Already its economy has been growing consistently above 4 per cent since 2000. Furthermore, the archipelagic country is still growing despite the ongoing crisis that has forced many others, including Malaysia, to go into recession.

I celebrate the much talked about progress in Indonesia, first and foremost, because of the ideal of a liberal democracy. That is the only form of government that is supportive of individual liberty. Only that system is capable of balancing individual liberty against state power as well as any majority power. It guards individual liberty tightly against the ugly side of gross majoritarianism: tyranny of the majority.

To have one more state — in the case of Indonesia, a major state — embracing liberal democracy as a system, and having it working, enhances the influence of the idea all over the world. To have one more state as a liberal democracy further gives credence to the statement that the most successful countries in modern times, by and large, have been liberal democracies.

A point that is more relevant is the effect of Indonesian progress on Malaysia. Its success as a liberal democracy is important to Malaysian democrats and liberals because if Indonesia, during this period of its liberal democracy, can achieve unprecedented socioeconomic progress to catch up with Malaysia, it can provide Malaysia with a liberal democratic model to follow.

This is an important point that demands stressing. It provides a strong alternative to the development model preferred by the government of the People’s Republic of China. For Malaysian democrats and liberals, between deep statism as practised in mainland China and democracy, the answer does not demand too much mental manoeuvring.

This idea may in a way parallel the Domino Theory in a restricted sense. The Domino Theory in its original form postulates that if one country fell to communism, others in the region would fall to communism too, just as a domino piece in a well-arranged deck only waits toppling after the fall of the first piece. Except this time around, the force that pushes the first piece sits on the opposite side of communism, and decades after communism was ideologically defeated.

The liberal democratic Domino Theory could even affect Singapore. Any big change in Malaysia will affect Singapore, just as a big change in Indonesia will affect Malaysia. A liberal democratic Malaysia will present unwanted pressure for the Singapore establishment to be more flexible in matters concerning democracy and liberty.

For Singapore, in times when it is surrounded by illiberal states — Malaysia and Indonesia that from time to time presented a cold front to it — it can find allies in other liberal democracies in the West, even when Singapore itself is an illiberal state. When, and if, it is surrounded by liberal democracies, Singapore’s ties to Western liberal democracies would somewhat diminish as attention would shift from Malaysia and Indonesia’s record to Singapore’s.

On top of that, liberal democracies tend to be noisy about illiberal conducts. If the governments of Malaysia and Indonesia are unwilling to do so, then the civil society in both countries would. Consequently, the domino deck would exert strong pressure on Singapore to democratise and liberalise.

Before that can happen, Indonesia must make significant progress. Without that, Indonesia will not have a significant role in democratising and liberalising Malaysia and give currency to the theory. One barrier to that progress was exemplified by the recent bombing in its capital.

What happened in Jakarta is disheartening because it can adversely affect confidence in the country. Confidence is a precious commodity in the making of a successful economy. Without it, Indonesian economy can falter to undo the progress made on the political front. Without a healthy economy, a liberal democratic Indonesia will not command respect from others. That will easily cancel out the possibility of the Domino Theory.

Thankfully, the bombing so far has not significantly impacted the Indonesian economy. It may be that the momentum of progress there is so big compared to the negative impact of the bombing. If that is so, that is great. Yet, one may never know what is in store next.

An Indonesia in chaos will not only remove an external factor that catalyses the realisation of a liberal democratic Malaysia, it can also contribute to a setback. Indonesia after all is not so far away and it has been pointed out that the network of terrorism consists also of Malaysians. These Malaysians may target Malaysia some day.

If ever that happens, it is likely that individual liberty in the country will suffer further erosion. In the United States, with its strong tradition in liberty and credible institutions, a strong challenge against the transgression of liberty can be mounted by its civil society. In Malaysia with smaller cache as far as the idea of liberty is concerned, the same challenge will be hard to mount. After all, laws irreverent to liberal democratic values introduced during the Emergency era are still in place. For instance, when was the last time Malaysia held a local election?

For Malaysian democrats and liberals, it is in their interest to ensure that what is in store for Indonesia is peace instead of chaos. They can do this by requiring their own government to cooperate earnestly with the Indonesian government on the matter of anti-terrorism. Successful cooperation will lessen the possibility of Malaysia facing such attacks at home and avoid the oft-mentioned dilemma between liberty and security.

The dilemma between the two is a false one, since liberty requires protection to remain firm. That, after all, is the purpose of a liberal democracy. But convincing the masses of that reasoning will be a difficult task during dangerous times. With an illiberal government at the helm, the government will certainly make use of that opportunity to rob liberty from individuals, either consciously or indirectly.

The cause of terrorism is clearly multifold but I am convinced that poor economic conditions — which in turn affects other factors like good education that are crucial in sustaining a liberal democracy — play a large role in it. A developing Indonesian economy can address that, and that makes the progress in Indonesia all the more important; economic success is the real anti-terrorism measure.

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

First published in The Malaysian Insider on July 27 2009.

Categories
ASEAN Photography Politics & government

[2028] Of Indonesian presidential election accidentally reached to my home

The postal service mistakenly sent the following letter to my house:

Fair Use. Obtained from The Star.

I do not know the content of the letter for sure because I do not have the authority to open it. Judging from the envelope however, I would risk guessing that it contains a ballot for Indonesian living abroad to use to partipate in yesterday’s presidential race.

Categories
ASEAN Economics

[2018] Of with ceasation of supply, protectionist will be proven wrong

Wages in Malaysia are generally depressed.

Protectionists blame foreign labor as the main cause of that depression. According to them, if we are less dependent on foreign labor — low-skilled mostly — wages will go up. So, they want to kick out as many foreign labor as possible. Even all, for the extremists.

They make that assertion without considering foreign labor are active in sectors mostly different from the ones locals are participating in; there simply not enough locals wanting to participate in the sectors filled with foreign labor.

Removal of these foreigners will no doubt increase wages up as the law of supply and demand demands it, but that is largely true only in those sectors. The problem of wage depression in the larger economy will not be addressed or significantly affected with the absence of foreign labor.

In front of our eyes is a natural experiment to prove that. Indonesia has decided to stop the flow of maid into Malaysia:

JAKARTA, June 25 (Bernama) – Beginning today, Indonesia will halt temporarily sending maids to Malaysia until there are discussions on the review of the memorandum of understanding (MoU) on the matter. [Indonesian Maids To Malaysia Halted Temporarily. Bernama. June 25 2009]

I am confident that while wages for maids will rise, wages in other sectors will remain largely unaffected.

In fact, Malaysian productivity might fall because Malaysians who face high opportunity cost between housework and professional job might not be able to do what Adam Smith wrote in The Wealth of Nations: specialization.

And in economics, besides supply and demand, productivity is a major component in the determination of wages.