Growing up, Mr Najib attended the renowned Malay College Kuala Kangsar before studying for a bachelor’s degree in industrial economics in the UK. [Profile: Najib Abdul Razak. BBC. April 2 2009]
I do not think that is right. Did he attend the Malay College?
I thought he went to St. John in Kuala Lumpur instead?
Libertarians typically have no reason to protest the typical annual meeting of Group 20 (G20). G20 is of course the grouping of the richest and most influential countries in the world. This year’s meet up in London however is not a typical gathering. It is extraordinary because of the global economic turbulence we are witnessing at this very moment. In trying to address the problem, both the Obama and the Brown administrations are advocating large spending and they will likely call for others to do the same at the G20. This call — probably made for the first time in recent memory — gives libertarians a reason to join the protest against the G20, particularly, against the US and the UK.
Both administrations have been building the spending momentum for weeks, if not months now. Indeed, both countries are leading the way in economic stimulus with government spending as a major pillar. Much has been spent but both English-speaking countries — especially the Obama administration — content that too many are not spending enough. The idea is that the problem is not spending too much. Rather, it is about doing too little.[1]
In Malaysia, the Finance Minister Najib Abdul Razak has unfortunately embraced that idea. With as much as RM67 billion worth of stimulus plan with another RM5 billion injected into the equity market with much opacity by the Malaysian government, the credential of the expected next administration of Malaysia — the expected Najib administration — as a big spender is not in question. This is by no mean that Malaysia is following the footstep of the US and UK. Indeed, the current administrator of Malaysia is gloating by the fact that they did it first during the Asian Financial Crisis when the US was dead against it. The Malaysia’s administration takes the current trend as a justification of their past action.
Momentum or not, both Obama and Brown administrations’ effort to lobby for more spending from other countries is meeting resistance, especially from Europe and Latin America. For regions not known for their love for free market, this is certainly refreshing when the traditional advocates of free market are taking steps in the wrong direction.
Germany called United Kingdom Prime Minister Brown’s method as crass Keynesianism.[2] Although eventually capitulating by increasing its spending but still short from what the Brown and the Obama administration had hoped for, Germany was unhappy at what they saw as them bailing out imprudent others. Germany had worked hard to keep its accounts in order and it despised the idea of spending their money to correct others’ mistakes, while undoing Germany’s successes.[3]
Czech Premier who also holds the presidency of the European Union went as far as calling Obama’s call for greater spending as the road to hell. He has been reproached by other European leaders for the harsh words but nevertheless, it exhibits the sentiment of the member states of the European Union.[4]
In Latin America where Brown and later the Vice President of the United States Joe Biden flew down earlier, both faced similar but more politely put opposition. The hero of the moment was Chile, as President Michelle Bachelet, an economic left, practically rehashed argument forwarded by the Conservative Party led by David Cameron in the United Kingdom to Brown.[5]
Judging from the results of these meetings, both Obama and Brown are likely to meet heavy resistance at the table of G20 when it comes to how to address the global economic crisis.
In all likelihood, the reversal of roles probably has little to do with philosophical difference and much to do with the fact that the economic crisis has unequal effect across the world. In Europe unlike the United States, far more comprehensive social safety nets are in place. The automatic pervasive mechanism as advocated by economist John Taylor is already in place.
Germany meanwhile had saved enough in good times that they believed that the country was able to ride on the wave safely. The same argument is applied by Chile when Bachelet effectively said no to Brown’s call for support for greater spending, which he is expected to repeat at the table of G20.
For Asian countries especially for the export-driven economies, while the pain is undeniable, it is unlikely to go as bad as in the US. And indeed, the different nature of economic crisis in Asia demands different solutions. What the US and the UK are asking is but only a one-size fit-all policy.
Also, there is a sense of the often used German word which has found its way to mainstream English language: schadenfreude. Schadenfreude means pleasure derived from watching others’ misfortune. The latest prominent leader seemingly to enjoy the scenario is the Brazilian President when Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. He reminded all that this crisis was caused by “white people with blue eyes.”[6] This schadenfreude however has become excessive lately and risks of becoming masochism.
For libertarians, the opposition mounted against the US and the UK is something to be supported of, even when the causes of opposition differ. As it goes, there are no permanent allies and no permanent enemies. There are only permanent interests.
[1] — In this crisis, doing too little poses a greater threat than doing too much. Any sound economic strategy in the current context must be directed at both creating the jobs that Americans need and doing the work that our economy requires. Any plan geared toward only one of these objectives would be dangerously deficient. Failure to create enough jobs in the short term would put the prospect of recovery at risk. Failure to start undertaking necessary long-term investments would endanger the foundation of our recovery and, ultimately, our children’s prosperity. [Obama’s Down Payment: A Stimulus Must Aim for Long-Term Results. Lawrence Summers. Washington Post. December 8 2008]
[2] — Mr Steinbruck questioned why Britain was “tossing around billions” and closely following the high public spending model put forward by 20th Century economist John Maynard Keynes.
“The switch from decades of supply-side politics all the way to a crass Keynesianism is breathtaking,” he said. [Germany questions UK rescue plan. BBC News. December 11 2008]
[3] — German Chancellor Angela Merkel said in a speech to Germany’s parliament on Thursday that her government was doing more than most to support the world economy through higher spending and lower taxes. Germany’s stance could come under pressure from financially weaker countries within Europe as their economies sink deeper into trouble, economists say.
Struggling EU countries range from Ireland and Spain, where housing-market bubbles have burst, to Hungary and Latvia in the continent’s post-communist East, where capital flight has forced governments to seek IMF aid.
Although Germany is in its worst recession in 60 years, Europe’s biggest economy has relatively strong public finances and enjoys the trust of capital markets.
That means Germany could be doing more to raise its domestic demand through higher government borrowing, say critics. Germany’s reluctance to do so means its neighbors’ recessions will be worse than necessary, says Julian Callow, European economist at Barclays Capital. [EU Rebuffs Calls to Increase Fiscal Stimulus, Aid. Marcus Walker. Adam Cohen. Wall Street Journal. March 20 2009]
[4] — BERLIN, March 25 — The president of the European Union on Wednesday ripped the Obama administration’s economic policies, calling its deficit spending and bank bailouts “a road to hell.”
The comments by Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek of the Czech Republic, which holds the E.U.’s rotating presidency, startled some U.S. and European officials, who are preparing for President Obama’s visit next month to several European cities, including Prague, the Czech capital. [E.U. President Blasts U.S. Spending. Craig Whitlock. Washington Post. March 26 2009]
[5] — Gordon Brown suffered another setback over his diplomatic offensive yesterday, as the Chilean president inadvertently echoed Conservative attacks on the prime minister’s handling of the economy. [E.U. President Blasts U.S. Spending. Craig Whitlock. Financial Times. March 26 2009]
[6] — Mr Brown’s decision to use the South American leg of his trip to call for a G20 $100bn (£70bn) deal to support world trade was overshadowed when Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the Brazilian president, blamed the financial crisis on “white people with blue eyes”. [E.U. President Blasts U.S. Spending. Craig Whitlock. Financial Times. March 26 2009]
Just got back from the UMNO General Assembly and among top leadership of UMNO, Khairy Jamaluddin will probably have the hardest time to lead, simply because the division within the wing he is leading.
Each time his name was mentioned, a big boo followed. On the contrary, when Mukhriz Mahathir joined the hall to take his seat in the wing, he received a raving applause. Odd indeed because the sentiment in the hall did not reflect the election result.
When Khairy Jamaluddin spoke behind the rostrum, he took a humble tone, probably realizing his unpopularity in the hall.
Ali Rustam was popular. Add the adverb very if I am guilty of underemphasizing the support he enjoyed today. The hall definitely considered the judgment against the politician from Malacca by UMNO diciplinary board as injustice. From my outsider perspective, clearly, there is perverse incentive in UMNO at the moment; a convicted corrupt politician can be a star, the darling of the hall. If there is a lesson from there, it is that do not act unjustly because the victim of unjust act, even if he is less than innocent, can become the prince of heart.
Zahid Hamidi was the first to realize that and to utilize the popularity of Ali Rustam at the Putra World Trade Center, mostly because his turn to speak was right after Ali Rustam’s. He mentioned Ali Rustam a couple of times and each time he did so, the crowd went wild without fail.
Mahathir Mohamad was welcomed whole-heartedly by UMNO members. Muhyiddin Yassin was speaking when he entered the hall and the new Deputy President of UMNO had to take a pause as the crowd gave the former Prime Minister a standing ovation. Muhyiddin Yassin, rather than finishing his interrupted sentence, decided to give Mahathir Mohamad the spotlight by citing his name, almost to the point of too much.
Not as much as Shahrizat Abdul Jalil though. With a divided UMNO, she went on to mention everybody’s name, from Rafidah, to Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to Najib Razak to more names than I care to remember. She appeared as a person earnestly trying to hedge her bet across the board.
And this time unlike two days earlier, I stayed to the end because while some points are very disagreeable (being a secularist, a passive republican and a liberal in an UMNO pow-wow, what a surprise, eh? The too many mentions of religion and ethnonationalism were dizzying), the quality of the speeches were noticeably better than the previous ones.
Finally, Najib Razak. I do have other reservation, especially about the divergence between his rhetoric and the the rhetoric of so-called UMNO grassroot present in the hall, and between his rhetoric and events I am witnessing in as a citizen of Malaysia. Nevertheless, he appeared as a person that have the ability to lead. I was in the hall and I have to admit he managed to bring out the fighting spirit in UMNO members there. It was as if, an unconfident UMNO finally found the rock they require. He called for unity and showed courage to implicitly inform Mahathir Mohamad and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi that he is a man of his own.
In my humble opinion, Pakatan Rakyat will have to on their toes because they — if the momentum I saw in the hall continues — have just found their match. In the last general election, UMNO entered the ring wounded. This time, some recuparation had taken place.
Will there be change in Barisan Nasional?
With Samy Vellu still manning the steering wheel of MIC,[1] it is not hard to present a case which BN would continue doing business as usual despite requirement for change along with internal almost Darwinian political rhetoric of change.
But with Najib Razak expected to assume the post of Prime Minister from Abdullah Ahmad Badawi soon, in the strictest sense, change will definitely happen. The composition of the Cabinet is likely to change too, if the signal that the current Deputy Prime Minister is giving out is to be believed in.[2]
The willingness of BN to pull a political coup in Perak too gives the air that there is more tolerance for — to put it politely — unorthodox maneuvers that are uncharacteristic of the current Prime Minister. That is change too, for better or for worse.
In that light, a more meaningful question to ask is whether there will be a change for the better?
That is harder to answer and I personally would like to be fair by giving Najib Razak a chance to prove himself. To pre-judge him maybe an unfair position to take.
Indeed, he is riddled with controversies but with cognizance of how unclean politics is, I am unwilling to believe those far too many accusations until it is proven. No doubt, some events related to the DPM and BN are curiously questionable but I am a skeptic in many ways. It is only right for me to keep to that tradition of mine.
Still, there are signs that changes which Najib Razak plans to introduce might be unpalatable to individuals like me. One clearest sign yet is the recent 3-month ban imposed on Harakah and Suara Keadilan as announced today by the Ministry of Home Affairs.[3]
On TV3 just now, the announcer stated that the reason for the ban is the seditious nature of both papers. In the same breathe, the announcer read what she was supposed to read: the Home Ministry has no intention of infringing free press but Harakah and Suara Keadilan have gone too far.
Give me a break. They actually still believe that kind of tricks work still.
As a libertarian, I find it tiring to present effective but template-like arguments against such reason. I feel like a broken record but the sad part is, those questions are still relevant. Too far to whom? Who is the judge?
The timing, as suggested by Mr. Teoh of The Malaysian Insider, further invites critical questions . The fact that the timing of the ban coincides with three by-elections to be held on April 7 is inescapable. Among many questions, the convenient date for BN highlights possible abuse of government machinery to forward an unkosher political agenda.
Then, there is a question of equal application of the law. If sedition is the benchmark, clearly with the untruth and inflammatory style, Utusan Malaysia deserves reprimand as heavy as Harakah and Suara Keadilan. Even the TV3 too if I may add.
Change?
Who am I kidding?
I need to remind myself that I am a skeptic. And I am applying my skepticism with equal pressure on all sides.
[1] — KUALA LUMPUR, March 22 (Bernama) — Former MIC vice-president Datuk M. Muthupalaniappan, who failed in his bid today to contest the party top post, has declared that democracy is dead in the MIC.
He said this was evident from the fact that he had many of his nominations disqualified.
Muthupalaniappan had submitted 53 nominations supporting him at the party presidential nomination at the MIC headquarters this morning. Forty-eight of the 53 nominations were rejected due to non-compliance with the MIC constitution and the presidential election by-laws.
At the end of the day, he only had five valid nominations as opposed to incumbent president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu’s 455. Samy Vellu was declared president of the party for the 11th consecutive term. [Muthupalaniappan Cries Foul, Says Democracy Dead In MIC. Bernama. March 22 2009]
[2] — PETALING JAYA: Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has listed out the qualities he is looking for in his new Cabinet line-up when he takes over as Umno president and Prime Minister.
He said those in his Cabinet must have ability, credibility and general public acceptance so that he could institute reforms in both the party and the Government. [Najib wants an able and credible Cabinet. The Star. March 23 2009]
[3] — KUALA LUMPUR, March 23 — In a move that appears to be geared towards handicapping the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) machinery ahead of the three by-elections on April 7, Suara Keadilan and Harakah have been banned for three months by the Home Ministry with immediate effect.
The party organs of Pas and PKR respectively were informed of the decision around 5pm this evening by fax with no reason given. [Harakah and Suara Keadilan banned. Shannon Teoh. The Malaysian Insider. March 23 2009]
There is something about the way the Deputy Prime Minister is looking at the Prime Minister.
The publisher of the original photo, The Star, captioned it as “Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at the Umno special meeting Wednesday afternoon to decide on Datuk Ahmad Ismail’s fate over his alleged racist remark about the Chinese”.
Obviously, it fails to capture the expression of both politicians.
So, please provide your caption!
And consider this as an open tread.