Talk less, listen harder

This column appeared in The Star recently. It is good that The Star can sometimes still give write some acceptable columns but still stop short of directly criticizing the BN Government. I agree fully that any politician that do not listen hard enough will find themselves out of office soon if not later. 

They (including the civil servants) need to know that they should serve the rakyat and not the other way around. If this can be successfully implemented, I am sure they will listen more and talk less.

Until the next time, cheers.

 ON THE BEAT WITH WONG CHUN WAI

The rakyat is the boss and, political affiliations aside, politicians had better start listening to the boss.

 

THE country needs more people like Mohd Nur Ismail Mohamed Kamal, the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD) chief, and Datuk Seri Idris Jala, head of the Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu).

The two are not afraid to face angry crowds at meetings where people have heaped criticisms, made unreasonable demands and often vented their anger at the Government. The participants are often the urban middle class who are outspoken.

From MRT stations to transformation plans to key performance indicators, they have spoken about the grand plans for development that are being rolled out.

Generally, their explanations made sense to their listeners, but at times people became lost when they delved into the details. But there is one common feature at such town house meetings – the two are ready to listen to the public.

The people want to be heard and not be talked down to. This is what many of our politicians do not seem to realise.

If non-politicians like Mohd Nur Ismail and Idris are able to take the heat, there is no reason why some of our politicians should prefer the safer way by delivering speeches, often mundane and unimaginative ones, at the rostrums.

Both have set the standards by putting their views and also the input of the people on websites, and setting up toll-free lines for ideas and suggestions, in the case of SPAD. They also hold exhibitions to show the rakyat what they have.

Young Malaysians want to see their leaders with rolled-up sleeves on stage taking on questions relating to issues affecting their daily lives. They want to tell our leaders how they are coping with the increase in cost of living and how they have to sacrifice their sleep and leave their homes early to beat the increasingly bad traffic jams.

They want to talk about the need to provide more trains to take them home after work, how to make their neighbourhoods safe and about their children’s education.

How many of our leaders know the price of onions, chicken or chilli at the markets despite professing to represent the common people?

The rakyat will be sufficiently satisfied if our leaders can listen, respond with decent answers, come back to see them again and, if they screw up, to just have the decency to apologise and stop being defensive.

We are not interested in 100-storey buildings, stupid political quarrels, whether wives should be obedient to their husbands in bed or racist tirades from political dinosaurs like Datuk Ibrahim Ali of Perkasa.

The bread and butter issues matter most to Malaysians – nothing more, nothing less.

The trouble with most politicians is that once they hold the microphones, they cannot let go. But they had better learn to pass the microphones to their listeners more.

Young people have seen a dressed-down US President Barack Obama at meetings with the people. Never mind if the occasions are part of some clever public relations exercise, these are powerful visual messages.

Even the straight-laced Chinese leaders who don’t have to worry about elections also realise the need to be seen conducting such intimate meetings, where even the bodyguards know how to move away from the cameras. In both instances, new standards have been set.

Such images give these leaders a more caring and down-to-earth persona and project them as keen to listen, instead of being aloof or in a hurry and are only interested in a photo opportunity with aimless handshakes.

Young Malaysians, especially those whose jobs require them to make presentations to their clients to clinch business deals, have reasons to be critical when they listen to their leaders.

Many of our leaders, to these young professionals, fall way short of their expectations and the result is that they do not have respect for the leaders.

The young have become more outspoken, more articulate, and they demand greater democratic space.

Their world view is certainly very much in contrast to the older leaders. And if the latter equates the demand for greater democratic space with chaos and disloyalty to the country, then it would be a costly political error. Again, it would be another case of politicians not listening hard enough or even bothering to listen.

The country can also do away with certain pompous ministers who demand that their subordinates greet them at the airport. One or two are known to throw tantrums when they are not accorded such respect, and they insist that their staff spend an entire day moving around with them when they are making state visits. Moving around in an entourage seems to give them a sense of self importance.

Worse is to call for press conferences when they really have nothing new or anything sensible to say. Often, it is a case of talking for the sake of talking.

Malaysian taxpayers would also be very thankful if they could see an end to the elaborate dances and greetings for politicians at every function, and the 15-minute salutation to address the never ending list of Tan Sris, Datuk Seris, Datuks and Datins. What’s wrong with just “tuan-tuan dan puan-puan”? Can we just get to the point so we can all get back to our work, please?

Neither should we be paying for those huge billboards showing the faces of our leaders. There is no difference between Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat leaders when it comes to such ego trips.

The bottom line is the rakyat is the boss – it’s that simple. So, regardless of their political affiliations, our politicians had better start listening hard instead of just talking too hard.

Ahead of Malaysia-Vatican ties, an archbishop under siege

This article appeared in The Malaysian Insider on Thursday, 14 July 2011. It seems now that there parties who is going to politicise this matter. I for one, support fully the action of the Archbishop. Why? Simply because first, if there will be the establishment of diplomatic ties, it will be good for the church. So, why not work towards this. it does not mean that with the estabishment of diplomatic ties, we cannot criticize the Government? Anyway, who is to say that this Government will be around for long? We just not just blindly criticise anything that the Government do. Look at the issue. If not, we will just as bad.

Second, God ways are not man's ways. In God's ways, we are taught to forgive and to do good. The Archbishop is not a politician. So many of our politicians will just criticise and go against anything their opposition say or do just for the sake of it. This is so immature. If one is travelling with the PM, does not mean one agrees fully with the PM. Moreover, no one is privy to what will be discussed with his holiness, the Pope.

So to the detractors, please do not be short sighted.

So, those who are bringing up this issue is just venting their anger on Najib. I suggest them not to drag the Archbishop into this politics. To His Grace, I say, keep it up and God Bless you in your work.

Until the next time, cheers.

Ahead of Malaysia-Vatican ties, an archbishop under siege

KUALA LUMPUR, July 14 — As Putrajaya gears up to establish formal ties with the Vatican, the archbishop of Kuala Lumpur has come under scrutiny from certain sections of his congregation who question his role in the government’s diplomatic mission.

Some of the harshest criticism against Archbishop Murphy Pakiam come, surprisingly, from within the local Roman Catholic Church, with a vocal few labelling the senior cleric a “sellout”, as one local priest recounted to The Malaysian Insider.

Rev Father Michael Chua acknowledged that Pakiam (picture) has come under attack since word got out that the archbishop will be accompanying Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak on the federal government’s official visit to meet Pope Benedict XVI next week.

“Many critics may view the establishment of these ties and the participation of the local hierarchy as a ‘selling out’ or radical change of position by the Church,” said the ecclesiastical assistant in the Archdiocesan Ministry of Ecumenical and Inter-religious Affairs (AMEIA) for the Catholic Archdiocese of Kuala Lumpur.

The priest attributed the Catholic community’s anger to the timing of the visit.

“Perhaps, what may render it as controversial to some people is that Putrajaya chooses to respond at this time,” he said.

“It is unfortunate that this event comes after the occurrence of several tense and critical events, including the use of the ‘Allah’ word in the Church's publication, the Alkitab and the Bersih rally,” he said, linking their outrage to a series of current events that have  chilled relations between Christians and the majority Muslim federal government.

Chua said if not for those issues “most Catholics would be celebrating that ties are finally being established between the Vatican and Malaysia after years of pursuing this”.

The other problem, he said, was that many Malaysian Catholics were not able to distinguish between a state that has diplomatic ties with the Vatican and a one that does not, which causes them to question why the archbishop is accompanying the Malaysian delegation.

“In the case of the former, a visit by a head of state would therefore not involve the local hierarchy as all communique will be via the respective state's ambassadors (the nuncio, in the case of the Vatican),” Chua explained.

The Malaysian Insider understands that the Catholic Church does not usually send a representative to accompany the government’s diplomatic missions.

The priest explained that many were under the impression that the local Church has abandoned its role in standing up for values to build a just, peaceful and equitable society.

Several parish priests in the Klang Valley said they have been approached by concerned churchgoers over the seeming conflict of interests for a man of the cloth to act as the government’s wingman on an official trip.

“However, in the present case, since there are no diplomatic ties between the Vatican and Malaysia, Archbishop Pakiam, a local prelate of the Catholic Church who has been instrumental in laying the ground work for this state-to-state diplomatic relations, has been invited by the Vatican to be part of this process,” Chua said.

He further explained that the Vatican has always sought relations with all countries. 

“Of special interest are predominantly Muslim countries, as this is in line with the Vatican's mission to promote Christian-Muslim dialogue,” he noted of Pope Benedict.

“It must be made clear that the Church continues to remain non-partisan as she seeks to dialogue and co-operate with all willing parties as part of its mission,” he said.

Malaysia is one of 17 nations that have yet to set up formal links with the head of the Roman Catholic Church.

The prime minister’s visit this time around is hoped to change all that.

The day after Bersih........

Well, yesterday's Bersih rally was a significant day for a lot of Malaysians whether they took part or not. Although there were 50,000 (depending who was counting) who took part, there were a lot more who wished they were there.

One thing for sure, the frustration with the Government and the police is surely growing. Personally, I feel the Najib administration as with his earlier predecessor, PM Abdullah Badawi has made the biggest error of trying to portray the cause of Bersih as bad for the country and economy.

For me, the crux of the matter is how do we want to treat our own people. Do we want to pull the wool over their eyes and think them as fools (like how the Govt owned media is trying to do) or to think Malaysians are a bunch of trouble makers (like how the police as decided before the rally) or Malaysians are a bunch that can be bullied or threatened (like how the the Govt and police are using their authority)?

Please do not do that, it is a dead end. If only, the BN started to change this mindset, I am sure a lot of middle Malaysia will go back to support them (both Malays and non-Malays). I just cannot figure what why they would want to take self destructive steps.

BN should also understand that a lot of Malaysians do not just support the opposition but are doing so because they are upset with BN. There is a huge difference! This is more so pertinent when as the incumbent, you have so much power to do good and yet only give lip service. I myself, am frustrated by this.

For the media, the old strategy of spinning is so outdated that I find it so amusing that they think they can actually get away with it. Maybe the people working there know it but their political masters are not willing to accept it? Sometimes, they themselves spinned so much that they actually get lost themselves. In addition, they are suddenly so fair and independent when analysing about other countries political situation and yet so biased in their local analysis.

For the opposition, the same criteria will be put on them if they are elected. There are no favoritism when it comes to the welfare of the country and people. For me, the opposition parties are also full of opportunists and clowns. So, we must move away from party politics and choose the right candidate who works hard for the people and country and with the right consciense.

In today newspaper, I had some good laughs at the statement by our IGP as well as some of the articles and columns in The Star. Their articles only look at one side only so how can we call it fair? 

I was touched to see so many people from all walks of life who braved danger to walk for their believe and cause. If so many young people in Malaysia have such strong believes and are willing to fight for them (peacefully), then I can say Malaysia will have a good future.

Until the next time, cheers.

Yellow: What’s behind the shade? - The Star columnist writes

In the Along the watchtower column in The Star, I read with much amusement what the writer wanted to convey. I was unsure whether it was his attempt at being humorous or trying to subtly trying to brainwash us on the color yellow or as an educational article (lots of interesting facts) or even as a all out spin, I don't know. Maybe it was written in a half hearted manner? What do to, all of us have to "cari makan" what.

Anyhow, the article is as below for your own judgement.

Until the next time, cheers.

The Star, Thursday, 6 July 2011

Along The Watchtower
By M. Veera Pandiyan

The organisers of Bersih 2.0 should explain their links and funding by the NED.

 

IT’S been a rather eventful week shaded by the overwhelming colour of yellow.

In psychology, the colour is associated with optimism and cheerfulness.

Yellow, the colour of the sun, is linked with laughter, happiness and good times.

People surrounded by yellow feel optimistic because the brain actually releases more serotonin, the happy hormone that influences mood and sense of well-being.

But yellow can also be quickly overpowering if over-used. When intense, it can inflame and also evoke fear.

Studies show that babies cry more in bright yellow rooms and adults are more likely to lose their tempers in such places.

Apparently, energy levels can be taken up by the intensity of the colour to the point of it becoming an irritant.

Primarily, yellow is used to attract attention.

That is why most danger signs come in yellow and black.

Spiritually, the hue is said to provide clarity of thought and enlightenment of mood.

Yellow has a very colourful use in language. The terms “yellow belly” or “yellow streak” connote it with cowardice, deceit or betrayal.

During the Middle Ages, paintings by Christian artists depicted Judas by dressing him in yellow.

In China, a pornographic film is called “yellow movie”, unlike the “blue movie” used in the west and elsewhere.

In Arab culture, people can recognise a “yellow smile” – a fake expression.

Such smiles are put on when people want to hide their lack of interest, or any other emotion.

It is similar to the French expression of rire jaune (yellow laughter), which means to laugh from the wrong side of the mouth or feigned mirth.

Politically, yellow characterises freedom and moderation in many countries.

In the US, where yellow traditionally has a negative nuance, the Gadsden Flag, a symbol of American independence, has become popular again, especially with “Tea Party” activists.

The yellow flag, with a fierce-looking rattlesnake, coiled and ready to strike, bears the motto: “Don’t Tread on Me”.

The US is also the origin of “yellow journalism” – the phrase to describe irresponsible, exaggerated, lurid and slanderous reporting that can be traced to the late 1800s when two newspaper owners tried to outdo each other with their front-page stories to get the highest circulation.

Joseph Pulitzer (yes, of the Pulitzer Prize fame) who owned the New York World was the first to make use of sensational journalism to impress readers.

For example, his headline for a story on a heat wave that killed many people was: “How Babies are Baked”.

His rival, William Randolph Hearst, who owned the San Francisco Examiner, bought the New York Journal and also bought over Pulitzer’s top writers to outdo the World.

The rivalry was most intense before the Spanish-American War, when both papers churned out outrageous headlines to whip up support for the US, much to the dismay of other publishers and editors.

Both papers were denounced as “yellow journals”, inferring that Pulitzer and Hearst were cowards who chose the easy way to gain readers through sensationalisation and false news rather than responsible reporting.

Back home in Malaysia, critics of the mainstream media have been accused of being “yellow-bellied”, especially with regard to positions taken on the Bersih 2.0 rally.

The organisers of our yellow rally have since agreed to call it off and hold their gathering in a stadium instead after an audience with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

If Bersih 2.0 is indeed all about the noble cause of demanding free and fair elections, it must be rightly given the utmost support by all Malaysians.

The organisers of Bersih 2.0, however, must also explain their association and funding by the US’ National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

Even in the US, many questions are being asked about the NED set up in the early 1980s in the wake of negative revelations about the CIA.

According to William Blum the writer of Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II, the NED was set up to overtly do what the CIA had been doing covertly for decades.

He described it as a “masterpiece of politics, public relations and cynicism”.

Ron Paul, a Republican Congressman from Texas, described the NED as “nothing more than a costly programme that takes US taxpayer funds to promote favoured politicians and political parties abroad”.

“What the NED does in foreign countries, through its recipient organisations the National Demo­cratic Institute and the International Republican Institute, would be rightly illegal in the US.

“The NED injects soft money into the domestic elections of foreign countries in favour of one party or the other.

“It is particularly Orwellian to call US manipulation of foreign elections ‘promoting democracy.’

With such questions, don’t Malaysians deserve to know more about links between Bersih 2.0 and other Malaysian NGOs funded by the NED?

> Associate Editor M. Veera Pandiyan likes Coldplay’s song “Yellow”.

Running scared in Malaysia by John Malott in The WSJ

Mr Mallott was the Malaysian Ambassador to Malaysia some time ago. Ever since he left Malaysia, he has been quite critical of the Government in areas of human rights and political fairness. In another article that appeared in The Malaysian Chronicle, he words were much more stronger and colorful than in this article. From what I read, he has some strong views the way we conduct business here. Maybe, he has more information or intelligence than most of us, Malaysians.

Running scared in Malaysia by John Malott in The WSJ

The Malaysian government has pulled out all the stops to prevent an opposition rally this weekend. This week, army units conducted crowd control exercises with banners that said, "Disperse or we will shoot!" 

By John Malott, The Wall Street Journal  

The police set up roadblocks and arrested Malaysians simply for wearing yellow T-shirts, the signature color of Bersih, a coalition of 62 nongovernmental organizations that demands changes in Malaysia's electoral system. To date, the police have arrested over 250 supporters of Bersih, claiming that they are "waging war against the king."

Then something unprecedented happened. Malaysia's King Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin, allegedly the target of Bersih's campaign, intervened. He called on both Prime Minister Najib Razak and Bersih to resolve their differences in a spirit of harmony and cooperation, for the good of the nation.

There was a collective sigh of relief in Malaysia. The leader of Bersih, Ambiga Sreenevasan, an attorney and former president of the Malaysian Bar Council, met with the king and announced that the "Walk for Democracy," as it was called, was cancelled. She said that she was ready to meet with the government to discuss Bersih's concerns about electoral fairness. Prime Minister Najib then offered an olive branch, saying, "We are willing to provide a stadium for them to rally in … from morning until night," an offer that Ms. Ambiga and Bersih immediately accepted.

Then Mr. Najib backed off. His government says that because Bersih is still illegal, it cannot apply for a permit. It also has banned Bersih's leadership from entering Kuala Lumpur on the day of the rally. On Thursday, he joined a gathering of martial artists who said that their 50,000 members will "wage war" against Bersih. Donning their militant uniform, Mr. Najib said, "If there are evil enemies who want to attack the country from within, you, my brothers, will rise to fight them."

Mr. Najib has undermined the authority of the king, who gave Bersih and its concerns credence by meeting with its leadership and calling for a negotiated solution. The political situation in Malaysia is a fast-moving target, and each day brings new developments. Ms. Ambiga and Bersih now say that because of Mr. Najib's actions, they will go ahead with their assembly, no matter what.

Nobody knows what will happen tomorrow. Bersih's main issue is not freedom of assembly but the fairness of Malaysia's democratic process. Bersih's backers ask how anyone can be opposed to free and fair elections.

It's an easy question to answer. The United Malays National Organization, of which Mr. Najib is president, is the longest continuing ruling party in the world, and it is running scared.

In the last general election in 2008, Malaysia's opposition took 47% of the popular vote. That year Parti Keadilan Rakyat, the party of Mr. Najib's nemesis Anwar Ibrahim, went from one seat to 31. The establishment parties in Malaysia's neighboring states are also in retreat. The opposition scored a major victory in Thailand last weekend, and in Singapore opposition candidates made surprising gains. No wonder Mr. Najib and company are worried.

Many observers of Malaysian politics believe that electoral reform will lead to the ruling party's defeat, and that is why UMNO is afraid of Bersih. In the last election in 2008, the party received only one-third of the nation's votes. UMNO rules only because of its coalition with other political parties, which it increasingly marginalizes, that represent the Chinese and Indian minorities.

Mr. Najib and his allies say that the opposition's gains in 2008 prove that Malaysia's elections are free and fair. Impartial observers disagree. Academic studies have enumerated how the Election Commission gerrymanders electoral districts to benefit the ruling party. The U.S. Department of State's human rights report bluntly states that opposition parties are unable to compete on equal terms with the governing coalition because of restrictions on campaigning and freedom of assembly and association. "News of the opposition," the U.S. says, is "tightly restricted and reported in a biased fashion."

In the recent state elections in Sarawak, the government announced $390 million in local projects during the run-up to the polls. Prime Minister Najib was caught on video tape telling one village gathering that the government would give them 5 million ringgit ($1.5 million) for a local project on Monday, but only if they elected his candidate on Sunday.

Who would win elections in Malaysia that truly are free and fair? The U.S. State Department reports that despite the many election irregularities during the 2008 elections, "most observers concluded they did not substantially alter the results." But unless the electoral reforms that Bersih is calling for are made, we will never know.

Despite the government's intimidation, thousands of Malaysian citizens of all races and religions are expected to exercise their constitutional right to assemble and call for free and fair elections. Tomorrow's protest represents a brave step in what not just Malaysians but also the international community should hope will begin the country's transition to full democracy. Mr. Najib should display his own courage and ensure that a peaceful rally that seeks the fundamental rights of democratic peoples everywhere does not turn into a bloody confrontation.

Mr. Malott was the United States ambassador to Malaysia from 1995-98.