Malaysian race/religion based politics is dangerous!

Generation Election 13: ‘Victory’ at any cost?

 

Pilihanraya Umum 13 PRU 13 General Election 13 

The DAP strategy of targeting MCA candidates could make the Chinese community the unwitting victim.

THE 2008 general election was significant as a “political tsunami” – the Opposition achieved its best ever gains, with the promise of an emerging two-coalition system.

That election would have been even more historic had it also achieved what many thought it would: end communal politics for good.

But it failed miserably, with no political party blameless. Perhaps it was too much to expect qualitative change in addition to quantitative change (seat numbers in state assemblies and Parliament).

Communal politics has been a bane of this country for as long as there have been elections.

That remains a fundamental reality into the foreseeable future.

For Barisan Nasional (and its predecessor the Alliance) as well as the Op­­p­o­sition, race-based politics is practised if not always acknowledged. It takes far more to turn that around than many have imagined.
Whether party membership is defined by ethnicity or not, one race or another dominates and characterises each party.

Parties that are multiracial in theory are just less transparent in their ethnic politics.

However, what turns an unfortunate situation tragic is when those parties most vehement about having “turned the corner” of communal politics are also doing the most to perpetuate it.

PAS as the Islamist party has set new standards in trying to ram Islamist-style restrictions down the throats of all Malaysians – Muslim and non-Muslim. It now does so with more gusto and less hesitation.

PKR as another Muslim and Malay-majority party chooses indifference and complacency in the face of the PAS onslaught.

It has even supported the idea of turning Kelantan into an Islamic state.

The DAP prefers silence and inaction amid PAS’ swagger. Elsewhere it would wield its non-Muslim credentials, sometimes to the point of playing the Christian card.

None of this helps to tone down Malaysia’s sweltering communal politics. And since this reinforces the problem in Pakatan itself, it could prompt more of the same in Barisan as well.

The DAP’s latest move sees party adviser Lim Kit Siang contesting the Gelang Patah seat in Johor. It would be the latest “stop” in a long and roving parliamentary career.

MCA, which has half (seven out of 15) of its parliamentary seats in the state, sees Johor as its stronghold.

MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek condemned this as DAP’s strategy of “Chinese killing off the Chinese”.

Both Chinese-based parties are natural rivals whose mutual rivalry has now reached a new high.

DAP leaders may dismiss this alarm as predictable melodrama, but it contains a hard kernel of truth.

The DAP’s drive for power is not above pitting Chinese candidates against other Chinese candidates, which is likely to reduce further the number of ethnic minority MPs.

Johor is also Umno’s home state. There is virtually no prospect of the DAP snatching the state from Barisan.

However, DAP efforts to unseat MCA parliamentarians in Johor could produce a strong Malay-based Umno in the state government contending with a Chinese-based DAP in the Opposition.

That would be bad and dangerous for politics, race relations and the Chinese community’s representation in governance. It would be a regression, precariously setting an unhealthy precedent.

In recent years Malaysian political discourse became more multiracial as both Government and Opposition coalitions became more racially mixed.

With both Barisan and Pakatan led by Malay-majority parties, political differences were distanced from racial differences.

In the absence of thoroughly multiracial politics, that seems the next best option. The prospect of political fault lines coinciding with ethnic fault lines, raising the possibility of an ethnic conflagration as in 1969, has thus become more remote.

But the risk of returning to such political volatility remains. Respon­sible leaders of every party need to be cognizant of these realities.

Besides, the cause of shedding the racial element in party politics cannot be furthered by recourse to more racial politics.

Under a veneer of multiracial rhetoric, the DAP has been known to practise communal politics in its seat choices and allocations.

Lim’s foray into Gelang Patah to battle the MCA incumbent there is the latest example of this approach. Instead of creating a more multiracial two-coalition system, this communal cannibalism could promote an unhealthy and perilous two-race system.

Apparently, the DAP’s objective is simply to unseat MCA candidates, seen as soft targets since 2008, regardless of the cost to the people. That can only come at the expense of deepening racial politics in electoral outcomes.

Perhaps the DAP’s Chinese candidates are thought to have better chances in challenging MCA’s Chinese candidates than Umno’s Malay candidates. But that is still a tricky calculation depending on the circumstances at the time.

Thoughtful and responsible leaders may not consider that a risk worth taking, much less a cost worth paying.
 

BEHIND THE HEADLINES  By BUNN NAGARA

Related posts:

Malaysian Chinese at a Political Crossroads forum; Chua-Lim Debate, all hype but no climax 

Is the Two-Party-Sytem becoming a Two-Race-System? Online spars started ahead of tomorrow Chua-Lim debate!  

Malaysian Chinese Forum kicks off with a bang; Chua-Lim showdown!  

Malaysian Politics: Chua-Lim Debate Sets New Standard 

Sabah's invaders from the Philippines only flog a dead horse!

EVEN though foreign insurgents make a historical claim to Sabah, the facts of history refute it.

AS Malaysian troops and police continue mopping-up operations to flush out straying remnants of the Lahad Datu standoff, partisans on both sides trade emotive claims and insults.

Analysts, meanwhile, weigh the terms in historical documents like “rent”, “lease” and “cession money” to determine Sabah’s actual status. But not only are these documents read differently in translation (English and Sulu), the terms are also interpreted differently.

It makes more sense to focus on the events and circumstances of history. The known facts reveal at least 16 reasons why the Filipino Sulu claim to Sabah is unwarranted and unworthy of consideration.

First, today’s Philippines as a modern nation state and a republic by definition abrogates a former sultanate whose territory it occupies and whose sovereignty it denies.

The Republic of the Philippines has no claim to Sabah of its own. The on-off claim, originating from Sulu sovereignty made by certain quarters, is only a private matter of some revisionist individuals.

The second reason is that the Sulu Sultanate no longer exists, since there was no provision even for a constitutional monarch. Any claim requires a claimant and the property/territory in question, whether anyone else has effective control and ownership over it.

If the claimant or the territory does not exist, the claim cannot stand. The insurgents and their leader Jamalul Kiram III are only pressing a notional claim, since they cannot represent a defunct entity.

Third, there is no agreed rightful heir to the last Sultan of Sulu, even if an heir were to press the claim. Jamalul’s claim to be that heir is disputed by nearly a dozen other hereditary “royal” personages.

Another reason for rejecting his claim to Sabah comes with denial of his claim to the throne: 10 other “heirs” had renounced all claim to Sabah in 2007. Nine did so in a signed statement, and Rodinood Julaspi Kiram II in a separate declaration.

It does not matter whether Jamalul was among the nine. If he was, he had unlawfully reneged on the signed agreement, and if he wasn’t, he is outnumbered and is challenged 10 ways.

Fifth, when Spain took over the Sulu Sultanate as part of the Philippines, it left North Borneo (Sabah) in British hands. Spain disrupted the Sultanate by removing 18-year-old Sultan Jamalul Kiram II in 1886, replacing him with a rival, only to “reappoint” him six years later.

Britain made North Borneo a protectorate in 1888. Under Spain, the Philippines and most of the Sulu Sultanate with it were going in one direction, while North Borneo and the British went in another.

Eventually, the sultanate was divested of political and administrative powers until it exercised authority only over religious matters. No effective, functioning sultanate existed any more.

Sixth, the death of Sultan Jamalul Kiram II in 1936 saw no successor, since he died childless. His younger brother and anointed successor, Mawalil Wasit, died the same year before he was crowned.

Thus ended the Royal House of Sulu’s lineage. After Spain passed the Philippines, including the territory of the former sultanate (excluding North Borneo) to the United States, the US officially abolished what remained of the sultanate in 1936.

Eighth, the British North Borneo Company also ceased payment to the sultanate that year, indicating that the business sector had considered the 1878 agreement voided. (Payment later resumed only after relatives of the deceased sultan brought the matter to court.)

Ninth, President Manuel L. Quezon of the (then) Commonwealth of the Philippines declared in 1936 that Jamalul Kiram II was the last Sultan of Sulu. To emphasise the point, Quezon said the Philippine government would no longer recognise a Sulu Sultanate.

Britain had been exercising increasing proprietary moves over North Borneo, earning two rebukes from the US (1906, 1920). Britain ignored those reminders and annexed North Borneo in 1946, turning it into a crown colony.

Whatever the moral issues there, it again spelled the end of any vestige of Sulu royalty. For London, it was a justifiable move since it had taken over all the legal obligations of North Borneo.

Tenth, there was no question later (in the 1960s) about Sabah having to obtain independence from Britain. This underlined the fact that Britain was the sole governing authority up to that point.

Then as Sabah’s independence and the Cobbold Commission’s findings led to the scheduled formation of Malaysia on Aug 31, 1963, agitation flared from the Philippines. The date was postponed to Sept 16, such that Sabah was an independent entity for 16 days, ending any remaining claim from an extinct sultanate or the Philippines as belonging to it.

Twelfth, the very act of freely becoming part of the Malaysian federation negated all further claims on the territory by foreign partisans. The new state of Malaysia in its present form is recognised in all international organisations, including the United Nations and Asean, of which the Philippines is also a member.

Although former President Marcos tried to retake Sabah in the 1960s, the claim was later abandoned. At the Second Asean Summit in Kuala Lumpur in 1977, Marcos declared that the Philippines was taking concrete steps to end the claim.

Later, as Marcos’ rule clearly became a dictatorship, he made Punjungan Kiram “interim sultan” for Sulu. But this candidate ran off to Sabah, preferring to be a Malaysian instead.

Marcos then “appointed” Punjungan’s son Jamalul Kiram III successor to a non-existent sultan. This instigator of Lahad Datu is not only a dubious candidate since he is not the son of a sultan, but his claim to authority comes from a discredited and ousted dictator of a republic.

Not least, when President Corazon Aquino’s post-Marcos government planned a new Philippine Constitution in 1987, Malaysia lobbied for wording to end the disturbing claim to Sabah for good.

This would replace “historical right or legal title” with “over which the government exercises sovereign jurisdiction” (i.e. the status quo), which was accepted after the third reading in Congress.

So for Philippine citizens to invade Sabah to lay claim to it clearly violates their country’s Constitution. President Benigno Aquino III’s prosecution of these criminals is fully in accordance with the law.

It is also said that no rightful Filipino claim to Sabah exists because as a country, it had not consistently engaged in the activities of a de facto power there. Not only that, there has also been no consistent Filipino claim to Sabah.

Behind The Headlines by BUNN NAGARA

Related posts:

Sulu history and the Chinese

The former Sulu Sultanate, a foreign problem in history that became Sabah's   
The Sultan of Sulu reclaims eastern Sabah, MNLF among invaders 
Stop paying quit rent to Sultan of Sulu, it’s time to close the chapter   
Filipinos’ Sulu militant group in Sabah must leave Malaysia today

Dr Mohamad Tajuddin holds memories of unity

Being the only Malay among a class of Chinese students holds special memories of unity.

IN these months of Merdeka and the formation of Malaysia, I wish to pay tribute to my old school, SMJK Hua Lian in Perak.

Why was my school experience so special? I was the only Malay boy in a sea of Chinese students, yet I felt no racial or religious pressures. I sailed through four years of education making friends, having fun and learning lots of things from my mostly non-Malay teachers.

While I take a few moments to recollect some incidents, why don’t we also take this time to ask just what is wrong with our country – to the point that racial and religious mistrust still prevails after half a century.

My childhood days from Standard One to Six were spent at the police barracks in Butterworth, Penang, where I would walk about half a kilometre every day to St Mark’s Primary School. My childhood friends at the barracks were mostly Malays, but there were several Chinese boys and the two sons of a burly Sikh sergeant major.

My father was only a police constable with the rank of “private” despite his 30 years of service. Mother tells of his reluctance to move too far away from his family in Pantai Besar and Batu Kurau (both in Perak), which resulted in his stagnant position. Though my father was educated only up to Standard Three, he could scold me effortlessly in Queen’s English!

But the most important thing that I remember is that he NEVER uttered a single harsh word against any Chinese or Indian, unlike the fathers of my friends. He had many Chinese friends whom he visited occasionally, with me tagging along on his Vespa.

At St Mark’s, I had many friends who were Indians, Sikhs and Chinese. I remember one particular boy, the “soft” kind who was always jeered at for being feminine. We both got on well because of our one common interest – Enid Blyton story books! We would exchange comics and books all the time.

At the police barracks, I flew kites and played gasing, football and hide-and-seek among the wreakage of armoured police vehicles.

One day, I was greatly saddened to learn that my father was retiring from the police force and that we had to move to Taiping. The family moved in June of 1976 to the police barracks in Taiping. At 14, it was difficult to make friends at the barracks, so I was hoping it would be better in the new school. Little did I realise that my life was about to take a sharp turn.

There was no school that offered Industrial Arts in the English medium of instruction. St George’s Institution was agriculture based and King Edwards was commerce based. We finally found a school … next to the oldest prison in Malaysia. SMJK Hua Lian at Jalan Lumba Kuda had two sessions and 99.7% of its 2,000 students were Chinese!

I had been in Form 2A in St Mark’s, so when I transferred to Hua Lian, the headmaster asked which class I wanted to be in. I asked if there were any other Malay boys and if so, in which class? He said yes, but the two other boys were in Form 2D1 – the last class with the naughtiest students! I said okay and stepped into the most interesting period of my school life.

Try to imagine me at 14, a scrawny, bespectacled four-foot-something guy amidst burly Chinese five-footers who were all a year older than me as they had been to Remove class. I was an “A” student among those who got Cs and Ds. Every time the teacher stepped out to go to the toilet during the monthly exams, the whole class would crowd around me for answers to all the subjects, except my weakest subject, Mathematics.

I excelled in English and Bahasa Malaysia (BM) and it was wonderful to see pandemonium breaking out among my classmates whenever it was announced at assembly that I had obtained the highest marks for English in the whole form, beating those nerds from 2A1 (all boys) and 2A2 (all girls). My old form teacher was all smiles when he told the class that he was pleased to have at least one student who passed all his subjects.

Two recollections are worth highlighting here. Once, a Malay teacher who taught BM was so incensed with some students for being rude to him that he threw everyone out of the classroom and we had to stand in the hot sun for the whole period. That included me. It wasn’t fair because I was always a “teacher’s pet”. So there we were, all 42 of us, being stared at by the girls in 2B2, 2C2 and 2A2.

The other thing that has stayed with me is how my Chinese friends loved to gamble. They would bet almost every single day on Malaysian football, sports or even whether it would rain that day. Once I saw a boy win RM1,000 in a football pool! I rarely saw a RM50 and had never even seen a RM100 note. My mother gave me RM10 a month as allowance but she cooked and packed food for me every day.

I was moved up to 3B1 after that year and left my colourful friends at 3D1. After the LCE exams (the equivalent of SRP today), I was placed in the top science class, which was co-ed. One thing about Hua Lian – I had never had any puppy love problems because of the racial difference. I was not interested in the girls and I was not much to look at anyway.

For me, the most memorable thing about being in 4Sc1 was that we put up a play during Teacher’s Day and was asked to restage it in front of the whole school.

Another fun thing was that I joined the Police Cadet Force with my tall Chinese friends, about 40 of us. We learnt to march and practise arms drill and withstand the verbal abuses of our drill masters. With our smart uniforms, and knowledge of security details during special occasions in school, we impressed the girls – one of the perks of being in that hot and sweaty, brown get-up.

In 5Sc1, we had a lot of class parties. I had never been to a party before, especially one with a mix of boys and girls. My Chinese friends were very tolerant of my faith and endeavoured to make sure all the food was “halal”, or so they told me. I had absolute faith in their sincerity. We played games at these parties and joked around. It was great fun and I had never felt accepted as much before.

The other great thing was the formation of the first ever multi-racial sepak takraw team. I loved the game and played the “killer” position. There were only three other Malay boys in school and we had to find five Chinese boys because of the compulsory three-team rule. We sought good football players and basketball players as takraw requires agile footwork, springing and ball-handling.

We managed to form the team and went on the inter-school competition league. We went up against three schools and, of course, lost all the games. But everywhere we went, we were the talk of the day as no one had ever seen a Chinese-Malay takraw team.

I was one of the top 10 students in the MCE examination (the equivalent of SPM), securing 6As. I was the only Malay candidate in the Science stream and all my Chinese and Indian teachers were most proud of me. I was the only one who had scored a distinction (A2) in the Overseas English Exam, finally beating that lanky nerd of nerds, the head prefect.

After a short stint in Lower Six, I left to study in the United States for six years on a government scholarship. By then, most of my friends had gone to Canada, Britain or Australia, sponsored by their parents. Some who did not make it to Lower Six or the local universities had to look for work.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all my Hua Lian teachers from 1976-80 for their dedication and commitment. I used to joke that I was the best and worst Malay MCE student because I was the only one.

My Chinese friends and I studied, played (I never gambled although almost all my friends did), partied, took part in sports, marched in the cadet corps, went girl-watching at the Taiping Lake Gardens, had ice kacang at the Larut Matang Supermarket and talked about our future.

I sincerely believe that if narrow-minded politicians were to leave our multi-racial communities alone, we would probably live in better harmony than we do now. I not only survived, but thrived, at SMJK Hua Lian with my Chinese friends and teachers.

Happy Malaysia month!

By PROFESSOR DR MOHAMAD TAJUDDIN MOHAMAD RASDI

Source: The Star/Asian News Network

Stop playing race game in Malaysian politics

The country has changed so much since 1969 that to keep using the argument that we are on the verge of race war is rather obsolete.

I WAS wondering when it was going to happen; when certain quarters were going to dust off that old chestnut of May 13, 1969, and use it as a political tool.

It all seems terribly coincidental that as the general election draws nearer, suddenly race riots get inserted into political speech, and a movie about May 13 is apparently waiting to be released.

The country has changed so much since 1969 that to keep using the argument that we are on the verge of race war is rather obsolete.

Let’s look at some facts. Firstly, the vast majority of the Malaysian population were not even born in 1969.

This means that first-hand knowledge of that terrible time is simply not part of most of us. Without that emotional connection, I believe that younger Malaysians are willing to question the feasibility of such a thing happening again.

And really, could it? In 1969, the politics of the nation was so very clearly divided along racial lines. The Opposition was not united as it is today. PAS won 12 seats, DAP 13 and Gerakan 8.

They were not part of a coalition and each stood on its own, therefore it was possible to play the race game because, in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor in particular, the Opposition had the face of “the other”.

Today, with the Pakatan coalition in existence, the Opposition is a much more complex animal. If the Opposition wins, how can the race card be played when two of the component parties are so predominantly Malay?

Let’s take a look at recent events that has got some powerful people’s knickers in a twist.

In particular the Bersih demonstrations of 2007, 2011 and 2012. The demographics of these events were multi-ethnic and became even more multi-ethnic with each progressive one.

By the time of this year’s Bersih demonstration, the make-up of the people who took part was much closer to the make-up of the country as a whole. However, the predominant ethnic group was still Malay.

This goes to show that the political divide, not of political parties but of ordinary citizens, can no longer be conveniently divided along ethnic lines.

Significant numbers of Malaysians, regardless of their background, can be united when they have a common political goal, in this case clean and fair elections.

Furthermore, ethnic Malays can be vocally unhappy with the status quo. In the present-day scenario, it is ridiculous to say that the politics in Malaysia is simply a matter of Malays versus Non-Malays.

And let us look at the 2008 elections. The results were unprecedented and surprised most people. I remember that night very well, as the results became clear that Barisan had lost their two-thirds majority and five state governments.

I decided to drive around Kuala Lumpur, just to see what would happen. And what happened? Nothing.
The streets were quiet. No celebratory parties, no processions, no fireworks; nothing.

The Opposition and their supporters on the streets were as muted as the Barisan and their supporters.

No gloating, no taunting, no excuses at all to provoke a reaction from the supporters of the powers-that-be.

I am certain that if a similar result is achieved in the next elections, the same would happen. There will be no provocation from the opposition and their supporters.

That is not to say there will not be any trouble. Recent events in this country have proven that there are gangs of thugs who are willing to be violent for political purposes.

The thing is though, I believe that the Malaysian public are not going to rise to the bait.

I fervently hope we will show them that we are better than them, we are nobler than them and they are nothing but hooligans with delusions of grandeur.

No, the danger that faces this country will not come from race riots.

If we have trouble in Malaysia, it will be if there is a prolonged disrespect for true democratic principles.

If the election process is not transparent and fair, if the result of a clean election is not respected, then and only then should we start to worry.

BRAVE NEW WORLD

By AZMI SHAROM

The modern day slacker

It is this type which frustrates the hardworking Malays, who have worked so hard to bust the myth of the lazy Malay, the subsidy-mentality-bumi, and gives them a bad name.

YOU would have known at least two of this type: the young Malay boy in his late 20s to mid-30s who has the potential, but for no reason at all, seems intent on ruining his life, by simply being lackadaisical and complacent. He is the slacker.

It is this type which frustrates the hardworking Malays, who have worked so hard to bust the myth of the lazy Malay, the subsidy-mentality-bumi, and gives them a bad name.

The latter, who come from various economic backgrounds, burn the midnight oil at their corporate jobs. Some take on another as a side income or work at two jobs.

Their partners or spouses are equally as hardworking, but when drawn into conversation about the idle Malay boy, both will throw their hands up in the air.

Talk to non-Malay professionals and they say nonchalantly, “That’s what you get when you hire these Malays.”

A successful bumi businessman told me once that he hires only young non-Malays, because he had been duped too many times by the boys he wanted to help.

These boys, who seem to be mushrooming by the day, are articulate, and do keep abreast of current events. Interestingly, these boys mainly come from working class backgrounds.

They’re not unintelligent. Have a chat with them – they can be so perceptive that you wonder why they are not in politics or a think-tank. And yet, they are in debt, and seem to relish in their financial piccadiloes; when they are offered opportunities, they take and screw them up halfway.

The reasons are unbelievable: I broke up with my girlfriend. I don’t have money. I don’t have the ilham. My friend owes me money. I owe myself money.

However, despite their apparent flaws, they complain about how the world owes them a living. The government should give me a grant. The government owes me a living because I’m Malay and poor.

People don’t like me because I’m not connected. Girls don’t want to date me because I’m poor and directionless.

Granted, some do try. But they look for short cuts.

Some of them become the “shadows” of the bodyguards, the lesser datuks and proxies to the middleman to the PA to the right-hand man of the “Man Himself”, in vain hopes for a small cut.

If they are lucky, they take back RM5,000. They create small enterprises and mark up costs that defy business logic, that in the end they have to close shop.

The opportunities are already there. Yes, our education system is not perfect, but many have come out from it better and richer.

I also do not deny that working or doing business is not easy either. Yet there are many Malaysian success stories.

Blame the NEP if you want, but the truth is, many have also thrived sans it. Some packed up their bags and moved abroad without a degree or connections. The Internet is at your disposal – for all this talk about not having money, a good number of these boys have a working computer. Mac, no less. So work from home.

Work with clients from everywhere! A friend once hired a Nigerian student in Nigeria to create his website. That young boy from the sticks of Nigeria delivered a really swoosh website within a month.

When asked why they are so dismissive of politics and youth activities, they can tell you, “It’s a waste of time. We’re not America. There’s a tradition of activism there, not here. Besides, we’re the grassroots. The government should take care of us and provide us with incentives.”

How can any government do so, and why should it? This is not about opportunities but attitude!
There is already a social and economic imbalance which will worsen.

Many marriages break down, and some of the increasing reasons I hear from my syariah lawyer friends are that these boys are complacent and do not contribute to the marriage financially.

They do not pick up the slack at home by being the housekeeper, and expect the wives to fund two families. Theirs and his.

Some resent their wives’ successes and create problems. Some of them bring their debts into the family equation.

Economically, if more and more of these youths opt to be slackers, the country’s GDP will go down greatly and crumble into a declining and worsening economy.

The divide between the haves and have-nots will widen. The gender imbalance is already there: More young (Malay) women are in tertiary institutions and working very hard.

Quite a number have told me they fear marriage because they do not want to be beholden to a spouse who cannot contribute to a marriage.

At this juncture, this begs another question.

Why are a good number of young and working class Malays complacent? Sometimes, I feel that the foreign workers deserve citizenship because they work and somehow manage to save for their families back home.

They live in the most deplorable living conditions, and some worse than the shacks I have seen in my kampung.

The question should no longer be about whether Malay youths are politically apathetic. The question should be how to make these boys work and be motivated.

It is a study I greatly welcome and would like to do.

A WRITER'S LIFE By DINA ZAMAN

Are Malaysians really racists?

PUTIK LADA By RICHARD WEE

Race relations laws will assist the authorities to manage race relations, to clarify any uncertainty, but may to a certain extent suggest that Malaysians are, perhaps, racists.

IT is of crucial importance for the citizens of any growing nation to also grow intellectually. A mature nation is not just a nation of financial wealth, but a nation filled with people who can articulate their points intellectually and critically, and do so calmly and with poise.

In 2007 and 2008, the National Young Lawyers Committee of the Bar Council (NYLC) held a series of forums – known as “Siri Pemikiran Kritis” (SPK) – which encouraged open debates and discussions of issues which affected the people and the nation.

These debates and discussions included issues relating to the economy, civil liberties, and human rights. It was hoped that these forums would activate quality dialogues, over rhetoric and emotional outbursts.

The series was very well received. The panel of invited speakers ranged from national leaders to NGO members.

The attendees were mostly normal Malaysians who cared for the country and who were keen to hear the views of the panel speakers.

As the name of the series suggests, its purpose was to encourage critical thinking. The forums took a standard format.

The NYLC would invite a few speakers who were well versed with the topic, and have a moderator to host.

After each speaker presented his thoughts on the topic at hand, the floor would be open for the attendees to pose queries and sometimes debate with the panel speakers.

The very first SPK was held on Jan 11, 2007, and the topic was the New Economic Policy. It was a good start, and eventually, eight further forums were held.

This year, the NYLC is reviving the SPK series. This is part of the NYLC’s on-going community programme, which includes not only offering people legal and non-legal assistance, but also to educate and engage via public forums such as the SPK.

The idea of public forums where Malaysians can gather and listen to the ideas and views of others, and partake in open dialogues, drove the current NYLC team to re-visit the successful SPK.

To kick start the 2012 version of the SPK, the NYLC will host a forum on the issue of the proposed race relations law in Malaysia – “Race Relations Laws: Backwards or Forwards?”

Law Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Nazri Aziz, announced that a Bill would be presented in Parliament, which would be in similar vein with the race relations laws of other countries.

What are race relations laws? In its simplest sense, race relations laws govern the relations of different races in a country. In the United Kingdom and the United States, laws governing race relations were passed and are used to manage the different races.

Do we need such laws in Malaysia? Does Malaysia not already have a sufficient legislative framework to govern race relations? How have we been governing race relations since 1957? Is our Federal Constitution a sufficient guide on race relations? Is it not enough for race relations be governed by honest and benevolent government policies?

Perhaps the new laws would assist the authorities to manage race relations. Arguably, there is an opportunity to clarify any uncertainty.

To a certain extent, the proposed race relations law suggests that Malaysians are, perhaps, racists. Only in countries where racism is rampant, or where it is damaging the roots of the society, would such a law be necessary.

Are Malaysians really racists?

That would be a question which only the Malaysian people can answer.

It is possible that this country is not, by majority, filled with racists, but instead that Malaysia has been subjected to unfortunate and sometimes insidiously enforced policies, which gives the impression that we are racists.

Taking a general view of Malaysian society, there is hardly any open, blatant racism.

For example, in the US, at the peak of racism, African Americans were not allowed to share seats in buses with White Americans in some states.

That was a dark moment in American history and their Senate had to intervene with laws to legislate that.
Policies in America also changed to discourage segregation.

Unlike in the US, any Malaysian can hitch a ride on a bus and share seats with people of different races. This is, of course, a simplistic example. Perhaps Malaysians may feel otherwise.

People may feel that we need such laws. Malaysians may also feel that we should discuss and perhaps debate on this proposed law.

So, do we need race relations laws in Malaysia? Or do we actually need race relations policies instead? And if we do introduce race relations laws, what would they contain?

So many questions. So many issues.

That being the case, we invite you make your way to the upcoming SPK Forum, which will be held on Saturday, March 31, at the Bar Council Auditorium in Kuala Lumpur from 10am to 2pm.

The forum will be initiated by Senator Gan Ping Sieu who is also Youth and Sports Deputy Minister. The speakers will be Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, Farish Noor, and Faisal Moideen. It will be moderated by Syahredzan Johan.

Please register with the Bar Council by contacting Janet Nathan, the Executive Officer in charge at janet@malaysianbar.org.my, as seats are limited.

> The writer is the chairperson of the National Young Lawyers Committee. PutikLada, or pepper buds in Malay, captures the spirit and intention of this column – a platform for young lawyers to articulate their views and aspirations about the law, justice and a civil society. For more information about the young lawyers, visit www.malaysianbar.org.my.

Mature debates awakening policy makers!

Mature debate the way to go
  ROAMING BEYOND THE FENCE By TUNKU 'ABIDIN MUHRIZ  

Younger, more mature Malaysians have moved on and would like to see more debates, particularly on substantial issues which in the long term can feed the policy makingprocess.

YOUTH and Sports Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Shabery Cheek is not a bad squash player, and I partially attribute my two wins over him to home ground advantage — we were playing at the Royal Sungei Ujong Club which once served as Seremban’s Istana Hinggap — and also to the fact that he was already rather tired, having already played two sets with the Yang di-Pertuan Besar (of which the outcome for the minister was similar).

It is said that he is the most approachable among the Cabinet ministers, and I can see why.

His name is also nearly uttered in the same breath as Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah, Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan, Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed, Datuk Shahrir Samad, Khairy Jamaluddin and, of late, Datuk Seri Nazri “Valentine’s Day” Aziz as Umno politicians who have been condemned within their party for being too liberal or independent-minded.

Round one: Dr Chua and Lim speaking to the press after their debate last Saturday.

(Two of these individuals listed mostly the same names when I asked who else in their party broadly agrees with them — even if they don’t enjoy particularly close relationships with one another.)

Among veterans, there’s Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, recently joined by Tan Sri Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir, in being critical of the party.

Back in 2008, as Information Minister, Shabery Cheek had the courage to face Anwar Ibrahim in a televised debate after the latter’s release from prison.

This was touted as the debate of the century, but now similar superlatives are being applied to the one last weekend between Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek and Lim Guan Eng.



I have been told that the available translations are poor, so I won’t judge the content, but what struck me was the eagerness in presenting this debate as one concerning only ethnic Chinese in Malaysia, rather than a debate to discuss issues pertinent to all Malaysians.

It is as if one’s ethnic background constrains the subject matter — but I am sure people of all ethnic backgrounds have a view about cars being towed in the late evenings.

Still, the fact that the debate happened at all has been widely appreciated. Of course, such debates for the benefit of Malaysian students abroad have been happening for some time.

The recent one between Khairy and Rafizi Ramli in London has been making the rounds online, but I remember such debates taking place when I was an undergraduate there myself.

Some say such debates are a waste of time, because Malaysians are supposedly too immature.

Well, immature politicians of whatever age can wallow in their own ignorance: younger, more mature Malaysians have moved on and we would like to see more debates, and on substantial issues which in the long term can feed the policy making process.

This change in attitude must have something to do with the active culture of debating in our varsities.

Not too long ago I was a judge at one of these debating events, and if these ladies and gentlemen become parliamentarians in the future there may yet be hope for our Dewan Rakyat to return to the civilised, august chamber that it once was.

The cultivation of public speaking begins at a young age.

Last week, I was at SMK Tuanku Muhammad to close a public speaking competition for schools in Kuala Pilah, and the 15-year-old girl who won spoke as eloquently as the local MP.

In my own speech I mentioned that aptitude in both Malay and English is not only crucial to our nation’s future success, but also in understanding our past; from the time of Tuanku Muhammad, English was widely used in government, business and social circles: a far cry from the termination of the English national-type schools, the PPSMI debate and ministry websites that “poke eyes”.

In a school named for Tuanku Muhammad’s niece, Tunku Kurshiah, the wind orchestra was rehearsing for its Konsert DiRaja on Sunday. Starting out as a marching band in the 1970s, the orchestra now routinely wins competitions against other schools.

It had invited me to accompany them on the piano, and it was a privilege to play One Republic’s Apologise and the Blues Gang’s Apo Nak Dikato with an orchestra carrying the first Raja Permaisuri Agong’s name in the presence of many of her family members, including the Yang di-Pertuan Besar and the Tunku Panglima Besar of Kedah (herself a TKCian).

I hope in due course the extraordinary commitment to co-curricular activities can be expanded to squash, too.

Preliminary research suggests that Shabery Cheek is the only person in the Cabinet or among senior Opposition figures (there is still, lamentably, and so close to the rumoured general election, no Shadow Cabinet) who plays this game of strategy, stamina, and flexibility.

> Tunku ’Abidin Muhriz is president of IDEAS.

Related posts/articles:

• Malaysian Politics: Chua-Lim Debate Sets New Standard 

• Malaysian Politics: Chua-Lim Debate Sets New Standard (rightways.wordpress.com)

How frail the Malaysian unity!

How frail our unity is

WHY NOT? By WONG SAI WAN saiwan@thestar.com.my

Malaysians always boast about how we can live with each other but yet that multi-racial fabric is easily torn.

REPORTERS for English newspapers in Malaysia are taught from their very first day not to write their reports on racial lines but to promote national unity and, more importantly, not to incite racial hatred.

The most common example of this is reporting on court cases.

This is why court reporters go out of the way to find out the occupations of the protagonists in the trial.

More often than not, one would read in a paper like ours that “a factory worker was charged with stabbing a clerk at a shopping complex”, without reference to the ethnicity of the people involved.

The thinking of our newspaper gurus in the early days was that although we were made up of various communities, it was best we saw each other as Malaysians, and to mention someone’s ethnic background was considered bad form.

Of course, there was an underlying reason for it.

Editors those days were also conscious of promoting unity and maintaining good race relations.

Imagine the sort of problems that could arise if the story above read: “A Malay factory worker was charged with stabbing a Chinese clerk at a shopping complex.”

Such writing, it was argued, would do nothing for the development of the country or race relations.

In fact, there were some who argued that such a writing style would only inflame hatred, especially if the report was about violence.

It would not be wrong to say such thinking became even more pronounced after the racial riots of May 13, 1969.

I was taught this no-race mantra when I joined this newspaper in 1984. In fact, my editor told me, the mere mention of the name would be a dead giveaway of the person’s race (his words, not mine).



“Wong Sai Wan cannot be an Indian person” was his favourite reminder to me each time he caught me writing an article where I mentioned someone by his ethnicity.

However, things have changed over the past three decades.

Although most English language newspapers in this country still do not report crime and court articles according to ethnicity, most of us now allow mention of language or ethnicity if it gives perspective to an article, especially features.

After 40 years, we would have all thought that we would be mature enough to handle any form of differences without referring to it in terms of race or religion.

Along with the millions of other Malaysians, I often shake my head in disbelief when opportunist politicians try to use the race card to shore up their flagging popularity.

I was so proud to see young Malaysians reject the position taken by these older politicians from both sides of the divide and instead to treat any issue based on merit and not on the colour of one’s skin.

Since 2008, I have been slowly converted to the position that Malaysia has become mature enough to handle conflicts and criminal violence even if the perpetrators were identified by race or religion.

Yes, our society has created code words to describe each other and most of the time these descriptions are taken in good humour.

These code words evolve with time. For example, during my younger days, all Malays were referred to as Ah Mat, Chinese as Ah Chong and Indians as Muthu.

Nowadays, the nicknames have changed to Mat Rempit, Ah Beng and Macha.

These monikers are slightly crude, but not derogatory – at least that’s what I think and see from the reaction within our modern society.

However, then came the infamous I-City KFC incident.  It was a simple case of a restaurant worker losing his cool and punching a customer who obviously also lost his cool.

However, the incident, unlike similar fights that had happened numerous times in other restaurants, was captured on video and uploaded on YouTube.

It went viral after it was shared on Facebook. The clip was uploaded without moderation to give it some sort of perspective.

The person who taped it with a handphone described it as a fight at KFC.

What happened over the next few hours of the uploading of the video on cyberspace was truly disgusting. Malaysians put a racial slant on the incident.

Most of those who took the side of the customer, Danny Ng, were non-Malays, while the restaurant staff were mainly defended by Malays.

On Facebook, supporters on either side started to verbally attack each other – with some making up various stories of how the incident started, and the supposed quarrel between Ng and the staff.

The words used by the two groups to attack each other were derogatory and racist. The so-called unity we boast about was shattered.

Ng has since denied that the incident was racial in nature and clarified that neither he nor the KFC staff used any racial slurs.

However, those on the social media ignored this and continued to make all sorts of comments.

Facebook and YouTube are the most popular forms of social media. Opinions are shaped on these two websites.

Comments there become a strong reflection of the state of our own society.

Sadly, in this case, we failed big time. Malaysians have come across as immature, racist and unforgiving.

Malaysians need to show the world that we can handle ourselves, accept each other and celebrate our differences.

Fortunately, the “quarrel” occurred over cyberspace, and maybe it was a good place to let off steam without taking it into the real world.

This incident has shown that our unity is very fragile and our race relations far from adequate.

Our leaders must realise this and not rely on bigotry to gain popularity with only a certain segment of society.

> Executive Editor Wong Sai Wan loves his fried chicken but also hates poor service.

 Related post:


Let’s all be Malaysians first !

Hang Tuah, etc. found not Malay but Chinese!

Origins of Hang Tuah ( and Hang Jebat Hang Lekiu etc)

By John Chow

Findings of the team of scientists, archaeologist, historian and other technical staff from the United State, United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, Yemen & Russia

The graves of Hang Tuah, Hang Jebat, Hang Lekiu and their close friends have been found and  their skeletons had been analysed.  Their DNA had been analysed and it is found that Hang Tuah, Hang Jebat, Hang Lekiu etc. are not Malay,  but Chinese  (Islamic Chinese,  just like the famous Admiral Cheng Ho).  Malacca was a protectorate of China at that time,  andthe Emperor of China sent the Sultan of Malacca “yellow gifts’ as a token of his sovereignty.  The 5 warrior brothers were believed to be sent to help protect Malacca and its Sultan from Siam (Thailand). 

The Sultans of Malacca was directly descended from the Parameswara from Indonesia who fled to Tamasek (Singapore) and then to Malacca.  The Malaccan Sulatanate family eventually spread and became the Sultanate of the other Malay states of Perak and Johor.  Therefore,  the Sultanate royal court and the aristocrats of the Malay sultanates are actually foreigners from Sumatra and Java.  Hang Tuahand his friends were the protectors of the Indonesian aristocratic Parameswara family who came to Malaya around 1400 AD and claimed sovereignty of the land. 

For confirmation please refer to:-

The Federal Association of Arc & Research of Michigan, USA

John Chow’s notes:-

Hang is an unusual surname or name for a Malay. It sounds like s corruption of a Chinese surname.

In fact,Chinese names start with the surname first, and given names last.Malay names start with the given names first and the father’s name last(as in Ahmad bin Yusuf which means “Ahmad, the son of Yusuf).There is no surname in traditional Malay. There is no surname to carry forward to the next generation.

We also need to examine the genealogy.  We know that Hang Tuah’s father was Hang Mamat.  Here,  we do not see a Malay name transmission.  We see a name being carried forward.  It is also noted that the placement of the name that is carried forward is in front.  This indicates that the surname is “Hang”.  It is the transmission of Chinese names.  

We also know that Hang Tuah’s son is Hang Nadim.  Again,  the name “Hang” is carried forward,  and yet again,  auspiciously in front,  as a Chinese name would be,  with the surname in front.  There is no indication of a Malay naming convention.

Note that Hang Nadimis also known as Si Awang (Malays would colloquially refer to others as “Si”.   “A”  or “Ah” is a common prefix for referring to others in Chinese.  Thus,  a person with surname Wang/Huang would be referred to as “Si Ah Wang” in Malaysia  - Mr. Ah Huang) by the Malays. 

Note that Hang Tuah’smother is Dang Merdu.  “Dang” would be quite an unusual surname for a Malay also.  However,  “Dang”  or “Tang” is a common Chinese surname.  Note that the name “Dang”  is in front,  signifying that this is a Chinese naming convention,  yet again. 

Some Malays will argue that “Hang” is an honorific term (Humba) for those that serve the royal courts.  http://www.freewebs.com/suaraanum/0506b02.htm   This argument is not tenable.  Firstly,  where is the precedence in sultanates that preceded the Malaccan Sultanate?  Secondly,  where is the evidence that this is so in succeeding sultanates?  Thirdly,  where is the evidence that this practice was carried out in the sultanate of that time?  And has that Sultan given it to other court official and the royal family and their court officials and courtesans?  Where is the evidence?  Fourthly,  since Hang Tuah’s father is called Hang Mamat,  then he would have served the Sultan prior to Hang Tuah.  But there is no evidence this is so.  In fact,  there is evidence that Hang Tuah was a very poor kid in the village.  His father was not a high court official,  and he was not brought up in the court.  In addition,  since if Hang Tuah’s father Hang Mamat had already served as a high court official,  why must Hang Tuah be educated in Bahasa Melayu and court etiquette etc. again since the family is already indoctrinated in royal protocol? 

"Dalamperbendaharaan nama-namaorang Melayu semasa zaman kesultanan Melaayu Melaka, tiada terdapat nama-nama seumpama Hang Tuah, Hang Kasturi, Hang Jebat, Hang Lekir, Hang Lekiu, ringkasnya ringkasan yang bermula dengan ¡®Hang¡¯. Sejarah juga telahmencatatkan nama-nama dari bangsa Cinayang bermula dengan Hang, Tan, Maa dan Lee. Ia bergantung kepadasuku kaum atau asal-usul keturunan mereka dari wilayah tertentudari China. Kemungkinan untuk mendakwa bahawa gelaran ¡®Hang¡¯ telah dianugerahkan oleh Raja-Raja Melayu juga tiadaasasnya. "

The last sentence loosely translates as, "There's the possibility to propose that the term "Hang" conferred as ahonorific by the Malay Kings also has no basis."

 Moreover,  before the time of the 5 warriors with their close families during this close period of relationship with the Chinese,  there are no Malays with this name.

Note that the Chinese ‘princess’ who married the Sultan of Malacca was called “Hang Li Po”.  Here,  we not only see the same name,  but the name is also in front,  indicating a Chinese naming convention.  Hang Li Po brought along with her many servants and bodyguards from China who became the Baba and Nyonya's of Malacca  -  these folk exist to this day.  Chinese who do not know how to speak or write Chinese.  They have been totally ‘malayanised”.  Babas are people of Chinese descend who have been malayanised to such an extent that they wear Malay clothing, eat Malay food (with some Chinese food), speak Malay, and do not speak or write Chinese.  Malacca is famous for its Baba communities.  The only thing that is Chinese about them is that they are of Chinese ancestry.  If you say that Hang Tuahis a Malay in the same sense that these Chinese have been malayanised,  then you might be quite right.  However,  at this present moment,  we are arguing on the basis whether he was an ethnic Malay or an ethnic Chinese,  in the sense of blood ancestry. . 

There is an old Chinese tradition where warriors or servants in the royal palace were given or re-issued with surnames given by the emperor,  to signify that they belong to the emperor,  or to one of his offsprings.  Therefore,  it is possible that some very special bodyguards of the emperor or the royal family,  have the same surname to signify that they are a unit formed especially to protect that one owner.  Since the Princess Hang Li Po was given away in marriage to a strategic partner whose land the emperor wanted to ensure is safe and stable,  heassigned a group of able warriors to the Princess Li Po,  and he gave their families the same surname.  This is not an unusual practice for the Chinese emperor. 

As for Hang Kasturi having 4 characters in his name,  it is unusual,  but it does happen that some Chinese have only 2 characters,  and some have 4 characters in their names.  For example,  my paternal grandmother had only 2 characters in her name. 

See: http://www.anu.edu.au/asianstudies/ahcen/proudfoot/mmp/rtm/teachers.html

 

In the GENEALOGICAL TREE OF THE ROYAL FAMILIES OF PERAK STATE  (http://www.geocities.com/aizaris/genealogy),  you may note 2 things:-

1)            Evidence that traditional Malay naming conventions do not carry the name of the father forward.

2)            There is no surname to carry forward

3)            Neither name nor surname are placed in front.

4)            The genealogy of the early part of the lineage tree makes reference to Chinese ancestry:-  “Putera   Chedra China”   “Puetra China”   and then later  “Paduka Sri Cina”  

This proves there has been early Chinese links in the Malay/Indonesian races and aristocratic lineages.

 One Malay argued that Hang Tuah was already in the service of the Sultan before Hang Li Po was sent to Malacca.  However,  there is not evidence of this.  A probable reference is the semi folklore Hikayat Hang Tuah,  whicjh is not very reliable as it has many contradiction to SejarahMelayu.  From the Ming Dynasty chronicles does not mention Hang Li Po or Hang Tuah but did mention the trip of Sultan Mansur Shah.  See: http://thepenangfileb.bravepages.com/histr36.htm

It is even possible that Hang Li Po was a minor “princess”  (ie.  only a daughter of a court official) who the emperor ordered to be given away to marry a vassal sate in order to ensue loyalty and close diplomatic relation.  The whole event was blown up to given the foreign king a big ego boost that the great Chinese overlord gave him his own daughter in marriage!  (It is doubtful that the conservative Chinese emperors would give their daughters away to somebody living in a foreign land very far away).  It has happened before in the history of China.  For example,  the Tibetans think that their King Sonten Gampo forced the Chinese emperor to give away his daughter in marriage in order to make peace with great big powerful Tibet.  The story from the Chinese side is that the Chinese emperor tricked the egotistical Tibetan king into believing that the palace maid was a princess and sent her off with her retinue and gifts.  It was a ‘diplomatic trick”.  Therefore,  it is possible that the Chinese court repeated the trick on Sultan Mansur Shah,  and gave him a “Chinese princess” with many gifts for the Sultan.  In the meantime,  he sent some warriors to the Sultanate to help ensure peace, safety and stability in the region – all in China’s national interests.  Protect your friends and your interests will be protected.  Or it could have been a ploy used by the Chinese emperor and the Malaccan sultan to use this marriage of a “princess” to deter the Siamese kings from encroaching on Malaccan territory.   Siam would not dare to invade Malacca whose sultan is a son in law of the mighty Chinese empire!

Footnote:-

The 5 sworn brothers who studied and practised Silat together are:-

Hang Tuah, Hang Jebat, Hang Lekir, Hang Lekiu and Hang Kasturi. 

Further references:-

Serajah Melayu– History of the Malay Peninsula

http://www.sabrizain.demon.co.uk/malaya/parames.htm

Parameswara and the founding of the Sultanate of Malacca    by John Chow

 This is my limited understanding of this subject matter.

Related posts:

Malaysian History & Legend; facts & fallacies; myths ...

Hang-ups over Malaysian history 

The times to change in Malaysian politics!

Evolving with the times

INSIGHT: By JOCELINE TAN

DAP’s new Malay recruits are more likely to impress its non-Malay supporters than the Malay ground which it is trying to infiltrate but, in the long run, it is an astute move to tap into the changing urban demography.

DATUK Ariff Sabri has been the talk of Pahang Umno since he joined DAP a few weeks ago. Ariff, a former Pahang assemblyman but who is now more famous as a blogger, is arguably the biggest Umno name to have joined DAP.

“I was quite shocked. I thought someone was playing a joke on me and I felt sad when it turned out to be true,” said Pahang exco member Datuk Sharkar Shamsuddin.

The Umno and DAP view of each other has always been extremely polarised – ultra Malay versus Chinese chauvinist. As far as Ariff’s friends in Umno were concerned, his political move was akin to leaving one world for another.

 

Malay recipe: Zulkifli (left) and Zairil (centre) represent DAP’s past and present attempts at diluting its image as a Chinese chauvinist party. They are seen here with life member Iskandar Basha Abdul Kadir (right) in Penang.

 
On top of that, DAP has been making a song and dance about the fact that Ariff hailed from the Prime Minister’s constituency and used to be the Pekan Umno information chief.

But no one felt more taken aback than Pahang Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Adnan Yaakob. The two men have known each other for years and when Ariff was not picked to defend his Pulau Manis state seat in 2008, the Mentri Besar had reportedly made efforts to ensure that Ariff and his family would be all right.

Sharkar is one of those people who sees everyone as a friend and he called Ariff to urge him to rethink his decision, but the die was cast.

Ariff and Aspan Alias, another Umno politician from Negri Sembilan, had attended the DAP national conference in January where they were welcomed like VIPs. Since then, former National Union of Journalists president Hata Wahari has also been recruited.

The latest recruits stand out as both are from Umno whereas Hata had single-handedly taken on Utusan Malaysia before he was sacked from the paper.

In that sense, it was the first time that DAP had managed to snare three Umno-related personalities who can now join them in challenging Umno.

Hata, who is currently working for Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar, seems to be taking his radical views against Utusan Malaysia and on press freedom to the political arena.

Ariff and Aspan have used their blogs to air their opinions and often to hit out at what they think is wrong with Umno.

Ariff, being a former assemblyman, is definitely the biggest catch among the three. He said he is against corruption and wants to see good governance and the rule of law.

“It’s not easy to move on but I am taking stock of the new realities of Malay politics. The younger generation is less racial in outlook and more willing to go on merit,” he said.



He is also much harder to define – he is a big fan of muay thai, has a taste for serious literature and likes music from an earlier era. Although his blog may be rather too cerebral for the average person, his writing is very cut-and-thrust and he can be quite ruthless. He has commented on everything from politics to the economy and has a loyal following.

DAP Youth chief and Rasah MP Anthony Loke who took the initiative to approach Ariff admitted he was attracted to the latter’s line of attack against Umno.

“We told them to go on writing. They can attack Umno and explain a lot of things on our behalf,” said Loke.

But what is the big deal, some have asked. They said that a few new Malay members looking for a new platform to air their grouses is not going to change the image of DAP. They think DAP is recruiting people who have an axe to grind, basically “Umno-bashers” who can take the DAP fight with Umno to another level.

There has been a trickle of Malays into the party over the years and there is even an all Malay DAP branch in the Klang Valley. There have also been Malay DAP candidates every general election but only three or four have managed to win seats, the most notable being the late Bayan Baru MP Ahmad Nor who was a well-known trade unionist.

But DAP’s attempts to reach out to the Malays over the last 40 years have been a flop partly because of the success of Umno’s propaganda against DAP and partly because of the way DAP had exploited Chinese issues.

DAP was more than happy to ride on its reputation as a champion of all things Chinese but their troubles in the wake of their success in Penang and Perak drummed home the point that their Chinese image had become a liability.

All those years of attacking Umno, the NEP, Islamic policies, the civil service, the police and, more recently, the MACC have come home to roost.

The targets of their criticism have one thing in common – they are largely associated with the Malays and Islam. Their attacks have been akin to Malay-bashing and the party has, rightly or wrongly, acquired an anti-Malay reputation.

Last year, the party launched its Malay website, Roketkini. It is not the most original of names but it is quite an interesting site although critics say that it sounds like a Malay apologist for a Chinese party.

It is quite obvious that Roketkini’s purpose is also to debunk Malay prejudices against DAP, defending the party against notions that it is anti-Islam, supports the Islamic State, is trying to promote a Christian Prime Minister, has communist leanings and so on.

Malays in the party find themselves always having to explain themselves to their Malay friends. For instance, former vice-chairman Zulkifli Md Noor still gets puzzled looks after 30 years in the party. Some of his friends think that DAP uses Malays like him as tokens and that the party is not sincere in giving them real roles. His detractors see him as a DAP poodle.

They said that if DAP genuinely wanted to promote the Malays, people like Zulkifli should be given winnable seats. Instead, he has contested three general elections in seats where he was pitched against big guns and where he had little chance of winning. In 2008, he even had to make way for a well-connected Indian candidate even though he had been doing work in that particular constituency.

But Ariff is definitely not going to be anyone’s poodle. For instance, his blog is called Sakmongkol AK47 – Sakmongkol is the name of a famous kickboxer whereas AK47 is a Russian-made firearm.

He described his first few interactions with DAP as a culture shock but as he said: “Just because I am in DAP does not make me less of a Malay, I’m still a loyal subject of the Rulers.”

During a party retreat in Seremban last year, Lim Kit Siang had urged members to correct their image by attracting young, liberal and progressive Malays.

“We’re not only targeting former Umno members, we’re also looking for fresh faces without any political history,” said Loke.

DAP, said social historian Dr Neil Khor, is by constitution a non-sectarian party.

“They have to practise what they preach. They have been dominated by a Chinese type of thinking. I think they are trying to say that, yes, we can’t deny that we have become an ethnic Chinese party but we are pushing for a more multi-racial outlook,” said Dr Khor.

The latest Malay recruits will probably be made candidates in the next general election. The question is whether they will be tested in Malay seats where they will have to struggle to win or given safe, Chinese-majority seats.

“If they pull it off, it will be a real game changer for DAP,” said Dr Khor.

Everyone is watching what the party is planning to do in Perak. Pakatan Rakyat politicians have convinced themselves that they will take back Perak and the talk is that DAP wants to have their own Malay candidate for mentri besar. They have been badly damaged by attacks that although they won an overwhelming number of seats in the state, they had to surrender the mentri besar post to PAS.

Not everyone in the party is thrilled about the entry of Ariff, Aspan and Hata. First, there are the suspicions and stigma attached to party-hoppers. Then there is the concern about whether they will be able to adapt to the party’s way of doing things.

A few of them are also concerned about the Johor-born Hata. They saw how he bit the hand that fed him and his ferocious flogging of his then employer shocked many people. They are worried the firebrand could easily turn around and bite DAP if things do not go his way in future. They can see that this is a guy who goes for broke.

They want the party to recruit more Malays like Zairil Khir Johari and former Transparency Malaysia chief Senator Tunku Aziz Ibrahim. They have no baggage and do not ask too many embarrassing questions or cause trouble in the party.

Zairil, whose stepfather is the late Umno veteran Tan Sri Khir Johari, is seen as a rising star in Penang where he is the Chief Minister’s blue-eyed boy. The Internet chatter is projecting him as the next deputy chief minister. But to be fair to him, he is a genuinely likeable person, humble and hard-working.

“All these people joined without any pre-conditions. They may or may not be candidates in the general election and we do not have carrots to dangle,” said Jelutong MP Jeff Ooi.

The party constitution specifies at least two years of membership because anyone can be considered as an election candidate but it can be waived by the central executive committee as in the case of Ooi, who joined the party about six months before the 2008 election.

The short-term take on this is that DAP is trying to dilute its Chinese image which is becoming a liability in its quest for power. But the new recruits are more likely to impress DAP’s non-Malay ground rather than the Malays whom they are trying to attract. No one can quite see Malays rushing to join DAP in the near future and especially given the way DAP leaders attack Malay institutions.

But in the long term, this is an astute party that has begun to tap into the changes taking place in the urban areas and among urban Malays.

The Malay population is growing very fast and will soon dominate the electorate map in such a way that future general elections will be largely a Malay fight. Any party that wants to stay relevant will have to be acceptable to the Malays in one way or another.