On The Beat
By WONG CHUN WAI

STAND-UP comic Harith Iskandar is the product of Malay-English parentage. He has acted in plays and movies speaking in Bahasa Malaysia and earns a living telling jokes, mostly in English with some Malay and Chinese words thrown in.

He has been telling his audiences that he plans to get married soon with a woman of Chinese-Indian parentage. “I do not know how our children will fill up those forms. I think they will have to tick every box – Malay, Chinese, Indian and lain-lain.”

The predominantly Chinese crowd in Petaling Jaya roared when he asked when Malaysians could stop having to state their racial background. Then he delivered his punch line: “But I am a Malaysian first.” His listeners were on their feet by then, which goes to show how much the issue had struck a chord with urban Malay­sia.

With certain politicians asking the Chinese community to be “grateful” for getting their citizenship and Perkasa asking the community to “repent”, it does not need a political scientist or a sociologist to explain why many Chinese voters have refused to vote for the Barisan Nasional.

Yet, the Chinese electorate has often been pro-establishment, except for 1969 and then in 2008. In 1999, when Umno suffered badly in the hands of PAS, it was the Chinese voters who came to the rescue of Umno candidates.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak retained his Pekan seat with a 241-vote majority against unknown PAS challenger Ramli Mohamed.

Ibrahim Ali, who was then a deputy minister, lost his Pasir Mas parliamentary seat and certainly his predominantly Malay voters rejected him. We don’t recall him telling off the mostly Malay voters for being ungrateful despite being benefactors of the New Econo­mic Policy.

The Chinese voters backed the Barisan so strongly that even the DAP’s Lim Kit Siang and Karpal Singh lost their parliamentary and state seats in Penang. The Chinese voters were angry at the DAP-PAS electoral pact and wanted to send a strong message of disapproval.

The irony was that then PAS Youth chief Datuk Mahfuz Omar – now a vice-president – said Umno was increasingly dependent on Chinese votes.

“This would be very dangerous to the Malay sovereignty,” he said.

Fast forward 2010, we are hearing such similar statements from the likes of Ibrahim Ali, who have forgotten or chosen to forget that the Chinese votes can help Umno.

When the MCA and Gerakan were weak, it would be the Umno votes that helped these two parties. That has been the way since the Alliance under Tunku Abdul Rahman, who was aware that the inclusion of non-Malays in the government would be crucial to its legitimacy as well as to keep intact the politics of consensus and accommodation.

The power-sharing concept has worked so well that now the Pakatan Rakyat has adopted it via a PKR, DAP and PAS coalition.

Immediately after the 1999 electoral bashing, Najib, who was an Umno vice-president, said the voting trend of Malays – who favoured the opposition – was a signal for Umno to work harder in ensuring the party and Barisan success in future.

Umno, he added, must correct its mistakes and look at itself before pointing fingers at others for the defeat. That, however, seems to be the pattern of some politicians after the Hulu Selangor by-election which the Barisan won. Imagine how these politicians would have reacted had the PKR won the seat.

But it is encouraging for Najib to ignore these hollow calls by going to the Chinese school in Rasa with a RM3mil cheque to construct a building.

Najib is obviously looking further ahead. The RM3mil is a political investment for the next general election, not just for Rasa but for every Chinese majority constituency, as his gesture went down strongly.

There is no need to tell the community to be grateful. After all, the Chinese and Indian communities helped build the nation and the bulk of income tax is said to be from the Chinese community.

A political party is just like any company. It has to sell its product by convincing its customers why it is better than its rivals. In meeting sales targets, no company picks its customers according to their race. Every customer should be treated like a king and every effort should be made to win his heart and mind. So it is incredulous that one would ask his customers to be “grateful” and to “repent” or, worse still, even ask what more the customers want.

The electorate, like the customers, expect their sales persons to be nice to them if they still want to do business. If these salesmen disappear when their services are needed or act arrogantly, then we can expect the company to be out of business.

All is not lost for the Barisan because the scenario has improved. Besides, Najib’s increasing favourable ratings and the economy – a crucial key indicator for the Chinese – has seen some positive outlook starting with a stronger ringgit.

The feel good factor seems to be coming around and while the government’s expectations for the GDP growth is between 4.5% and 5.5%, others believe that 6.6% is possible.

Local companies have reported better market confidence in the first quarter results. In fact, monthly car sales reportedly recovered from a low of 33,000 in October 2008 to an average of 42,000 per month over the last six months.

The transformation plans would certainly have an impact on the country’s economy and the political scenario.

There is no need for anyone to play the racial card and Umno should distance itself from groups or individuals fanning communal sentiments. The fact that the MCA and the MIC put the word “Malaysian” first when they were formed is sufficient proof of their allegiance to this country.

Strangely, comedians like Harith are making sense while our politicians have become comics instead, often with their foot in their mouth.

MALAYSIA is spending millions of ringgit trying to repair its image overseas but plenty of taxpayers’ money can be saved if our politicians exercise some self-restraint with their statements.

So, like many people, I am finding it hard to understand why we feel the need to avoid answering plainly if we are Malaysian first, or Malay, Chinese or Indian first.

In fact, none of our politicians, who are worried about how their party members or constituents would feel, should even bother to respond if challenged with that question. The question should not even have cropped up in the first place.

Some politicians seem to find it necessary to wriggle themselves out of what they perceive to be a politically sticky situation.

I am now in Beijing attending a meeting of the Asia News Network, a media alliance of 21 news organisations from 18 countries.

I have been referred to as a representative from Malaysia and certainly I cannot imagine telling the Chinese nationals here that I am a Chinese first and Malaysian second. I would feel a sense of betrayal to my country if I do that.

I may be of Chinese origin but as a third generation Malaysian Chinese, I cannot write Chinese. Instead, I studied Malay literature in school and went on to enrol in the Malay Letters Department at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) in my first year.

Like all UKM students, I was also required to pass a compulsory course in Islamic Under­standing to graduate. So, I would like to think that my appreciation of the national language and Islam is well grounded.

I enjoy Malay music, growing up in the era of the Alleycats and Revolvers where non-Malays hit the local music charts. And many like me think the world of Sheila Majid, whose music transcends all races.

And when we cheer our sports heroes, notably Nicol David and Lee Chong Wei, I am sure we regard them as Malaysian heroes. We would never look at them as Eurasian or Chinese first. That would be unforgivable, and if they were to say that to the world in any interview, it would not be unacceptable too.

Yes, it is a fact that my grandparents came from Guangdong, China, but my father was born in Langkawi. He speaks excellent Malay and would put many Malaysians to shame with his command of the language and his adoption of the Malay culture.

Yes, we are aware that the first generation Chinese were accorded citizenship and certainly the early settlers were grateful and they appreciated the understanding struck by the Alliance leaders. That is a fact; but it is also a fact, in case some of us choose to forget or ignore, that this country was built on the sacrifices of these Chinese and Indians settlers too.

Their enormous economic contribution, in addition to the blood, sweat and tears of the Malay civil servants, policemen, soldiers, teachers and padi farmers, helped make Malay­sia what it is today.

Malaysia would not have been formed either without the blessing of the people of Sabah and Sarawak, which comprises many ethnic groups.

So, I find it very hard to understand why it should be a controversy at all. It’s a non-issue and most Malaysians wish our politicians would come clean on this. All this is not going to lift the national spirit.

If there is one commonality in this plural society, it is our nationality. No one can take that away because this is our country of origin.

Stressing on our common grounds and universal values is certainly more meaningful and unifying than outlining our differences.

Yes, it’s true that even in Indonesia, there are people who talk about the origin of their provinces with strong parochial sentiments, but nationality will always prevail in the end. Likewise, the Irish and the Latinos in the United States are proud of their heritage but they are Americans first and they certainly won’t be apologetic about it.

Many of us may insist on placing our status as a follower of a faith first. No one would argue over that because many regard placing one’s faith before any national or racial boundaries as a priority. It’s not even a matter of choice.

Leaders must lead and not allow themselves to be led. They have to do what is right and not only try to say what is right.

It’s better that we focus our minds on building the togetherness of Malaysia: that we are one nation, one people and, certainly, one Malaysia.

There were fears of jobs being lost, just like in the US, and many companies which rely on exports began to reassess their strategies and in some cases, knee-jerk reactions as they braced for dropping revenues.

Sign of approval: Surveys have shown that Najib’s leadership and administration are enjoying a high approval rating and confidence. — Bernama

Comparing Najib with his predecessor Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, whom they believed to be gentler and kinder, the opposition expected the new prime minister to crack the whip.

The experiments of a more tolerant and open Malaysia were over, they said, and warned that opposition leaders would be put in jail.

A year later, none of that has happened. Najib has instead come out stronger, going by the latest approval rating.

In surveys carried out by the Merdeka Centre for Opinion Research and the International Islamic University (UIA), the findings showed that his leadership and administration are enjoying a high approval rating and confidence.

Among the people, according to UIA’s Prof Datuk Seri Dr Syed Arabi Idid, there is less concern over how the economy would fare.

There are good reasons. Malaysia is now officially out of the recession, recovering from the global crisis with Najib promising that the economy could expand by 5%.

The fourth quarter expansion of 4.5% was much healthier than expected and represented a rebound after three consecutive quarters of contraction. The premier credited stronger external and domestic demand, stimulus spending, measures to ensure access to financing, and “accommodative” monetary policy for the resumption of growth.

Last week, the ringgit outperformed all other countries in the region in the first quarter, propelled by a strong rebound in the economy and the Government’s increased effort to attract foreign investors.

At RM3.26 against the US dollar on Wednesday, the ringgit was at its strongest level against the greenback since August 2008. Year to date, it has risen 4.75%.

The ringgit surged 4.1% against the US dollar in March alone, after Bank Negara on March 4 raised its key overnight policy rate for the first time in almost four years.

Many Malaysian companies have reported better revenue over the past few months, reflecting the realities on the ground that are beyond economic rhetorics.

A cursory glance at the job vacancy advertisements show that companies are hiring people again following the freeze in recruitment when the global crisis cut revenues last year. Employers are relooking at extending contracts of workers who had reached 55 years old as the balance sheet shows improvement and the ability to retain staff.

Najib still has plenty to work on, though. He has done the right things, unlike politicians who prefer to just say the right things to remain popular or safe.

His 1Malaysia concept needs more explanation and more pushing. The Malay right wingers see his 1Malaysia as a compromise of the Malay identity while some non-Malay groups question the sincerity of the concept.

As for the opposition, they seem more interested in questioning the originality of the slogan, side-stepping from its spirit and noble intention.

The allegation that Najib carbon-copied the 1Malaysia slogan from the “One Israel” slogan of a political alliance has become a side issue.

In 1990, even before the “One Israel” was born in 1999, this writer travelled to Zambia with then premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad to meet President Kenneth Kaunda, who widely used the slogan “One Zambia” at every function we attended.

As I wrote last week, even an Indonesian non-governmental organisation came out with the “One Indonesia” slogan in 2006.

So, it’s hardly the exclusive right of any one or any nation. So we should stop this Jewish conspiracy silliness and move on to the real issues.

It’s important that all Malaysians, regardless of their race and religion, understand and appreciate the concept.

The latest survey showed that Najib earned the trust of 51% of Indians and 46% of Chinese, compared with the 13% and 6% earned by Umno.

Merdeka Centre’s Ibrahim Suffian, however, cautioned that the high approval rating should not be misconstrued as electoral support but an agreement with the intentions and stated policies of the Prime Minister.

It’s a fair conclusion but certainly the shifting political opinion would have a bearing on the electoral support.

The reservations over the 1Malaysia concept could be because of the fears and perceptions among sections of Malays, the core support of Umno and Barisan Nasional, that they would lose their Malay identity. Some even fear losing political dominance.

Among the non-Malays, some have taken the slogan many steps further with their own expectations, forgetting the historical, economic and social realities of this country.

As with any concept, it takes time for people to accept and for it to evolve. The idea must be allowed to grow and it is good that it is debated. Differing views need not necessarily mean friction.

In Malaysia, we often talk about a split each time there is an election, especially at party level. In a democracy, election is a peaceful and healthy process of selecting a leader, that’s all.

The Malays will never lose their political dominance because as a population, they have kept growing while the Chinese and Indian communities, the two largest minority groups, have shrunk. The Malays will dominate the population demography, just as it is already in command position now.

But the days of Malaysians seeing each race as competitors have to end. There is no reason to compete in a small pond when we can combine our resources to compete against the world.

Indonesia is certainly one of the fastest growing economies and given the similar background of the Malays, non-Malay businessmen can compete there with the help of their Malay partners.

In India and China, given the language and cultural backdrops, Malay businessmen can combine with their Indian and Chinese brethren to compete there.

As the world market opens, foreigners will make their entries here. They will set up operations here and compete with the locals.

Our sundry shops, whether Chinese or Malay-owned, are all gone with foreign-owned hypermarkets completing their dominance here. Customers do not care about the racial or religious background of any company as long as they get a good deal.

The Chinese-owned kopitiam and Malay-owned warung have already lost out to the Starbucks and Coffee Bean outlets.

These are the harsh realities of a globalised economy where the competition can be brutal. Therefore, Malaysians have to change. The world has changed, so the question is whether Malaysians have changed or are prepared to change to compete at the global market.

Our economic and political policies are no longer keeping Malaysia competitive regionally and globally to generate growth. There is even fear, within the private sector, that we are lagging behind our Asean neighbours as our foreign direct investments take a hit.

We have to take a critical review of ourselves to prevent stagnation or worse, a slide in the market because we still want to cling on to the old ways.

We need an overhaul. The New Economic Model will be one chance we have. We have reached a defining moment in history and this is a window of opportunity for us to put things right.

We cannot forever live in a comfort zone. The days of subsidies, which have been a burden on the government, are gone. We cannot say eating too much sugar is bad and then expect the Government to spend billions on subsidy; we cannot drive big cars, moan about the environment and then expect the Government to pay our petrol bills.

Neither can we defend the affirmative action, which is to help the poor, if we expect discounts for multi-million mansions and golf club memberships. At the end of the day, only the poor deserve help, regardless of their race and religion.

Let’s help make the task of Najib more effective. We are at a critical stage – are we prepared to change ourselves in a fast changing world so we will not lose out in the long term?

CONTROVERSY is brewing over whether the 1Malaysia slogan is original. The accusation is that Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s unity slogan is a carbon copy of the “One Israel” concept devised for the Jewish state.

Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has further accused Apco Worldwide, an international public relations company hired by the government, of being behind former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s similar sounding concept.

The company has denied involvement in the Israeli slogan, saying it has a website where its list of clients can be seen.

Most Malaysians would not really get excited by Anwar’s accusation but there is a substantial number who regard any link with Israel, no matter how minor, as unacceptable.

In short, it is a sensitive subject and there certainly are political points to be scored, if given a chance.

It is not even a major controversy in the media but the subject is expected to crop up again in Parliament.

The Barisan Nasional and the Opposition have already clashed over the issue, with Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin saying the 1Malaysia slogan was coined even before Apco was hired.

But let’s take a few steps back and look at the issue from a non-political angle. Seriously, with due respect to the Prime Minister, it is a catchy slogan and one that is easy to remember. But it’s hardly original.

Who’s copying who?

The One Utama shopping centre in Petaling Jaya has been around way before the 1Malaysia concept. In fact, One Utama was launched in 1995 – that’s four years before One Israel (conceived in 1999).

Go on Google and you’ll see there’s a One America group which aims to celebrate African-American heritage and other minority groups that are pushing for recognition of diversity.

There are countless “One America” or “America One” slogans used by groups, companies and non-governmental organisations. They range from marathons to television stations. Certainly, there is no point in accusing anyone of copying anyone there.

In Saudi Arabia, there’s a popular television station called “1 Saudia-Arabia” and certainly no one would make any allegation that the TV station took its name from the “One Israel” concept.

We can be sure that the staff at the television station, which promotes Islamic programmes, would not take kindly to any suggestion of that sort.

Over in China, when one talks about the One China principle, it simply means that any diplomatic relations should be with mainland China and not with Taiwan, which it still regards as one of its provinces.

Regular visitors to China will tell you that “One China” is regularly used in restaurants, and even non-governmental groups use it with some variations.

At risk of being accused by the Indonesians of copying them again, there was a “One Indonesia” campaign launched by an NGO in 2006 after its independence day to celebrate love, unity and change among Indonesians.

Now, let’s get back to the point of One Israel. It was a political alliance formed by Barak, a Labour leader, in the run-up to the 1999 elections. The Labour Party wanted to make the party more centrist.

Well, his idea wasn’t original either. The new term was coined after Tony Blair’s New Labour image. One Israel, as a party, collapsed in 2001 with the party being investigated for receiving foreign funds.

The sensitivity, if not animosity, in Malaysia towards Israel and Jews has long been instituted given our links with the Muslim world.

But the presence of Americans with Jewish roots is something we have to accept and learn to live with. We shouldn’t be hypocritical about this whole issue.

Former World Bank president and US deputy defence secretary Paul Wolfowitz is a Jew with strong links to Jewish lobby groups. He is regarded as a neo-conservative and a hawkish advocate against Iraq. He is also a supporter and friend of Anwar and, whether rightly or wrongly, that has also been used against the Opposition Leader.

But the point is that in the US, among the elite and inner circle, the powerful Jews are always there. Even in the Obama Administra­tion, there are at least 17 influential Jews inside the White House, including the powerful Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Don’t go overboard

There are two issues here that we need to be rational about. As much as politicians want to create controversies, we should not get too carried away and not see the big picture. They shouldn’t throw stones too if they live in glass houses.

If we really want to use the Jewish card, then we should switch off our television every time talkshow host Larry King appears on CNN because he is a Jew. We should stop listening to Barbra Streisand and Barry Manilow because they are Jews. Certainly, we must stop watching director Steven Spiel­berg’s wonderful movies.

No one can argue against the concept of 1Malaysia. It has been generally accepted by most Malaysians who want to see it work. There are Malay nationalist groups who question 1Malaysia and there are opposition groups who want answers about Najib’s commitment to 1Malaysia. But for most of us, a noble idea should not be torn down. Let’s make it work.

At day’s end, let’s go for a drink at One Bangsar before we watch the Formula One race this weekend.

ONE week – that’s all the time the candidates contesting in the MCA election will have to campaign. They will file their nominations tomorrow and by next Sunday, the delegates will decide their fate.

THE number of politicians from Kuala Lumpur, including the Prime Minister, making their way to Sarawak has increased over the past one month as talk of a state election steps up.

Media organisations have also started to make logistic preparations for the impending big political event.

There is a sense of optimism in the air for Barisan Nasional as there is a general expectation that it will make another strong showing again. There is even talk of a near clean sweep.

The Barisan is already in pole position with 62 representatives against the DAP’s six and one from the PKR. There are two other state assemblymen – an independent and a Parti Cinta Malaysia representative – who are regarded as Barisan-friendly.

While there is no clear indication when the state polls would be called, the consensus among political analysts and the media is that the expected victory for the Barisan would be a major boost for the coalition before the general election.

It would certainly shore up the credentials of Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, who will mark his first year in office next month.

With the battle between the Barisan and Pakatan Rakyat becoming more intense in the peninsula, Sabah and Sarawak have now become a crucial battle ground.

At parliamentary level, the Barisan holds 30 seats against one seat held by the DAP. The Bandar Kuching parliamentary seat has always been an opposition stronghold.

Sarawak has never been easy for the opposition as state issues are more dominant than federal concerns.

It does not help that some Kuala Lumpur-based politicians do not even know the geo­graphy of the state, let alone its sentiments and peculiarities. Multi-culturalism is not just tolerated or accepted but celebrated in Sarawak, which is such a joy for visitors coming to this state.

State leaders, including Muslims, openly talk about their financial support to churches with pride. Some declare having taken tests in Bible Knowledge during their school days, without worrying if it would affect their political image.

In February, prominent entrepreneur Datuk Raziah Mahmud created history by becoming the first non-Chinese chairman of a Chinese school in the state, probably in Malaysia too.

In the spirit of 1Malaysia, her company Kumpulan Parabena Sdn Bhd donated 4ha of land to SJK Chiaw Nan, with construction of the new RM10mil school building to begin next year.

She urged bumiputras to attend Chinese schools, saying the reasons were obvious – Chinese is an important language of business.

When a church in Lutong, Miri, was damaged in January, Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud condemned the incident and told the media that his great-grandfather offered to help the Christian missionaries when they first arrived in Mukah, saying this was not against Islam.

Talk of race supremacy and whipping up religious sentiments are absent in Sarawak. It would surely be frowned upon.

The DAP and PKR are still regarded as outsiders in a state where parochialism still matters. The DAP has its home-grown leaders and a few have earned the respect of the Chinese community, which comprises 30% of the population.

But the PKR has no one to lead the charge. Any alliance between the DAP and the PKR would have to be led by the former.

The geographical terrain also makes it near impossible for the Pakatan to take on the Barisan with its strong campaign machinery.

Campaigners need to travel by boat and helicopter to reach many parts of the state. Even boat rides can take days in some interior constituencies.

A ceramah at a restaurant may work in some urban seats in Kuching or Sibu but would not be possible in the longhouses, where gatherings are small and casual.

In short, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim would have little traction in the state, as Deputy Chief Minister Tan Sri George Chan aptly put it in an interview with Malaysian Insider.

The Sarawak United People’s Party headed by Chan, however, has it tougher in the battle for the urban votes.

He has expressed confidence in winning back the lost state seats but for sure, there is plenty of work to be done.

But the man calling the shots – Taib Mahmud – is still very much the man who would deliver the votes.

Although he is 74 years old and has to contend with critics questioning his hold on the leadership, no one can dispute that Taib is reliable. It is a fact that the federal leaders acknowledge; in the next general election, they know they need him more than ever.

LET’S give credit when credit is due. The clear drop of crime rate is certainly encouraging in the current war against crime, which is part of the Government’s transformation programme.