Sept 11 will long be remembered as the day when the terrorists pierced the
heart of America's financial and security hub, but many will have forgotten
that on Sept 8 two years ago a Moscow apartment was bombed, killing some 300
people.

As the US mourned the tragedy, ordinary Russians gathered
at a courtyard in southern Moscow for a similar memorial. A chapel now marks
the spot where the nine-storey brick building once stood.

The blast, which hit at 5am, reduced the building to a smoky heap of rubble and
killed 124 people, including 13 children. The attack was the worst in a series
of explosions in Russia.

There was the initial outrage but the Americans could well take a leaf from the
Moscow incident – two years later, investigators have made little
progress.

Law enforcement officials have been saying that they know the identities of the
bombers but have been unable to catch them. Topping the wanted list of terrorists
is Achemez Gochiyayev, 31, who is accused of masterminding the blast.

According to the Federal Security Service, Gochiyayev is a native of
Karachayevo-Cherkessia and a staunch Wahabbi, the follower of a strict Islamic
sect.

He was trained in camps set up in Chechnya by Jordanian-born warlord Khattab,
who allegedly ordered the blasts and paid Gochiyayev and four accomplices, who
are believed to be hiding in Chechnya.

Gochiyayev's brother-in-law, Taukan Frantsuzov, is on trial in the southern
city of Stavropol for participating in ''illegal armed formations'' in
Chechnya.

Over in Munich, German mourners also remember September as a black month. In
the early hours of Sept 5, 1972, terrorists scaled the perimeter fence
surrounding the Olympic Village.

Their target was the temporary home of the Israeli Olympic team and, within 24
hours, the terrorists had left 17 men dead. The eight attackers responsible for
the massacre were members of Black September, an extremist faction of the
Palestinian Liberation Front.

The execution had been well planned. Two of the assailants had worked in the
Olympic Village to familiarise themselves with its layout.

One had lived in Germany for five years and attended university in Berlin and
had worked at the village as a civil engineer.

As in all three incidents, the affected countries reacted angrily, victims
wanted revenge while the perpetrators claimed it was an act of war, in the name
of God, and claimed they understood the pain and sorrow of those who lost their
loved ones.

As US President George W. Bush whips up the hysteria of war, it might be wise
for him to steady his nerves and steer the same course.

He cannot afford to make the US look weak; neither does he want to see young
Americans returning from Afghanistan in body bags.

While Osama bin Laden has remained the prime suspect, no one is sure that he is
responsible for the US attacks. The US, which talks about upholding the law,
cannot act on suspicion. Bush has given the impression of wanting to squeeze
the trigger without knowing who he is pointing the gun at.

Air strikes and missile attacks over the mountainous deserts of Afghanistan
will serve no purpose. Assuming Osama is still hiding out in some cave, he will
be safe. If he has already fled Afghanistan, then the whole exercise is a
mockery.

If air attacks are made, innocent Afghans, including those who hate the
Taliban, will be killed. State terrorism will be no different from those
committed by zealots.

If the option of ground attacks is chosen, American troops should look at
history first – with the exception of Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan,
Afghanistan has long been the graveyard of those who try to conquer the land.
Then, there is the danger that a conflict launched in Afghanistan could spill
over into Pakistan.

As the US decides on its military options, it must rethink its Middle East
policy, which has bred much contempt and hatred against the Americans.

Even if the US succeeds in arresting Osama, there will be more of such
people.

It is important that the US engage moderate Islamic countries, particularly
those in the Middle East and South-East Asia, in its long-term strategies in
these two regions. It is also an opportunity for the US to stop its unilateral
actions and erase the stigma of being the ''policeman of the world.''

It is best that the volume of the war drum be reduced. The world can do with
less killing in the name of politics, diplomacy or religion. There can be no
justification for the loss of innocent lives.

Terrorism is not only of local concern because it has a
vast international network. As shadowy groups, they move from country to
country, under different guises.

They may have a base country, where they operate for indoctrination, training
and propaganda purposes, but their tactic is to operate in cell groups.

In the past, countries like the US spent huge sums fighting the communists. Now
that the Cold War is long over, there appears to be a lax in security.

Security agencies like the CIA and FBI have found their budget slashed. There
is more investment in technology intelligence than human intelligence in the
gathering of information.

Now a small group of people, using low-tech methods, has successfully brought
the mighty United States to its knees. They have proven that they can penetrate
the heart of the US financial and security centres.

No nation, especially democracies, is free from such a threat. Everyone must
realise that terrorism needs to be rooted out ruthlessly. There should be no
pity or the slightest hint of support when women and children are killed. No
religion in the world condones the taking of lives.

Fighting terrorism is about sharing crucial information and manpower within the
scope of national sovereignty. Rogue countries like Sudan and Afghanistan have
long been harbouring terrorists like Osama bin Laden.

Despite the denials by the Taliban and the fact that no one is sure who is
responsible for the New York tragedy, these countries are long-known to have
provided a safe haven for terrorists to carry out their crime against the
world.

Many militants, including those from the KMM from Malaysia, have travelled to
Afghanistan to take up weapons training. It was in Afghanistan that our
self-styled Mujahideen were indoctrinated before returning to Malaysia to
advance their causes. They have bombed churches in Indonesia, in the name of
religion.

No one can be sure what was Osama's role in the bombing and hijacking but he
has certainly inspired many terrorists. The 44-year-old Saudi, who is said to
be hiding in Afghanistan, commands Islamic militants willing to die in their
war against the United States, which he sees as the ultimate enemy.

He has been the target of a massive US manhunt since 1998 when bomb attacks on
the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania killed 224 people and injured 4,000
others. He has denied responsibility for the embassy attacks.

The world now faces a chronic and serious threat – one that is able to bring
war to any country without that country knowing who the enemy is.

All democratic countries, including Malaysia, must spare no effort and money to
fight extremism. Our security forces must be prepared and equipped to deal with
any potential threat of extremism in schools or universities.

Moderate Malaysians must realise that we cannot accept religious extremism in
our multi-racial country. We must not take for granted our liberal and open
lifestyle, worse still if we were to exchange it for one that is theocratic and
anti-secular.

Let's not send the wrong signals to the world. Malaysia should not become
another Afghanistan.

A few PAS leaders have said that they do not condone the
actions of these radicals, but most of the party leaders have chosen to remain
silent.

The MP for Sik, Shahnon Ahmad, went a step further in dismissing the KMM issue
as a creation of the Government and press. His statements would probably get
nods of approval from critics except that the similar cynical remark was used
at the height of the Al Maunah arrests.

Over the past one week, the party has gone on the offensive, lodging police
reports against government leaders and threatening legal action. These actions
were taken in the wake of press reports that the militants have infiltrated
religious groups in universities, where students were given hate lessons.

Lee's uneasiness of the growing threat of Islamic militancy and the increasing
clout of PAS is a clear indication how wrong signals have been sent to the
region. It does not augur well for Malaysia, politically or economically, that
PAS is getting stronger.

Singapore's PAP leaders have made no secret that they would rather deal with
Umno. It is not because Umno is weaker, as PAS president datuk Fadzil Noor has
chosen to believe.

PAS leaders may be strong in religious matters, but they have no track record
in modern economics and management. A Barisan Nasional government is guaranteed
to be multi-racial while a PAS government would only comprise Muslims.

Non-Muslim supporters of PAS, who fall into the Islamist party's PR exercise in
Kelantan and Terengganu, often returned gleefully that both states have temples
and churches and even bah kut teh stalls. But they miss the point – all these
are available in other states. More importantly, other states have non-Muslim
and women leaders in government, but not in these two PAS-run states.

Many leaders in this region are wary of the "loose cannons" in PAS,
who often make controversial pronouncements that also affect the civil
liberties of non-Muslims. Asean leaders would certainly be mindful of having
such orthodox leaders as their neighbours, especially when PAS leaders are
likely to be supportive of the activities of insurgents in their
countries.

Lee has warned that the region must be on alert for a growing
"anti-Zion" crusade spawned by fighting in Afghanistan, where many
Muslim volunteers had taken up arms and undergone training.

At a press conference in Kuala Lumpur last week, Lee said "it has become a
kind of internationalised anti-crusade and anti-Zion" and that such
Islamic militancy has grown in Indonesia and Pakistan, too.

"You have to watch it carefully, because if it takes root in Indonesia and
they go up to the islands south of us, or if they take root in Malaysia and
come down to Johor, then we are vulnerable."

He said the recent rise in Islamic militancy in Indonesia started when
Vice-President B.J. Ha-bibie cancelled a decree imposed by former President
Suharto, outlawing the use of Islam or Islamic symbols for political parties.
As a result, more than 20 political parties used Islamic symbols, and several
splinter groups eventually won in elections.

Malaysians have no business in the internal squabbles of Indonesia. In the name
of religion, Malaysians have gone to Indonesia to fight there. The KMM, for
example, has returned home to commit robbery and the murder of a Barisan state
leader.

Lee isn't the only one alarmed by the rise in such political radicalism. So,
too, are moderate Malaysians of all faiths.

It is sad for Malaysians to note that Parti Keadilan Nasional and Parti Rakyat
Malaysia have a lack-lustre attitude towards the KMM issue, perhaps worrying
they might antagonise opposition voters.

But political expediency should not be allowed to cloud their positions. The
background of Keadilan and PRM is not in tune with that of PAS although they
have a common enemy in BN.

They should not allow militancy to creep into Malaysian politics, and they
cannot assume that students who have been instilled in radicalism will support
Keadilan or PRM.

Political differences we may have, but moderate Malaysians must never allow
such radicalism and extremism to take root in their homeland.

At Bako, there is a Chinese temple near a Malay village but, interestingly, it
is maintained with the help of Muslims there.

With 38 ethnic groups in the state, Sarawak's Cabinet,
headed by Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud, a Melanau, is also the most
multi-racial.

For Sarawakians, of greater importance is their sense of togetherness in a
state that has been regarded as a showcase of ethnic and religious
tolerance.

The people can be forgiven if they sometimes feel uneasy with the preconceived and
even condescending attitude of their brethren from the peninsula.

For Malaysians who have never set foot in Sarawak, its image is one of savages,
rivers and jungles.

Taib, who heads the Parti Pesaka Bumiputra Bersatu, has led the state for 21
years, probably the longest term of any chief minister.

Not everyone has been happy with him. There have been allegations of business
cronyism to neglect of hill people because of uneven economic
development.

His detractors claim that Taib has been able to hold on to power because the
opposition is in disarray.

It cannot be denied that there have been pockets of dissatisfaction, as in all
democracies but, generally, Sarawakians are happy with what they have,
especially their lifestyles.

The fact remains that Taib has been able to deliver the votes to the Barisan
Nasional. In the 1996 state polls, the Barisan won 58 seats while the DAP won
four.

In the 1999 general election, the Barisan made a clean sweep, winning all 28
parliamentary seats it contested.

The country's biggest state will probably be even more important in the next
general election, scheduled for 2004.

Sarawak will have its state elections this month and the bet is that the
Barisan will perform even better than the last time.

The Barisan will again focus on the politics of development and its uniqueness,
where racial and religious tolerance has been a hallmark. It will continue to
emphasise on the relevance of moderation and power sharing.

The opposition, especially the DAP and the state-based State Reform Party, are
harping on native customary rights, land issues and mismanagement.

Parti Keadilan Nasional is making its debut in the state polls but its leaders
are mainly from the DAP and who are at loggerheads with their former
party.

Both the parties have already said they eye the same urban constituencies. It
will be interesting to see how national leaders from both sides will campaign
in Sarawak.

PAS is almost non-existent in the state and its brand of politics is treated
suspiciously in a state where people have a more liberal and tolerant attitude
towards religion.

Still, the Islamist party has said it will contest.

It will not be easy for PAS to convince Sarawakians that their politics is
suitable for them. The party failed miserably in Sabah and will probably face
the same fate in Sarawak, too.

It will not be wrong to say that PAS may be successful in Kelantan and
Terengganu but their fiery speeches will be a turn-off in Sarawak.

The rocket symbol is more familiar to the voters and if the opposition can make
any dent, it is only the DAP which has several home-grown leaders but it will
have to square off with Keadilan first.

But it's the votes of the predominantly rural constituencies that will make the
difference, where land rights are emotional issues, particularly in the
transformation of the way the natives live.

The challenge of the Barisan will be to explain that the value of land will not
jump unless there is a chance of development.

Estate development, which has been promoted for years to encourage rural
farmers to participate in government land projects, will continue to be
highlighted in the polls.

Unlike the peninsula, campaigning in the rural heartland is a logistics
nightmare. Unless the candidates and their supporters have access to transport
such as speed boats and helicopters, it will be pointless to even think of
contesting.

In Telang Usan, for example, the mode of travel is river, timber track and air.
It covers the upper Baram region to as far as the Bario highlands near the
Sarawak-Indonesia border.

In areas near Limbang, it means campaigning in villages scattered along
mangrove swamps that one uses to get to Brunei.

This time, the anti-logging issue seems to have disappeared but Time magazine
and even CNN has given the issue a new lease of life by featuring
self-proclaimed Swiss environmentalist Bruno Manser's exploits in the
jungle.

He is, in fact, the cover story in the latest issue of the magazine, perhaps to
time it with the state elections.

But the focus seems to be on the challenge that former Defence Minister Datuk
Abang Abu Bakar Mustapha is throwing against the Barisan, presumably in all the
constituencies.

It sounds like a personal fight with an old score to settle. He claims to
represent Umno, but Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Datuk Seri Abdullah
Ahmad Badawi have dismissed the claim.

It will not be easy for Abang Abu Bakar's contenders to say that they are not
against the Barisan when they urge the voters to reject the Barisan at the same
time.

And, in a rather unhealthy turn of events, racial politics has surfaced in this
election with allegations that the Melanaus have dominated the politics of
Sarawak while the Malays have been sidelined.

Nevertheless, the bet is that a landslide victory for the Barisan is imminent.
In fact, the Merdeka celebrations finale has been lined up in Sibu on Sept 16,
a few days after polling.

Sept 16 is significant because Malaysia would not have been formed, 38 years
ago, without the support of Sabah and Sarawak.

In all objectivity, the number of crimes committed by
locals must surely be higher but as guests in this country, Indonesians are
expected to behave better.

Undeniably, many Indonesians have helped built our country through hard work
and honest living, especially in the construction industry.

Domestic maids have helped run our households to enable husband and wife to
combine their incomes, providing a higher standard of living.

Many factories would not be able function without Bangladeshi workers.

But the message to foreigners is that those who have been granted PR status
should not take this privilege for granted.

They must also realise that there are many foreign spouses, including
professionals, who wonder why they don't deserve PR status after having lived
here for over 10 years.

Surely, these highly-educated and well-trained professionals can contribute
more than lesser-skilled foreigners.

Malaysians must therefore welcome the proposal to impose heavier penalties,
including whipping, to check the influx of illegal immigrants.

It is regrettable that activists like Tenagita director Irene Fernandez have
chosen to attack the Government for reintroducing such laws.

Last week, Deputy Home Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said proposals
by the newly set up Cabinet Committee on Illegal Immigrants would include
punishment on illegals, employers and those found harbouring them.

The Home Minister said the panel proposed to increase the current fine of not
more than RM10,000 or jail term not exceeding five years or both.

It also proposed that whipping be included as part of the sentence for
illegals. It is learnt that the proposal is for a maximum of six strokes of the
cane for the first offence.

Abdullah said there were now about 600,000 illegals in the country, mostly from
neighbouring countries. Those in the peninsula are mainly from Indonesia with
some from other countries including those from the African continent.

Malaysians, especially those in Sabah, must be forgiven if they are cynical
about that figure. Most of us believe it is much higher.

These laws, at first glance, may seem harsh but they are necessary as an
effective deterrent to combat this menance.

At the same thing, the fight against the influx of illegal immigrants can only
be meaningful if there is a clean machinery.

An equally strong punishment must be meted out against enforcement officers
found to be involved in this human trade.

The decision to impose heavier penalties, especially on employers, reflects the
seriousness of the Government in wanting to end the problem.

If there are no errant bosses who readily provide jobs for these foreigners,
then they will be discouraged from coming here.

In Singapore, employers are fearful of hiring illegals because of tough laws
against offenders.

If previously the authorities had to deal with social problems such as
contagious diseases, squatter woes and crimes, they now have to cope with
religious militancy, even if the number of people involved seems small.

Malaysians must realise that by opting for such cheap labour from neighbouring
countries, they will merely see short-term gains.

Taxpayers already have to subsidise foreigners who use our hospitals and other
facilities. Their children are already in local schools, further burdening our
teachers.

Decades from now, they will have an impact on our political landscape,
particularly when their family size is usually bigger than average
Malaysians.

Even small traders have felt the pinch from the more aggressive Indonesian
hawkers who have taken over Chow Kit, once predominantly inhabited by Chinese
and Malay traders.

The efforts by the Home Ministry deserves our full support because the
long-term cost of having these immigrants around is just too high.

Malaysia should seriously woo our brethrens who have gone overseas and
highly-skilled foreigners, especially those in the medical, engineering, arts,
manufacturing and information technology fields.

Such expatriates will sharpen our competiveness in facing globalisation as
Malaysia needs at least 35,000 skilled workers.

But patriotism and an attractive pay packet are not the only things these
experts look for.

We need to get our priorities right. We are competing with Singapore, Hong Kong
and other countries for the best brains.

Yes, we need manual workers as much as we need the experts, but control is
imperative.

Speaking at the Dewan Negara, Jamilah was quoted by
Bernama as saying that by working at night, women would not be able to
discharge their conjugal responsibilities.

If this happened, she said, husbands would find an outlet for their urge
through incest, cases of which are increasingly reported these days. Jamilah's
statement has created an uproar among women groups.

It is an illogical proposal because it will never happen. She should not expect
all women to stay at home at night merely because of conjugal rights. For that
matter, why should such meaningful relationships be confined only to the
night?

Surely Jamilah must realise that even if the wives are at home and their
husbands are working, such intimacy can never take place. Is PAS also
suggesting that men should not work at night?

It is incredulous for PAS to link incest to women on night shift. The same
argument has been put up by other PAS leaders who link rape to so-called
provocatively-dressed women.

They appear to forget that in several highly-publicised rape and murder cases,
the victims were decently dressed, some even wearing telekung. Some of the
victims were minors; surely they cannot be indecently dressed as suggested by
the PAS leaders.

Jamilah's statement is certainly offensive to women. She seems to have reduced
women to sex objects, whose primary function is to satisfy their
husbands.

No one can question the responsibilities of a wife in discharging her family
and marital duties but Jamilah's suggestion is unacceptable.

PAS has always kept women out of the mainstream. Its women's wing, for example,
plays a relegated role in the party.

It remains to be seen whether the party will actually field women candidates in
the next general election and even if they win, the question is whether the
party is ready to appoint them as state government leaders.

Women reporters, for example, have complained for years how they are segregated
from men when covering the annual PAS general assembly.

PAS should not fault non-Muslims for having a negative perception of the
Islamist party. Neither should its party leaders blame the press for bad
publicity.

It is the party's own doing.

Although PAS is confident of doing well in the next general election, it is
unlikely to inspire confidence among the majority of non-Muslims, especially
Chinese voters, with its brand of politics.

PAS is mistaken if it assumes that Chinese voters would be convinced of its
purported tolerance by bringing them to visit Buddhist temples and the few pork-selling
restaurants in Kelantan.

The existence of these temples and restaurants are mere tokens because there
are no restrictions in other states under Barisan Nasional.

Liberal Malaysians and non-government organisations, who are unhappy with the
government, must not assume that PAS would be a better alternative because it
will never change its brand of politics.

PAS leaders have consistently maintained that it wants to set up an Islamic
state and no one, including those in the opposition front, should kid
themselves that the religious line is merely for political expediency.

No one should fault Singapore Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew for feeling uneasy
over the growing influence of PAS and its impact to the region. As a
far-sighted statesman, Lee obviously sees how a theocratic Malaysia, under the
spectre of PAS, would bring disastrous political effect to Singapore.

The majority of Malay voters – and certainly most Chinese voters – will not
allow PAS to win the next elections.

In assessing the political scenario in Malaysia, many often fail to take into
account the sentiments of Sabah and Sarawak voters, who deliver almost a third
of the seats in Parliament.

PAS is almost non-existent in these two states and its candidates can expect to
lose their deposits in the coming Sarawak elections.

Women, who make up almost half the electorate, will be another group of crucial
voters in the next general election. Efforts have already been made to win the
women's votes, including appointing women to top government posts, the creation
of a Women and Family Development Ministry and Puteri Umno.

It is left to be seen how PAS will woo the women voters.

To the majority of non-Muslims, their perception of an
Islamic state, which PAS wants to set up, is about policies of
punishment.

PAS cannot say that non-Muslims have misunderstood what PAS has been trying to
advocate because such negative perception is basically the party's own
doing.

The state governments of Kelantan and Terengganu have kept introducing laws
which have further reinforced that image.

In Kelantan, the state has introduced laws to separate women and men in payment
queues in supermarkets and discouraging the civil service from hiring
attractive women.

In Terengganu, the state has demolished the replica of a turtle at a roundabout
and has planned to implement syariah and hudud laws.

Even the non-Muslims have not been spared as gaming and alcohol have been
banned in both states.

PAS deputy president Datuk Hadi Awang recently announced that PAS would close
down the casino in Genting Highlands if it captures Pahang in the next general
election.

But the fears of non-Muslims, which are very real, are not confined to PAS
wanting to ban the sale of liquor or shutting gaming outlets but, more
important, it is the exclusion of non-Muslims from government under an Islamic
state.

Non-Muslims may still keep their places of worship under an Islamic state but
they may no longer have the political rights that they now enjoy.

In fact, no one can tell for sure what kind of Islamic state model PAS wants to
pursue, particularly when many West Asian countries have poor records of human
rights.

Pro-opposition supporters may think that PAS is the only viable party to take
on Umno, the backbone of Barisan Nasional, but they are basically gambling away
their rights, particularly the non-Muslims.

If the DAP, after three years of association, is now struggling to save the
marriage, it does not make sense for non-Muslim groups and parties to support
the Islamist party.

DAP has found out the hard way that PAS will never change their objective and
struggles. It will never compromise its plans to implement Islamic laws in
Malaysia.

Moderate Western-suited politicians now in PAS like Tumpat MP Datuk Kamaruddin
Jaafar will have to fight it out with the orthodox ulamaks, who will keep their
tight grip on the party.

The DAP has found itself in a dilemma because it understands the sentiments of
the majority of non-Muslims, particularly those in the cities and new
villages.

The DAP realises that it will never be able to regain the lost ground if it
continues to hold PAS' hands.

DAP chairman Lim Kit Siang must surely realise that it is to the advantage of
Chinese-based parties like the MCA and Gerakan for the DAP-PAS pact to
continue.

If the link stays, the two Chinese parties will surely continue to harp on the
pact, as it did in the 1999 general election.

PAS has consistently maintained that it will strive to set up an Islamic state.
There is no way that PAS will drop that objective because that is the basis of
its struggle.

PAS now believes it is strong enough to win the next elections with or without
the DAP. In fact, in the Lunas by-election last November, PAS helped Parti
Keadilan Nasional win the seat without the support of the DAP.

The DAP, which had earlier stayed away, only came at the eleventh hour when it
was almost certain that Keadilan would win.

In the case of Keadilan, its deputy president Dr Chandra Muzaffar has kept his
views very clear about the Islamic state envisaged by PAS but there is
uncertainty whether other Keadilan leaders are as broad-minded as he is.

It is clear that the opposition front is on shaky ground when it comes to the
Islamic state issue.

Some non-Muslims have criticised the DAP, particularly on an Internet news
website, about its uneasiness with PAS.

But DAP leaders like Kit Siang and his deputy Karpal Singh are feeling the
pulse of the Chinese and Indian voters better than these critics.

It is understood that some young DAP leaders, particularly those with
non-governmental organisation background, are against the DAP ending its ties
with PAS. But realistic and experienced DAP leaders like Kit Siang and Karpal
Singh understand that it is no good for a political party to talk about
idealism if it cannot win enough seats.

The alleged involvement of PAS members with the Kumpulan Mujahideen Malaysia
(KMM) will not help PAS win more non-Muslim votes.

There may be some who will refuse to believe the allegations by the police but
the majority of non-Muslims accept that PAS will always attract such
militants.

PAS leaders may not even know the identities of these members, being a
broad-based party. In fact, its leaders have openly condemned the use of
violence and have distanced itself from KMM.

Still, the stigma of PAS being perceived as an Iranian-style party which
advocates a conservative theocratic state has been etched on the minds of
non-Muslim voters, who will be the decisive voters in the next elections.

In the 1999 polls, his party detractors said he had eyed
the PJ Utara parliamentary seat but it was given to another young upstart,
Ronnie Liu, who failed to win the seat.

The critics said Teng had felt he was being sidelined and that Liu was being
favoured at his expense.

Teng's outburst in criticising the leadership surprised many but for party
insiders, especially those in Selangor, it reflected a situation that had been
simmering for a while.

Fingers have been pointed by supporters of Teng. One target is central
executive committee member Lim Guan Eng. Last week, Teng alleged that a CEC
member from Malacca had pressured party members to issue statements against him
but did not name Guan Eng.

The ruckus has worsened with Johor DAP Youth chief Dr Boo Cheng Hau joining in
the fray by expressing the same sentiments. He, too, has asked Kit Siang to
retire from politics.

In the case of Dr Boo, he openly defied the CEC warning that there should be no
more statements from party members on the issue.

It isn't clear how much support Teng can garner. The last attempt, called the
Knock Out Kit Siang (KOKS) plan, failed miserably when those behind the move
were booted out of the CEC.

History seems to be repeating itself in the DAP. Teng is not the first DAP
leader to call for reforms. Others have tried and paid heavily for challenging
the party elders.

The list includes founding secretary-general Goh Hock Guan, who drew the Rocket
symbol, Yeap Ghim Guan, Lee Lam Thye, Hu Sepang, Dr Eng Seng Chai, Chan Teik
Chan, Gooi Hock Seng, Teoh Teik Huat, Sim Kwang Yang, Dr Kua Kia Soong, Chin
Nyok Soon and Seow Hun Khim.

Others like Wee Choo Keong, Liew Ah Kim and Fung Ket Wing have set up the
Malaysian Democratic Party, which seems to be heading towards oblivion like the
now defunct Socialist Democratic Party (SDP) formed by DAP dissidents.

There have been promises of reforms by Kit Siang previously but nothing much
has been done. No one can argue that Kit Siang is a political icon. He has done
more than others in the party. But his contributions have also led to the party
being identified as a one-man show. So strong is his aura and presence that
despite having given up the secretary-general's post to Kerk Kim Hock, he
continues to eclipse Kerk.

The chairman's post, previously held by Dr Chen Man Hin, used to be advisory,
but under Kit Siang, he is regarded, rightly or wrongly, as more powerful than
Kerk.

But Kit Siang cannot be faulted entirely. His absence from Parliament should
have been used by the young MPs to bring up high-profile issues, as he had done
in the past, but none have followed in his footsteps.

After so many years, there are plenty of grievances in the DAP, including its
poor organisational structure. No one is sure of the membership size; the party
has branches but no divisions, unlike other parties.

There are also no direct elections in the DAP. Under its constitution, the
party elects 20 CEC members, who then decide among themselves who should hold
what positions. Ten others are appointed. At grassroots level, members
virtually have no say on who they want to lead the party.

The main grouse is that Kit Siang has been around too long. Although he
regularly tells Barisan Nasional leaders to quit, the former Opposition Leader
has held on to his post longer than his political nemesis.

His defenders, however, said that besides Karpal Singh or Dr Chen, there are no
DAP leaders charismatic enough to fire the imagination of voters. One possible
successor was Guan Eng but he is now almost inactive politically after being
jailed for breaching the Printing Presses and Publications Act.

For Teng, his priority is to get elected to the CEC because a place will mean
he has the sympathy of the delegates.

If he fails to get in, it means the beginning of the end of his political
future in the DAP.

It would possibly mean not being picked by the DAP to defend his seat in the
next general election. His options would be to quit the DAP and be an
independent, join Parti Keadilan Nasional as many DAP leaders have done or
defect to a component party of Barisan. His brother, Chang Yeow, is a Gerakan
assemblyman in Penang.

The DAP, without doubt, is at its lowest ebb. Its fortunes seem to have taken a
heavy beating after the 1999 polls when Chinese voters punished the party for
working with PAS.

When the congress meets, it has a chance to put things right. It can pull out
from the opposition front and regain its credibility in the eyes of its core
supporters. If it stays put, then it should never bring up the Islamic state
issue again. Any attempt, however feeble, would only invite flak from others.

It should forget about asking PAS, the dominant party in the opposition front,
to leave. The suggestion by Karpal Singh is ludicrous.

The DAP needs to show that it can win enough seats in the next polls if it
wants to attract talents into its ranks.

The reality of the game is that no one respects a loser. At this point, the
Rocket is fast running out of steam.

One possible explanation for the preference of these white
men could be their bulging wallets or our Malaysian women's misconception that
these foreigners are more romantic, having watched too many Hollywood movies.

But it is the preference for a foreigner, somewhat a novelty, in their arms
that is the more likely reason for the increasing number of “sarong party
girls.''

Like satan-worshipping, it is a sign against local convention and Asian
traditional customs and religious rules.

Local political satire Politik Kedai Kopi naughtily claims the preference for a
Caucasian male partner is particularly prevalent among Malay women.

It describes foreigner-worshipping as among the sins of the Malays, besides
being involved in poison-pen literature and getrich-quick schemes.

But Malaysian men ought to share the blame too. After all, they are unlikely to
take these often well-endowed “sarong party girls'' home to introduce to their
mothers as prospective brides.

My Malay colleagues also wonder why the more religious Malays prefer to dress
up like Arabs with serbans and long flowing robes.

Besides Caucasians and Arabs, young Malaysians, particularly the Chinese, seem
to imitate anything Japanese these days.

I thought Malaysian youths only have black hair but these days, they come in
red, brown, orange, red and even blond.

It is terribly confusing for someone like me, who still thinks he is
liberal-minded at 40 and having grown up with Saturday Night Fever. I am
finding it hard to comprehend this fondness for multi-coloured hair.

Hong Kong used to be the benchmark of youngsters from Cheras and Kepong. No
longer.

When the Prime Minister initiated the Look East policy, where we were told to
emulate the industriousness of the Japanese, he certainly did not have in mind
Frankenstein-like platform shoes.

My Indian colleagues are still trying to understand why their younger brethren
within the community prefer to dress and talk like they have just stepped out
from a Bronx ghetto in New York although they are from Brickfields and Sentul.

With their clean-shaven heads and poor attempts to sound like a soul brother,
one can sense the underlining admiration and adoration these youngsters have
for American blacks and their desire to hide their Indian roots.

It's a crying shame because the Tamil culture is rich and is recognised for its
intellectual history.

But that has been sacrificed for some mindless rap talk which is a pale shadow
of the Indian heritage.

Tune into our radio stations and there is no shortage of disc jockeys who think
and believe that speaking correct English means sounding like a white man or a
black man.

We laugh at our Malaysian-accent English but strangely, and without thinking,
we embrace the French and the Spaniards for their heavily accented, even flawed
English, with the misguided belief that they sound romantic.

And many of us think they really sound good simply because that has been
grounded into our minds by the media.

Paris is perceived as a romantic city simply because that's what the media,
especially the movies, say.

Never mind the fact that Parisians are snooty, rude and refuse to acknowledge
English-speaking Malaysians struggling to buy a croissant, which is tasteless
compared to the local roti tissue.

There's no end to foreigner-worshipping, really. Many of our hotel
receptionists and restaurant waitresses are guilty of giving preference to
foreigners, especially whites.

I am sure many of us, at some point, have experienced the contempt of some
hotel workers for locals.

But thank God, our Culture, Arts and Tourism Ministry officials have more sense
than our hospitality services workers.

Malaysia is being aggressively promoted in India, China and West Asia because
tourists from these areas have a passion for shopping, which is good for our
economy.

The older white tourists prefer to sit by the pool with a book, the middle-aged
prefer the sex industry in Phuket and Bangkok while the young are backpackers
with tight budgets.

Having said that, Malaysians should be mindful of not encouraging racism or
xenophobia, the hatred for foreigners.

It will be myopic for us to be inward looking. History is filled with leaders
who bring disasters to their country because of their narrow nationalistic
views.

Malaysia needs to be wary of politicians who refuse to accept the importance of
English or orthodox religious types who preach against liberalism. Worse still
are those who think circus acts are immoral.

Let's take the best of foreign values and assimilate them into our local
context. Not everything foreign is wrong and not everything Malaysian is right
either.

Devil-worshipping or foreigner-worshipping aside, nothing will stop many of us
from watching the Red Devils at work tonight.

Although the college is owned by the MCA, there is no
place for politics within the campus.

The students are aware their priority is to study, get their diplomas or
degrees, and gain employment.

They can join any political party, if they are keen, after getting their
scrolls.

After three decades, with TAR college's proven track record of producing over
60,000 graduates, it is a natural progression for the MCA to set up a
university.

Though there are already 14 public universities, six private universities and
three foreign branch campuses in the country, the setting up of Universiti
Tunku Abdul Rahman would help ease the continuing demand for places in local
institutions of higher learning.

Each year, we read of bright young Malaysians who are unable to enter local
universities because of limited space.

The quota system has further added pressure on our universities and the
Education Ministry in coping with the demands for places in faculties such as
medicine, dentistry, engineering and computer science.

With the setting up of Utar, it is hoped Malaysia will not lose these talents
overseas.

Malaysia needs the contribution of intelligent Malaysians and every effort must
be made to stop this brain drain.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad must be commended for his
openness in approving the setting up of Utar.

It is thus most regrettable that critics, particularly PAS and Parti Rakyat
Malaysia, are finding fault with Utar.

It is the height of hypocrisy for PAS to object to the setting up of Utar on
the grounds that it is initiated by MCA.

PAS is a known sponsor of kindergartens, religious schools and colleges, where
its politics are propagated to the students.

In universities, PAS leaders continue the indoctrination of students with its
brand of extremism.

PRM also has a steady following among non-Malay students and it is well-known
that some university lecturers openly advocate the party's politics in
campus.

There are other critics who have attacked Utar on the grounds that it is
initiated by the MCA, and nothing else. Flimsy arguments are put up to hide
their political prejudices.

Then there are also MCA members themselves, because of their quarrel with party
president Datuk Seri Dr Ling Liong Sik, who are prepared to run down Utar for
political expediency.

And there is the journalist who wrote in an Internet news website that the MCA
“thinks it does the community proud. It does not.''

The DAP, at least, feels the pulse of the Chinese community better now after
its defeat in the 1999 general election.

Misreading the mood of the community, the party partnered PAS in the fight
against the Barisan Nasional and paid a heavy political price. This time, it
has openly come out to support Utar even as PAS and PRM have stated their
objections.

Grassroots members of Chinese-based political parties, including the DAP, are
aware the community has given its endorsement to the university.

The MCA leaders must now explain that, unlike many private colleges, including
TAR, Utar would be able to grant university degrees.

It also has the potential of becoming an internationally renowned university in
the region if it has a good academic staff and the right person to head it, in
line with the Government effort to make Malaysia an education centre of
excellence.

The community should not be unduly concerned about talk that colleges such as
the private New Era College would be affected if fund-raising campaigns are
carried out for Utar.

Utar should not be seen as a competitor but as a complement in the field of
education. Even if it was not mooted by MCA, other private universities would
be set up.

At present only Universiti Malaya offers courses in Chinese Studies, but with
the setting up of Utar, a similar faculty can be set up too.

As a full-fledged private university, Utar will also be able to attract many
foreign students.

Malaysians, especially the Chinese community, has high expectations of Utar and
they want the university to take off.

Malaysian leaders, particularly those claiming to represent the Chinese
community, should provide ideas on how Utar can become a reality instead of
finding fault with the proposal.

MCA leaders will come and go but Utar will remain as a hallmark of the
community's uncompromising pursuit of education.

Malaysians will certainly benefit from the programmes offered by Utar when it
is fully realised.

For the sake of our children, can we just keep politics out of Universiti Tunku
Abdul Rahman?