EIU Democracy Index: Malaysia slips down Democracy Index... Aidila Razak, mkini

Malaysia slips down Democracy Index

Aidila Razak
malaysiakini, Jan 6, 2011, 7:00pm

  

Malaysia has taken a slight tumble down the Economist Intelligence Unit's 2010 Democracy Index, slipping three places to number 71 out of 167 countries, with its overall score dropping from 6.36 points in 2008 to 6.19 last year.

This places Malaysia squarely in the "flawed democracy" category, along with 52 other countries that received overall scores of between 6 and 7.9 out of a maximum of 10 points.

Flawed democracies are countries that have "free and fair elections" and respect "basic civil liberties", but face "problems such as infringements on media freedom".

Such countries also have "significant weaknesses in other aspects of democracy, including problems in governance, an underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political participation", the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) index shows.

The score is an average of points garnered in five different categories: electoral processes and pluralism, civil liberties, functioning government, political participation and political culture.

Scoring is based on expert assessment and public opinion surveys through the World Values Survey, Eurobarometer surveys, Gallup polls, Asian Barometer, Latin Barometer, Afrobarometer and national surveys, as well as voter turnout and predominance of the legislative branch over the executive.

The EIU recorded concern over political participation and civil liberties in Malaysia, giving these categories fairly poor scores of 5.56 and 5.88 points respectively.

However, Malaysia pulled a respectable 6.79 points for a functioning government, while its electoral processes received 6.5 points and political culture scored slightly lower at 6.25.

The EIU describes the the political situation in Malaysia as a "fierce political tussle" between BN and Pakatan Rakyat, which it expects to continue in the near future.

Media freedom wanting

Political cultures in Asia, it notes, are "often underdeveloped and shallow", even in countries considered to be democracies.

Special mention was made of the deterioration of media freedom in Malaysia, placing it beside Fiji, Sri Lanka and Thailand, where there is "often pressure on the independent media".

"The reasons for this decline are complex and varied. Underlying negative trends appear to have been exacerbated by the post-2008 economic crisis.

"Many governments have felt increasingly vulnerable and threatened, and have reacted by intensifying their efforts to control the media and impede free expression," the report states.

Topping the index is Norway, with an overall score of 9.8, while South Korea leads Asia in the index at 20^th spot, with 8.11 points.

Southeast Asia's youngest nation Timor Leste leads the region at number 42 (7.22 points) while Thailand comes up tops among Asean countries at 57^th spot (6.55) followed by Indonesia, which is ranked 60^th (6.53).

Nevertheless, Malaysia trumped Singapore by 19 places. With a dismal 5.89 points, the island-state was ranked 82^nd,, making it to the "hybrid regime" where "elections have substantial irregularities that often prevent them from being both free and fair".

Other countries ahead of Malaysia on the index include Botswana (35^th at 7.63 points), Papua New Guinea (59^th at 6.54 points), Mongolia (64^th at 6.36 points) and Namibia (69^th at 6.23 points).

Portrait of my father, Fan Yew Teng... By Pauline Fan

Portrait of my father, Fan Yew Teng

By Pauline Fan


It has not been easy to bid farewell to my father, a man who touched so many not just by his tenacious commitment to social justice and through his incisive political writings, but also through his warm, radiant, playful personality.

Papa was a wellspring of strength and joy for the family; he was the deepest source of joy and laughter in my life. He loomed large in our lives; his presence was indelible, his charisma unmistakable. He was always a kind of hero figure for me and my sister. When we were young, we would watch him with awe working among his books, listen to him incessantly typing away on his old manual typewriter, and the scent of pipe tobacco that filled his study is still my favourite scent in the world.

As I grew older, I began to understand that Papa’s work, his continuous engagement in politics and social issues, was inseparable from his life. He did not simply have a ‘job’; he lived out his uncompromising principles through his writings and actions, and was driven by his deep-seated ideals to fight for social justice and human dignity. For Papa, politics was the natural arena where citizens could exercise their rights and obligations in modern society. In the words of Papa’s literary hero George Orwell: “In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics’. All issues are political issues . . .”

The complex layers of Papa’s personal history revealed themselves to me over time, like the hidden meanings in a poem familiar but not yet understood. When I was about nine years old, Papa took the family on holiday to Pahang, Terengganu and Kelantan to visit the various small towns where he had once been posted as a teacher in the 1960s – Kuala Lipis, Temerloh, Kota Bharu and Tanah Merah.

We travelled by train, his preferred mode of transport, and accompanied Papa as he traced the journey he had taken as a young teacher 20 years earlier. He deeply loved his country – its landscape, its people and their customs; and the East Coast remained specially cherished in his memory. We went to the seaside in Marang, then to the rather godforsaken town of Tanah Merah, adopted two kittens at the train station in Manik Urai, named them Manik and Urai and left them with his old friend Gopal in Kuala Lipis.

Only later did I discover that Papa had been posted to teach in these remote areas because of his active involvement in the National Union of Teachers (NUT). He had served as the NUT’s Director of the National Membership Campaign and Assistant Secretary of the Pahang branch and was the editor of ‘The Educator’, the official organ of the NUT. The authorities were particularly irked by his role as one of the co-organisers of the teachers’ strike of 1967, which helped bring about equal pay for women, as well as housing, pension and medical benefits for all teachers.

Similarly, I learnt about Papa’s political career gradually in the course of growing up, as one discovers another piece of a vast, living jigsaw puzzle – about his years with the Democratic Action Party (DAP) and how he served as Acting Secretary-General while Lim Kit Siang was detained under the Internal Security Act; about his terms as Member of Parliament for Kampar and Menglembu; about his sedition case for publishing a speech by Dr. Ooi Kee Saik in ‘The Rocket’; and about how he was disqualified from Parliament and deprived of his Member of Parliament’s pension.

While Papa was campaigning with the short-lived Social Democratic Party in 1986, I remember accompanying him to see his old printer who was preparing his campaign posters and leaflets. I remember too Papa’s disappointment when the SDP failed to win any seats, and how he then withdrew from formal politics and threw himself into writing and activism. Papa’s fighting spirit was irrepressible; even in his hours of political defeat and isolation, he remained convinced that political change was both necessary and possible.

Papa did not deliberately set out to ‘radicalise’ his daughters, but politics was such an elemental part of his being that we inadvertently imbibed his sense that Malaysia’s political landscape left much to be desired. One of the ways my sister and I spent time with Papa was to accompany him on his ‘wanderings’ to second-hand bookshops and coffee shops in Kuala Lumpur and Petaling Jaya, where he would run into friends and ‘comrades’ and engage them in vibrant exchanges of opinion about the latest political scandal or social injustice.

Papa was truly a man of the people; he could establish instant rapport with virtually everyone, from his loyal newspaper man, Balan, to Pak Ali, a devoted member of Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) who owned a restaurant in Taman Tun Dr. Ismail for many years. When my sister and I returned to Malaysia during our university holidays, Papa brought us along to several PAS and DAP ceramah as well as to various talks he was giving at Cenpeace or ABIM, where we witnessed the fiery oratory style that never left him. He also brought us to the Malaysian Sociological Research Institute to meet the intriguing chain-smoking activist and writer, Dr. Alijah Gordon, who was extremely fond of him.

Papa forged friendships that lasted for life. His relentless pursuit of social and political justice for ordinary people, as well as his vivacious personality and well-read intellect, endeared him to many the world over. Among his friends he counted Helen Clark, the former Prime Minister of New Zealand, and Malcolm Caldwell, the British Marxist scholar who was killed by the Khmer Rouge in 1978.

Papa believed in people and principles, not in systems and ideologies. I think this is why he was so fascinated by history, the narrative of humanity itself. Papa’s knowledge of history never failed to astound us. He could talk for hours on the history and politics of India (particularly the dramatic local politics of Tamil Nadu), or Willy’s Brandt’s Ostpolitik, or the fall of the Roman Empire.

And Papa believed in love. His romance with my mother was epic in every sense; turbulent at times, but adoring to the end. Shortly after my parents got married, my mother left for Cambridge to pursue her Doctorate. Undeterred by his aversion to air travel, Papa voyaged over land and sea, from Port Klang to Madras, across India by train, then by bus through Pakistan, over the Khyber Pass in Afghanistan, through Iran and Turkey and on to Europe, to join my mother in England in the winter of 1975-76.

Papa’s personal legacy to me is a passion he cultivated in me since childhood, a passion that shaped my life profoundly through young adulthood and continues to this day to mould who I am and how I relate to the world: an undying love of literature. Papa constantly invoked the spirit of the writers he loved most – George Orwell, James Joyce, and Albert Camus among others. He imbibed and lived, in his own flesh and blood, the writer’s life: he wrote only by hand or on his beloved typewriter, he smoked a pipe in the style of Bertrand Russell, he read voraciously, and his room was a labyrinth of books, newspapers, and magazines.

Papa was urged by an intellectual restlessness that is the mark of all true writers. He believed in the power of the written word to encapsulate the interminable drama of the human spirit, of the individual and society. Like the Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Papa believed that “literature is the living memory of a people.” In fact, one of the last books Papa read from cover to cover was Michael Scammell’s acclaimed biography of Solzhenitsyn which Papa had picked up at a second-hand bookstore in Bangkok. Incidentally, Scammell had interviewed Papa about his sedition case in the 1970s for a write up for the ‘Index on Censorship’, the prominent British journal on political freedom which Scammell founded and edited.

Language and politics were inextricably linked for Papa. His commitment to the written word reflected his conviction that writers had a duty to uphold the integrity of language, to employ it as a weapon of truth against a political rhetoric riddled with lies.

As Orwell remarked: “Political chaos is connected with the decay of language . . . one can probably bring about some improvement by starting at the verbal end”. It is this belief in the ability of language and literature to speak truth to power that urged Papa to read and write to the very end.

I imagine Papa now taking his place among his literary heroes; I imagine him engaging in endless conversations (and arguments) with them, in a place beyond space and time, beyond history, beyond language – a place, in the words of the poet Yehuda Amichai, “where there is time for everything”.

Note: A special memorial tribute service for Sdr Fan Yew Teng will be held at the YMCA Hall in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday 5th January 2011 from 8pm to 11pm. Another memorial service will also be held in Ipoh at the Excelsior Hotel (14th floor) Conference Room on Thursday, 6th January 2011. All are welcomed to attend.

TMI: The lost meaning of Christmas... by David KL Quek

The lost meaning of Christmas — David KL Quek

January 04, 2011

“And so this is Christmas

For weak and for strong

For rich and the poor ones

The world is so wrong

And so happy Christmas

For black and for white

For yellow and red ones

Let's stop all the fight

A very merry Christmas

And a happy New Year”

— John Lennon, “Happy Christmas (War is Over)”

Christmas message transcends glitzy commercialism
Christmas for me is mostly about family, and a timely reflection upon the deeper religious significance when Jesus Christ was born more than 2,000 years ago.

It is also the time to ponder on the year that has been, and envisage what the coming year would hold in store for us personally, but more importantly for Malaysians as a whole — because we are at the cusp of something phenomenal and momentous, of possible change towards a manifestly different but better, more mature society.

My family and I had been away in Singapore for a few days, away from almost all communications — no unnecessary SMSes, no emails, no Facebook or Twitter, no work connections, almost no newspapers or TV, by choice. I persuaded my family to stay off the electronic roaming grid and thus, disengage from our ubiquitous connectedness. It was good to be detached although only for a few short days, as we welcome in the New Year of 2011.

But alas back in Malaysia, ushering in the New Year appears to have swept along yet unsettled and unsettling issues on the sociopolitical front, not an auspicious beginning for a much astrology-commentated “challenging” year ahead.

Upon reaching home soil, I am therefore aghast to hear that there had been “overzealous” moves to “de-Christianise” Christmas to enable and prettify the so-called Christmas visit of the PM to “celebrate” this festivity with Christians. (“Najib, apologise for un-1Malaysian directive”)

I suppose, it did not cross the minds of our non-Christian bureaucrats that it is meaningless and inane to even suggest that this politically-charged visit be void of all possible misinterpretable religious connotations. Hence, the now disavowed “directive” that the symbolisms of Christianity (i.e. the iconic crosses/crucifixes, the hymns and carols reflecting the Christian beliefs) be subtracted from the celebrations just to appease some political parochialism and skewed “religiose” correctness.

Minus Jesus Christ, there is no Christmas significance, lest there continues to be some less-than-subtle move to downgrade the faith held by some one-quarter of the world’s population, albeit held by just some nine per cent of our Malaysian citizens.

But I agree that the glitzy secular images of snow and reindeer, Santa Claus and presents, turkey, pudding and eggnog, poinsettias and mistletoes — all these increasingly gratuitous celebrations have permeated the global understanding of this festivity, if indeed this is the distorted message of the new and now.

Sadly, the religious message is increasingly difficult to decipher apart from all the extraneous commercial noises which fog over the true meaning of this singular event. The consumerist buying sprees and sales, the Christmas trees and decorations, the glitzy partying are but secular distractions.

I suppose when one is younger, Gen X and Y, all these have special appeals to usher in a Dionysian respite of fun and games. But that said, it is not necessarily the “wet-blanket” approach that most middle-aged or “mature” generations should enshroud themselves with, in grim joyless austerity.

Because the music, the carols and hymns, the biblical message, the pleasure of the gift-giving and sharing, the peaceful connotation so attached to the meaning of Christmas, are a joyful expression of the message intended to further enhance if not embellish the true gist of the “holiday” season — but these should not be the “be all and end all” of this celebration.

Essentially, Christmas time should dictate a renewal of faith as well as a renouncement of evil and sin. Basically this is at the personal level, a call to forgiveness, a return to godliness and a promise of faith keeping, to acknowledge the goodness and authority of a Higher Being.

It is also time to remind ourselves of our human nature, our imperfections, our proclivity to error-filled ways and our inherent sinfulness, and a resolve to aspire to be better than our human weaknesses and foibles would allow us, or tempt us to be otherwise.

Because in all honesty, we are all more likely to be less than good — given that totally unrestrained morals, or lack of which, to choose! We are oftentimes also driven by innate selfish motives, and we are prone to be less than kind to others, than we can or should be. But, as is always enjoined by most other religions, humanity has always been urged to behave and do better than their baser selves, that we can do better…

“Agape” a selfless love for others, expressed without ulterior or selfish reasons is that fundamental gift and message of Christians. Above all we are exhorted to be more human and humane, to work towards peace, to be better national and global citizens, and we are entreated to champion unreservedly for human rights and dignity for all, especially the underserved, the unjustly treated, the indigent and the marginalised, i.e. those who have so much less by virtue of fate or circumstances… to walk in the shoes and spirit of Christ.

Time out for reflection
I treasure this time of the year for winding down — the pent-up tensions, the ratcheted-up rhetoric, discordant disagreements, combative battles of wits and wills, brutish alpha male infighting, ad hominem attacks and more; all these need a specially apportioned but assured space and time to dissipate, to simmer down a few notches…

I suppose it would be unrealistic to expect that all human interactional misunderstandings and tensions become fully dispelled with just time and natural forgetfulness… Yet, it is good to reduce such “heated up” moods so that cooler or lukewarm sentiments are better than the blistering boils which can cause so much unintended or even intended harm and injury.

Like a recurrent active volcano, its sporadic eruptions need always that intermittent dormancy to rebuild its tamped down volatilities and energies, which while so potentially destructive its consequential lava flows can also be so enriching and fertile, otherwise…

So I cherish this perforce moment of quietude, by opting for a much-needed vacation from the daily “drudge” of work, toil, duties and “responsibilities” or even communication.

Lest we wish to remain forever trapped within the clutches of never-ending grind of day-to-day humdrum affairs, we all need to chill out, to take a break, to time out for some much needed freedom from work, to be able to reminisce and ponder even if for a little while, even if for the simplest distracted thoughts — if for nothing else to be able “to stand and stare”.

Serious burnout and boredom can etch psychological scars on our crowded fatigued minds. I believe we would perform the worse for it, if we let these psychological millstones weigh down or becloud our vision, our purpose in our individual lives.

For many of us though, we are so embroiled in the work of the living that we could not easily extract ourselves from its claw hold of remaining connected, of wishing to remain relevant, constantly on top of things, in our small if ephemeral niches of our increasingly hyper-segmented lives...

Thus, it is not surprising that one finds it very hard, even well-nigh impossible, to be totally cut off from the world: the ever-present background noises, the incessant sound bites, the strangle-hold of constant connectedness of the mobile phone, the emails, the tantalising yet very tenacious stickiness of the internet, Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Perhaps many of us think we are more than what nature has in store for us humans, that we have a greater or more meaningful impact on others around us. Perhaps we do, but then again these are in some mostly trivial, fleeting and inconsequential moments and ways, in hindsight — mostly petty to the point of insignificance.

Overcoming our apathy
Some of us of course prefer the close comfort of home and our own cloistered world of just a few — believing that we do not need to be too involved in the world out there, with all its changeable and discordant political or social clatter. Somehow, we would quietly get along and simply work for our own families, our close-knit circle of friends, our own interests (and be damned with the world!).

But we also choose to moan and groan on asides, while choosing to remain grimly dumb when it truly matters, we let injustice and wrongdoings perpetuate in a complicit acceptance of status quo, too timorous to even contemplate any divergent action to improve or counteract these transgressions.

At other times, we overplay our roles and overstep the boundaries of propriety, and we get hardboiled into believing in our own superiority, our own self-importance. We shout and we rant hatefully, particularly in nameless blogs and commentaries, but anonymously, as if these would suffice to influence events in some way or other.

Sometimes we are just indifferent and we couldn’t care less, the Mr Hyde overcoming the Dr Jekyll within us.

This converse reaction however, more often than not, stifle us into stagnant morasses of inactivity and fearful non-action when faced with hurdles or challenges, mostly because we are unmoved or simply feel too hopeless and helpless to do something. Our greatest weakness is to remain apathetic, subsuming to a culture of the “silent majority” or worse, to that overarching Mammon of all-consuming personal self-interests and personal gain.

Christmas is that special time to rekindle the humility, which would make us that much more caring, kindlier and compassionate. And yet we are reminded to be more proactive and find the inner strength to act more unwaveringly toward a greater good and become more socially engaged.

We must emerge from our blasé attitude. We must temper our profit motive, our baser instincts towards callous personal gain at all costs, and a deteriorating regard to society’s expected generosity and altruism towards the less endowed.

But although most of what we do unfortunately have very little long-term impact on society and others; we must not let this mindset stifle our zeal for doing more. Our influence on an individual basis may be less than meets the eye, but collectively as a united group, we may exert a stronger consequence than we believe maybe possible.

It is certainly not the case of “half empty” vs “half full” perspective of the world around us, but bare-bones realism. Some of us are habitually more sedate and pessimistic than others, some more cynical, while a smaller number subscribe to a more optimistic and “feel-good” attitude.

We need to infuse ourselves with greater belief in being able to bring about change for the better! If we wish to leave bigger imprints on society, we do have to commit to some paradigmatic shift, to engage more forcefully and more steadfastly into causes, which can then be better addressed for larger segments of our society. We need to act.

Every Malaysian must believe in and partake of change that we wish for, but we must all do our part and continue to nudge the momentum of the art of the possible, no matter the distracting noises, the occasional internal bickerings and diversions, which seem to hamper our ultimate objectives!

What next 2011?
The year 2010 is over, and 2011 is upon us.

Uncertainty with a dash of cautious optimism seems to permeate the Malaysian psyche. The scent of a snap general election is in the air. Yet, there is so much “static” and simmering ethnic and religious tension that seems to charge the Malaysian political atmosphere.

Malaysians are repeatedly reminded that political change risks the unknown, with cynical “warnings” for choosing incumbency, or face possible consequences including social unrest! But what sort of “same old, same old” politics and administration, are we asked to choose from? There has been so little transformative change in our 53-year-old governing parties that we are asked once again to believe in their “righteous” largesse to deliver more of the same!

Most of the touted transformative plans and programmes are glitzy and slogan-heavy, but they remain nebulous and laden with concepts, which have not been fully articulated or formulated to encompass many of our concerns and misgivings.

We seek greater transparency and dialogue to improve our debilitating civil administrative systems, our police, our judiciary, so that together we can achieve more than what has been simply planned or articulated as lip service. We need greater but necessary oversight of experience or scrutiny or input from other “out-of-the-box” stakeholders — which means that most of us need to participate as civic-minded citizens more fully and without fear or favour.

We are alarmed that the government appears to be whittling down its commitment to social development programmes — our subsidies on fuels and foods, utilities, healthcare and social safety net allocations from tax revenues, have been reduced. Such civic obligations have been increasing with most other countries around the world, through greater productivity, care and prudence in use of public funds and taxes, and with less leakages and wastage. We seem to be doing the reverse.

We worry as to the gradual passing of the buck back to consumers and taxpayers, who would be once again be made to accept higher payment instruments to help defray an ever bigger and more bloated public administrative budget. We worry that the much-needed tax subsidies for social development and healthcare would be gradually removed to further burden the poorest and the middle class, whose disposable incomes and savings for retirement are already hugely inadequate.

We worry that the poorest 40 per cent of the population would be left once again marginalised, to accept bare minimum public products, utilities and services, without systematic social safety nets such as minimum wage, unemployment benefits, affordable housing, liveable retirement pensions, catastrophic social health insurance such as Medicare, Medicaid or CHIPs or whatever.

Yet we all aspire to be better — to reach the 2020 goal of a developed nation with per capita income of some US$15,000 or more. We need to beat the so-called middle-income trap, but we appear to be least prepared for the obligatory sacrifices and the mandatory leap in productivity — so elusive for most Malaysians these past few decades.

We need to prod our population to do more, now and continue to improve all the time, to keep up with the highly competitive world out there. We cannot afford to be bogged down by petty and nonsensical parochial interests and partisan prejudices and rhetoric, which destroy the fabric of our fragile unity amidst our increasingly touchy mindsets.

We must strive to work together to be better than one ethnic or religious fraternity alone — collectively we should be better than one, in the true spirit of “1 Malaysia”, or a “Bangsa Malaysia”, or whatever name to go by! But this must not be an empty slogan, a meaningless rehashed discordant shibboleth, which rings hollow, when one does not walk the talk!

No one wishes to be left behind; no one wishes to lose this unforgiving strife for advancement and one-upmanship. Yet, we must actively find more meaning and purpose in our lives, to enhance the social and development goals for all Malaysians — we simply need to strengthen and inculcate our competitive and entrepreneurial skills!

We can do better to help reduce, even eradicate poverty, enhance living skills and standards including healthcare and quality of life, and abolish social ills such as pervasive corruption, street crimes, and sociopolitical injustice.

We must rid our mindsets from glaring ethnic and religious bigotry and intolerance, which distract from our national objectives. We must not let contemptuous shrill groups hijack our Malaysian national goal by raising hateful prejudice and racist rhetoric, which destroys the confidence and the patriotism in the non-Bumiputera citizens and the international community to return, to work productively, to remain and to invest and re-invest in this country, our country too.

Thomas Friedman, New York Times columnist and author, argues that Americans have “to postpone gratification, invest for the future, work harder than the next guy and hold their kids to the highest expectations.” Otherwise, he says, the country will be unable to keep up with China and other emerging economies. This aptly applies to us Malaysians in more ways than others! We must and can do better!

Our national psyche and our collective belief in ourselves as a nation is now at one of its lowest ebbs. We cannot be distractedly locked in internecine infighting, while the rest of the world rolls ahead!

Ah, Christmas time is that time for thought, for reappraisal, for re-aligning our purposes and goals — most importantly, to refocus on our lives and clarify our individual and collective purposes. Are we ready to invest in the future for all Malaysians, or just for the one or few?

May the year 2011 be an especially meaningful, prosperous and love-filled one for everyone! Happy New Year!

* Dr David KL Quek reads The Malaysian Insider.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

ANTS & GRASSHOPPERS: A CHANGING MORAL STORY... By Anonymous Cynic

ANTS & GRASSHOPPERS: A CHANGING MORAL STORY... 

By Anonymous Cynic

Older Version
 
An ant worked hard in the sweltering heat all summer, building its nest and laying up supplies for the winter.

A grasshopper thought the ant was stupid not knowing how to enjoy life. It spent its days laughing, singing & dancing thoroughly enjoying the summer.

Came winter, the ant was warm, comfortable and had no shortage of food.

The grasshopper had no proper shelter, no stored food, and couldn't find anything to eat from the snow-covered ground. So it died and the story ended.  
MORAL OF TH E STORY: Be responsible for yourself!

______________________

Modern Malaysian Version    

An ant worked hard in the sweltering heat all summer, building its nest and laying up supplies for the winter.

A grasshopper thought the ant was stupid not knowing how to enjoy life. It spent its days laughing, singing & dancing thoroughly enjoying the summer.  

Came winter, the shivering grasshopper called a press conference and demanded to know why the ant should be warm and well fed while he was cold and starving.

TV1, TV2 & TV3 showed up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper alongside to a video clip of the ant in his comfortable home with a table full of food.

The majority of the Malaysian Parliamentarians were stunned by the sharp contrast. How could this poor grasshopper be allowed to suffer?

Khairy staged a demonstration in front of the ant's nest.

Nazri went on a hunger strike along with other grasshoppers demanding that they be relocated to warmer climate area during winter.

The Malaysian Government immediately passed a law forbidding all ants from working hard in the summer so as to bring about equality of poverty between ants and grasshoppers.

Hishammudin increased 'More Special Reservations' for grasshoppers in Educational Institutions & Government Services..

The ant was fined for failing to share 30% of his food with the grasshopper. The Prime Minister announced that this was part of the NEP.  No ant should question it. (Don't forget, Tax Audits were introduced and targeted at certain individuals who were eventually penalised heavily for not contributing enough to the well-being of the grasshoppers).

Many years later...

Some ants migrated to the US and set up multi-billion dollar companies there.

Hundreds of grasshoppers still died of starvation despite the 'More Special Reservations'.

Losing significant number of hardworking ants and free-loading the grasshoppers, Malaysia  remained a developing country, despite its abundant natural resources. 

All because the remaining ANTS were still doing their work .............................

Latest findings showed that almost all the grasshoppers in the political arena and civil service were hoarding corrupt wealth which they refused to share with fellow grasshoppers.  
 

 
MORAL OF TH E STORY:   Be careful how you vote in 2011.

---

I’ve sent this to you because I believe that you are an ant – not a grasshopper !  Make sure that you pass this on to other ants .  Don’t bother sending it on to any grasshoppers because they wouldn’t understand it, anyway.  

The Star: The mystique of national transformation... By TAN SRI LIN SEE-YAN

The mystique of national transformation

By TAN SRI LIN SEE-YAN

The Star, Saturday January 1, 2011

The challenge is to convince stakeholders to buy in and take ownership of the array of programmes.

I am often asked: What is this New Economic Model (NEM) all about; how is this related to the Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) and Government Transformation Programme (GTP); what has all this got to do with creating a high-income society; and what is this middle-income trap we are caught in; and why the urgency for national transformation.

Since the idea of NEM was first mooted by the Prime Minister in mid-2009, our vocabulary has been enriched (or debased) by a barrage of upbeat words (economic roadmap, transformational journey, squeezed-in-the-middle, social minefields, talent management, managed liberalisation, catalysing change, etc.) some of which boggle the mind, and new acronyms (NEAC, GNI, NKEAs, NKRAs, SRIs, EPPs, BOs, 10MP, IEB, Permandu and GOA, Greater KL/KV, etc.).

All enough to confuse most, let alone know what they stand for and to understand the complex web of inter-relationships among them.

No wonder the public seems confused. Many businessmen, investors, civil servants and even academics are not sure they understand enough to lend a deep insight into how the various parts fit together and how they relate to what they are doing. Let alone fully appreciate the whole scheme of things in order to be able to buy in.

After all, the entire framework, strategies and policies and the manner they are stitched together are rather complex. Going through the maze of close to 2,000 pages of inter-related technical reports and discourse, and understanding what they really mean in terms of practical implementation, was rather onerous. Unless stakeholders appreciate enough to buy in and take ownership of the array of programmes, no amount of political will and leadership commitment can see them through in practice. That's the challenge, I guess.

Middle-income trap
It is a fact that middle-income economies (MIEs) have grown less rapidly than either most rich or poor countries which account for the lack of convergence in the past 100 years. So, middle-income nations get squeezed-in-the-middle, between low-wage poor-nation competitors (that dominate in mature or old industries) and rich-country innovators (that dominate new activities based on technological change).
East Asian nations today face this challenge, especially Malaysia and Asean. Economic theory postulates that MIEs face three transformations as they evolve: (i) diversification slackens and then reverses as they get more sophisticated and specialised; (ii) fixed investment assumes less importance as innovation gathers steam; and (iii) quality of education shifts to enable workers to readily absorb new skills and technologies to increasingly add value to the production process.

These are observable outcomes as MIEs successfully shift their growth strategies.

But in the absence of economies of scale, East Asian MIEs will need to struggle uphill in their attempt to maintain previous high growth rates. Strategies based on continuing capital accumulation will deliver steadily worse results. Simply because the law of diminishing returns soon sets in.

Many nations in Latin America and the Middle East are examples of MIEs that have not been able to get out of this middle-income trap.

For East Asia, however, I see room for optimism. World Bank studies have shown that some MIEs in East Asia have successfully made this transition from middle income to rich under proper environments driven by private enterprise, and adopting correct policies. Studies show some MIEs (e.g. South Korea and Taiwan) have remained successful manufacturers even in rather mature industries. Also, China, Taiwan, South Korea and India have shown that success in knowledge-based industries and services can be had. For these MIEs, the tactic has been to straddle both strategies.

Clearly, exploiting economies of scale does offer a way out. The World Bank experience shows “the pattern of trade, the flow of ideas and innovations, the new financial architecture, and the performance of cities are all consistent with East Asian economies displaying a shift towards growth that is founded on economies of scale.”

However, it comes at a price: distributional consequences in terms of rising inequalities, widespread corruption, persistent crime and lack of social cohesion are symptomatic of this model. Be that as it may, transformational change is what is needed if we are to get out of the middle-income trap. There is no other way.

NEM, ETP and GTP
Hence, the NEM for Malaysia. Designed to provide a “concerted, holistic roadmap” to raise income and living standards over the next 10 years, its goals are anchored on strategies outlined in the ETP and GTP. It targets growth in gross national income of at least 6% a year. By 2020, income per capita is expected to reach US$15,000 (RM48,000), enough to become a developed nation.

To achieve this, the ETP identifies eight strategic reform initiatives (SRIs) to propel transformation and growth, namely, promoting a private-sector led economy; creating a quality workforce; instilling competition; strengthening the public sector; building knowledge-base infrastructure; enhancing sources of growth; ensuring growth sustainability through innovation; and implementing transparent and market-friendly affirmative action. Strategically, this makes a lot of sense. But, it's a tall order by any standard.

On the ground, the ETP roadmap identifies 12 National Key Economic Areas (NKEAs) in its drive to maturity these represent growth engines identified to bring about high incomes through constant value adding. They are: oil and energy; financial services; palm oil; wholesale and retail trade; tourism; electrical and electronics; business services, education, communications, content and infrastructure; health tourism; agriculture; and the Greater KL areas.

The ETP needs to be private-sector driven, with Government shifting its role from financier to facilitator. The implementation of the ETP complements the transformational push of SRIs. The outcome is expected to be a more balanced and more sustainable economy. Bear in mind that SRIs are intended to deal with foundational economic issues underpinning transformation and growth.

However, success of the ETP rests on four key underlying thrusts. The first involves the creation of an innovative and creative culture. To thrive, this needs an ecosystem that inculcates private enterprise and risk-taking which flourish best in a competitive and regulatory-friendly environment.

The second addresses the presence of a reliable flow of quality workforce incubating in a conducive workplace.

The third deals with a revamped Government able to transform its service delivery system. This requires a Government “embedded” in support of private initiatives, but not “in bed” with investors.
Only a quality civil service instilled with fiscal discipline can deliver this.

And the fourth tackles the issue of inclusiveness and the need to reduce disparity often collateral damage from unfettered laissez faire private participation, in the absence of checks and balances. This thrust is critical for social cohesion in the face of a strong push for growth. For without growth, there will not be enough to redistribute.

The GTP in conjunction with the ETP form an integral part of the NEM. The GTP is intended as the implementation roadmap to improve performance of the government engine. Here, six National Key Result Areas (NKRAs) have been identified as critical: reducing crime; fighting corruption; transforming education; reducing poverty; improving rural infrastructure; and providing modern urban public transportation.

To me, as a matter of priority, early outcomes must be measured against the goal of zero tolerance of corruption and crime, and building a modern education system. To retain talent and to attract more, you need to transform the fight against corruption and crime in order to create liveable cities to act as “talent magnets” which are open, tolerant, safe and liberal with attractive living lifestyles.

A lesson from history
European renaissance started first in Italy in the 15th century. It rapidly spread to western and central Europe. Outcomes were centred on (a) absorption of knowledge (mathematics) from India and Arabia; (b) notion of good living; and (c) rapid transmission of ideas through the advent of printing. But undesirable social conditions (poverty, strife and corruption) deteriorated in the midst of a golden age of plenty. What's happening in East Asia mirrors the renaissance swift absorption of knowledge from the United States and Europe, focus of living well now, and widespread dissemination of ideas emanating from information and communications technology and the computer. The lesson is clear: transformational changes must be accompanied by greater social cohesion to avoid problems from the worsening of social maladies.

Important how the public feels'
The Prime Minister declared that success of the ambitious blueprint hinges on its effective implementation: “Execution needs to be flawless.” As I see it, discernable progress in four areas of priority concern to the rakyat and investors needs to come early enough to build confidence. They are corruption, crime, education and private enterprise.

It is not enough to show that in the first nine months of 2010, crime fell by 16% (but still have 132,355 unresolved reported cases) and street crimes fell 38% (18,299 unresolved reported cases) or that 648 people were arrested for corruption.

The public and investors (with ears on the ground) have to “feel” any improvement. Raw and biased statistics cannot tell the real story, and don't impress. At this time, it would appear the rakyat and investors don't “feel” any material improvement in the crime and corruption situation. That matters. But they don't rush to judgement. What they want to “feel” is for today to be better than yesterday, and tomorrow to be better than today; and come tomorrow, their expectations are fulfilled.

Incidents from personal experience reinforce this. Damansara Heights (DH) is rated as a top spot to work and live in greater KL. I stay there and my office is in nearby busy Plaza Damansara. Last week my car was parked three doors away from my office, and within 10 minutes (no joke) the car was gone stolen (sophisticated anti-theft gadgets didn't help).

Although a police pondok is nearby, I still had to go to report at a police station far away and took altogether three hours just to get a police statement taken. Many more steps still have to be made before I can file an insurance claim. That's another story. Because my car was a popular brand, we were told that four such cars were stolen in DH in recent days.

Not so long ago, my associated office in DH was broken into and computers were stolen. When friends and neighbours learnt of my predicament, I had an earful of equally unfortunate incidents nearby, including muggings, holdups and handbag snatching. The point is simple: crime remains a problem of serious concern, even in the most liveable area in KL. People and investors just don't “feel” safe whatever the data may show.

Human capital and innovation
Key to NEM's success is ready availability of quality human resources. At its foundation is the education system and how it can be made to deliver. So far, none of the SRIs, NKEAs and NKRAs points to confidence that this will be done comprehensively any time soon.

Time is of the essence. The competition for talent is getting more intense worldwide. Bear in mind it takes at least a generation to finish one cycle of “production”.

On math, reading and science tests given to 15-year-olds in 65 countries in 2009, Shanghai teenagers topped all three worldwide. Near the top were: Singapore, Taipei, Finland, South Korea and Japan. Malaysia was not on the radar screen. The United States was, once again, in the middle of the pack in science and reading, but below average in math.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (which runs these tests) attributed Shanghai's success to being a “leader in reform”, citing the city's near universal education system, its competitiveness in admissions, high level of student engagement, modern assessment system, ambitious curriculum, and a programme to assist weak schools. Until now, China has not even surfaced as a threat!

Human capital lies at the core of innovation and the taking of risks. Raising productivity requires a labour force of high calibre committed, motivated and skilled enough to drive transformational change based on excellence over the long term. Only private initiative can deliver this. Lest we forget, there is a big difference between incremental improvements and transformational change.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy says it best: Invention of the light bulb did not come about from incremental improvements to the candle. Make no mistake, transformational changes necessarily involve the taking of risks.

Tom Watson (founder of IBM) once said: If you want to succeed, raise your error rate. As I see it, a government that takes no risk in promoting innovation is one that is likely to make the bigger error of not trying hard enough. Getting private initiative back as the engine of growth is hard but critical.
Bold steps need to be taken. Incremental changes like getting government-linked companies (GLCs) to sell down equity, etc. won't get us there. Private investors need to get their Schumpeterian “animal spirits” fired up enough to squeeze out their entrepreneurial juices.

To be serious, the Government needs to get out of the business of doing business. GLCs and other federal and state enterprises are unfair competition. They only work to hold back the prompt re-emergence of real private initiative.

I should end with a quotation from my favourite poet, E.E. Cummings:

America makes prodigious mistakes,

America has colossal faults, but one thing cannot be denied:

America is always on the move.

She may be going to hell, of course, but at least she isn't standing still.

This is no time to stand still in undertaking bold transformational change. In the end, that's what statesmanship is all about.

Former banker Tan Sri Dr Lin See-Yan is a Harvard-educated economist and a British Chartered Scientist who now spends time writing, teaching and promoting the public interest.

malaysiakini: Malaysia's lost decade... by Josh Hong

Malaysia's lost decade

Josh Hong
malaysiakini: Dec 31, 2010, 2:24pm

After much dithering, I picked up the courage 10 years ago this month to return to Malaysia. Prior to that, I had spent a good 11 years in London, where the 'miserable comfort' was both real and surreal to me.

I knew I had to put up with some serious miseries in Kuala Lumpur: horrible traffic congestion, notoriously disorganised public transport, and an economic 'miracle' that had been brought to its knees by the financial crisis in the late 1990s.

But there were hopes too. The general elections in November 1999 had dealt a severe blow to Mahathir Mohamad's autocratic and megalomaniac style of government, while a new political course was struggling to make its voice heard, one that was no longer premised on race and the feudalistic loyalty that it demanded, but on one's civic duties as a dignified citizen that respect the rule of law, fair play and justice.

In other words, I wanted to see the end of the Mahathir regime, which was plain racist, arbitrary and corrupt to the core, and see it replaced with an alternative that truly championed the people's causes. Ten years on, my initial hopes have largely evaporated.

Since Mahathir's 'retirement' in late 2003, we have had two more prime ministers, but neither of them has grasped the opportunity to reform the country root and branch.

If anything, political culture in the country has only gone from bad to worse. Malaysian politics is divisive; it always has been. But it was the power-crazy Mahathir whose 22 years of rule that had sharpened the religious, ethnic and class differences. Every time when his power was threatened, Mahathir showed no qualms of resorting to racist and communal politics for survival.

Throughout the last decade, there was one word that made the most frequent appearance in the Malay press: pengkhianat (either of bangsa or Negara). 

 

Whenever Umno is pressed against the wall, the party leadership is quick to accuse its detractor of being an ingrate or a running dog to a foreign power. This is a tried and tested formula, engendered by Mahathir and perfected by his successors. Their latest tactic is to hide behind the Malay rulers, oblivious to the fact that national/religious/racial is no substitute for our dignity as individuals who cherish freedom.

Mahathir brought in Anwar Ibrahim in 1982 to shore up Umno's Islamic 'credentials', and did not hesitate to demonise PAS throughout the 1980s and the 1990s. Extremism begets extremism, and one would only expect the opponents to fight back with more vigour and determination, hence the increasingly conservative religious climate across the Peninsula. Soon, Sabah and Sarawak will succumb to it if Umno has its way.

The aftermath of pandering PMs

Both Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Najib Abdul Razak have failed to respond to this. Instead of putting the nation (or are we a nation in its classical sense?) back on the secular track as envisioned by the Federal Constitution, Mahathir's successors have only managed to pander further to the religionists, albeit in a different way.

Religious authorities are now emboldened to threaten members of the public, Muslims and non-Muslims alike. People like Azwan Ismail risk becoming social outcasts unless they keep their true identity hidden. Meanwhile, removing non-Islamic symbols is an unwritten requirement if one desires the prime minister to grace one's religious occasion.

In the event of lack of public support and state protection, I would suggest Azwan to emigrate. Facing threat from naked religious power and confronted with an indifferent society, emigration is always the safest bet.

This is not a time to engage in scholarly or religious debate over the issue of sexuality when one's life is at risk. No fiddling when the weak minorities are being cursed, please.

As for non-Muslim bodies, there is one simple way to save yourselves the dilemma of having to avoid using religious signage: stop inviting politicians for religious functions.

After all, it is not the presence of the prime minister that saves one's soul. If one insists on such feudal practice, then be prepared to live with the humiliation and stop complaining.

At the societal level, ethnic divisions have only become more visible. Every single issue can conveniently become tinged with racial or religious colour, and the public's attention is easily shifted. Despite the March 2008 political tsunami, people on the street now only feel more alienated from each other.

Corruption maggots' endless feast
Yes, Teoh Beng Hock died a tragic death, and it is only right that all conscientious Malaysians are aggrieved by it.

But there are many more innocent deaths too, such as that of Gunasegaran and Aminulrasyid Amzah, and it is time that we have a concerted and nationwide effort to bring justice to their bereaved families. Sadly, cross-ethnic solidarity remains slow in coming.

Finally, none of our leaders has demonstrated the actual will to root out corruption and overhaul our economic structure. The appointment of Mohd Isa Samad, the tainted former menteri besar of Negri Sembilan, as Felda chairman is the latest case in point.

Furthermore, our economy remains anchored in the fraternity between tycoons (predominantly Chinese but increasingly multiracial) and the ruling elite. The 'loveable rich' pledge their allegiance to Umnoputras in return for economic favours, required by the 'political and economic architecture to bribe as well as to lobby', as described by Joe Studwell in Asian Godfathers.


The end result is the rapidly widening inter and intra ethnic income gap evidenced by the mushrooming of modern condos and service apartments in Malaysian cities that cater mostly to the super-rich. Liew Kee Sin of S P Setia Bhd., a top property developer, has indeed thrived under the New Economic Policy, but he does not speak for the majority of Malaysians who merely eke out a living.

Still, it is nearly an insurmountable task to make this raw reality plain to the general public (the Malays especially) because of Umno's media manipulation and its camouflaging of class dominance with ethno-populism.

Tony Benn, a British Labour veteran and a staunch socialist, attributed Britain's social malaise in the 1980s to Margaret Thatcher's philosophy that measured 'the price of everything and the value of nothing'. Listen to his excellent speech in Parliament, and one will be astounded to know how much the issues elaborated by Benn are relevant to Malaysia's lost decade.

What would become of Malaysia in the next decade to come? I certainly hope I will live long enough to see it. Happy New Year!

CPI Commentary: The Islamisation of Malaysia (Pt II)... by Michael D. Barr & Anantha Raman Govindasamy

The Islamisation of Malaysia: religious nationalism in the service of ethnonationalism 2

Commentary

Written by Michael D. Barr & Anantha Raman Govindasamy

Friday, 31 December 2010 00:00

Islamisation of education Let us start our study of the education system, not in education proper, but at an educational display in Malaysia’s Museum of National History as described by Virginia Hooker (2003: 4-6) in the opening pages of her A Short History of Malaysia. The most significant feature of this display for our study is that it represented the history of Malaysia as beginning with the coming of Islam. The peninsula’s pre-Islamic history was not denied, but it was effectively discarded. For instance, the Srivijaya Empire, which ruled both the peninsula and what is now East Malaysia from the seventh to the twelfth centuries, was only admitted to have left behind historical remains that show its ‘influence’ (Hooker 2003: 5). This ‘influence’ was put into sharp relief by a nearby map with flashing lights showing the spread of Islam throughout South-East Asia, and a replica of what Hooker describes as ‘the famous Terengganu Stone’ (Hooker 2008: 5). This archaeological artefact is a stone pillar dating from the early fourteenth century, which uses Jawi script (Malay written in Arabic script) to say that Islam was at that time already the local religion of the peninsula. Hooker (2003: 5) tells us that ‘the Terengganu Stone is the earliest record of the presence of Islam on the Peninsula and is cited [in the museum display] as evidence that Malaysia has one of the oldest links with Islam in Southeast Asia.’ Hooker was making the point that the display was presenting a skewed, Islamised version of Malaysian history that overplayed the place of Islam in the peninsula’s history, but as distorted as the Museum’s display might have been, it was much less Islamised than what has been taught to secondary school students in their history lessons since 2003. In that year, a new history syllabus and a new series of history textbooks were introduced in all secondary schools across Malaysia. The only significant point of difference between the old and the new versions was in the Form 4 syllabus and textbook.15 Form 4 is the year when schools teach the history of civilisations under the title ‘World Civilisations’, but since 2003 this has not so much been a course in ‘World Civilisations’ as a course in ‘Islamic Civilisation’. The old textbook, which was used until 2002, was titled Sejarah Peradaban Dunia: Tingkatan 4 (World Civilisation History: Form 4) (Ministry of Education Malaysia 1999), and was a broad civilisational history of the world. It contained six chapters titled (in English translation): ‘Early Human Civilisation’, ‘Islam Changed Human Civilisation’, ‘The Transition of the European Society and Its Impact’, ‘Revolution and New Phase of Human History’, ‘Western Imperialism and Local Reactions’, and ‘Moving towards International Cooperation’.16 In this textbook, Islamic history was presented conceptually as having a central place in world history as the religion that ‘changed civilisation’ by contributing to an improvement in world civilisation, but this conceptual centrality was not allowed to overwhelm the syllabus: it was studied in only one chapter out of six, with other chapters studying, for instance, Indian, Chinese and European civilisations. The syllabus also discussed in detail the pre-Islamic period in South-East Asia, with much emphasis on Hindu-Buddhist influence in the Malay world. In the revised version, however, Islamic history was given an unprecedented prominence, occupying fully half of the book. This textbook, titled prosaically Sejarah Tingkatan 4 Buku Teks (Form 4 History Textbook) (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002a), consists of ten chapters, five of which focus on Islamic history: ‘Islamic Civilisation and Its Contribution in Mecca’, ‘Islamic State in Medina’, ‘The Formation of Islamic Government and Its Contribution’, ‘Islam in South-East Asia’, and ‘Islamic Reform and Its Influence in Malaysia before the Arrival of the Colonial Powers’. The other five chapters survey the early development of civilisation per se: Indian and Chinese influence in South- East Asia (in Chapters 1-3), ‘Developments in Europe’ (Chapter 9) and ‘The British Policy and Its Impact on the National Economy’ (Chapter 10). The chapter on the British in Malaysia sits incongruously in a book on civilisational history, but its presence, along with Chapter 8 (‘Islamic Reform and Its Influence in Malaysia before the Arrival of the Colonial Powers’) serves to articulate the rest of the book very firmly into the history of Malaysia. As Milner noted in his brief analysis of this textbook: Although highlighting ‘Islamic Civilisation’, the book is in fact written from the stand point of Malay civilization and Malaysia. . . . Although the potential of a rigorously Islamist perspective . . . is acknowledged, the book manoeuvres back in its final chapter to the task of foregrounding Malays and Malaysia [and] the final sentence of the book asserts the continuing importance of the Malay people and the Malay language (Milner 2005: 153). Indeed, the final two chapters of the book provide a direct link between the civilisational history studied in Form 4 and the Form 5 syllabus, which is a more traditional celebration of Malay nationalism, with barely a mention of Chinese or Indians (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002b). The tight pathway from religious nationalism in Form 4 history to ethnic nationalism in Form 5 should come as no surprise. It provides evidence to support the argument being made in this article that Islamic identity is being kept subservient to Malay identity in official discourses and is being used by the governing Malay elites to bolster the conventional Malay-centric nationformation mythology, especially since history textbooks have always reflected official state-driven agendas of nation-building, emphasising the primary importance of an almost egalitarian multiculturalism during Tunku Abdul Rahman’s rule before 1969 (Milner 2005: 132-3), a more Malay-centric multiculturalism after 1971 when Tun Abdul Razak was prime minister, and promoting the strong Malay-centric national identity of 1987 while Anwar Ibrahim was Minister for Education (Abdul Rahman Haji Ismail and Badriyah Haji Salleh 2003: 184-6). The output of this overtly Islamic textbook was therefore shocking to minority political leaders (Lim 2003) and prompted debates in Parliament because it was recognised that it was not the result of a whim on the part of the authors, but part of a systemic program. The direction of the content of this textbook was, in fact, determined at the time the authors were appointed. Fully half of the co-authors (two out of four) are Islamic scholars: Mohammad Bukhari bin Ahmad and Rosnanaini binti Sulaiman, who trained in Islamic civilisation and Islamic education, respectively. Mohammad Bukhari bin Ahmad obtained his PhD from the University of California and also studied at Ferdowsi University (Mashhad), Tehran University in Iran and Bosphorus University in Turkey. His scholarly writing includes Qasidahs in Honor of the Prophet (1983) and The Ocean of Unity (1993). Rosnanaini binti Sulaiman is a specialist in Islamic history and education, and has been teaching Islamic history for two decades. Currently, she is affiliated to the Maktab Perguruan Perempuan Malayu (Malay Women’s Teachers’ Training College) in Melaka.17 With half the authors Islamic scholars, no one should be surprised if half the textbook is on Islamic civilisation. The decision to appoint this panel of authors must have been taken at a high level in the Ministry of Education, suggesting that even though we are talking about only one year of the history syllabus, this was part of a broader program of Islamisation. If confirmation of the presence of this broader program is needed, it could be found in a 2008 statement by Datuk Alimuddin Mohd Dom, the Director General of Education for Malaysia, when he foreshadowed the systematic promotion of Islam Hadhari in the school curriculum (New Straits Times Online 2008), a program that is, in fact, an effort to create an image of a ‘big Malaysia’ that spiritually, if not actually, traces its roots back to the Prophet Muhammad in seventh-century Mecca. If we look at the Sejarah Tingkatan 4 Buku Teks (Form 4 History Textbook), it is, in fact, an exemplary manifestation of Islam Hadhari. Tour of a textbook Yet, despite the imposition of this religious nationalist construction on Malaysia’s history syllabus, it is still ostensibly directed towards enhancing Malaysian unity, just as the old syllabus had been (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2000: 3, 2002c: 3). The 2005 National Education Policy has even elevated the teaching of history per se to the status of a ‘core subject at secondary school’, with the specific intention of using it in the promotion of ‘National Unity’ (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2005c: 40). The approach of the 2003 Form 4 textbook makes it clear that this ‘unity’ is to be built around the centrepiece of Islam. Even before opening the book, the front cover confronts us with a picture of the same Terengganu Stone that featured in Hooker’s account of the Museum of National History’s display, set against a background that is dominated by pictures of Islamic architecture. Once this civilisational history book is open, we find that the opening three chapters present a superficial overview of ancient civilisations, with accounts of the Mesopotamian, Roman, Greek, Mauryan, Gupta and Chinese empires interspersed amongst each other, and rarely an entire page devoted exclusively to a single subject (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002a: 1-64). Islamic civilisation is absent from these chapters, probably because it cannot be easily construed as being ancient, but Islam itself is nevertheless treated in the final three pages of Chapter 2, which offer a cursory survey of world religions. These few pages are very significant in our study, consisting of less than a page each for Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Confucianism and Taoism (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002a: 65-8). The importance of this feature is that it is the last mention of Confucianism and Taoism in the book, and consideration of Hinduism, Buddhism and Christianity is thereafter restricted to contextual references in Chapter 3 (on ‘Ancient South-East Asian Civilisations’) and Chapter 9 (on ‘Developments in Europe’) (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002a: 71-97, 214-42). Turn to Chapter 4, however, and the reader faces an entire chapter just on the development of Islam in Mecca-before it even took the 200-mile journey to Medina (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002a: 98-116). It is obvious that this marks the beginning of a radically different approach, but the full significance becomes apparent only when we read the instructions to teachers conveyed in the Ministry of Education syllabus about the teaching of this chapter. The purpose of this chapter, teachers are told, is to understand the development of the ummah and the importance of leadership for its well-being (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002c: 31). The word ummah is an exclusively Muslim term, referring to the ‘community of believers’ and its unqualified use in the context of Chapter 4 already carries the clear message that the Muslim perspective is being privileged in this history. The message is reinforced by the stated purpose of the following chapter, which is to convey the message that ‘Muslim solidarity strengthens national prosperity’ (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002c: 35). This is an explicit claim by the Malaysian ummah to the centre stage of Malaysian society: claiming that prosperity for the rest of the country must be built around the solidarity of the Muslim centre. Yet, after two chapters, this coverage of Islamic civilisation still has not progressed beyond the lifetime of the Prophet or the borders of the Middle East. Students still have ahead of them two more chapters in which they follow Islam to Europe and Asia, and, in Chapter 8, they finally get to read of Islam being established in Malaysia (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002a: ch. 6-8). This chapter is the grand denouement of the arc of chapters on Islam: the faith has arrived in Malaysia and is accepted by the Malays, beginning in Melaka and working through the peninsula. The word ummah is never used in this chapter, but the anachronistic term masyarakyat Melayu (‘Malay community’) is used to great effect.18 After four chapters of prelude, there is no need to make explicit the assumptions of the centrality of Islam in the national history. It is nevertheless made explicit in the syllabus, which speaks at one point of the religious education system as ‘our national heritage’, and instructs teachers to impart an appreciation of the current national education system on the basis of this heritage (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2002c: 49). History is a compulsory subject, and all children passing through the education system are examined in it externally when they sit for the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (Malaysian Examination Certificate) at the end of Form 5. The imposition of an Islamic metanarrative at this point can be neither accidental nor incidental. It must be regarded as a deliberate attempt to impose a new form of identity on both the Muslim and non-Muslim children. This conclusion becomes even more pointed if we look beyond the teaching of history, and consider that the Islamisation process has permeated the entire schooling experience for those students who attend national schools. At this level, there is no need to look very far to find an official statement of intent, since as recently as 2007 then Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak declared explicitly ‘the government’s aspiration to empower Islamic education in the country’ (New Straits Times 2007b). To this end, the government is not only providing compulsory Islamic religious education for Muslims, but is also in the process of introducing the Arabic language in primary and secondary schools as a compulsory subject for Muslims and as an option for non-Muslims (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2005c: 16-7). These programs, along with training in Jawi script, Quranic recitation and Fardhu Ain (‘Islam’s obligatory duties’), are being taught making full use of information and communication technologies through a new RM150 million program that was intended to build 1666 special teaching laboratories in national primary schools across the country (Ministry of Education Malaysia 2005c: 17; New Straits Times 2007b). With a program like this in train, it is no wonder that the Form 4 history syllabus asks teachers to present the traditional system of Islamic schools as part of the national heritage: by the time the upgrade is finished, the national school system will have become a twenty-first-century version of the old eighteenth-century madrasah, except, of course, for the increasingly awkward presence of non-Muslim children. These are very contemporary initiatives, but they have not appeared in isolation. Since the early 1980s, national schools have become increasingly Islamic in their ambiance and ethos, under the explicit direction of successive prime ministers and ministers of education. Islamic education is now compulsory for all Muslim children in national schools with five or more Muslim pupils (down from the previous threshold of 15) (Government of Malaysia 1985: 48; Ministry of Education Malaysia 2005c: 16-7), and courts have confirmed that no consideration will be given for personal or parental wishes regarding the element of compulsion (New Straits Times 2007a). The general ambiance is now so thoroughly Islamic that even some Malay parents are keeping their children out of the national schools because so many of them are, in the words of one such parent, ‘more like Islamic religious schools’ (New Straits Times 2007c). According to this parent, some schools hold Muslim prayers during assemblies, while others refuse to organise school concerts for fear it might be un-Islamic to make music. At the moment, non-Muslims are exempt from compulsory attendance at Islamic and Islam-related classes-and, indeed, non-Muslim children cannot attend an Islamic class without the written permission of their parents-but there are grounds to be concerned that this could change. It is suggestive that in a 2003 seminar on ‘Education and Religion’, the President of the Malaysian Muslim Lawyers Association felt confident putting the view that Muslims and non- Muslims should be taught ‘the same moral values’ and that Islamic classes be opened to non-Muslims as an option, ‘just as you would choose another language as a subject because you would like to learn about it’ (Zaitoon 2005: 112-3). The significance of this episode is not that this was a particularly strong indication of forthcoming change-seven years later the suggested reform has not been introduced-but simply that this leading Muslim professional felt that this was an appropriate suggestion to put on the table and it was published in a book coedited by someone (Abdul Razak Baginda) who was closely identified with then Deputy Prime Minister (and now Prime Minister) Najib. Even more worrying is the fact that this suggestion is very much in the spirit of a series of specific initiatives taken by former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohammad over the The Islamisation of Malaysia 1980s and 1990s designed to ‘Islamise’ education. In 1982, Dr Mahathir tried to introduce a new tertiary subject on Islamic civilisation and make it compulsory for all university students in Malaysian universities. He repeated the exercise in 1997, once again trying to make it compulsory for all students. Both moves faced political backlashes from non-Muslims and both were watered down-the 1982 course was quickly made optional for non-Muslims (Mauzy and Milne 1983-4: 640-1) and the 1997 course was superficially broadened to include a notional coverage of Indian and Chinese civilisations (Milne and Mauzy 1999: 89-90)-but the direction and spirit of the moves is clear. It is, in fact, the direction and spirit of the whole religious nationalist project in Malaysia-placing Islam and the Muslim community at the centre and making it very clear to the minorities that their place in society is in a position of subordination. This is not the full story of Islamisation, nor does it give an adequate account of some of the more aggressive or oppressive aspects. Somemention has been made in passing of custody battles, and the destruction of non-Muslim places of worship, but this does not convey the full flavour: systematic and violent destruction of Hindu temples (Farish 2008); the current import and publishing ban on the Christian Bible and any Christian use of the word ‘Allah’ as Malay for God (AFP 2009a, b; New Straits Times 2009); and the episodes of bodysnatching as Syariah courts posthumously declare recently deceased people to have secretly converted to Islam and then insist on burial with Muslim rites (Associated Press 2006). These episodes and many others like them represent the sharp thorns of Islamisation, but they are not central to the program. Barr had the chance to ask a fairly senior member of the Malaysian elite about these incidents in early 2008 and found him apologetic, explaining these actions as the result of a disconnection between Malaysia’s modern elite and its more backward grassroots: either autonomous actions by overenthusiastic local authorities or highlevel political responses to grass-roots expectations. Although his response was highly political in itself, there is probably a lot of truth in it. After all, these actions are not sensible or prudent, and it is difficult to see much point in most of them. If we take this explanation at close to face value, we should relegate the more extreme of these actions to the periphery of our analysis, even though they will be at the front of the minds of victims and potential victims.  The significance of our study of developments in the education system is precisely that these measures cannot be dismissed as peripheral. They were planned years in advance and administered from the highest levels of government. Furthermore, they are undoubtedly one set of drivers that are feeding the grass-roots reactions that were bemoaned by Barr’s confidant.   Conclusion What our study of the education reforms reveals is not an assimilation program designed to assimilate people into Islam, let alone into ‘Malayness’, but a systematic attempt to assimilate non-Malays and non-Muslims into Malaysian society on terms dictated by the hegemonic core national grouping: Malay- Muslims. The religious nationalism of Malay-centric Islam feeds directly and explicitly into traditional Malay nationalism, reinforcing the self-confidence and sense of entitlement of the Malay-Muslim community, and exaggerating the message to non-Malays (and especially to the Chinese and Indians) that they are not core participants in the Malaysian nation. Neither part of the ummah nor the Malay masyarakat, they are subordinate, vulnerable and marginalised in their own country, yet expected to contribute to the Malaysian national project from the margins. Part I of this paper appeared yesterday. It was first published in the Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol.64, No.3 of June 2010. ************************* Notes: 15. The history textbooks for Forms 1 to 3 are designed to provide a basic overview of Malaysian history. They have a significant bias towards Malay nationalism but are free of any Islamist bias (see Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2004, 2005a, b). 16. All translations are by Anantha Raman Govindasamy. 17. The information about the authors is derived directly from the back cover of the Sejarah Tingkatan 4 Buku Teks (Form 4 History Textbook). 18. The use of the term masyarakat (‘community’) in this context is anachronistic because there was no conception of a Malay community until the twentieth century. See extensive discussions on this matter by several contributors to Barnard (2004). _____________________________________________ References: Abdul Rahman Haji Ismail and Badriyah Haji Salleh, 2003. ‘History through the eyes of Malays: changing perspectives of Malaysia’s past’, in Abu Talib Ahmad and Tan Liok Ee (eds), New terrains in Southeast Asian history (Athens: Ohio University Press), pp. 168-98. AFP (Agence France-Presse), 2009a. ‘Catholic paper defies Malaysian government ban on ‘‘Allah’’ ’, 20 January. AFP (Agence France-Presse), 2009b. ‘Malaysia to reinstate ‘‘Allah’’ ban for Catholic paper: report’, 1 March. Amrita Malhi, 2003. ‘The PAS-BN conflict in the 1990s: Islamism and modernity’, in Virginia Hooker and Norani Othman (eds), Malaysia: Islam, society and politics (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies), pp. 236-65. Andaya, Leonard Y., 2004. ‘The search for the ‘‘origins’’ of Melayu’, in Timothy P. Barnard (ed.), Contesting Malayness: Malay identity across boundaries (Singapore: Singapore University Press), pp. 56-75. Associated Press, 2006. ‘Malaysia’s racial harmony shaken by dispute over Everest hero’s faith’, 1 January. Barnard, Timothy P. (ed.), 2004. Contesting Malayness: Malay identity across boundaries (Singapore: Singapore University Press). Barnard, Timothy and Jan van der Putten, 2008. ‘Malay cosmopolitan activism in post-war Singapore’, in Michael D. Barr and Carl A. Trocki (eds), Paths not taken: political pluralism in post-war Singapore (Singapore: National University of Singapore Press), pp. 132-53. Barr, Michael D., 2002. Cultural politics and Asian values: the tepid war (London: Routledge). Barr, Michael D. and Zlatko Skrbis?, 2008. Constructing Singapore: elitism, ethnicity and the nation-building project (Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies). BBC News, 2005. ‘Malaysia to curb ‘‘moral policing’’ ’, 26 March, world/asia-pacific/4383911.stm>. Bernama Daily Malaysian News, 2004. ‘Shamala-Ridzwan’s custody case raises constitutional issues’, 23 June. Camroux, David, 1996. State response to Islamic resurgence in Malaysia: accommodation, co-option, and confrontation’, Asian Survey, 36(9): 852-68. Chandra, Muzaffar, 1987. Islamic resurgence in Malaysia (Petaling Jaya: Penerbit Faja, 1987). Cheah Boon Kheng, 2002. Malaysia: the making of a nation (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies). Cheah Boon Kheng, 2005. ‘Ethnicity in the making of Malaysia’, in Wang Gungwu (ed.), Nationbuilding: five Southeast Asian histories (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies), pp. 91-115. Chong, Terence, 2006. ‘The emerging politics of Islam Hadhari’, in Saw Swee-Hock and K. Kesavapany (eds), Malaysia: recent trends and challenges (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies). Daniel, Lynn (ed.), 2006. The Far East and Australasia 2007 (London: Routledge), Thirty-eighth edition. Department of Islamic Development Malaysia, 2005. Islam Hadhari: an explanation (Putrajaya: Department of Islamic Development Malaysia). DeVotta, Neil, 2007. Sinhalese Buddhist nationalist ideology: implications for politics and conflict resolution in Sri Lanka (Washington, DC: East-West Center). Farish A. Noor, 2003. ‘The localization of Islamist discourse in the Tafsir of Tuan Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Murshid’ul Am of PAS’, in Virginia Hooker and Norani Othman (eds), Malaysia: Islam, society and politics (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies), pp. 195-235. Farish A. Noor, 2008.The Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF) of Malaysia: communitarianism across borders?, Working Paper No. 163 (Singapore: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies). Frith, Tabitha, 2000. ‘Ethno-religious identity and urban Malays in Malaysia’, Asian Ethnicity, 1(2): 117-29. Government of Malaysia, 1985. Report of the Cabinet Committee to review the implementation of educational policy (Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Education). Hamayotsu, Kikue, 2003. ‘Politics of Syariah reform: the making of the state religio-legal apparatus’, in Virginia Hooker and Norani Othman (eds), Malaysia: Islam, society and politics (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies), 55-79. Harper, T. N., 2001. The end of empire and the making of Malay (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Hng Hung Yong, 1998. CEO Malaysia: strategy in nation-building (Subang Jaya: Pelanduk). Hooker, Virginia Matheson, 2003. A short history of Malaysia: linking East and West (Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin). Hooker, Virginia Matheson, 2004. ‘Reconfiguring Malay and Islam in contemporary Malaysia’, in Timothy P. Barnard (ed.), Contesting Malayness: Malay identity across boundaries (Singapore: Singapore University Press), pp. 149-67. Kahn, Joel S., 2006. Other Malays: nationalism and cosmopolitanism in the modern Malay world (Singapore and Copenhagen: National University of Singapore Press and Nordic Institute of Asian Studies in association with the Australian Studies Association of Australia). King, Ross, 2008. Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya: negotiating urban space in Malaysia (Singapore and Copenhagen: National University of Singapore Press and Nordic Institute of Asian Studies in association with the Australian Studies Association of Australia). Lee, Raymond, 1988. Patterns of religious tension in Malaysia’, Asian Survey, 28(4): 400-18. Lim Kit Siang, 2003. ‘Defend secular Malaysia’, Speech at the 46th National Day Celebration, Tanjong Parliamentary Constituency, 31 August, lks2563.htm> (accessed 21 January 2008). Lukman Thaib, 2005. Islamic political representation in Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press). Mahathir Mohamad, 2000. Islam and the Muslim ummah: selected speeches of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Prime Minister of Malaysia, Hashim Makaruddin (ed.) (Subang Jaya: Pelanduk). Malaysiakini, 2006a. ‘Ministers want protection for religious minorities’, 20 January, . Malaysiakini, 2006b. ‘Ministers back down, memo withdrawn’, 21 January, com/news/46065>. Malaysian Federal Constitution, 2006. (Putrajaya: Government Press). Martinez, Patricia A., 2001. ‘The Islamic state or the state of Islam in Malaysia’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, 23(3): 474-503. Mauzy, Diane K. and R. S. Milne, 1983-4. ‘The Mahathir administration in Malaysia: discipline through Islam’, Pacific Affairs, 56(4): 617-48. Means, Gordon P., 1969. The role of Islam in the political development of Malaysia’, Comparative Politics, 1(2): 264-84. Milne, R. S. and Diane K. Mauzy, 1999. Malaysian politics under Mahathir (London: Routledge). Milner, Anthony, 1982. Kerajaan: Malay political culture on the eve of colonial rule (Tucson: University of Arizona Press for the Association for Asian Studies). Milner, Anthony, 2002. The invention of politics in colonial Malaya (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Milner, Anthony, 2005. ‘Historians writing nations: Malaysian contests’, in Wang Gungwu (ed.), Nation-building: five Southeast Asian histories (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies), pp. 117-61. Milner, Anthony, 2008. The Malays (Chichester: Wiley). Ministry of Education Malaysia, 1999. Sejarah Peradaban Dunia: Tingkatan 4 [World civilisation history: Form 4] (Kuala Lumpur: Institute of Language and Literature). Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2000. Sukatan Pelajaran Sejarah, Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah [History syllabus itemisation, integrated secondary school curriculum] (Putrajaya: Malaysia Centre for Curriculum Development, Ministry of Education Malaysia). Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2002a. Sejarah Tingkatan 4 Buku Teks [Form 4 history textbook] (Kuala Lumpur: Institute of Language and Literature). Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2002b. Sejarah Tingkatan 5 Buku Teks [Form 5 history textbook] (Kuala Lumpur: Institute of Language and Literature). Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2002c. Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Tingkatan 4, Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah [Form 4 history syllabus itemisation, integrated secondary school curriculum] (Putrajaya: Malaysia Centre for Curriculum Development, Ministry of Education Malaysia). Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2004. Sejarah Tingkatan 1 Buku Teks [Form 1 history textbook] (Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Institute of Language and Literature). Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2005a. Sejarah Tingkatan 2 Buku Teks [Form 2 history textbook] (Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Institute of Language and Literature) Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2005b. Sejarah Tingkatan 3 Buku Teks [Form 3 history textbook] (Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka, Institute of Language and Literature). Ministry of Education Malaysia, 2005c. The national education policy: pre-school to postsecondary level (Putrajaya: Ministry of Education Malaysia). Mohamed Aslam Haneef, 2005. ‘The development and impact of Islamic economic institutions: the Malaysian experience’, in K.S. Nathan and Mohammad Hashim Kamali (eds), Islam in Southeast Asia: political, social and strategic challenges for the 21st century (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies), pp. 82-99. Mutalib, Hussin, 1993. Islam in Malaysia: from revivalism to Islamic state? (Singapore: Singapore University Press). Mutalib, Hussin, 2007. ‘Religious diversity and pluralism in Southeast Asian Islam: the experience of Malaysia and Singapore’, in K.S. Nathan (ed.), Religious pluralism in democratic societies: challenges and prospects for Southeast Asia, Europe, and the United States in the new millennium (Singapore and Kuala Lumpur: Konrad Adenauer Foundation and Malaysian Association for American Studies), pp. 35-60. Nagata, Judith, 1980. ‘Religious, ideological and social change: the Islamic revival in Malaysia’, Pacific Affairs, 53(3): 405-39. New Straits Times, 2003. ‘Custody turmoil’, 15 September. New Straits Times, 2007a. ‘Muslim pupils must take ‘‘core subject’’ ’, 30 March. New Straits Times, 2007b. ‘Institute for research in Islamic education’, 26 September. New Straits Times, 2007c. ‘Why parents don’t opt for national schools’, 19 October. New Straits Times, 2009. ‘Syed Hamid warns the ‘‘Herald’’ ’, 22 January. New Straits Times Online, 2008. ‘Guidebook on Islam Hadhari for school’, 18 February, www.nst.com.my>. Noordin Sopiee, Mohamed, 1974. From Malayan union to Singapore separation: political unification in the Malaysia region, 1945-65 (Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press). Pardesi, Manjeet S. and Jennifer L. Oetken, 2008. ‘Secularism, democracy, and Hindu nationalism in India’, Asian Security, 4(1): 23-40. Rahim, Lily Zubaidah, 2009. Singapore in the Malay world: building and breaching regional bridges (London: Routledge). Riddell, Peter G., 2005. ‘Islamization, civil society and religious minorities in Malaysia’, in K.S. Nathan and Mohammad Hashim Kamali (eds), Islam in Southeast Asia (Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies), pp. 162-90. Roff, William R., 1994. The origins of Malay nationalism (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press), Second edition. Shad Saleem Faruqi, n.d. [No title], in Abdul Razak Baginda and Peter Schier (eds), Is Malaysia an Islamic state? Secularism and theocracy: a study of the Malaysian constitution (Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Strategic Research Centre and Konrad Adenauer Foundation, seminar proceedings 2002), pp. 13-75. Shamsul, A.B., 2004. ‘A history of an identity, and identity of a history: the idea and practice of ‘‘Malayness’’ in Malaysia reconsidered’, in Timothy P. Barnard (ed.), Contesting Malayness: Malay identity across boundaries (Singapore: Singapore University Press), pp. 135-48. Straits Times, 1951a. ‘Malays let down: Onn’, 26 August. Straits Times, 1951b. ‘Onn dominates meeting. But silence was profound’, 27 August. Straits Times, 1961. ‘Tengku hits at a British built barrier in Borheo’, 24 July. Straits Times, 2006. ‘Couple in court over son’s conversion to Islam’, 22 September. Straits Times, 2009. ‘Conversion case puts gov’ts promise to test’, 27 April. Willford, Andrew C., 2007. Cage of freedom: Tamil identity and the ethnic fetish in Malaysia (Singapore: National University of Singapore Press). Zaitoon Othman, 2005. ‘Zaitoon Othman’, in Abdul Razak Baginda and Peter Schier (eds), Education in multicultural societies: perspectives on education in Malaysia (London: ASEAN Academic Press).