Mahathir, the Malays and Race
Alan Sipress wrote in the Washington Post: Publicly, Mahathir has said
his chief regret has been his failure to hoist the Malay majority to
the same level as the country's non-Malays, in particular the Chinese.
He has overseen years of affirmative action that steered public
contracts and other benefits to Malays. This has enriched an elite close
to the ruling party. But many Malays feel bypassed. "The great irony is
that this great Malay nationalist wanted to lift up the Malay people by
their bootstraps to new heights and now these very same people can't
wait to see the back of him," said Edmund Terence Gomez, a social
analyst at the University of Malaya. [Source: Alan Sipress, Washington
Post, October 27, 2003]
Ian Buruma wrote in The New Yorker: “Mahathir,
whose father had some Indian ancestry, had always been obsessed with
race, and the modern era of Malaysian politics can be traced to his book
“The Malay Dilemma,” published in 1970, a decade before he came to
power. It is a distillation of the kind of social Darwinism imbibed by
Southeast Asians of Dr Mahathir’s cohort through their colonial
education. The Malay race, the book argues, couldn’t compete with the
Chinese for genetic reasons. Whereas the Chinese had been hardened over
the centuries by harsh climates and fierce competition, the Malays were a
lazy breed, fattened by an abundance of food under the tropical sun.
Unfettered competition with the Chinese “would subject the Malays to the
primitive laws that enable only the fittest to survive,” Dr Mahathir
warned his fellow-nationals. “If this is done it would perhaps be
possible to breed a hardy and resourceful race capable of competing
against all comers. Unfortunately, we do not have four thousand years to
play around with.” [Source: Ian Buruma, The New Yorker, May 15, 2009
>>>]
“And so the Malays had to be protected by
systematic affirmative action: awarded top positions and mandatory
ownership of business enterprises, along with preferential treatment in
public schools, universities, the armed forces, the police and the
government bureaucracy. Otherwise the “immigrants,” as the ruling party
still calls the Chinese and the Indians, would take over. “The Malay
Dilemma” was immediately banned for being divisive. The country was
still reeling from the race riots of 1969, when, after a predominantly
Chinese party enjoyed an election victory, hundreds of Chinese were
attacked by Malays. Killings led to counter-killings. Such intergroup
tensions were hardly new: ever since Britain left its former colony,
political parties have used ethnic resentments to gain votes, while PAS
sought to turn Malaysia into an Islamic state. Presiding over this
fraught mosaic of ethnic and religious politics throughout the
nineteen-sixties was the aristocratic Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman
“” until, in the fall of 1970, he was brought down by the brand of Malay
nationalism advocated in Dr Mahathir’s book.” >>>
Corruption Under Mahathir
Although Mahathir championed himself as a corruption fighter and friend
of the poor, the gap between rich and poor and cronyism rose under his
watch. He awarded contacts for some of Malaysia’s biggest multibillion
dollar projects to his friends and friends of his ministers. Still,
these friends had to perform. If they didn’t they were purged.
In a typical case, a company owned Mahathir’s close
friend Syed Mokhtar Albukhary, was awarded the contract to bought the a
new $3.8 billion railroad across peninsular Malaysia. The contract was
awarded without any competitive bidding and previous deals made with
China and India were canceled.
Mahathir Mohamad claimed he was not corrupt. He
took only a $4,000 a year salary and turned over gifts and cars given to
him to the state museum on the island of Langkawi. He told Newsweek
that whenever the topic of his children come up at meetings he excuses
himself. “They’re not idiots, they are doing well in business,” he said.
In 2001, Mahathir’s son Mokhzani told Newsweek that he was probably
worth about $60 million. A good chunk if his money came from a hospital
supply contract for the southern provinces o Malaysia.
Malaysian Tycoon Claims Mahathir Forced Him to Buy Malaysian Airlines
In July 2006, an ex-tycoon has accused former prime minister Mahathir
Mohamad of forcing him in 1994 to buy a controlling stake in Malaysian
Airline to bail out the government. AFP reported: “Tajudin reportedly
purchased a controlling stake of 29 percent in Malaysia Airlines in 1994
from the central bank, paying about twice the market price for the
ailing carrier. The well-connected tycoon claims a conspiracy over the
deal and is suing the government and a number of state-owned companies
for 13.46 billion ringgit ($3.69 billion), according to Malaysia's Sun
newspaper. Tajudin was one of a number of Malay entrepreneurs
hand-picked by Mahathir in business dealings as part of efforts to boost
the wealth of the country's majority ethnic group, or bumiputras as
they are called. Analysts have said the affair has shed light on
long-held beliefs about government assistance given to bumiputra
businessmen in the country. [Source: AFP, July 25, 2006]
Associated Press reported: “Tajudin Ramli filed a
court document 29, saying his purchase of the 32 percent stake in
Malaysian Airline System Bhd for 1.8 billion ringgit, then worth US$750
million, was not a normal commercial deal as was made out at the time
but a forced "national service." If true, Tajudin's allegations would
point to shady financial practices and lack of transparency in the
government in the 1990s when many private entrepreneurs with close links
to top politicians were obliged to carry out business on behalf of the
state and received favors. [Source: AP, July 7, 2006 |*|]
“The Sun said Tajudin's court document was in
support of a lawsuit that he filed against the government and other
individuals, seeking 13 billion ringgit in compensation, alleging a
conspiracy by the government to take over his companies. Tajudin claims
he was directed by Mahathir and his then-finance minister Daim Zainuddin
to buy the MAS shares from the airline's main owner, the central bank,
for 8 ringgit per share even though its market price was 3.50 ringgit a
share. Tajudin said Mahathir and Daim told him he was buying the shares
as a national service to save the central bank, the Bank Negara, which
at the time was hit by multibillion ringgit foreign exchange losses. |*|
“Tajudin was hailed then as a national hero. But in
his court document, Tajudin says he was a reluctant hero. He says he
did not want to buy the stake as he was worried about financial losses,
but agreed to do it because it was a directive from the government. He
also claims that Mahathir and Daim assured him verbally he would be
protected from financial losses and liabilities. But he was told by the
two leaders not to reveal this arrangement. "Due to the sensitive nature
[of the deal] Tajudin did not seek any written confirmation from
Mahathir or Daim, " the Sun said. "Tajudin had never known [Mahathir]
... to renege on any agreement before." Tajudin took out a personal bank
loan to fund the purchase of the stake and pledged his companies,
Naluri and Technology Resources Industries Bhd (TRI), as collateral. |*|
“After the 1997 Asian financial crisis, his
debt-ridden companies were taken over by the state debt restructuring
agency Danaharta. Also, TRI-owned Celcom, a mobile phone operator, was
forced to merge with the state-owned phone company, Telekom Malaysia. In
2000, the government repurchased Tajudin's Malaysia Airlines stake for 8
ringgit, even though the market price was around 3.6 ringgit, causing a
public outrcry that the government was bailing out a crony. But Tajudin
says he was a victim rather than a beneficiary because Danaharta not
only took over his companies but also sued him in May this year to
recover 589 million ringgit that it claims he still owes to the
government. Tajudin said he filed the 13 billion ringgit lawsuit and
revealed the secret deal with Mahathir because of Danaharta's actions.”
|*|
Mahathir denied the allegations. "I don't remember
instructing him to buy MAS shares. At that time the government was not
short of money. Yes we lost some money but we know what to do, how to
recover, and we recovered," Mahathir told reporters. "Perhaps you should
ask him how he came up with the conclusion that I forced him to buy
MAS...I don't ask people to do national service.” Recalling his version
of events, the former premier said he was informed of Tajudin's
interest in buying MAS by then finance minister Daim Zainuddin -- who
himself has been dogged by corruption allegations. [Source: AFP, July
25, 2006]
Repression Under Mahathir
After nearly losing an election in 1987 and facing leadership
challenges among his own party, Mahathir placed the independent
judiciary under parliamentary control, threw critics in jail without a
trial or even charges, and muzzled the free press. As the years passed
after that he became more authoritarian and accusations of cronyism and
running the country through a system of political patronage increased.
Under Mahathir, Malaysia’s political culture became
increasingly centralised and authoritarian, due to Mahathir's belief
that the multiethnic Malaysia could only remain stable through
controlled democracy. The Internal Security Act was invoked in October
1987 arresting 106 people, including opposition leaders. The head of the
judiciary and 5 members of the supreme court who had questioned his use
of the ISA were also arrested, and a clampdown on Malaysia's press
occurred. This culminated in the dismissal and imprisonment on
unsubstantiated charges of the Deputy Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim, in
1997 after an internal dispute within the government. The complicity of
the judiciary in this piece of persecution was seen as a particularly
clear sign of the decline of Malaysian democracy. [Source: Wikipedia]
Mahathir concentrated power more and more and more
in his own hands without being accountable to anyone. He controlled the
police and his image stood behind every cash register in Malaysia.
Young people were arrested for "spreading false news on the Internet."
Mahathir used to joke that maybe he was the first dictator in the world
to be elected in the democratic process.
Under Mahathir, Richard Lloyd Parry wrote in The
Times: “Malaysia was a democracy, but a timid one in which the press
agreed with almost everything the government said. Those who spoke out
against the government were liable to find themselves locked up without
trial under the British colonial era’s Internal Security Act. One of the
low points for human rights came in 1998 when Anwar Ibrahim, his then
deputy, was arrested on charges of sodomy and corruption — charges that
many still regard as trumped up by allies of Dr Mahathir, who felt
threatened by the younger man’s popularity. He appeared in court with
his face bruised from a beating in police custody. The perpetrator, it
later turned out, was Dr Mahathir’s own chief of police. [Source:
Richard Lloyd Parry, The Times, October 30, 2006 ///]
“In his 22 years as their prime minister, the
prickly Dr Mahathir was not noted for his tolerance of criticism,
constructive or otherwise. Newspapers toed the government line or soon
found themselves in difficulty, and judges whose rulings were not to Dr
Mahathir’s liking were unceremoniously dismissed. It was an open secret
that his method of governing combined strong state intervention with
complex patterns of political patronage, but curiosity about the
lucrative business opportunities enjoyed by his sons and specially
favoured associates was robustly discouraged. Anwar Ibrahim, the deputy
he initially groomed to succeed him, spent years in prison on trumped-up
charges for daring to say publicly that corruption had reached critical
dimensions. ///
Human Rights Under Mahathir
The Mahathir government banned rallies, took the police from their
normal jobs and used them to initimidate members of the opposition, and
discharged people on trumped up terrorism, murder and robbery charges.
When asked about the American concept of freedom and human rights,"
Mahathir roared, "Free for whom? For rogue speculators. For anarchists
wanting to destroy weak countries in their crusade for open societies."
Many ordinary Malaysians were afraid of openly
criticizing the government out of fear of what might happen to them.
Civil servants had been forced to sign a “good behavior” document that
made it easier for the government to fire them if they criticize the
government. Students were kicked out of university and a lecturer was
fired and 47 other were disciplined for engaging in “anti-government”
activities.
Alan Sipress wrote in the Washington Post:
Hishamuddin Rais, 51, a filmmaker and columnist, was released in 2003
after two years in prison under Malaysia's draconian internal security
act, often used to silence political opponents and human rights
advocates. Rais was jailed following his role in organizing street
protests....Recalling the weeks spent in solitary confinement -- the
spartan underground cell, the handcuffs and blindfold, and the long
hours of abusive interrogation -- Rais suddenly looks away, his brow
deeply furrowed. He was not physically tortured, he said. But he
conceded: "I broke down. I cried." Rais, once a student activist, said
he has seen the spirit of Malaysia's universities crushed during
Mahathir's rule. "The campuses have become very docile, kind of barren
areas where contending ideas are no longer debated," he said. "This is a
very dangerous situation. They are a breeding ground for one-track
thinking like Muslim fundamentalism."
[Source: Alan Sipress, Washington Post, October 27, 2003]
See Separate Article ANWAR IBRAHIMMy comments:
I enjoy reading this kind of History of Malaysia as against the History texts written by professional historians much dictated by the authorities concerned. Nowadays we have sufficient supply of this kind of well-endorsed authentic history available on the internet. I fully agree with the Taiwan's writer and ex-politician called 龙应台。I read a newspaper interview of her in Sin Chew Daily News two days ago (27/6/2018). She shared her point of view of democracy of Taiwan. She described her viewpoints on democracy so vividly and beautifully. It was so impressive that I read with my full attention to every detail and can still remember the key points.
Here I only want to share her point on dictated History texts and history by the words of mouth which she encourages younger to get it from their elders. Ya, we can only get the true and authentic version of History to pass on. It is a first-hand knowledge, too. The dictated History is like processed foods which are so altered to recognise what is what in the foods. That's why nowadays, very few people bother to take 'processed History' seriously. Luckily, we have the internet which I always see it a God-gifted tool for truth though the fake news is also there to distract you.
![Untitled_-_36_0[1]](https://i2.wp.com/curiostraveller.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/untitled_-_36_01.jpg?resize=640%2C389&ssl=1)
