Let us take that at its face value and examine thes charge. Without knowing who the ex-minister is, it would be difficult to proceed. Is is Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah? Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie? Tun Daim Zainuddin? Tan Sri Mohamed Khir Johari? Tun Omar Yoke Lin? Tan Sri Lee San Choon? Or he whose name cannot be mentioned even by the deputy prime minister? I shall leave to guess who amongst them, and those unmentioned, is the treacherous rascal who besmirches Malaysia's good name. Why does he want to tarnish the good names of all retired cabinet ministers when his grouse is only with one? He should name him promptly if his accusations are to be believed.

Malaysia's long-time foreign secretary and former foreign minister, Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie, is more direct. "India is not interested in the region in the way countries in the region expects it to," he says, "which is why I saw the defence pacts with Indonesia and Vietnam as the most momentous geopolitical move India has made in the region since its independence in 1947." India's Andaman islands are but 90 kms north of Acheh in Indonesia. But it steadfastly refused any move to be involved in a formal sense with the region. It rejected an invitation to join ASEAN when it was formed in 1967, it was tardy to welcome it, dismissing it supercilliously at the time, but it is now a dialogue partner. Even that only after the ASEAN leaders delinked India from Pakistan in their dealings with the two countries.

In those days, most Malaysians went to study in London as opposed to the United Kingdom. Malaysia's independent leaders in their student days could meet there to discuss the country's future because it was a convenient meeting point. But to suggest that Tengku Abdul Rahman would meet in Malaysia Hall with Tun Abdul Razak and others is to bend the historical truth. The independence leaders had returned home by the time Malaysia Hall was leased in 1951. Indeed, by then the Tengku had become president of UMNO, Tun Abdul Razak was state secretary of Pahang, Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie in the Malayan civil service. They could have had meetings there on subsequent meetings but they certainly did not discuss their hopes for the future of Malaya in Malaya Hall, as it was then known.

Within UMNO itself, after Tun Abdul Razak's unexpected death in January 1976, there was no clear cut successor. Tun Razak had, as Tan Sri Abdullah, points out in his New Straits Times column "On The Record" (NST, 26 September 00, p12), identified a brood of politicians who could take over from him. Amongst them were Dr Mahathir, Tengku Razaleigh, Dato' Musa Hitam, Tun Ghafar Baba. Indeed, if Tengku Razaleigh had joined the cabinet, instead of continuing to head Petronas and Bank Bumiputra Malaysia Berhad, after the 1974 general elections, he would have been deputy prime minister under Tun Hussein. But he miscalculated. He was not an outsider. The outsider was Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie, the then home minister. When Tun Hussein wanted him as deputy prime minister, the three UMNO vice presidents -- Ghafar Baba, Tengku Razaleigh, Dr Mahathir -- in a demarche said none would serve if one of them was not appointed deputy prime minister. Only the three said they would not serve, not as Tan Sri Abdullah insists the UMNO Supreme Council. Ghafar was not considered, Tengku Razaleigh was not in the cabinet, leaving only Dr Mahathir, who was. This was done in anti-Hussein surroundings, in the fallout from the Selangor mentri besar, Dato' Harun Idris's arrest for corruption, with his backers accusing close aides of Tun Razak as being pro-communist. This led to Tan Sri Abdullah's detention under the Internal Security Act for five years. But that is another story.
Tan Sri Abdullah is right when he suggests Tan Sri Lee and the MCA president preferred Tengku Razaleigh to Dato Seri Mahathir Mohamed as UMNO deputy president and therefore deputy prime minister after Dato (later Tun) Hussein Onn became Prime Minister in 1976 after Tun Abdul Razak Hussein died in London. He was close to Tengku Razaleigh, and he paid the price by being forced to resign. There was no question that UMNO stabbed him in the back. He miscalculated in his support for who should be UMNO president and paid dearly. He had to go. The MCA leaders themselves decided it could not have as president one who backed the Prime Minister's rival. That they did underlines not that the MCA has Chinese support but when the crunch comes, they had no choice but to kill their leader for putting lucrative contracts at risk. The non-Malay parties in the National Front survive, especially after the 1969 riots, by destroying their own standing with their communities if their leader's links with the UMNO president suffers. The MCA leaders' ability to shoot themselves in the foot when everything works in their favour is uncanny. It also makes Tan Sri Lee's claim the MCA had Chinese support even more questionable. When Dr Mahathir became Prime Minister in 1981, Tan Sri Lee's political career had come to an end, especially when Tengku Razaleigh prepared to challenge Dr Mahathir for the UMNO presidency after Dato' (now Tan Sri) Musa Hitam was appointed deputy prime minister. The MCA realised that with Tan Sri Lee as their leader, it would suffer at the hands of a vindictive Prime Minister. So, he had to go. That paradoxically proved how misguided Tan Sri Lee was at his victory in Seremban in the 1982 general elections.

Can Malaysia fit into this millieu when the frosty relations with Indonesia is compounded by a failure of intelligence and personal ties. That the Prime Minister have difficulties communicating with President Abdurrahman Wahid, as with Presidents Suharto and Habibie (the latter for his Estrada-like sympathies for that man in solitary confinement in Sungei Buloh prison), is well known. The personal relationships that Malaysian officials once had with his neighbours, firmed through their frequent associations in Asean, is today no more. I remember once asking the then foreign minister, Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie, about some Singapore-Indonesian friction that had not yet hit the papers. He called his Singapore and Indonesian counterparts, Mr S. Dhanabalan and Prof. Mochtar Kusumaatmadja, on the phone, and asked them to speak to me about the problem, asked me what they said and gave me his interprepation. That camraderie has all but disappeared when foreign policy became not to further the country's interest, but the leader's. And we pay for that neglect. The failure of intelligence cannot be far behind. The failure for not toeing the official line is severe. Just ask any of those known to be in the other camp in Malaysian politics, be he Tan Sri Musa Hitam, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah or Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim. The failure of intelligence is not far behind and inevitable. And fails us when we need it most. As now. The Abu Sayyaf fiasco is but a consequence of that failure.

Once, intellectuals like Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie and Tan Sri Noordin Sopiee provided that useful role. They are not readily available these days. While university lecturers and professors stand for general elections under a National Front ticket, none would want to be quoted or named to comment on behalf of the government, or indeed express a point of view that can be attached to his name. I often am asked by these foreign news organisations for pro-government, anti-government and neutral commentators, but the pro-government names would rather not. The official love-hate relationship with the foreign media is one reason, but it is more than that. The Prime Minister would readily agree to an interview on CNN, but when the reporter does his duty and writes a fair report, he gets annoyed. It is this annoyance that dictates the National Front mood in dealing with foreign reporters. The aim is to batten the hatches, not to argue its case.

The Prime Minister insists the NECC-2 is "not set up for political reasons". He says "certain quarters" had turned down invitations, amongst them representatives from DAP, PAS, PRM; he does not mention if KeADILan was invited. Why does the Prime Minister say NECC-2 is not a politically-motivated forum? NECC-2 looks into the future of what Malaysia would be like ten to 20 years ahead; that, in his view, rules out a political motive: "a term of ten to 20 years is more than the term for a certain political party to rule after winning an election". In any case, "political affiliation is not a consideration for membership of the NECC-2". It is purely coincidetal that most of them are from the National Front coalition partners. You know the anti-national fellows in DAP, PAS, PRM rejected the application; so the body is not political. How can the opposition now claim that they were ignored: they were offered three seats, why did they not take it? Still, some interesting names are missing. Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie, in every major economic and political decision taken since the 1950s and a member of NECC-1, is missing. He recovers from shingles, but why is he left out. His role in the proceedings, assuming for a moment that the Prime Minister means what he says, would have equalled more than a dozen of those appointed. His mind is as razor sharp as it was decades ago.

Look at the matter of Harakah, the official organ of the opposition PAS. The licence does not allow it to be circulated outside its membership. PAS never followed those dictates and today is the most widely distributed alternate view available to the Malaysia. And its circulation exceeds that of all the mainline newspapers. What does the government do? First invite PAS to come and discuss its transgressions with the Ministry of Home Affairs. Then the deputy home minister, Dato' Tajol Rosli Ghazali, advises PAS to follow the law. PAS tells both courteously to go fly kites. The DAP would not have been allowed this courtesy. Why this special treatment? Is the deputy minister worried about his parliamentary seat in North Perak, sandwiched as it is between Kedah and Kelantan, in the next elections? So, why is he not enforcing the law as he is sworn to?

Pak Lah (1364)   United States (636)   Straits Times (412)   Samy Vellu (224)   Putra Jaya (200)   Chief Justice (200)   Saddam Hussein (188)   Vincent Tan (164)   Civil Service (154)   Parti KeADILan (148)   Islamic State (118)   Johore Bahru (100)   Sungei Buloh (94)   Bukit Tinggi (88)   Abdul Razak (80)   Pengkalen Pasir (68)   Ting Pek (64)   Armed Forces (59)   Soviet Union (58)

Malay Dominance (58)   Yong Teck (56)   Hong Kong (56)   Human Rights (56)   Syed Hamid (54)   Puteri UMNO (52)   Islam Hadhari (52)   Royal Commission (51)   Hussein Onn (51)   Rafidah Aziz (48)   Indian Congress (48)   Open House (44)   Vision Schools (44)   Shah Alam (44)   Malay Unity (42)   Chua Jui (42)   Abdul Taib (42)   Ampang Jaya (36)   Ras Adiba (36)

Osama Bin Laden (36)   Nik Aziz Nik (20)   Ling Liong Sik (18)   Lee Kuan Yew (18)

High Court Judge (14)   Wan Azizah Wan (9)   Lim Kit Siang (9)   Megat Junid Megat (8)

Mahathir (2960)

Anwar (2399)