MGG Pillai Commentary View

<< Previous || Next >>

Malaysian MPs' arrogance goes global

Malaysian MPs, especially from the National Front (BN), are under the illussion that once elected, they are masters, not servants, of the people. They strut the Malaysian stage with an arrogance, and entourage to match, and look upon those who voted them in, with a contempt that often beggars belief. Once, years ago, at Penang airport, an MP then and en routed to his constituency -- he is now a cabinet minister -- offered me a lift into town. When he saw his car, he blew his top. "How dare you," he shouted at his hapless driver, "bring the Holden (MGG: an Australian car once popular here)? Don't you know I am attending an UMNO meeting? Go back and bring the Mercedes, not the 190, but the 250!." And made me wait with him for two hours until his "proper" car arrived.

This arrogance, in this age of globalisation, is now global. The BN MP for Batang Lupar, Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaffar, accused Malaysian diplomats overseas, in Parliament this week, for not dropping everything to rush to the airport to greet MPs. Instead, they spent their time on "tea luncheons and dinners" There is nothing wrong with "tea luncheons and dinners", for these "functions are used to discuss serious national or bilateral matters". But, he insisted, not at the expense of any delegation of MPs from Malaysia. "Sometimes," he complained, we don't even have cars from the embassies picking us up from the airport." They believe Malaysia established embassies around the world to provide a luxury limousine taxi service for intinerant MPs on a jaunt.

Once ministers would demand that ambassadors and high commissioners turn up at wee hours of the morning to keep cabinet ministers company at airport stopovers. They often do not know their geography. A Malaysian high commissioner in Pakistan told me how he was ordered to fly several hundred miles, at short notice, so a cabinet minister in transit in Karachi would not be bored. No explaining about the four-hour flight he had to take did not impress. But when he said the journey from Islamabad to Karachi was longer than from Kota Kinabalu to Kuala Lumpur, he was accused of shirking! In the end, he said he would turn if the cabinet minister would pay for his ticket. (This was in those days when ambassadors overseas were grandees in their own right, with a clear idea of what is expected of them and how they would carry them out. Today, they are no more than file shufflers.) Which is why many diplomots even now refuse to be high commissioners and ambassadors in capitals Malaysian politicians use as waystations.

So, when Wan Junaidi complained about not being taken seriously by Malaysian embassies overseas, he reflects an arrogance now endemic amongst BN MPs. But why did the deputy foreign minister, Dato' Leo Michael Toyad, instead of ticking off the MP in no uncertain terms, merely remarked it was offensive to say ambassadors are too busy having tea. Why did he not say, clearly and unequivocally, that Malaysian missions overseas represent Malaysian interests to the world, that the ambassador is not a glorified penghulu from, say, Batang Lupar, that it is not his business to ensure that every itinerant MP be met, provided transport and taken care when he turns up. But I am not surprised. Malaysian politicians and officials strive hard to recreate Malaysia in every foreign corner of the world, and they believe that diplomatic representaation is to ensure that Malaysian officials are taken care of in foreign countries, not to represent Malaysian interests overseas.

This pervades through the civil service. Wisma Putra micromanages embassy finances, ambassadors have a long list of dos and don'ts which often make nonsense of their plenipotentiary task. How can you demand that wine, or pork, not be served at embassy premises? This attempt to control pervades through the system. Officers with the power to control do not hesitate to. What happens then is that Merlimau is created in Madrid, Simpang Rengam in Seoul, Kajang in Canberra. And like penghulus in Malaysia, they are kept on their toes by petty bureaucrats at home. And we wonder why our diplomatic missions are so ineffective overseas. I have heard of ambassadors being asked, at dinner with high level officials from the country they are in being asked by a visiting functionary from home if the food is halal or if the wine is bought at government expense.

Can this rot be reversed? No. The political will is absent. The administration dissembles, with those in power not knowing how to stem it. The BN's arrogance is endemic, and seeps through the system. When cracks appear, it is ignored until it is too late, when nothing can be done. President Ayub Khan had this vision of elected officials in Pakistan being servants, not masters, and created a political system he called basic democracy. He said it would save Pakistan from chaos. It did not, Pakistan, to not put a fine point to it, is a failed state. Since its independence, it has gone through cycles of military generals in office out to put the state right. Every instance has failed. President Musharraf's plan, a variation of President Ayub Khan, is as flawed. As it was from the start of its independence.

Malaysia, on the other hand, was once a functioning state with much to commend it. But the BN deliberately turned it into a failing state. That is the frightening reality that we must face. Everything breaks down, no politician or leader is interested in this dramatic decline from order to anarchy. The state is allowed to slide into a mess. And we have regular exhortations to strive hard to make Malaysia a developed nation, when in reality it heads for undeveloped status that in time even Ougadougou would deign to ignore us. No one would admit it, but it is a matter of time before the state dissembles into chaos and anarchy. There is no governance. The Prime Minister and his cabinet governs the country as a private dictatorial fiefdom, parliament and the civil service ignored, opposition tied up in knots and otherwise ignored, the democratic practices and laws constrained. with the weight of the law against those who protest.

The frequent idiotic statements from cabinet ministers and MPs reflects not competence and seriousness, but proof of the inevitable decline of Malaysia as a state. One does expect irrelevant and stupid questions in Parliament as Wan Junaidi posed. We are spared the worst of these, for the press only pays lipservice to parliament. Its proceedings are not covered as it should be. And even that coverage is neutered, so interesting debates and asides are deliberately not reported. The state is now confused and unsettled that one would be surprised if Dr Leo Michael Toyal had responded to Wan Junaidi with a clear statement of what diplomacy is all about. For that, there must be clear minds in Wisma Putra who could articulate Malaysia's role in the world. The few minds who can are sidelined. Time servers and glory seekers cannot replace national interests. But Wisma Putra believes it can. So it celebrates the loss of its strength by pandering to the lowest common denominator, and blame all who point that out.

M.G.G. Pillai
pillai@mgg.pc.my