Insecurity in Eastern Sabah Raises Questions!

Joe Fernandez

Hoteliers in Sabah are grumbling increasingly loudly that tourists are canceling too many bookings in the wake of the Lahad Datu Standoff and the on-going mopping up operations by security forces. They worry that things may become a whole lot worse for the hospitality industry in the state before turning for the better, if at all, in the near future.

The state has some 25,000 hotel rooms to help the hospitality industry rake in some RM5.2 billion last year from nearly three million visitors. The forecast revenue for 2015, according to Sabah Tourism Board chairman Tengku Zainal Adlin, is RM15 billion on the high side. That amounts to a quarter of the RM60 billion per annum that Malaysia presently collects from tourism receipts.

Clearly, the travel industry is high income lifeblood for the Sabah economy which already suffers the drain of most of its resources and revenues to Putrajaya. Palm oil and the oil and gas sectors are other bright spots. Timber is a sunset industry.

Foreign missions in Malaysia, erring on the side of caution, have reportedly either extended previous Travel Advisories or issued new ones urging caution if travelling to eastern Sabah.

However, travellers may not make any distinction between the Sabah east and west coasts. They may not make any distinction either between Sabah and the rest of Borneo.

They fear being the target of kidnappings.

Will Other Communities Also Start Making Similar Demands?

P. Waytha Moorthy

This is the 13th day of my Hunger Viratham. The visitors are streaming in and it is becoming more difficult to stay focused on my writing. It has somewhat slowed down my writing. Still, there is no let up in my resolve to achieve our goals of obtaining binding endorsement and commitment to implement Hindraf’s proposals and I continue with my Hunger Viratham.

More people are beginning to ask just where the BN and the PR political leaders are. Do they not care?

Well, I will let them answer the people.

For today I will discuss the question of the costs of implementation of Hindraf’s five-year blueprint proposals.

The politicians in power go to great length to propose, promote and implement mega project like the MRT, the High Speed Rail Link between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore and the Undersea Tunnel linking Penang to the mainland. These projects can cost when done, from RM10 billion to RM80 billion.

Is Malaysia’s Electoral System Ready for GE13

Dr. Wolfgang Sachsenröder

With a possible, some say probable, watershed and regime change for Malaysia’s increasingly competitive political system in the pipeline, it is useful to look into the election system and its mechanisms. The media, fascinated with personality clashes, campaign highlights and the outcome of elections, don’t look too often into details of the electoral law. And most voters don’t care much whether the ruling governments tweak the rules in their own favour, most often by changing the boundaries of precincts more or less unnoticed – the old, widespread, and popular gerrymandering. Malaysia is not alone here, but the discrepancies in the electoral size of constituencies in favour of Malay and against Chinese areas have been “adjusted” frequently and helped the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) to safeguard its dominance over the last decades.

One of the special features in Malaysia’s multi-ethnic society is the still predominantly race-based party system. UMNO, the long term dominant ruling party was founded in 1946 as a reaction against the granting of citizenship to Chinese and Indian immigrants upon independence. The defensive attitude of the Malay (then shaky) majority, understandably insisting on political dominance in their own homeland, led to the formation of other ethnic-based political parties. UMNO, in a successful move to broaden its support base since 1974, managed to co-opt the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC),  the Malaysian People’s Movement Party (GERAKAN) and a number of parties in Sabah and Sarawak into the National Front (Barisan Nasional / BN) coalition (now altogether 13 parties), which enjoyed a huge majority in Parliament until 2008.

The NEP: The Good and the Bad - Revisited

Anas Zubedy

What is the NEP?

In a simple definition, the New Economic Policy is Malaysia’s socioeconomic affirmative action plan. It was implemented in 1971 in the aftermath of the 1969 racial riots, and the period set for the implementation of NEP was 1971-1990.

The overriding objective of the NEP was stated as national Unity. The goal of the NEP was two pronged – one, eradicate poverty; and two, restructure society to eliminate the identification of race with economic function through rapid expansion of the economy over time. However, it was clearly stated that this restructuring of the racial composition of employment and ownership of wealth was to be done without denying opportunities to others. The strategy was to accelerate economic growth, but at the same time, redirect the benefits more to the disadvantaged.

What is the background of the NEP?

The NEP has historical basis. Even from the colonial days before Merdeka, the Malays had been given certain privileges by the British, especially quotas for public scholarship and civil service employment.

The period of British rule left behind some remnant effects on our society and economy. The economic system and the geographical location of where we lived and worked were divided along racial lines. The Malays were largely concentrated in the traditional agricultural sector where per capita income was the lowest and poverty was the highest. The Chinese were concentrated in mining, manufacturing and construction where per capita income was recorded as much higher. The Indians were largely labourers in estates and mining.
          
The NEP was announced in June 1970 in the aftermath of the racial riots in 1969. Whatever is said about the immediate causes of the riots, the root cause for the unrest was socioeconomical imbalance. It was clear that the problem of poverty and the economic differences along racial lines were detrimental to social stability and national Unity and had to be addressed immediately. The NEP was formulated as a concerted effort to reduce poverty and restructure the economy.

The problem with Malay unity

Jacqueline Ann Surin

ONE of the exhortations to Malay Malaysian voters as the general election looms is to vote the party that will ensure “Malay unity”. Politicians and at least one member of royalty have called on Malay voters to put Malay unity above all else when they go to the polls.

And because Malay Malaysians are also constitutionally meant to be Muslims, there has been unsurprisingly another aspect of this public service announcement. Vote the party that will ensure Muslim unity and the cohesion of the ummah. And to Umno and PAS, the two parties that represent Malays and Muslims respectively: consider a merger so that Malay-Muslim unity can be secured.

But does Malay unity exist to begin with? Does Muslim solidarity? Was either ever present historically or currently in Malaysia? And when politicians, academics and royalty start to promote Malay and Muslim unity, are they peddling an ideal for the nation or a dangerous myth for the masses?

What unity?

The presumption behind Malay and Muslim unity is that either or both groups are monolithic entities. Further, that every member of the group shares the same historical roots, cultural identity, political and economic aspirations, and religious beliefs. After all, if either or both groups didn’t have enough of a cohesive identity and shared sense of ideals, then talking about uniting would be like asking water and oil to combine into one.


To begin with, are the Malays really culturally and historically similar to each other? The series of Found in Malaysia interviews tell us that many of the foremost Malay Malaysian personalities have different lineages. In brief, the Malays we interviewed had the following ancestries: Orang Asli, Javanese, Thai, Chinese,  Japanese,  Australian, Bugis, Arab and European. And because the notion of the “Malay” is a political construct that was initiated by the British, and continues to be a construct perpetuated by the current powers that be, the definition of Malay can shift from state to state.