Lailasari, its hard for me to be ignored by u.. why u doing so? All of a sudden u hate me? I miss u so much la.. its really tearing me apart...
I miss you so much..
Thursday, May 13, 2010
Monday, July 13, 2009
Link to a book about politics during Hussein Onn & Mahathir era
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14489742/Sejarah-an-Politik-Malaysia-19781987
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Book about NEP implementation
http://books.google.com.my/books?id=68oIFR8jEe0C&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118&dq=tengku+razaleigh+petronas+1975&source=bl&ots=Qhrcn6s0_r&sig=ZeS8Mds6aprg12h_YIZ2GWpMWfw&hl=en&ei=CPTAScfyKZDG6gPml-msDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result#PPA126,M1
An Article in Singapore Business Times 18 Mar 2009
Published March 18, 2009
The odd man out in M'sian politics
The last of an Umno generation, Tengku Razaleigh makes everyone in politics uncomfortable with his straight talk
By S JAYASANKARAN
KL CORRESPONDENT
Email this article
Print article
Feedback
TENGKU Razaleigh Hamzah is the odd man out in Malaysian politics. Since the March 8, 2008 general election, which fractured politics like never before, the lawmaker from the United Malays National Organisation (Umno) has come across as the lone voice of calm and moderation in a world of near-continuous bickering.
Radical ideas: A former finance minister, Tengku Razaleigh thinks it is time for a national unity government in Malaysia and that Umno should be democratised at all levels
Tengku Razaleigh makes everyone in the Malaysian political fray uncomfortable. He reminds Umno of its corruption, bemoans the judiciary's lack of integrity and whacks the Opposition's hypocrisy.
He slammed the Umno-led Barisan Nasional's (BN) takeover of the Perak state government through crossovers as 'a lie' and, probably much to the embarrassment of the state's sultan, who refused to dissolve the assembly for fresh polls, has called for just that.
And when asked why the state didn't have fresh polls, Malaysia's former finance minister (1976-84) replied bluntly: 'The chances are we (the BN) will lose badly in Perak and that is why they are reluctant to have the sultan dissolve the assembly.'
They may smart at his comments but BN leaders are loath to take him on. The reason: Tengku Razaleigh, 72, is the last of an Umno generation - that of Abdul Razak Hussein, Malaysia's second premier. Tengku Razaleigh was wealthy before he entered politics. He did not go into politics to line his own pockets and has contributed more than his fair share to the country and his party.
Not that he hasn't tried going for the top. In 1987, he came within a whisker of unseating former premier Mahathir Mohamad as Umno's president. And more recently, he tried to get enough nominations - he needed at least 58 - to bid again for the presidency. It turned out to be a fiasco. Deputy Premier Najib Razak got 190 while Tengku Razaleigh got just one nomination.
It was a situation that must have hurt. 'Of course, I felt let down,' he says softly. 'Maybe I don't know the party any more or maybe they don't think I have, in some small measure, contributed towards the country and Umno.'
Like Dr Mahathir, Tengku Razaleigh began as a Malay nationalist, achieving prominence as executive director of Pernas, an organisation set up to promote the economic interests of the country's majority Malays. An economist by training, he is also pro-business and friendly towards foreign investment. But unlike Dr Mahathir, Tengku Razaleigh isn't very blunt. Other politicians say he doesn't have the killer instinct to go for the jugular as Dr Mahathir used to do.
Indeed, he seems to believe in public service.
As the pioneer chairman of Petronas, the state oil company, in the 1970s, he refused to take a salary, apparently feeling his personal wealth was enough.
Unfailingly polite and with great personal charm, he has often been compared to Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's first premier, from 1957 to 1971.
Whether Umno delegates know of his background is debatable, but Tengku Razaleigh doesn't care. He thinks the situation in the country is worrying, with the electorate getting more polarised. Of three by-elections that are coming up in April, he feels the Opposition has the edge in two - in Sarawak and Kedah - while the one in Perak is 'touch and go'.
Indeed, he is worried about East Malaysia as a whole. 'Sabah and Sarawak have to be closely monitored because it could spark the disintegration of Malaysia going forward,' he says. 'The people there have been quite unhappy with the way they have been treated, and we have to find out why.'
He thinks the disgruntlement is greater in Sarawak. 'I don't think the people of Sarawak have been happy with Taib (Taib Mahmud, the state's chief minister since the late 1970s),' he says. 'And now it's all slowly coming to the surface.'
After March 8, 2008, when the BN lost five states and its two-thirds parliamentary majority, some political analysts said the 'liberality of space' espoused by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had backfired.
'I don't agree with that,' snaps Tengku Razaleigh. 'It's better to try a more consensual approach. If you try and batten everything down with a sledgehammer, it will work so long as you are around. Then it will come back to haunt you.
'Look at Dr Mahathir and the revelations about the judiciary and other things that have repeatedly cropped up after his retirement.
'These were things that were whispered about during his tenure and now it's out in the open. Also, it's difficult to continue being a strongman now as the Internet has changed everything.'
On the economy, he thinks the slowdown should have been addressed sooner and with a lot more money - 'at least RM30 to RM40 billion' (S$12.5 to S$16.7 billion).
'Now is the time for micro-management, every week you have to make sure the money is going to the right places, that it's targeted,' he says.
But Tengku Razaleigh's economic plans have fallen on deaf ears. He has proposed a National Housing Programme - along the lines of Singapore's Housing and Development Board - and another programme to make Malaysia a regional oil and gas hub. While economists have lauded his ideas, nothing has come out of them.
But his most radical ideas are political. He thinks it is time for a national unity government and that Umno should be democratised 'at all levels'.
'Every member must be given a right to vote for their leader and there should be no more delegates,' he says. 'There should be no more quotas and everyone should be free to contest. The leadership should be separate from government. And the president should serve no more than three terms, that is, nine years, which is still more than the US president.
'The BN should be reformed, with everyone given the chance to join directly, and there should be elections to choose the BN leader.
'Similarly, all parties should reflect the demographics of Malaysia to contest in election. The DAP (the Democratic Action Party) says its multiracial but it's Chinese. PAS (the Islamic party of Malaysia) is the same, only it's Malay. And the money for campaigning should come from government and it must be for everyone. Donations should be limited by law.'
Pie in the sky? Tengku Razaleigh smiles wryly: 'You won't be the first one to say that. But I have been thinking about these things for a long time.'
The odd man out in M'sian politics
The last of an Umno generation, Tengku Razaleigh makes everyone in politics uncomfortable with his straight talk
By S JAYASANKARAN
KL CORRESPONDENT
Email this article
Print article
Feedback
TENGKU Razaleigh Hamzah is the odd man out in Malaysian politics. Since the March 8, 2008 general election, which fractured politics like never before, the lawmaker from the United Malays National Organisation (Umno) has come across as the lone voice of calm and moderation in a world of near-continuous bickering.
Radical ideas: A former finance minister, Tengku Razaleigh thinks it is time for a national unity government in Malaysia and that Umno should be democratised at all levels
Tengku Razaleigh makes everyone in the Malaysian political fray uncomfortable. He reminds Umno of its corruption, bemoans the judiciary's lack of integrity and whacks the Opposition's hypocrisy.
He slammed the Umno-led Barisan Nasional's (BN) takeover of the Perak state government through crossovers as 'a lie' and, probably much to the embarrassment of the state's sultan, who refused to dissolve the assembly for fresh polls, has called for just that.
And when asked why the state didn't have fresh polls, Malaysia's former finance minister (1976-84) replied bluntly: 'The chances are we (the BN) will lose badly in Perak and that is why they are reluctant to have the sultan dissolve the assembly.'
They may smart at his comments but BN leaders are loath to take him on. The reason: Tengku Razaleigh, 72, is the last of an Umno generation - that of Abdul Razak Hussein, Malaysia's second premier. Tengku Razaleigh was wealthy before he entered politics. He did not go into politics to line his own pockets and has contributed more than his fair share to the country and his party.
Not that he hasn't tried going for the top. In 1987, he came within a whisker of unseating former premier Mahathir Mohamad as Umno's president. And more recently, he tried to get enough nominations - he needed at least 58 - to bid again for the presidency. It turned out to be a fiasco. Deputy Premier Najib Razak got 190 while Tengku Razaleigh got just one nomination.
It was a situation that must have hurt. 'Of course, I felt let down,' he says softly. 'Maybe I don't know the party any more or maybe they don't think I have, in some small measure, contributed towards the country and Umno.'
Like Dr Mahathir, Tengku Razaleigh began as a Malay nationalist, achieving prominence as executive director of Pernas, an organisation set up to promote the economic interests of the country's majority Malays. An economist by training, he is also pro-business and friendly towards foreign investment. But unlike Dr Mahathir, Tengku Razaleigh isn't very blunt. Other politicians say he doesn't have the killer instinct to go for the jugular as Dr Mahathir used to do.
Indeed, he seems to believe in public service.
As the pioneer chairman of Petronas, the state oil company, in the 1970s, he refused to take a salary, apparently feeling his personal wealth was enough.
Unfailingly polite and with great personal charm, he has often been compared to Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's first premier, from 1957 to 1971.
Whether Umno delegates know of his background is debatable, but Tengku Razaleigh doesn't care. He thinks the situation in the country is worrying, with the electorate getting more polarised. Of three by-elections that are coming up in April, he feels the Opposition has the edge in two - in Sarawak and Kedah - while the one in Perak is 'touch and go'.
Indeed, he is worried about East Malaysia as a whole. 'Sabah and Sarawak have to be closely monitored because it could spark the disintegration of Malaysia going forward,' he says. 'The people there have been quite unhappy with the way they have been treated, and we have to find out why.'
He thinks the disgruntlement is greater in Sarawak. 'I don't think the people of Sarawak have been happy with Taib (Taib Mahmud, the state's chief minister since the late 1970s),' he says. 'And now it's all slowly coming to the surface.'
After March 8, 2008, when the BN lost five states and its two-thirds parliamentary majority, some political analysts said the 'liberality of space' espoused by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had backfired.
'I don't agree with that,' snaps Tengku Razaleigh. 'It's better to try a more consensual approach. If you try and batten everything down with a sledgehammer, it will work so long as you are around. Then it will come back to haunt you.
'Look at Dr Mahathir and the revelations about the judiciary and other things that have repeatedly cropped up after his retirement.
'These were things that were whispered about during his tenure and now it's out in the open. Also, it's difficult to continue being a strongman now as the Internet has changed everything.'
On the economy, he thinks the slowdown should have been addressed sooner and with a lot more money - 'at least RM30 to RM40 billion' (S$12.5 to S$16.7 billion).
'Now is the time for micro-management, every week you have to make sure the money is going to the right places, that it's targeted,' he says.
But Tengku Razaleigh's economic plans have fallen on deaf ears. He has proposed a National Housing Programme - along the lines of Singapore's Housing and Development Board - and another programme to make Malaysia a regional oil and gas hub. While economists have lauded his ideas, nothing has come out of them.
But his most radical ideas are political. He thinks it is time for a national unity government and that Umno should be democratised 'at all levels'.
'Every member must be given a right to vote for their leader and there should be no more delegates,' he says. 'There should be no more quotas and everyone should be free to contest. The leadership should be separate from government. And the president should serve no more than three terms, that is, nine years, which is still more than the US president.
'The BN should be reformed, with everyone given the chance to join directly, and there should be elections to choose the BN leader.
'Similarly, all parties should reflect the demographics of Malaysia to contest in election. The DAP (the Democratic Action Party) says its multiracial but it's Chinese. PAS (the Islamic party of Malaysia) is the same, only it's Malay. And the money for campaigning should come from government and it must be for everyone. Donations should be limited by law.'
Pie in the sky? Tengku Razaleigh smiles wryly: 'You won't be the first one to say that. But I have been thinking about these things for a long time.'
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Speech by KU LI in ASLI
ASLI Strategic Outlook Forum
January 15, 2009
YBM Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah
RESTORING CONFIDENCE
[salutations]
A problem of confidence
The present financial crisis started in a speculative housing bubble in the US, inflated on greed and irrational confidence. Shady practices went mainstream under the wing of weak financial governance. When the bubble burst, gold-plated names on Wall Street were implicated. A massive loss of confidence in the financial sector has crippled credit flow worldwide. Consumption has contracted as households put off expenditure out of uncertainty. Investment has retreated. There has been a massive loss of confidence.
2. Expectations are a central factor in macroeconomic booms and busts. If a sharp loss of confidence is an endogenous part of the problem, a restoration of confidence must be the beginning of the solution. However, if we have learned anything at all from the crisis, this cannot be hollow confidence, but confidence based on a clear appreciation of our prospects. The lesson of the global economy is that false confidence based on irrational hope leads to collapse, disillusionment and pessimism.
3. We need a sound appreciation of our reality before we can dream of changing it. We need to face harsh truths before we can believe in ourselves and inspire others to believe in us. In coming to that sound appreciation here in Malaysia we have run out of time for politically manipulated messaging and sugar coated evasions.
4. Let us just begin by acknowledging that we will not be spared the effects of the global economic crisis.
5. Our leaders only undermine the government’s credibility when they paint an alternative reality for us. I understand we don’t want to frighten markets and voters unnecessarily, but we do not live in an information bubble. Only the most resolutely ignorant can now pretend that all shall be fine while the rest of the world deals with what Jeffrey Sachs has called “a world economy teetering on the brink of unprecedented catastrophe.” Leaders who deny the seriousness of the crisis only raise the suspicion that they have no ideas for coping with it. They undermine the government’s credibility when that very credibility, that confidence, is a key issue.
6. We are a trading and exporting nation. While we were relatively shielded from the first wave of financial failures there is no escape from the sharp demand slump in the global economy. The Government and Bank Negara maintain that our growth rate this year will be 3.5%. I fear it could be well under that. The latest numbers show a plunge in industrial activity, with manufacturing output in November, down 9.4 percent from a year ago. December may well be worse. Exports are down. There has been a dramatic swing in the balance of payments to a RM31 billion deficit in the third quarter, from a surplus of RM26 billion in the second. Anyone looking at the size of the downturn and at its swiftness can only wonder if we will be sailing through. This crisis really “went global” only in the final quarter of last year, but within that single quarter manufacturing both here and in Singapore contracted by more than 10 percent on the previous year. Policymakers in Singapore appear far more alarmed than our own. After having declared a recession, they found that the effects of the crisis were far worse than they thought. We are just at the beginning, and the bottom is not yet in sight.
7. Three and a half percent growth, even if we achieve it, will not create enough jobs to employ the large number who enter the workforce each year from our young population. Given our demographic profile and the fact that we are an oil exporter, our baseline do-nothing growth figure is not 0% but closer to 4%.
8. We do have a problem. Now we need to acknowledge that we are not in good shape to deal with it. After early decades of rapid progress, it looks like that economic growth has flattened, our public delivery system calcified and our economic leadership run out of ideas.
The financial crisis in the context of our developmental path
9. Malaysia is squeezed between being the low cost manufacturer we once excelled as, and the knowledge-intensive economy we are failing to become. Our years of sustained high growth ended in 1997 with the Asian Economic Crisis. With the subsequent rise of China and India as low cost producers with giant domestic markets, the manufacturing sector which propelled that growth is being hollowed out.
10. We are in the infamous “middle Income trap”. No longer cheap enough to compete with low cost producers and not advanced enough to compete with more innovative ones, we find ourselves squeezed in between with no economic story. Successful economies, like successful companies, need a compelling story, and we don’t have one. With falling communications and transport costs, the skilled engineers, managers and designers of the rich countries are pairing themselves to the cheaper labour of poor countries to extract productivity and cost benefits. The global integration of labour markets favours both rich and poor countries and stagnates the wages of those in the middle that are neither smarter nor cheaper. That means us. Our working people have suffered stagnant wages and a rising cost of living.
11. According to the World Bank, Malaysia’s share of GDP contributed by services was 46.2% in 1987. How much did you think it was twenty years later in 2007? 46.4%.
How much do you think the real wages of our workers grew between 1994 and 2007? By 2.6% in the domestic sector and by 2.8% in the export sector.
Unskilled migrant workers, documented and undocumented, make up 30-40% of our workforce. Meanwhile, alone in East Asia, the number of expatriate professionals here has decreased. Alone in East Asia, private sector wage increases follow government sector increases, not the other way around.
Did we have to learn about this from the World Bank? What has the EPU been doing? Has the cabinet pondered these numbers? Have we had a national discussion about what this?
12. The only long term path to prosperity is increased income through increased productivity. Sustained productivity growth is the engine of China’s unbroken run of high growth. Our failure to increase productivity and working incomes has been masked by an influx of cheap labour. That cheap labour has become another crutch for us.
13. Low growth
a) The other thing masking our underperformance over the last decade is the fact that in this time the world economy has experienced its biggest expansion in recorded history. We have averaged 4 to 5 percent growth throughout a historic boom over which world economic growth has averaged 4.5 percent. Meanwhile the two most populous nations in the world have been growing at or near double digit rates, multiplying per capita incomes and lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty in the greatest expansion of human welfare in history. That boom is over and we have missed it.
b) By analogy, when we view the report cards of our own children, we set our expectations against what they have been given and what they were capable of in the past. Turning to our own country, so richly endowed with natural and cultural resources, a stable society and good institutions, we see a failing report card. Instead of educating our young to be competitive we have turned out large numbers without the skills and attitudes suited for basic work, let alone for the global economy that is not out there somewhere but on our own shores.
Each decade we have discovered new ‘peer-countries’ against whom we might look decent because we have fallen out of the league of the last set of peers. We fail to notice we have been relegated. Remember that in the 60’s we were classified with Taiwan and Korea, in the eighties with Singapore and Hong Kong. Now we are less “relevant” than Vietnam as an investment destination. I remember receiving delegations from Taiwan and Hong Kong who came to learn from us.
14. Inequality
We cannot comfort ourselves that we have sacrificed growth for social equity. Despite the strong redistributive measures the government has pursued for decades, our Gini coefficient, the standard measure of inequality, has been ballooning. In this region only Papua New Guinea is more unequal. We have the most unequal income distribution in Southeast Asia. If there is supposed to be a trade-off between growth and equity, we have not made it. We are failing on both growth and equity.
15. What does it take to make the leap from middle to high income? The countries that have done it recently, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, have one feature in common: they were able to learn from previous crises. Without a buffer of natural resources, each of these economies was more exposed than we were. In relative terms, because they are even more trade oriented than we are, each may be harder hit by this downturn than we are. But we miss the picture if we stand by and comfort ourselves that we are ‘shielded’ because our capital markets have been less open. Our very problem may be that we have been shielding ourselves from learning, which requires systematic change in behaviour or knowledge informed by experience.
16. The criterion of success for making the developmental leap, the key differentiator between the leaders and the also-rans, is not immunity from economic crises (after all, if you have a Stone Age economy, you are completely immune) but the organizational capability of governments to learn and re-organize around new national economic strategies through these crises. Each major crisis is either an important opportunity to transform the economy or a major setback to our ambitions. The question is whether our policymaking and policy implementing apparatus is set up, motivated and led to learn from this crisis. It is a question of the capability of government and governance.
17. We must also retrain and re-skill those who lose their jobs because of this crisis. This cannot be done in the present ad hoc manner. It must be a coordinated program, with courses matched and tracked to learners according to a National Skills Plan which in turns supports a vision for the Economy. Those lost jobs, especially in the manufacturing sector, will not be coming back. We better have a plan and a vision.
18. What are the consequences of sailing into an economic storm in our present condition, after a decade of lacklustre performance and with no plan, no vision for sustained high growth? We can look at two scenarios: breakdown or relegation.
a) Breakdown
As a developmental state, the legitimacy of our government is based on its guarantee of social peace and economic development.
As Professor Clive Kessler has observed: “Social peace in Malaysia depends upon the continuation, and the continuing expectation, of economic growth and prosperity; while economic growth and prosperity depend upon the continuation and assurance of social peace.” This reciprocal relationship between peace and growth makes us prone to a vicious feedback cycle: if either engine were to fail, the other would fail with it, and take us down a spiral of failure with a painful end. Our margin for error is slimmer than we think. Our socio-political setup implies that we don’t have a smooth glide down to complete irrelevance. Like a bicycle or an airplane we need to be running at a certain speed to avoid falling off.
b) Relegation
On a second scenario we might just coast through the downturn. However we will emerge with an economy that has failed to gear up to the demands of the global economy, fallen yet further behind along our developmental path and locked ourselves tighter into a long term pattern of low growth. Sooner or later will come that painful reckoning described in the first scenario.
19. We should view the crisis in the context of our history as a young nation. The last time the world faced a contraction of this size Malaysia did not yet exist. The crisis is has broken out at a critical point in the development paths of our economy and our political system. Put these three factors together, and we have a perfect storm: an unprecedented need for leadership at just the moment when our system for selecting and legitimizing political leadership appears to be broken.
Where next
20. My reading of where we stand may seem harsh, but perhaps the world is harsher. I don’t wish to offend, but I believe we need to grasp the peril of our situation clearly before we know what to do next.
21. In the medium term we need to make a developmental leap. But a leap is not a straight-line projection of the present. It is not about doing more of what we have done. We are not going to get there putting up more highways, declaring more Growth Corridors or planting more oil palm. The way up is a complex achievement that in turn depends on transformative improvements in governance and a successful reform of our political system.
22. The world recession is a critical opportunity for us to re-gear and re-tool the Malaysian economy because it is a challenge to take bold, imaginative measures. It lights the fire under our feet to make transformative improvements in governance and politics. It also demands that the government spend boldly on the right things, in the right way, to stimulate demand.
23. Two criteria for ‘the right things” would be those public investments with the widest multiplier effects, over the short and the longer term. Over the short term, there are often tradeoffs between impact on demand and on improved economic capacity. Over the long term, the two are the same. The “long term multiplier” is nothing less than the improved capacity of the entire system.
24. So we must think carefully about what we spend the “fiscal stimulus” on. There is no such thing as a free lunch. We will be going into deficit to finance this stimulus, so it can’t be about just spreading money around. So far there has been no impact from the stimulus package announced in November, nor was it clear what the economic thinking was behind that measure.
25. We don’t need another stimulus “package” of spending here and there. What we need, and what the crisis gives us a chance to implement, is a set of bold projects with an economic story behind them to help Malaysia make the developmental leap we have been missing. We have a once in a lifetime economic challenge. We must meet this challenge with a historic sense of purpose. That means, not with a “stimulus” consisting of ad hoc pork barrel expenditures but a set of public investment projects guided by a vision, designed around a strategy and governed with bullet-proof integrity.
26. Let me suggest two programmes and an enabling set of reforms.
Oil and Gas Centre
27. Oil and Gas has served us well, but we have still not tapped our strategic strength in this sector despite our unmatched natural and strategic advantages:
a) Malaysia is the leading Oil and Gas producer in the region. Our proven reserves have been augmented by major discoveries in recent years.
b) More than half the world’s annual merchant fleet tonnage passes through the Straits of Malacca, with most of it continuing into the South China Sea. Oil flows through the Straits of Malacca are three times greater than that through the Suez Canal and fifteen times greater than flow through the Panama Canal. We live alongside the most important oil shipping route in the world. Our fifteenth century ancestors may have done more to tap that advantage than we.
c) We have in Petronas one of the leading oil companies in the world.
d) We have strong trade links to Middle Eastern oil producers.
28. We could do much better. Consider that despite having no oil resources, Singapore is among the top three global players in trading, refining and manufacture of oil and gas equipment.
29. Three years ago, while Malaysia still held the OIC chairmanship, I proposed a National Strategic Plan with the vision of developing Malaysia into Asia’s Oil and Gas centre, with leading capabilities in refining, shipping, distribution, storage and downstream production.
30. We should develop offshore storage facilities for other producer nations with high country risk. Oil and gas exploration, extraction and production are increasingly technology driven, high value operations in themselves as oil becomes scarcer. There will be large payoffs for having our own R&D capability in exploration, extraction and production. We should specialize in energy technology, including alternative energy sources for a carbon-constrained future.
31. We should form partnerships along the value chain. These could include a network of agreements with Gulf producers and with major consumers to improve oil security. We could form G-to-G partnerships in ASEAN, provide tax incentives and craft innovative Production Sharing Contracts,
32. Here’s the exciting thing. For all these ventures to work we need greatly improved capabilities to finance and trade oil and gas. Given our very special geographic and strategic advantages, we should build the first spot and futures Exchange for Oil and Gas in an OIC nation.
33. Whatever the government chooses to do, it should understand that for us to get on a higher growth plane we must specialize, and we must have a government capable of providing the direction, drive and executive capability to foster that specialization. Globalisation requires a relentless focus on competitive advantage. We need our own story.
Housing
34. Let’s start a program to bring home ownership to the whole country. The construction sector creates multiplier effects in more than a hundred other industries. It provides work in everything from insurance to advertising to materials supply. Of all the national projects we could undertake, few could have such a large social as well as an economic multiplier effect.
35. Housing builds powerful social capital and gives substance to citizenship. A national housing project allows us to design entire communities and townships with their transportation, communications, educational and recreational infrastructure with a strong set of standards and social objectives. It lets us plan the housing stock to cater to the lifecycle of home ownership, with a good mix of options for different localities and life-cycle requirements. It is a way to grow racial harmony, build integrated schools, and help the poor without creating a crutch.
36. Let’s commit ourselves to having each and every Malaysian family own their own home. This vision is a radical challenge to the nation to do better. It will require extraordinary improvements in our ability to design, construct and finance housing projects. It will require the setting up of a statutory board to oversee housing development, administration and management. As land governed by the State powers, the States will have to implement these projects. This will require, and hopefully force, improved coordination between the Federal and State governments, especially now that we might no longer expect that the same party is in power in both places.
37. Financing for this investment could come from modifications to EPF, with matched contributions from the government towards the value of the property. Because it comes out of savings, this spending would be non-inflationary. I can think of few better ways to get the economy humming again, give our citizens a focal point of hope and pride, and weave a safety net that also encourages savings and enterprise.
Public sector reform
38. We cannot wait till the crisis blows over to tackle the public delivery system head on. This is because we will need an upgraded public service just to implement such large public programs successfully.
39. The need for improved governance is greater, not less, in challenging economic times. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt implemented the New Deal to push America out of the Great Depression, many feared that this would present a huge opportunity for graft. Confounding these expectations, the New Deal programmes were implemented with unprecedented transparency. FDR did this by building oversight into the implementation of his rescue program.
40. Similarly, the two programmes I have suggested would come to nought if they were derailed by the corrupt practices that have become the norm in this country. Instead of rescuing our economy they would become millstones around our neck. As part of the project management of these programmes we should set up powerful, independent divisions devoted to investigating complaints of fraud.
41. Today the role of the public sector is a lot more complex than anyone could have imagined even a decade ago. A “public delivery system” that was designed for the challenges of the 1950’s cannot possibly cope with the complex demands of the globalised 21st. The current crisis propagated worldwide in internet time as regulators scrambled to catch up. Government now needs to be smarter, tougher and more responsive than before to engage on equal footing with business. We need leadership to change the operating model of the civil service from last century’s centralized planning approach, driven by budgetary plans, to a model of government as facilitator, aggregator and convener of business. Government that targets economic outcomes rather than accounting quotas.
42. We need to demand as much talent and organizational ability in our public service as the private sector does of its own people. Today the quality government is a core component of national competitiveness. However there is nothing strange about the expectation that the civil service should be a high performing organization led by an intellectual elite. It is how the Malayan Civil Service used to operate. Many of us remember it.
CONCLUSION
43. What I have outlined this afternoon are just my suggestions. I am sure there are many other ideas in this distinguished company.
44. Let me end where I began, with the question of confidence.
45. We need to restore confidence in our basic institutions, our leadership, the integrity of the Federation, the rule of law and our national Constitution. This is of a piece with the vital economic confidence needed to unleash credit, investment and consumption, and get everyone working. We need to restore confidence in Malaysia.
46. Real confidence is hope based on an apprehension of the truth. It is social capital and trust in society and its future. It is inspired by leaders willing to take us through an unflinching evaluation of where we are today to a vision of what we are capable of tomorrow. It means owning our own story and banking on it.
47. The country can no longer afford a political class out of touch with reality that trades on yesterday’s political insecurities and a government that has forgotten its purpose. We need a renewal of leadership as a first step to restoring true confidence.
48. The economic statistics are mere indicators of the activities and expectations of the unique national community we are trying to build, so that building an economy and building a nation, providing good governance and being truthful, are not things that can be achieved apart from one another. To reignite our confidence would be to revitalise the project of building Malaysia.
January 15, 2009
YBM Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah
RESTORING CONFIDENCE
[salutations]
A problem of confidence
The present financial crisis started in a speculative housing bubble in the US, inflated on greed and irrational confidence. Shady practices went mainstream under the wing of weak financial governance. When the bubble burst, gold-plated names on Wall Street were implicated. A massive loss of confidence in the financial sector has crippled credit flow worldwide. Consumption has contracted as households put off expenditure out of uncertainty. Investment has retreated. There has been a massive loss of confidence.
2. Expectations are a central factor in macroeconomic booms and busts. If a sharp loss of confidence is an endogenous part of the problem, a restoration of confidence must be the beginning of the solution. However, if we have learned anything at all from the crisis, this cannot be hollow confidence, but confidence based on a clear appreciation of our prospects. The lesson of the global economy is that false confidence based on irrational hope leads to collapse, disillusionment and pessimism.
3. We need a sound appreciation of our reality before we can dream of changing it. We need to face harsh truths before we can believe in ourselves and inspire others to believe in us. In coming to that sound appreciation here in Malaysia we have run out of time for politically manipulated messaging and sugar coated evasions.
4. Let us just begin by acknowledging that we will not be spared the effects of the global economic crisis.
5. Our leaders only undermine the government’s credibility when they paint an alternative reality for us. I understand we don’t want to frighten markets and voters unnecessarily, but we do not live in an information bubble. Only the most resolutely ignorant can now pretend that all shall be fine while the rest of the world deals with what Jeffrey Sachs has called “a world economy teetering on the brink of unprecedented catastrophe.” Leaders who deny the seriousness of the crisis only raise the suspicion that they have no ideas for coping with it. They undermine the government’s credibility when that very credibility, that confidence, is a key issue.
6. We are a trading and exporting nation. While we were relatively shielded from the first wave of financial failures there is no escape from the sharp demand slump in the global economy. The Government and Bank Negara maintain that our growth rate this year will be 3.5%. I fear it could be well under that. The latest numbers show a plunge in industrial activity, with manufacturing output in November, down 9.4 percent from a year ago. December may well be worse. Exports are down. There has been a dramatic swing in the balance of payments to a RM31 billion deficit in the third quarter, from a surplus of RM26 billion in the second. Anyone looking at the size of the downturn and at its swiftness can only wonder if we will be sailing through. This crisis really “went global” only in the final quarter of last year, but within that single quarter manufacturing both here and in Singapore contracted by more than 10 percent on the previous year. Policymakers in Singapore appear far more alarmed than our own. After having declared a recession, they found that the effects of the crisis were far worse than they thought. We are just at the beginning, and the bottom is not yet in sight.
7. Three and a half percent growth, even if we achieve it, will not create enough jobs to employ the large number who enter the workforce each year from our young population. Given our demographic profile and the fact that we are an oil exporter, our baseline do-nothing growth figure is not 0% but closer to 4%.
8. We do have a problem. Now we need to acknowledge that we are not in good shape to deal with it. After early decades of rapid progress, it looks like that economic growth has flattened, our public delivery system calcified and our economic leadership run out of ideas.
The financial crisis in the context of our developmental path
9. Malaysia is squeezed between being the low cost manufacturer we once excelled as, and the knowledge-intensive economy we are failing to become. Our years of sustained high growth ended in 1997 with the Asian Economic Crisis. With the subsequent rise of China and India as low cost producers with giant domestic markets, the manufacturing sector which propelled that growth is being hollowed out.
10. We are in the infamous “middle Income trap”. No longer cheap enough to compete with low cost producers and not advanced enough to compete with more innovative ones, we find ourselves squeezed in between with no economic story. Successful economies, like successful companies, need a compelling story, and we don’t have one. With falling communications and transport costs, the skilled engineers, managers and designers of the rich countries are pairing themselves to the cheaper labour of poor countries to extract productivity and cost benefits. The global integration of labour markets favours both rich and poor countries and stagnates the wages of those in the middle that are neither smarter nor cheaper. That means us. Our working people have suffered stagnant wages and a rising cost of living.
11. According to the World Bank, Malaysia’s share of GDP contributed by services was 46.2% in 1987. How much did you think it was twenty years later in 2007? 46.4%.
How much do you think the real wages of our workers grew between 1994 and 2007? By 2.6% in the domestic sector and by 2.8% in the export sector.
Unskilled migrant workers, documented and undocumented, make up 30-40% of our workforce. Meanwhile, alone in East Asia, the number of expatriate professionals here has decreased. Alone in East Asia, private sector wage increases follow government sector increases, not the other way around.
Did we have to learn about this from the World Bank? What has the EPU been doing? Has the cabinet pondered these numbers? Have we had a national discussion about what this?
12. The only long term path to prosperity is increased income through increased productivity. Sustained productivity growth is the engine of China’s unbroken run of high growth. Our failure to increase productivity and working incomes has been masked by an influx of cheap labour. That cheap labour has become another crutch for us.
13. Low growth
a) The other thing masking our underperformance over the last decade is the fact that in this time the world economy has experienced its biggest expansion in recorded history. We have averaged 4 to 5 percent growth throughout a historic boom over which world economic growth has averaged 4.5 percent. Meanwhile the two most populous nations in the world have been growing at or near double digit rates, multiplying per capita incomes and lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty in the greatest expansion of human welfare in history. That boom is over and we have missed it.
b) By analogy, when we view the report cards of our own children, we set our expectations against what they have been given and what they were capable of in the past. Turning to our own country, so richly endowed with natural and cultural resources, a stable society and good institutions, we see a failing report card. Instead of educating our young to be competitive we have turned out large numbers without the skills and attitudes suited for basic work, let alone for the global economy that is not out there somewhere but on our own shores.
Each decade we have discovered new ‘peer-countries’ against whom we might look decent because we have fallen out of the league of the last set of peers. We fail to notice we have been relegated. Remember that in the 60’s we were classified with Taiwan and Korea, in the eighties with Singapore and Hong Kong. Now we are less “relevant” than Vietnam as an investment destination. I remember receiving delegations from Taiwan and Hong Kong who came to learn from us.
14. Inequality
We cannot comfort ourselves that we have sacrificed growth for social equity. Despite the strong redistributive measures the government has pursued for decades, our Gini coefficient, the standard measure of inequality, has been ballooning. In this region only Papua New Guinea is more unequal. We have the most unequal income distribution in Southeast Asia. If there is supposed to be a trade-off between growth and equity, we have not made it. We are failing on both growth and equity.
15. What does it take to make the leap from middle to high income? The countries that have done it recently, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, have one feature in common: they were able to learn from previous crises. Without a buffer of natural resources, each of these economies was more exposed than we were. In relative terms, because they are even more trade oriented than we are, each may be harder hit by this downturn than we are. But we miss the picture if we stand by and comfort ourselves that we are ‘shielded’ because our capital markets have been less open. Our very problem may be that we have been shielding ourselves from learning, which requires systematic change in behaviour or knowledge informed by experience.
16. The criterion of success for making the developmental leap, the key differentiator between the leaders and the also-rans, is not immunity from economic crises (after all, if you have a Stone Age economy, you are completely immune) but the organizational capability of governments to learn and re-organize around new national economic strategies through these crises. Each major crisis is either an important opportunity to transform the economy or a major setback to our ambitions. The question is whether our policymaking and policy implementing apparatus is set up, motivated and led to learn from this crisis. It is a question of the capability of government and governance.
17. We must also retrain and re-skill those who lose their jobs because of this crisis. This cannot be done in the present ad hoc manner. It must be a coordinated program, with courses matched and tracked to learners according to a National Skills Plan which in turns supports a vision for the Economy. Those lost jobs, especially in the manufacturing sector, will not be coming back. We better have a plan and a vision.
18. What are the consequences of sailing into an economic storm in our present condition, after a decade of lacklustre performance and with no plan, no vision for sustained high growth? We can look at two scenarios: breakdown or relegation.
a) Breakdown
As a developmental state, the legitimacy of our government is based on its guarantee of social peace and economic development.
As Professor Clive Kessler has observed: “Social peace in Malaysia depends upon the continuation, and the continuing expectation, of economic growth and prosperity; while economic growth and prosperity depend upon the continuation and assurance of social peace.” This reciprocal relationship between peace and growth makes us prone to a vicious feedback cycle: if either engine were to fail, the other would fail with it, and take us down a spiral of failure with a painful end. Our margin for error is slimmer than we think. Our socio-political setup implies that we don’t have a smooth glide down to complete irrelevance. Like a bicycle or an airplane we need to be running at a certain speed to avoid falling off.
b) Relegation
On a second scenario we might just coast through the downturn. However we will emerge with an economy that has failed to gear up to the demands of the global economy, fallen yet further behind along our developmental path and locked ourselves tighter into a long term pattern of low growth. Sooner or later will come that painful reckoning described in the first scenario.
19. We should view the crisis in the context of our history as a young nation. The last time the world faced a contraction of this size Malaysia did not yet exist. The crisis is has broken out at a critical point in the development paths of our economy and our political system. Put these three factors together, and we have a perfect storm: an unprecedented need for leadership at just the moment when our system for selecting and legitimizing political leadership appears to be broken.
Where next
20. My reading of where we stand may seem harsh, but perhaps the world is harsher. I don’t wish to offend, but I believe we need to grasp the peril of our situation clearly before we know what to do next.
21. In the medium term we need to make a developmental leap. But a leap is not a straight-line projection of the present. It is not about doing more of what we have done. We are not going to get there putting up more highways, declaring more Growth Corridors or planting more oil palm. The way up is a complex achievement that in turn depends on transformative improvements in governance and a successful reform of our political system.
22. The world recession is a critical opportunity for us to re-gear and re-tool the Malaysian economy because it is a challenge to take bold, imaginative measures. It lights the fire under our feet to make transformative improvements in governance and politics. It also demands that the government spend boldly on the right things, in the right way, to stimulate demand.
23. Two criteria for ‘the right things” would be those public investments with the widest multiplier effects, over the short and the longer term. Over the short term, there are often tradeoffs between impact on demand and on improved economic capacity. Over the long term, the two are the same. The “long term multiplier” is nothing less than the improved capacity of the entire system.
24. So we must think carefully about what we spend the “fiscal stimulus” on. There is no such thing as a free lunch. We will be going into deficit to finance this stimulus, so it can’t be about just spreading money around. So far there has been no impact from the stimulus package announced in November, nor was it clear what the economic thinking was behind that measure.
25. We don’t need another stimulus “package” of spending here and there. What we need, and what the crisis gives us a chance to implement, is a set of bold projects with an economic story behind them to help Malaysia make the developmental leap we have been missing. We have a once in a lifetime economic challenge. We must meet this challenge with a historic sense of purpose. That means, not with a “stimulus” consisting of ad hoc pork barrel expenditures but a set of public investment projects guided by a vision, designed around a strategy and governed with bullet-proof integrity.
26. Let me suggest two programmes and an enabling set of reforms.
Oil and Gas Centre
27. Oil and Gas has served us well, but we have still not tapped our strategic strength in this sector despite our unmatched natural and strategic advantages:
a) Malaysia is the leading Oil and Gas producer in the region. Our proven reserves have been augmented by major discoveries in recent years.
b) More than half the world’s annual merchant fleet tonnage passes through the Straits of Malacca, with most of it continuing into the South China Sea. Oil flows through the Straits of Malacca are three times greater than that through the Suez Canal and fifteen times greater than flow through the Panama Canal. We live alongside the most important oil shipping route in the world. Our fifteenth century ancestors may have done more to tap that advantage than we.
c) We have in Petronas one of the leading oil companies in the world.
d) We have strong trade links to Middle Eastern oil producers.
28. We could do much better. Consider that despite having no oil resources, Singapore is among the top three global players in trading, refining and manufacture of oil and gas equipment.
29. Three years ago, while Malaysia still held the OIC chairmanship, I proposed a National Strategic Plan with the vision of developing Malaysia into Asia’s Oil and Gas centre, with leading capabilities in refining, shipping, distribution, storage and downstream production.
30. We should develop offshore storage facilities for other producer nations with high country risk. Oil and gas exploration, extraction and production are increasingly technology driven, high value operations in themselves as oil becomes scarcer. There will be large payoffs for having our own R&D capability in exploration, extraction and production. We should specialize in energy technology, including alternative energy sources for a carbon-constrained future.
31. We should form partnerships along the value chain. These could include a network of agreements with Gulf producers and with major consumers to improve oil security. We could form G-to-G partnerships in ASEAN, provide tax incentives and craft innovative Production Sharing Contracts,
32. Here’s the exciting thing. For all these ventures to work we need greatly improved capabilities to finance and trade oil and gas. Given our very special geographic and strategic advantages, we should build the first spot and futures Exchange for Oil and Gas in an OIC nation.
33. Whatever the government chooses to do, it should understand that for us to get on a higher growth plane we must specialize, and we must have a government capable of providing the direction, drive and executive capability to foster that specialization. Globalisation requires a relentless focus on competitive advantage. We need our own story.
Housing
34. Let’s start a program to bring home ownership to the whole country. The construction sector creates multiplier effects in more than a hundred other industries. It provides work in everything from insurance to advertising to materials supply. Of all the national projects we could undertake, few could have such a large social as well as an economic multiplier effect.
35. Housing builds powerful social capital and gives substance to citizenship. A national housing project allows us to design entire communities and townships with their transportation, communications, educational and recreational infrastructure with a strong set of standards and social objectives. It lets us plan the housing stock to cater to the lifecycle of home ownership, with a good mix of options for different localities and life-cycle requirements. It is a way to grow racial harmony, build integrated schools, and help the poor without creating a crutch.
36. Let’s commit ourselves to having each and every Malaysian family own their own home. This vision is a radical challenge to the nation to do better. It will require extraordinary improvements in our ability to design, construct and finance housing projects. It will require the setting up of a statutory board to oversee housing development, administration and management. As land governed by the State powers, the States will have to implement these projects. This will require, and hopefully force, improved coordination between the Federal and State governments, especially now that we might no longer expect that the same party is in power in both places.
37. Financing for this investment could come from modifications to EPF, with matched contributions from the government towards the value of the property. Because it comes out of savings, this spending would be non-inflationary. I can think of few better ways to get the economy humming again, give our citizens a focal point of hope and pride, and weave a safety net that also encourages savings and enterprise.
Public sector reform
38. We cannot wait till the crisis blows over to tackle the public delivery system head on. This is because we will need an upgraded public service just to implement such large public programs successfully.
39. The need for improved governance is greater, not less, in challenging economic times. When Franklin Delano Roosevelt implemented the New Deal to push America out of the Great Depression, many feared that this would present a huge opportunity for graft. Confounding these expectations, the New Deal programmes were implemented with unprecedented transparency. FDR did this by building oversight into the implementation of his rescue program.
40. Similarly, the two programmes I have suggested would come to nought if they were derailed by the corrupt practices that have become the norm in this country. Instead of rescuing our economy they would become millstones around our neck. As part of the project management of these programmes we should set up powerful, independent divisions devoted to investigating complaints of fraud.
41. Today the role of the public sector is a lot more complex than anyone could have imagined even a decade ago. A “public delivery system” that was designed for the challenges of the 1950’s cannot possibly cope with the complex demands of the globalised 21st. The current crisis propagated worldwide in internet time as regulators scrambled to catch up. Government now needs to be smarter, tougher and more responsive than before to engage on equal footing with business. We need leadership to change the operating model of the civil service from last century’s centralized planning approach, driven by budgetary plans, to a model of government as facilitator, aggregator and convener of business. Government that targets economic outcomes rather than accounting quotas.
42. We need to demand as much talent and organizational ability in our public service as the private sector does of its own people. Today the quality government is a core component of national competitiveness. However there is nothing strange about the expectation that the civil service should be a high performing organization led by an intellectual elite. It is how the Malayan Civil Service used to operate. Many of us remember it.
CONCLUSION
43. What I have outlined this afternoon are just my suggestions. I am sure there are many other ideas in this distinguished company.
44. Let me end where I began, with the question of confidence.
45. We need to restore confidence in our basic institutions, our leadership, the integrity of the Federation, the rule of law and our national Constitution. This is of a piece with the vital economic confidence needed to unleash credit, investment and consumption, and get everyone working. We need to restore confidence in Malaysia.
46. Real confidence is hope based on an apprehension of the truth. It is social capital and trust in society and its future. It is inspired by leaders willing to take us through an unflinching evaluation of where we are today to a vision of what we are capable of tomorrow. It means owning our own story and banking on it.
47. The country can no longer afford a political class out of touch with reality that trades on yesterday’s political insecurities and a government that has forgotten its purpose. We need a renewal of leadership as a first step to restoring true confidence.
48. The economic statistics are mere indicators of the activities and expectations of the unique national community we are trying to build, so that building an economy and building a nation, providing good governance and being truthful, are not things that can be achieved apart from one another. To reignite our confidence would be to revitalise the project of building Malaysia.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Who Said Razaleigh Crave for Power?
From: UM
Date: 24 May 1999
Time: 01:57:00
Comments
KOMEN:
INILAH YANG MEYAKINKAN KITA BAHAWA REFORMASI POLITIK PERLU DIBUAT DI NEGARA KITA SEKARANG. JIKA TERDAPAT ORANG-ORANG MACAM KU LI MAKA ROSAK LAGILAH MALAYSIA.
KITA HORMATI PANDANGAN BELIAU TAPI NAMPAKNYA IA TIDAK MENUNJUKKAN REALITI YANG SEBENAR.
NAMPAKNYA KU LI TAK SERIK-SERIK LAGI DIPERMAIN-MAINKAN DAN DIPERBODOH-BODOHKAN OLEH TUAN HJ. DR MAHATHIR.
IA TIDAK MENGAMBIL KIRA GELOMBANG ARUS PERDANA YANG BERLAKU DI NEGARA KITA SEKARANG.
JAWAPAN KITA ADALAH KITA BERIKAN PUKULAN MAUT UNTUK TUAN HJ. DR MAHATHIR DAN MANA-MANA PEMIMPIN YANG BERSEKUTU DENGANNYA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pas tak kuat - Razaleigh
MUKADIMAH BERIKUT ialah sambungan wawancara khas wartawan Utusan SIRAJUDDIN RAFIA dan OTHMAN MOHAMMAD dengan Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah yang disiarkan di Mingguan Malaysia, semalam.
KEBANYAKAN rakyat kini merasakan negara sudah mulai kembali tenang. Kemantapan dan kesetabilan politik juga dirasakan tidak banyak terjejas walaupun dengan tercetus 'gerakan reformasi' yang pastinya akan dapat ditangani dengan berkesan oleh UMNO. Keadaan ekonomi negara juga dikatakan mulai bercahaya kembali. Apakah pendapat Tengku, adakah pilihan raya sudah cukup sesuai diadakan sekarang atau tunggu sehingga ke akhir tempoh tahun depan?
Ku Li: Pilihan raya umum boleh diadakan pada bila-bila masa. Itu hak Perdana Menteri untuk menentukannya. Lagipun dalam sejarah, soal ekonomi bukanlah penentu terbesar keputusan pilihan raya.
Dalam pilihan raya umum 1986, waktu itu pun ekonomi kita teruk, zaman meleset, ramai menganggur, termasuk siswazah. Keadaan di kampung lebih susah. Harga kelapa sawit dan getah jatuh menjunam. Bila pilihan raya, kita (UMNO) menang juga. Malah paling besar dalam sejarah. Pas tinggal satu kerusi sahaja di Dewan Rakyat.
POLITIK KELANTAN UMNO Kelantan amat yakin akan merampas kembali teraju pemerintahan Kelantan daripada Pas dalam pilihan raya umum kali ini. Namun, ada pula yang percaya dengan perkembangan dalam UMNO sekarang, Pas bukan sahaja akan kembali memerintah Kelantan, malah akan pasti sapu bersih. Apakah pula pendapat Tengku sendiri?
Ku Li: Politik Kelantan sukar diramal. Sukar nak terima kemungkinan Pas sapu bersih negeri itu. Masalahnya kini, walaupun pendokong UMNO asal, sudah kembali di bawah satu payung UMNO, namun penyatuan dan perpaduan yang hakiki masih belum benar-benar wujud. Insya-Allah kalau masalah ini dapat diatasi segera, saya percaya Kelantan dapat diambil semula oleh UMNO.
Tengku sendiri pernah mengetuai parti S46 yang menentang UMNO di Kelantan dan daripada pengalaman semasa berada di luar UMNO itu, apakah pada pandangan Tengku kelemahan-kelemahan UMNO Kelantan sendiri dan apakah yang harus dilakukan oleh UMNO Kelantan kini jika ia benar-benar hendak menjadikan keyakinan menumpaskan Pas itu sebagai suatu realiti?
Ku Li: Pas atau mana-mana parti pembangkang, hanya kuat kalau UMNO pecah. Orang UMNO, di semua peringkat mesti cari jalan supaya bersatu dan tak pecah lagi. Buktikan UMNO boleh satukan semua orang Melayu termasuk dari kalangan Pas juga. Pemimpin mesti turun ke bawah, dampingi rakyat, terangkan ideologi perjuangan UMNO. Tegaskan dalam UMNO, soal masa depan ummah Melayu-Islam lebih penting daripada soal kebendaan. Terangkan betapa pentingnya agenda UMNO menegakkan syiar Islam, mengangkat martabat bahasa kita, budaya kita dan kedudukan Melayu-Islam di negara ini. Berhujahlah dengan mereka kenapa perjuangan ini lebih hebat daripada perjuangan Pas dan parti-parti lain.
Bandingkan apa yang terjadi kepada nasib Melayu atau umat Islam di negara-negara lain sekiranya mereka berpecah dan hilang kuasa politiknya. Tonjolkan kejayaan dasar-dasar UMNO seperti DEB yang telah menjadikan negara kita makmur, stabil dan lebih baik dari negara-negara lain walaupun satu ketika dahulu banyak dikritik oleh pembangkang. Tunjukkan keperibadian kita yang baik, ikhlas, jangan korup atau berbangga dengan korupsi. Semua ini penting agar orang tertarik dengan UMNO, terutamanya anak-anak muda yang idealismenya tinggi, tetapi tidak kenal UMNO dan tidak menghayati UMNO sebagai institusi penting orang Melayu, Islam dan negara keseluruhannya.
Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa Tengku sendiri turut bertanggungjawab menumbangkan UMNO di Kelantan dulu melalui kerjasama S46-Pas. Jadi ada yang berpendapat sekarang ini Tengku juga mesti bertanggungjawab untuk mengembalikan UMNO menerajui pemerintahan negeri.
Ku Li: Tanggungjawab untuk mengembalikan Kelantan kepada UMNO adalah tanggungjawab bersama. Saya sendiri, insya-Allah akan cuba sedaya upaya saya. Lagipun UMNO telah kuat kalau diambil kira lebih 100,000 bekas anggota Semangat 46 yang menyerahkan borang permohonan mereka menyertai UMNO dalam tahun 1996. Di kalangan mereka ramai aktivis politik yang amat berguna untuk kekuatan UMNO. Tambahan tenaga dan pengundi sejumlah ini sepatutnya sudah cukup untuk memenangkan UMNO di Kelantan. Lainlah kalau pemimpin bahagian-bahagian UMNO di negeri Kelantan tidak memanfaatkannya, mungkin jumlah ini tidak ke mana-mana. Alhamdulillah baru-baru ini dengan kelulusan 53 cawangan baru UMNO di Gua Musang, beribu-ribu ahli dan pengundi baru UMNO bertambah di kawasan itu. Insya-Allah semua ini akan membantu kekuatan UMNO di negeri Kelantan. Saya harap di tempat-tempat lain termasuk di luar Kelantan juga begitu.
Baru-baru ini Tengku kata Tengku memang tidak layak memimpin UMNO negeri kerana tidak memegang sebarang jawatan dalam kerajaan. Ada pula yang percaya Tengku hanya cuba merendah diri atau trying to be modest.
Ku Li: Saya benar-benar ikhlas dengan kenyataan itu!
Ramai berpendapat kekuatan Pas di Kelantan bukan kerana Pas itu kuat atau kerana Datuk Nik Aziz tetapi kerana kelemahan UMNO sendiri.
Ku Li: Seperti yang dikatakan, Pas sebenarnya tak kuat. Dia pernah kalah dan boleh dikalahkan. Malah, Pas pernah dikalahkan dengan teruk. Lihatlah pilihan raya negeri Kelantan tahun 1978 dan pilihan raya umum 1986. Tidakkah Pas juga pernah tersungkur? Semua bergantung pada UMNO sendiri, sama ada mahu bersatu atau tidak, mahu menang atau tidak...!
PELANTIKAN TPM Nama Tengku menyerlah dan memuncak sekali di saat-saat kekosongan jawatan Timbalan Perdana Menteri tempoh hari. Pada pandangan Tengku, apakah di antara sebab-sebab yang mendorong sesetengah kalangan melayakkan Tengku ditonjolkan sebagai salah seorang contender bagi mengisi jawatan itu?
Ku Li: Ini semua cakap-cakap orang. Saya bukanlah pesaing untuk jawatan itu (Timbalan Perdana Menteri) kerana saya hanya ketua bahagian dan tiada kedudukan dalam parti. Perkara ini saya sudah jelaskan kepada ramai orang, termasuk pucuk pimpinan parti.
Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa penonjolan nama Tengku itu juga telah sedikit sebanyak menaikkan semangat kebanyakan rakyat Kelantan. Ini tentulah membawa harapan yang tinggi bagi ahli-ahli UMNO di Kelantan juga. Namun, tentulah ada yang kecewa apabila akhirnya Pak Lah yang terpilih. Adakah Tengku juga merasai kekecewaan yang sama atau memang dari awal lagi Tengku sudah menduganya?
Ku Li: Dari awal lagi. Malah, bila dibubarkan Parti Semangat 46 dulu, saya dah katakan ia hanya untuk penyatuan Melayu dan saya tak mahukan apa-apa pelantikan untuk diri saya. Jadi, tidak ada sebab untuk saya kecewa. Ini ikhlas, bukannya cakap-cakap politik.
Saya dah jadi ahli MT UMNO sejak tahun 1963. Pada waktu itu, saya bukan sahaja tak mahu jadi menteri, tawaran jadi calon pilihan raya di kerusi Hulu Kelantan yang saya pimpin pun saya tolak, walaupun tempat itu selamat bagi UMNO. Di tahun 1973, saya jadi Naib Presiden UMNO dan masih tolak jawatan menteri kabinet. Ketika itu, niat saya hanya untuk berkhidmat kepada UMNO bukannya nak jadi menteri.
Saya hanya terima jawatan menteri dalam tahun 1976 kerana memenuhi wasiat (Allahyarham) Tun Razak yang menyatakannya sendiri kepada saya di London beberapa minggu sebelum beliau meninggal dunia. Lepas kematian Allahyarham Tun Razak pula, ada ura-ura kononnya (Allahyarham) Tun Hussein Onn (PM ketika itu) ingin melantik orang yang bukan di kalangan Naib Presiden parti jadi timbalannya.
Saya bersama Dr. Mahathir dan Tun Ghafar (Naib Presiden ketika itu) menemuinya dan menyatakan tak bersetuju kalau orang yang di luar hierarki parti dilantik memenuhi jawatan tersebut. Bukan kerana apa, tetapi takut parti pecah. Saya sendiri awal-awal meminta dikecualikan daripada pilihan beliau. Semua ini ada sejarahnya, ia bukan perkara baru dan diada- adakan.
Jadi memang benarlah soal tradisi parti menjadi persoalan utama?
Ku Li: Memang benar. Malah, sebelum pelantikan Pak Lah sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri baru-baru ini pun saya ada pergi jumpa PM, lebih kurang 10 hari atau dua minggu sebelum pelantikan itu, saya pergi jumpa PM. Saya tanya dia, pasal apa dia nak jumpa saya. Dia kata, pasal dia nak minta pandangan mengenai pelantikan TPM.
Saya tanya dia what's all about? Dia kata, sebab dia dipressure oleh MB-MB dan golongan lain menyebabkan dia terpaksa menimbang semula keputusan dia, kerana pada mulanya dia tak nak lantik, dia nak serahkan kepada parti menentukannya. Tapi dia kata nampak sekarang ini pressure tu kuat, dia kena lantik.
Dia tanya pandangan saya. Saya kata, pandangan yang saya boleh bagi cuma you go back to tradition.
Saya ingatkan balik sejarah yang saya sebutkan tadi semasa Tun meninggal, semasa kita bertiga Naib Presiden berjumpa Tun Husssein apabila dia nak lantik orang luar daripada MT dan Naib Presiden. Saya kata tak kenalah Datuk (Tun Hussein), kita tak setuju, in the absence of Timbalan Presiden, kita kena ambil dari kalangan Naib Presiden. Dan begitulah juga pandangan saya kepada Dr. Mahathir baru-baru ini. Saya kata simple saja, you lantik salah seorang Naib Presiden untuk jadi TPM, kalau you nak buat pelantikan sekarang. Itu saja yang saya cadangkan. Saya kata, kalau dah daripada tiga, dua sahaja yang masih boleh bertugas, jadi you pilih salah seoranglah. Jadi tak betullah orang kata saya kecewa. Kecewa apa?
Lagipun, cuba bayangkan, kalau berlaku sesuatu pada Dr. Mahathir, dan kalau seseorang yang menjadi TPM tidak duduk dalam hierarki parti, susah. Kalau berlaku pada Dr. Mahathir, kena strok ke, Mahathir mati ke, Mahathir terpaksa berhenti ke, orang ini kena dirujuk balik kepada parti. Parti akan buat keputusan, mungkin keputusan yang tak memihak kepada orang yang memegang jawatan itu. So it's not possible.
Kerana itulah kalau saya ditawarkan pun saya tak boleh terima. Kalau saya cakap sekarang tentulah orang kata saya sour grape. Tapi dengan ikhlas saya kata, saya cakap semua kawan-kawan, tak boleh. Kalau Dr. Mahathir tawar pun saya tak boleh terima. Inikan pula dia tak tawar. Dia cuma minta pandangan sahaja, jadi saya katakan dia patut lantik salah seorang daripada Naib Presiden. It was for the good of the party. I am not important.
Ada pula yang membuat andaian kononnya Perdana Menteri mempunyai agenda lain untuk Tengku di masa akan datang?
Ku Li: Saya tidak ada apa-apa komen. Ini sekadar cakap-cakap orang sahaja dan semua orang bebas memberi pendapat.
Saya sendiri tak tahu tentang apa-apa agenda.
Kononnya Tengku akan terus ke peringkat Presiden?
Ku Li: Tak naklah...
Atau mungkin terus bertanding lawan Dr. Mahathir lagi?
Ku Li: Saya tak mahu nak kata apa yang Tuhan tak tentukan. Tapi, kalau boleh, tak naklah.
Lagipun, I am not indispensible, orang lain ramai lagi yang baik-baik. Pak Lah ada...
Ada sesetengah orang melihat Tengku lebih baik? Malah ramai yang sudah kerja keras supaya Tengku dilantik TPM baru-baru ini.
Ku Li: Saya dah cakap, ikhlas saya cakap, kerana Allah saya cakap. ''I won't accept kalau PM offer pun. I told him. I am not interested. Kerana tadilah, kerana saya tak ada kedudukan dalam parti. Kalau sesuatu berlaku pada Dr. Mahathir, saya kena berhenti... jadi stopgap, tak guna.
Lagipun, saya dengan Dr.Mahathir pun saya tak tahu saya ini masih secocok ke tidak dengan dia.
Jadi nak tunggu selepas Dr. Mahathir tak ada baru Tengku nak cuba?
Ku Li: Tak, tak. Selepas pilihan raya umum ini kita tengoklah.
So there's no possibility that you'll make a come back during Dr. Mahathir's reign (Jadi tidak ada sebarang kemungkinan Tengku akan kembali semasa di bawah kepimpinan Dr. Mahathir)?
Ku Li: Tak, saya tak kata begitu. Saya kata, selepas pilihan raya ini kita tengoklah.
Tidak syak lagi ramai percaya Tengku sendiri memang akur dengan keputusan Perdana Menteri itu. Malah setiap rakyat merasakan pelantikan Pak Lah itu memang bertepatan sekali.
Ku Li: Saya sudah nyatakan ucapan tahniah saya padanya. Masa dan peluang pula harus diberi untuk beliau laksanakan tanggungjawabnya. Selebihnya terserahlah pada dirinya sendiri untuk buktikan kebolehannya. Soal sama ada beliau berjaya atau tidak, orang UMNO dan rakyatlah yang akan menilainya. Bukankah semua itu untuk rakyat?
POLITIK UMNO Walau apa pun, rata-rata ahli UMNO masih meletakkan harapan yang tinggi terhadap Tengku sebagai salah seorang pemimpin yang berwibawa. Mereka tidak mahu melihat Tengku tenggelam begitu sahaja dalam arena politik negara. Apakah perancangan masa depan Tengku sendiri dalam menentukan harapan ini tidak dikecewakan? Tidakkah pertandingan di peringkat pucuk pimpinan parti menjadi salah satu agenda perancangan tersebut?
Ku Li: Hingga kini, saya belum ada apa-apa rancangan. Apa yang boleh saya sumbangkan untuk UMNO akan saya cuba. Soal masa depan saya, saya serahkan kepada bahagian-bahagian UMNO seluruh negara. Mereka lebih mampu menentukan masa depan UMNO dan orang Melayu kita.
Walaupun jawatan Timbalan Perdana Menteri telah diisi, tetapi jawatan Timbalan Presiden UMNO masih kosong. Pada pendapat Tengku selaku seorang yang berpengalaman dalam politik, adakah ini suatu langkah yang bijak, lebih-lebih lagi apabila terdengar pula suara-suara yang menganggap penangguhan pemilihan itu sebagai menafikan hak demokrasi ahli untuk memilih pemimpin?
Ku Li: Perdana Menteri berhak menentukan siapakah timbalannya. Jawatan Timbalan Presiden UMNO pula adalah hak ahli menentukannya. Ini dua jawatan yang berbeza.
Jadi apa yang dibuat oleh Perdana Menteri melantik timbalannya walaupun ia bukan Timbalan Presiden Parti bukanlah suatu yang luar biasa.
Ada pula yang merasakan penangguhan itu hanyalah melambatkan the inevitable, kerana lambat-laun ia akan terpaksa diadakan juga. Jadi lebih baik ia diadakan sekarang daripada membiarkan ahli-ahli memendam rasa terlalu lama. Apa pendapat Tengku?
Ku Li: Lambat atau disegerakan pemilihan jawatan dalam parti mesti mengambil kira pelbagai sudut. Ini termasuk dari segi peruntukan perlembagaan dan kesesuaian masa.
Pelantikan Timbalan Perdana Menteri dibuat setelah Perdana Menteri menerima tekanan supaya beliau melantik bakal penggantinya untuk menghadapi sebarang kemungkinan ketiadaan beliau. Tetapi tidak demikian pula di dalam UMNO?
Ku Li: Saya kira, UMNO adalah sebuah parti politik yang paling matang dalam negara kita. Sudah tentu ia ada mekanisme yang cukup kuat untuk menentukan soal masa depannya sendiri termasuk soal kepimpinan. Lihat sahaja perlembagaan parti, termasuk yang baru dipinda mengenai cara pemimpin kita dipilih. Semuanya ada di dalamnya, dan kita mesti patuh kepadanya.
Sekiranya Tengku tidak ada niat untuk bersara daripada politik buat masa ini, dan Tengku juga tidak ada perancangan untuk bertanding di peringkat pucuk pimpinan parti, sejauh manakah Tengku mampu memainkan peranan dalam arena politik tanah air dan sejauh manakah pencapaian Tengku dalam karier politik Tengku sendiri, kalau hanya dengan sekadar memegang jawatan ketua bahagian dan ahli Parlimen Gua Musang?
Ku Li: Seperti yang saya katakan tadi, tanggungjawab saya ialah bagaimana untuk berkhidmat kepada orang Melayu, UMNO dan negara! Soal jawatan dan kedudukan bukan saya yang menentukannya. Itu terpulang kepada anggota UMNO dan rakyat.
PENDAPAT PERIBADI Cara nak lawan Pas di Kelantan?
Ku Li: Paling utama ialah kena senantiasa berdampingan rapat dengan rakyat. Ini Pas sentiasa di atas masjid, atas madrasah siang malam, tetapi kita pergi balik sebagai pelancong saja, sekali dua tiga bulan.... jumpa rakyat pun, assalamualaikum dari jauh sambil lambai-lambai tangan saja. Kalau kita tak boleh sentiasa bersama rakyat mana boleh nak lawan mereka.
Kalau (Datin Seri) Dr. Wan Azizah (Ismail) lawan Dr. Mahathir di Kubang Pasu?
Ku Li: Dr. Mahathir pasti menang. Siapa lawan pun dia menang. Sama juga kalau saya lawan, bukanlah saya nak mendahului Tuhan, tetapi mengikut kira-kira dan tradisi Melayulah, mereka tak pernah tolak pemimpin. Melainkan, kalaulah pemimpin itu buat dosa besar. Jadi Dr. Mahathir pasti akan menang. Demikian juga dengan Pak Lah, dan inilah kerusi-kerusi yang Pas akan bagi kepada Keadilan, termasuk kerusi saya di Gua Musang.
Kemungkinan Perlis, Terengganu, Kedah jatuh ke tangan Pas?
Ku Li: Saya yakin Kedah pasti susah nak jatuh ke tangan Pas, sebab kebanyakan kerusi adalah mixed constituency. Kebanyakannya ada 25 hingga 30 peratus pengundi bukan Melayu. Itu menyelamatkan UMNO. Kalaupun separuh pengundi Melayu pergi kepada Pas, ia (Pas) tak boleh menang kerana tak dapat undi bukan Melayu. Itu pendapat sayalah... negeri macam Terengganu pun susah Pas nak menang, kecuali orang UMNO sendiri yang bagi peluang kepada pembangkang.
Last changed: May 24, 1999
Date: 24 May 1999
Time: 01:57:00
Comments
KOMEN:
INILAH YANG MEYAKINKAN KITA BAHAWA REFORMASI POLITIK PERLU DIBUAT DI NEGARA KITA SEKARANG. JIKA TERDAPAT ORANG-ORANG MACAM KU LI MAKA ROSAK LAGILAH MALAYSIA.
KITA HORMATI PANDANGAN BELIAU TAPI NAMPAKNYA IA TIDAK MENUNJUKKAN REALITI YANG SEBENAR.
NAMPAKNYA KU LI TAK SERIK-SERIK LAGI DIPERMAIN-MAINKAN DAN DIPERBODOH-BODOHKAN OLEH TUAN HJ. DR MAHATHIR.
IA TIDAK MENGAMBIL KIRA GELOMBANG ARUS PERDANA YANG BERLAKU DI NEGARA KITA SEKARANG.
JAWAPAN KITA ADALAH KITA BERIKAN PUKULAN MAUT UNTUK TUAN HJ. DR MAHATHIR DAN MANA-MANA PEMIMPIN YANG BERSEKUTU DENGANNYA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pas tak kuat - Razaleigh
MUKADIMAH BERIKUT ialah sambungan wawancara khas wartawan Utusan SIRAJUDDIN RAFIA dan OTHMAN MOHAMMAD dengan Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah yang disiarkan di Mingguan Malaysia, semalam.
KEBANYAKAN rakyat kini merasakan negara sudah mulai kembali tenang. Kemantapan dan kesetabilan politik juga dirasakan tidak banyak terjejas walaupun dengan tercetus 'gerakan reformasi' yang pastinya akan dapat ditangani dengan berkesan oleh UMNO. Keadaan ekonomi negara juga dikatakan mulai bercahaya kembali. Apakah pendapat Tengku, adakah pilihan raya sudah cukup sesuai diadakan sekarang atau tunggu sehingga ke akhir tempoh tahun depan?
Ku Li: Pilihan raya umum boleh diadakan pada bila-bila masa. Itu hak Perdana Menteri untuk menentukannya. Lagipun dalam sejarah, soal ekonomi bukanlah penentu terbesar keputusan pilihan raya.
Dalam pilihan raya umum 1986, waktu itu pun ekonomi kita teruk, zaman meleset, ramai menganggur, termasuk siswazah. Keadaan di kampung lebih susah. Harga kelapa sawit dan getah jatuh menjunam. Bila pilihan raya, kita (UMNO) menang juga. Malah paling besar dalam sejarah. Pas tinggal satu kerusi sahaja di Dewan Rakyat.
POLITIK KELANTAN UMNO Kelantan amat yakin akan merampas kembali teraju pemerintahan Kelantan daripada Pas dalam pilihan raya umum kali ini. Namun, ada pula yang percaya dengan perkembangan dalam UMNO sekarang, Pas bukan sahaja akan kembali memerintah Kelantan, malah akan pasti sapu bersih. Apakah pula pendapat Tengku sendiri?
Ku Li: Politik Kelantan sukar diramal. Sukar nak terima kemungkinan Pas sapu bersih negeri itu. Masalahnya kini, walaupun pendokong UMNO asal, sudah kembali di bawah satu payung UMNO, namun penyatuan dan perpaduan yang hakiki masih belum benar-benar wujud. Insya-Allah kalau masalah ini dapat diatasi segera, saya percaya Kelantan dapat diambil semula oleh UMNO.
Tengku sendiri pernah mengetuai parti S46 yang menentang UMNO di Kelantan dan daripada pengalaman semasa berada di luar UMNO itu, apakah pada pandangan Tengku kelemahan-kelemahan UMNO Kelantan sendiri dan apakah yang harus dilakukan oleh UMNO Kelantan kini jika ia benar-benar hendak menjadikan keyakinan menumpaskan Pas itu sebagai suatu realiti?
Ku Li: Pas atau mana-mana parti pembangkang, hanya kuat kalau UMNO pecah. Orang UMNO, di semua peringkat mesti cari jalan supaya bersatu dan tak pecah lagi. Buktikan UMNO boleh satukan semua orang Melayu termasuk dari kalangan Pas juga. Pemimpin mesti turun ke bawah, dampingi rakyat, terangkan ideologi perjuangan UMNO. Tegaskan dalam UMNO, soal masa depan ummah Melayu-Islam lebih penting daripada soal kebendaan. Terangkan betapa pentingnya agenda UMNO menegakkan syiar Islam, mengangkat martabat bahasa kita, budaya kita dan kedudukan Melayu-Islam di negara ini. Berhujahlah dengan mereka kenapa perjuangan ini lebih hebat daripada perjuangan Pas dan parti-parti lain.
Bandingkan apa yang terjadi kepada nasib Melayu atau umat Islam di negara-negara lain sekiranya mereka berpecah dan hilang kuasa politiknya. Tonjolkan kejayaan dasar-dasar UMNO seperti DEB yang telah menjadikan negara kita makmur, stabil dan lebih baik dari negara-negara lain walaupun satu ketika dahulu banyak dikritik oleh pembangkang. Tunjukkan keperibadian kita yang baik, ikhlas, jangan korup atau berbangga dengan korupsi. Semua ini penting agar orang tertarik dengan UMNO, terutamanya anak-anak muda yang idealismenya tinggi, tetapi tidak kenal UMNO dan tidak menghayati UMNO sebagai institusi penting orang Melayu, Islam dan negara keseluruhannya.
Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa Tengku sendiri turut bertanggungjawab menumbangkan UMNO di Kelantan dulu melalui kerjasama S46-Pas. Jadi ada yang berpendapat sekarang ini Tengku juga mesti bertanggungjawab untuk mengembalikan UMNO menerajui pemerintahan negeri.
Ku Li: Tanggungjawab untuk mengembalikan Kelantan kepada UMNO adalah tanggungjawab bersama. Saya sendiri, insya-Allah akan cuba sedaya upaya saya. Lagipun UMNO telah kuat kalau diambil kira lebih 100,000 bekas anggota Semangat 46 yang menyerahkan borang permohonan mereka menyertai UMNO dalam tahun 1996. Di kalangan mereka ramai aktivis politik yang amat berguna untuk kekuatan UMNO. Tambahan tenaga dan pengundi sejumlah ini sepatutnya sudah cukup untuk memenangkan UMNO di Kelantan. Lainlah kalau pemimpin bahagian-bahagian UMNO di negeri Kelantan tidak memanfaatkannya, mungkin jumlah ini tidak ke mana-mana. Alhamdulillah baru-baru ini dengan kelulusan 53 cawangan baru UMNO di Gua Musang, beribu-ribu ahli dan pengundi baru UMNO bertambah di kawasan itu. Insya-Allah semua ini akan membantu kekuatan UMNO di negeri Kelantan. Saya harap di tempat-tempat lain termasuk di luar Kelantan juga begitu.
Baru-baru ini Tengku kata Tengku memang tidak layak memimpin UMNO negeri kerana tidak memegang sebarang jawatan dalam kerajaan. Ada pula yang percaya Tengku hanya cuba merendah diri atau trying to be modest.
Ku Li: Saya benar-benar ikhlas dengan kenyataan itu!
Ramai berpendapat kekuatan Pas di Kelantan bukan kerana Pas itu kuat atau kerana Datuk Nik Aziz tetapi kerana kelemahan UMNO sendiri.
Ku Li: Seperti yang dikatakan, Pas sebenarnya tak kuat. Dia pernah kalah dan boleh dikalahkan. Malah, Pas pernah dikalahkan dengan teruk. Lihatlah pilihan raya negeri Kelantan tahun 1978 dan pilihan raya umum 1986. Tidakkah Pas juga pernah tersungkur? Semua bergantung pada UMNO sendiri, sama ada mahu bersatu atau tidak, mahu menang atau tidak...!
PELANTIKAN TPM Nama Tengku menyerlah dan memuncak sekali di saat-saat kekosongan jawatan Timbalan Perdana Menteri tempoh hari. Pada pandangan Tengku, apakah di antara sebab-sebab yang mendorong sesetengah kalangan melayakkan Tengku ditonjolkan sebagai salah seorang contender bagi mengisi jawatan itu?
Ku Li: Ini semua cakap-cakap orang. Saya bukanlah pesaing untuk jawatan itu (Timbalan Perdana Menteri) kerana saya hanya ketua bahagian dan tiada kedudukan dalam parti. Perkara ini saya sudah jelaskan kepada ramai orang, termasuk pucuk pimpinan parti.
Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa penonjolan nama Tengku itu juga telah sedikit sebanyak menaikkan semangat kebanyakan rakyat Kelantan. Ini tentulah membawa harapan yang tinggi bagi ahli-ahli UMNO di Kelantan juga. Namun, tentulah ada yang kecewa apabila akhirnya Pak Lah yang terpilih. Adakah Tengku juga merasai kekecewaan yang sama atau memang dari awal lagi Tengku sudah menduganya?
Ku Li: Dari awal lagi. Malah, bila dibubarkan Parti Semangat 46 dulu, saya dah katakan ia hanya untuk penyatuan Melayu dan saya tak mahukan apa-apa pelantikan untuk diri saya. Jadi, tidak ada sebab untuk saya kecewa. Ini ikhlas, bukannya cakap-cakap politik.
Saya dah jadi ahli MT UMNO sejak tahun 1963. Pada waktu itu, saya bukan sahaja tak mahu jadi menteri, tawaran jadi calon pilihan raya di kerusi Hulu Kelantan yang saya pimpin pun saya tolak, walaupun tempat itu selamat bagi UMNO. Di tahun 1973, saya jadi Naib Presiden UMNO dan masih tolak jawatan menteri kabinet. Ketika itu, niat saya hanya untuk berkhidmat kepada UMNO bukannya nak jadi menteri.
Saya hanya terima jawatan menteri dalam tahun 1976 kerana memenuhi wasiat (Allahyarham) Tun Razak yang menyatakannya sendiri kepada saya di London beberapa minggu sebelum beliau meninggal dunia. Lepas kematian Allahyarham Tun Razak pula, ada ura-ura kononnya (Allahyarham) Tun Hussein Onn (PM ketika itu) ingin melantik orang yang bukan di kalangan Naib Presiden parti jadi timbalannya.
Saya bersama Dr. Mahathir dan Tun Ghafar (Naib Presiden ketika itu) menemuinya dan menyatakan tak bersetuju kalau orang yang di luar hierarki parti dilantik memenuhi jawatan tersebut. Bukan kerana apa, tetapi takut parti pecah. Saya sendiri awal-awal meminta dikecualikan daripada pilihan beliau. Semua ini ada sejarahnya, ia bukan perkara baru dan diada- adakan.
Jadi memang benarlah soal tradisi parti menjadi persoalan utama?
Ku Li: Memang benar. Malah, sebelum pelantikan Pak Lah sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri baru-baru ini pun saya ada pergi jumpa PM, lebih kurang 10 hari atau dua minggu sebelum pelantikan itu, saya pergi jumpa PM. Saya tanya dia, pasal apa dia nak jumpa saya. Dia kata, pasal dia nak minta pandangan mengenai pelantikan TPM.
Saya tanya dia what's all about? Dia kata, sebab dia dipressure oleh MB-MB dan golongan lain menyebabkan dia terpaksa menimbang semula keputusan dia, kerana pada mulanya dia tak nak lantik, dia nak serahkan kepada parti menentukannya. Tapi dia kata nampak sekarang ini pressure tu kuat, dia kena lantik.
Dia tanya pandangan saya. Saya kata, pandangan yang saya boleh bagi cuma you go back to tradition.
Saya ingatkan balik sejarah yang saya sebutkan tadi semasa Tun meninggal, semasa kita bertiga Naib Presiden berjumpa Tun Husssein apabila dia nak lantik orang luar daripada MT dan Naib Presiden. Saya kata tak kenalah Datuk (Tun Hussein), kita tak setuju, in the absence of Timbalan Presiden, kita kena ambil dari kalangan Naib Presiden. Dan begitulah juga pandangan saya kepada Dr. Mahathir baru-baru ini. Saya kata simple saja, you lantik salah seorang Naib Presiden untuk jadi TPM, kalau you nak buat pelantikan sekarang. Itu saja yang saya cadangkan. Saya kata, kalau dah daripada tiga, dua sahaja yang masih boleh bertugas, jadi you pilih salah seoranglah. Jadi tak betullah orang kata saya kecewa. Kecewa apa?
Lagipun, cuba bayangkan, kalau berlaku sesuatu pada Dr. Mahathir, dan kalau seseorang yang menjadi TPM tidak duduk dalam hierarki parti, susah. Kalau berlaku pada Dr. Mahathir, kena strok ke, Mahathir mati ke, Mahathir terpaksa berhenti ke, orang ini kena dirujuk balik kepada parti. Parti akan buat keputusan, mungkin keputusan yang tak memihak kepada orang yang memegang jawatan itu. So it's not possible.
Kerana itulah kalau saya ditawarkan pun saya tak boleh terima. Kalau saya cakap sekarang tentulah orang kata saya sour grape. Tapi dengan ikhlas saya kata, saya cakap semua kawan-kawan, tak boleh. Kalau Dr. Mahathir tawar pun saya tak boleh terima. Inikan pula dia tak tawar. Dia cuma minta pandangan sahaja, jadi saya katakan dia patut lantik salah seorang daripada Naib Presiden. It was for the good of the party. I am not important.
Ada pula yang membuat andaian kononnya Perdana Menteri mempunyai agenda lain untuk Tengku di masa akan datang?
Ku Li: Saya tidak ada apa-apa komen. Ini sekadar cakap-cakap orang sahaja dan semua orang bebas memberi pendapat.
Saya sendiri tak tahu tentang apa-apa agenda.
Kononnya Tengku akan terus ke peringkat Presiden?
Ku Li: Tak naklah...
Atau mungkin terus bertanding lawan Dr. Mahathir lagi?
Ku Li: Saya tak mahu nak kata apa yang Tuhan tak tentukan. Tapi, kalau boleh, tak naklah.
Lagipun, I am not indispensible, orang lain ramai lagi yang baik-baik. Pak Lah ada...
Ada sesetengah orang melihat Tengku lebih baik? Malah ramai yang sudah kerja keras supaya Tengku dilantik TPM baru-baru ini.
Ku Li: Saya dah cakap, ikhlas saya cakap, kerana Allah saya cakap. ''I won't accept kalau PM offer pun. I told him. I am not interested. Kerana tadilah, kerana saya tak ada kedudukan dalam parti. Kalau sesuatu berlaku pada Dr. Mahathir, saya kena berhenti... jadi stopgap, tak guna.
Lagipun, saya dengan Dr.Mahathir pun saya tak tahu saya ini masih secocok ke tidak dengan dia.
Jadi nak tunggu selepas Dr. Mahathir tak ada baru Tengku nak cuba?
Ku Li: Tak, tak. Selepas pilihan raya umum ini kita tengoklah.
So there's no possibility that you'll make a come back during Dr. Mahathir's reign (Jadi tidak ada sebarang kemungkinan Tengku akan kembali semasa di bawah kepimpinan Dr. Mahathir)?
Ku Li: Tak, saya tak kata begitu. Saya kata, selepas pilihan raya ini kita tengoklah.
Tidak syak lagi ramai percaya Tengku sendiri memang akur dengan keputusan Perdana Menteri itu. Malah setiap rakyat merasakan pelantikan Pak Lah itu memang bertepatan sekali.
Ku Li: Saya sudah nyatakan ucapan tahniah saya padanya. Masa dan peluang pula harus diberi untuk beliau laksanakan tanggungjawabnya. Selebihnya terserahlah pada dirinya sendiri untuk buktikan kebolehannya. Soal sama ada beliau berjaya atau tidak, orang UMNO dan rakyatlah yang akan menilainya. Bukankah semua itu untuk rakyat?
POLITIK UMNO Walau apa pun, rata-rata ahli UMNO masih meletakkan harapan yang tinggi terhadap Tengku sebagai salah seorang pemimpin yang berwibawa. Mereka tidak mahu melihat Tengku tenggelam begitu sahaja dalam arena politik negara. Apakah perancangan masa depan Tengku sendiri dalam menentukan harapan ini tidak dikecewakan? Tidakkah pertandingan di peringkat pucuk pimpinan parti menjadi salah satu agenda perancangan tersebut?
Ku Li: Hingga kini, saya belum ada apa-apa rancangan. Apa yang boleh saya sumbangkan untuk UMNO akan saya cuba. Soal masa depan saya, saya serahkan kepada bahagian-bahagian UMNO seluruh negara. Mereka lebih mampu menentukan masa depan UMNO dan orang Melayu kita.
Walaupun jawatan Timbalan Perdana Menteri telah diisi, tetapi jawatan Timbalan Presiden UMNO masih kosong. Pada pendapat Tengku selaku seorang yang berpengalaman dalam politik, adakah ini suatu langkah yang bijak, lebih-lebih lagi apabila terdengar pula suara-suara yang menganggap penangguhan pemilihan itu sebagai menafikan hak demokrasi ahli untuk memilih pemimpin?
Ku Li: Perdana Menteri berhak menentukan siapakah timbalannya. Jawatan Timbalan Presiden UMNO pula adalah hak ahli menentukannya. Ini dua jawatan yang berbeza.
Jadi apa yang dibuat oleh Perdana Menteri melantik timbalannya walaupun ia bukan Timbalan Presiden Parti bukanlah suatu yang luar biasa.
Ada pula yang merasakan penangguhan itu hanyalah melambatkan the inevitable, kerana lambat-laun ia akan terpaksa diadakan juga. Jadi lebih baik ia diadakan sekarang daripada membiarkan ahli-ahli memendam rasa terlalu lama. Apa pendapat Tengku?
Ku Li: Lambat atau disegerakan pemilihan jawatan dalam parti mesti mengambil kira pelbagai sudut. Ini termasuk dari segi peruntukan perlembagaan dan kesesuaian masa.
Pelantikan Timbalan Perdana Menteri dibuat setelah Perdana Menteri menerima tekanan supaya beliau melantik bakal penggantinya untuk menghadapi sebarang kemungkinan ketiadaan beliau. Tetapi tidak demikian pula di dalam UMNO?
Ku Li: Saya kira, UMNO adalah sebuah parti politik yang paling matang dalam negara kita. Sudah tentu ia ada mekanisme yang cukup kuat untuk menentukan soal masa depannya sendiri termasuk soal kepimpinan. Lihat sahaja perlembagaan parti, termasuk yang baru dipinda mengenai cara pemimpin kita dipilih. Semuanya ada di dalamnya, dan kita mesti patuh kepadanya.
Sekiranya Tengku tidak ada niat untuk bersara daripada politik buat masa ini, dan Tengku juga tidak ada perancangan untuk bertanding di peringkat pucuk pimpinan parti, sejauh manakah Tengku mampu memainkan peranan dalam arena politik tanah air dan sejauh manakah pencapaian Tengku dalam karier politik Tengku sendiri, kalau hanya dengan sekadar memegang jawatan ketua bahagian dan ahli Parlimen Gua Musang?
Ku Li: Seperti yang saya katakan tadi, tanggungjawab saya ialah bagaimana untuk berkhidmat kepada orang Melayu, UMNO dan negara! Soal jawatan dan kedudukan bukan saya yang menentukannya. Itu terpulang kepada anggota UMNO dan rakyat.
PENDAPAT PERIBADI Cara nak lawan Pas di Kelantan?
Ku Li: Paling utama ialah kena senantiasa berdampingan rapat dengan rakyat. Ini Pas sentiasa di atas masjid, atas madrasah siang malam, tetapi kita pergi balik sebagai pelancong saja, sekali dua tiga bulan.... jumpa rakyat pun, assalamualaikum dari jauh sambil lambai-lambai tangan saja. Kalau kita tak boleh sentiasa bersama rakyat mana boleh nak lawan mereka.
Kalau (Datin Seri) Dr. Wan Azizah (Ismail) lawan Dr. Mahathir di Kubang Pasu?
Ku Li: Dr. Mahathir pasti menang. Siapa lawan pun dia menang. Sama juga kalau saya lawan, bukanlah saya nak mendahului Tuhan, tetapi mengikut kira-kira dan tradisi Melayulah, mereka tak pernah tolak pemimpin. Melainkan, kalaulah pemimpin itu buat dosa besar. Jadi Dr. Mahathir pasti akan menang. Demikian juga dengan Pak Lah, dan inilah kerusi-kerusi yang Pas akan bagi kepada Keadilan, termasuk kerusi saya di Gua Musang.
Kemungkinan Perlis, Terengganu, Kedah jatuh ke tangan Pas?
Ku Li: Saya yakin Kedah pasti susah nak jatuh ke tangan Pas, sebab kebanyakan kerusi adalah mixed constituency. Kebanyakannya ada 25 hingga 30 peratus pengundi bukan Melayu. Itu menyelamatkan UMNO. Kalaupun separuh pengundi Melayu pergi kepada Pas, ia (Pas) tak boleh menang kerana tak dapat undi bukan Melayu. Itu pendapat sayalah... negeri macam Terengganu pun susah Pas nak menang, kecuali orang UMNO sendiri yang bagi peluang kepada pembangkang.
Last changed: May 24, 1999
A Malaysian story: The Razak boys
By Ho Kay Tat
WHEN announcing his impending “retirement” from politics, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said he was the last of the Tun Abdul Razak generation to lead the country as he would be passing over the leadership of Umno to Razak’s son Datuk Seri Najib.
Razak
It was a significant remark as the Razak legacy has had a profound impact on Malaysia.
Who were the Razak generation of leaders or the Razak political boys, as they were often called? What did they represent? Were they as cohesive as one would have assumed them to be since they were handpicked by Razak as the future leaders of the party and country?
A look back at these past 35 years offers a fascinating story.
First, who were the Razak political boys?
Many people would claim to be one, but the core group comprised Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, Tun Musa Hitam, Abdullah and Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad (aka Dollah Kok Lanas).
Razak brought Mahathir back into Umno after he was sacked in 1969 for his attacks on the country’s first prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, whom Mahathir accused of neglecting the interests of the Malays.
Razaleigh was tapped by Razak to promote Malay participation in the economy, first as Bank Bumiputra’s chairman and then to start Petronas.
Musa was a smart political operative who was frequently asked to carry out special assignments for Razak.
Dollah Kok Lanas was Razak’s principal private secretary — his gatekeeper who was both feared and despised by many.
Abdullah, on the other hand, served Razak as the secretary of the National Operations Council (NOC), which ruled the country when it was under emergency rule from1969 to 1971.
The careers of these men were intertwined with that of Razak, but what happened to each of them after the death of their mentor and master? We tell the story of the Razak boys using a timeline:
Hussein
1971
Razak took over from Tunku as Umno president and the country’s prime minister. Post-1969, it was a watershed period in Malaysia’s political and economic balance. It marked the launch of the New Economic Policy (NEP) and the expansion of the Alliance coalition to Barisan Nasional (BN), with the entry of opposition parties like PAS, Gerakan, SUPP and PPP. It was the beginning of the ascendancy of Umno, not just as a domineering political force but also an economic one. It was, in the later years, to change the face of Umno from a party of teachers to a party of businessmen.
The seeds that Razak sowed have grown into what Umno is today. But whether they flowered in the way he had envisioned, no one will know, because his right-hand man and close confidant, Tun Dr Ismail, and he did not live long enough.
Ismail, who was deputy prime minister, passed away earlier than Razak, in 1973.
Razak himself died three years later and was succeeded by Tun Hussein Onn. It would not be wrong to say that if Razak and Ismail had lived longer (both passed away at a relatively young age), Malaysia would perhaps be quite different today.
This is because while it is true the men he groomed did eventually take up the reins of power, it is fair to say that because of his premature demise, they did not spend enough years under his wing to truly appreciate his intentions and vision for the country. Razak’s early passing also led to a power struggle among his “boys” in the years ahead.
1976
When Hussein took over as prime minister, he was in a dilemma as to who to pick as his deputy. In the party hierarchy, he had a choice between Tun Ghafar Baba, Razaleigh and Mahathir, the three party vice-presidents. It was said that Hussein felt all three had “weaknesses” that would make them unsuitable for the job of deputy. Ghafar lacked a good education, while Razaleigh was deemed too young at 39. Hussein was not comfortable with Mahathir’s reputation as a Malay ultra.
Mahathir
Hussein was considering Tan Sri Ghazalie Shafie, the then powerful Home Minister, but was told by a few party stalwarts that he had to choose from one of the three vice-presidents.
In the end, to the surprise of everyone, he opted for the controversial Mahathir. That he himself had doubts about his decision was reflected in what he said when he made the announcement: “I pray to God that I have made the right choice.”
Ghafar was upset and chose not to serve Hussein’s Cabinet while Razaleigh was “compensated” by being appointed Finance Minister. Musa became Minister of Primary Commodities.
One Razak boy, however, had a bad time. Dollah Kok Lanas was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) shortly after Hussein became prime minister, accused of being a communist symphatiser. It was said to be vengeance by Home Minister Ghazalie because Dollah was said to have had a hand in blocking Hussein from appointing him as deputy prime minister. He was freed when Mahathir became prime minister in 1981.
Razaleigh
1981
Hussein surprisingly announced his retirement after a heart operation paving the way for Mahathir to become Malaysia’s fourth and eventually longest serving prime minister.
The start of the Mahathir era was to be the true test of the Razak boys. It was their time to work together on their own. Unfortunately, things did not work out as ideally as some had hoped. Under Mahathir, the rest of the Razak boys fell by the wayside one by one as he consolidated his own position by elevating his own boys to positions of power.
Most people had expected Mahathir to appoint Razaleigh as deputy prime minister, thereby helping the latter to become deputy president of Umno, in the same manner that Hussein had picked Mahathir to be deputy prime minister.
Instead, Mahathir decided that he would leave it to Umno members to choose the deputy president and thereby deputy prime minister. On the surface, it made Mahathir looked democratic but the reason was simply that he did not want Razaleigh as his deputy. Mahathir supporters took the signal and voted for Musa, who pulled off an upset win over Razaleigh. Musa won again in 1984. A once powerful rival in the Razak camp was hence weakened.
Musa
But the honeymoon between Mahathir and Musa did not last long. Mahathir was particularly peeved when newspapers dubbed his administration the 2M (Mahathir/Musa) government. This stopped after Mahathir made it clear that 2M stood for Mahathir Mohamad and not Mahathir and Musa!
After Musa and Razaleigh battered and bruised each other in their second contest in 1984, Mahathir demoted Razaleigh from Finance Minister to Trade and Industry Minister. In a shock move, he made businessman Tun Daim Zainuddin a senator and the Finance Minister. By then, Mahathir had already brought Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim into Umno, helping him to become Umno Youth chief.
It was the time of the Mahathir boys, which eventually led to a falling out between Musa and Mahathir, with the former resigning as deputy prime minister in 1986.
Dollah
A year later, Razaleigh, Musa and the rest of the younger Razak boys, like Abdullah and Datuk Shahrir Samad, teamed up to challenge Mahathir but fell short of victory by 43 votes.
Over the next decade, they spent their time on the sidelines as the Mahathir-Daim-Anwar combination ran the party and government on a tight leash. With power concentrated in their hands and Malaysia enjoying rapid economic expansion and wealth creation during the roaring 1990s, Umno became a money-making machine for many of its members and supporters. All three men cultivated powerful political and business allies.
All good things, however, come to an end and it did for Mahathir and his boys during the 1997/98 Asian financial crisis. Anwar tried to nudge Mahathir out of the picture as the economy and the stock and currency markets unravelled in pretty much the same devastating fashion as Wall Street and the global markets today.
Anwar
Mahathir fought back viciously and Anwar ended up in jail for six years. Mahathir and Daim also fell out and in 2001, the latter quit government for the last time.
After sacking Anwar in 1998, Mahathir had two choices for deputy — Najib and Abdullah. The obvious choice and the one his close supporters rooted for was Najib, son of Tun Razak and someone who had stayed loyal to Mahathir when he was challenged by Razaleigh/Musa and later by Anwar.
Abdullah, on the other hand, was part of the Razaleigh/ Musa group who fought Mahathir in 1987.
In another twist, Mahathir picked Abdullah. And we know what happened after that.
Daim
As Abdullah prepares to hand over power to Najib, Malaysia is at another political and economic crossroads.
Najib’s father became prime minister after Umno and the Alliance coalition fared badly in the 1969 election, which led to the May 13 race riots. On taking over, Razak embraced a few opposition parties and implemented the NEP for the purpose of achieving socio-political stability.
There were no race riots after the March 8 general election this year, but Umno and its coalition partners are today in a worse situation than they were in 1969.
What will Najib do? A new economic agenda? A new political arrangement? And just like his father had his “boys” to help him implement his policies, will there be Najib “boys” to do the same? Who are Najib’s Mahathir, Razaleigh, Musa and Abdullah? And where will they take Malaysia?
Ho Kay Tat is editor-in-chief at The Edge.
http://www.asia-inc.com/index.php/features/154-nov-dec-2008/325-a-malaysian-story-the-razak-boys
WHEN announcing his impending “retirement” from politics, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said he was the last of the Tun Abdul Razak generation to lead the country as he would be passing over the leadership of Umno to Razak’s son Datuk Seri Najib.
Razak
It was a significant remark as the Razak legacy has had a profound impact on Malaysia.
Who were the Razak generation of leaders or the Razak political boys, as they were often called? What did they represent? Were they as cohesive as one would have assumed them to be since they were handpicked by Razak as the future leaders of the party and country?
A look back at these past 35 years offers a fascinating story.
First, who were the Razak political boys?
Many people would claim to be one, but the core group comprised Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, Tun Musa Hitam, Abdullah and Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad (aka Dollah Kok Lanas).
Razak brought Mahathir back into Umno after he was sacked in 1969 for his attacks on the country’s first prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, whom Mahathir accused of neglecting the interests of the Malays.
Razaleigh was tapped by Razak to promote Malay participation in the economy, first as Bank Bumiputra’s chairman and then to start Petronas.
Musa was a smart political operative who was frequently asked to carry out special assignments for Razak.
Dollah Kok Lanas was Razak’s principal private secretary — his gatekeeper who was both feared and despised by many.
Abdullah, on the other hand, served Razak as the secretary of the National Operations Council (NOC), which ruled the country when it was under emergency rule from1969 to 1971.
The careers of these men were intertwined with that of Razak, but what happened to each of them after the death of their mentor and master? We tell the story of the Razak boys using a timeline:
Hussein
1971
Razak took over from Tunku as Umno president and the country’s prime minister. Post-1969, it was a watershed period in Malaysia’s political and economic balance. It marked the launch of the New Economic Policy (NEP) and the expansion of the Alliance coalition to Barisan Nasional (BN), with the entry of opposition parties like PAS, Gerakan, SUPP and PPP. It was the beginning of the ascendancy of Umno, not just as a domineering political force but also an economic one. It was, in the later years, to change the face of Umno from a party of teachers to a party of businessmen.
The seeds that Razak sowed have grown into what Umno is today. But whether they flowered in the way he had envisioned, no one will know, because his right-hand man and close confidant, Tun Dr Ismail, and he did not live long enough.
Ismail, who was deputy prime minister, passed away earlier than Razak, in 1973.
Razak himself died three years later and was succeeded by Tun Hussein Onn. It would not be wrong to say that if Razak and Ismail had lived longer (both passed away at a relatively young age), Malaysia would perhaps be quite different today.
This is because while it is true the men he groomed did eventually take up the reins of power, it is fair to say that because of his premature demise, they did not spend enough years under his wing to truly appreciate his intentions and vision for the country. Razak’s early passing also led to a power struggle among his “boys” in the years ahead.
1976
When Hussein took over as prime minister, he was in a dilemma as to who to pick as his deputy. In the party hierarchy, he had a choice between Tun Ghafar Baba, Razaleigh and Mahathir, the three party vice-presidents. It was said that Hussein felt all three had “weaknesses” that would make them unsuitable for the job of deputy. Ghafar lacked a good education, while Razaleigh was deemed too young at 39. Hussein was not comfortable with Mahathir’s reputation as a Malay ultra.
Mahathir
Hussein was considering Tan Sri Ghazalie Shafie, the then powerful Home Minister, but was told by a few party stalwarts that he had to choose from one of the three vice-presidents.
In the end, to the surprise of everyone, he opted for the controversial Mahathir. That he himself had doubts about his decision was reflected in what he said when he made the announcement: “I pray to God that I have made the right choice.”
Ghafar was upset and chose not to serve Hussein’s Cabinet while Razaleigh was “compensated” by being appointed Finance Minister. Musa became Minister of Primary Commodities.
One Razak boy, however, had a bad time. Dollah Kok Lanas was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) shortly after Hussein became prime minister, accused of being a communist symphatiser. It was said to be vengeance by Home Minister Ghazalie because Dollah was said to have had a hand in blocking Hussein from appointing him as deputy prime minister. He was freed when Mahathir became prime minister in 1981.
Razaleigh
1981
Hussein surprisingly announced his retirement after a heart operation paving the way for Mahathir to become Malaysia’s fourth and eventually longest serving prime minister.
The start of the Mahathir era was to be the true test of the Razak boys. It was their time to work together on their own. Unfortunately, things did not work out as ideally as some had hoped. Under Mahathir, the rest of the Razak boys fell by the wayside one by one as he consolidated his own position by elevating his own boys to positions of power.
Most people had expected Mahathir to appoint Razaleigh as deputy prime minister, thereby helping the latter to become deputy president of Umno, in the same manner that Hussein had picked Mahathir to be deputy prime minister.
Instead, Mahathir decided that he would leave it to Umno members to choose the deputy president and thereby deputy prime minister. On the surface, it made Mahathir looked democratic but the reason was simply that he did not want Razaleigh as his deputy. Mahathir supporters took the signal and voted for Musa, who pulled off an upset win over Razaleigh. Musa won again in 1984. A once powerful rival in the Razak camp was hence weakened.
Musa
But the honeymoon between Mahathir and Musa did not last long. Mahathir was particularly peeved when newspapers dubbed his administration the 2M (Mahathir/Musa) government. This stopped after Mahathir made it clear that 2M stood for Mahathir Mohamad and not Mahathir and Musa!
After Musa and Razaleigh battered and bruised each other in their second contest in 1984, Mahathir demoted Razaleigh from Finance Minister to Trade and Industry Minister. In a shock move, he made businessman Tun Daim Zainuddin a senator and the Finance Minister. By then, Mahathir had already brought Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim into Umno, helping him to become Umno Youth chief.
It was the time of the Mahathir boys, which eventually led to a falling out between Musa and Mahathir, with the former resigning as deputy prime minister in 1986.
Dollah
A year later, Razaleigh, Musa and the rest of the younger Razak boys, like Abdullah and Datuk Shahrir Samad, teamed up to challenge Mahathir but fell short of victory by 43 votes.
Over the next decade, they spent their time on the sidelines as the Mahathir-Daim-Anwar combination ran the party and government on a tight leash. With power concentrated in their hands and Malaysia enjoying rapid economic expansion and wealth creation during the roaring 1990s, Umno became a money-making machine for many of its members and supporters. All three men cultivated powerful political and business allies.
All good things, however, come to an end and it did for Mahathir and his boys during the 1997/98 Asian financial crisis. Anwar tried to nudge Mahathir out of the picture as the economy and the stock and currency markets unravelled in pretty much the same devastating fashion as Wall Street and the global markets today.
Anwar
Mahathir fought back viciously and Anwar ended up in jail for six years. Mahathir and Daim also fell out and in 2001, the latter quit government for the last time.
After sacking Anwar in 1998, Mahathir had two choices for deputy — Najib and Abdullah. The obvious choice and the one his close supporters rooted for was Najib, son of Tun Razak and someone who had stayed loyal to Mahathir when he was challenged by Razaleigh/Musa and later by Anwar.
Abdullah, on the other hand, was part of the Razaleigh/ Musa group who fought Mahathir in 1987.
In another twist, Mahathir picked Abdullah. And we know what happened after that.
Daim
As Abdullah prepares to hand over power to Najib, Malaysia is at another political and economic crossroads.
Najib’s father became prime minister after Umno and the Alliance coalition fared badly in the 1969 election, which led to the May 13 race riots. On taking over, Razak embraced a few opposition parties and implemented the NEP for the purpose of achieving socio-political stability.
There were no race riots after the March 8 general election this year, but Umno and its coalition partners are today in a worse situation than they were in 1969.
What will Najib do? A new economic agenda? A new political arrangement? And just like his father had his “boys” to help him implement his policies, will there be Najib “boys” to do the same? Who are Najib’s Mahathir, Razaleigh, Musa and Abdullah? And where will they take Malaysia?
Ho Kay Tat is editor-in-chief at The Edge.
http://www.asia-inc.com/index.php/features/154-nov-dec-2008/325-a-malaysian-story-the-razak-boys
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)