Mr Lee Suffers A Case
Of Prolonged Gila Talak

A Kadir Jasin

THIS is addressed to Singaporeans. Malaysians and others are, of course, not prohibited from reading and responding, but the priority is to Singaporeans.

I mean those Singaporeans who are members and supporters of the People’s Action Party. Yes, those of you who gave 66.6 per cent of the votes to the PAP in last year’s general elections. Thank to your votes, the PAP won 45 out of 47 contested seats.

And those of you who are not members and supporters of the PAP. Yes I mean those of you who gave 33.3 per cent of the votes to the Oppositions. Thanks to your votes, the Oppositions won two out of 47 contested seats.

Even those who are neither members nor supporters of the PAP and the Opposition are also invited.

By this I mean the ordinary Singaporeans who loyally serve in the National Service and who believe that Malaysia is the number one threat.

The ordinary Singaporeans who enjoy crossing the congested Causeway to buy cheap petrol in Johor Baru – cheap by way of exchange rates as well as purchasing power parity (PPP).

And I am not discriminating against those fiendish Singapore drivers who charge down the North-South Highway in their super fast Subaru Impreza WRX STI Type C as if traffic rules and regulations don’t apply to them.

To them, I say thank you for visiting Johor Baru, which according their great Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew was the “murder capital of the world”.

Thank you for visiting Malacca, Kuala Lumpur, Penang, Langkawi. Temenggor Dam and Kuantan. Thank you for patronising the famous Port Klang "pork bone tea" aka bak kut teh restaurants.

Most of all, I am thanking you for not swallowing hook line and sinker what Mr Lee tells you about big bad Malaysia. Had they listened to him, they would not have come to Malaysia.

Malaysia may not practice the Singapore version of meritocracy. Then again, even in Singapore not everybody enjoys the same degree of equality. Some are more equal than others. But I won’t dwell into that because I know you know your country better.

I know you keep coming to Malaysia because you feel pretty much at home in Malaysia. The bak kut teh sellers are not the “favoured” Bumiputeras. They are the Teochews, Hokkiens and Cantonese. Of course they are Malaysian Teochews, Hokkiens and Cantonese.

Eating and selling pork are haram for the Muslims. So the Bumiputera, the majority of whom are Muslims, are automatically excluded from that business. So is gaming and alcoholic beverages.

Pig rearing, gambling and alcoholic beverages are important business activities in Malaysia. Pig farmers are so powerful that they could force the Malacca state authorities to back down.

Malaysian leaders may, from time to time, proclaim Malaysia to be an Islamic state. But that does not stop the government from issuing lucrative gambling franchises to Malaysian Chinese and Indians.

They are so big and successful that they are now setting up shops in Singapore. Soon you no longer have to travel to Genting to gamble. You can just have to walk across to Sentosa Island.

When you’re tired of racing your Mercedes S Class and BMW 6-Series on our highways and have had enough of the Klang bah kut teh, you know you can check into one of our many world-class hotels, which incidentally are very rarely owned by the “favoured” Bumiputera.

So why am I saying this and why am I being extremely nice to you? Because I want you be totally aware that not everything Mr Lee tells you about Malaysia is true.

Most off all, I want to assure you that whatever we do – good, bad or indifferent – is not intended to coax Mr Lee to rejoin Malaysia.

We have no intention of inviting Singapore back nor are we about to consider remarrying Singapore even if Mr Lee is suffering an extended case of “gila talak” – longing to be reunited with one’s former husband or wife.

After 42 years of divorce, we have grown fond of living without Mr Lee as our strange bedfellow. Two years of living Mr Lee is quite enough.

I am sure very few of you would want Singapore to be part of Malaysia again. Singapore is wealthy. It’s clean and is doing well. Why bother rejoining the poorer Malaysia?

Why should you want to lose the pleasure of going to a foreign country to buy cheap petrol, eat bah kut teh to your hearts’ contend and race your Mitsubishi Evolution X without the fear of losing your driving licences?

Please do me a favour. Please help Mr Lee overcome the “gila talak” syndrome and tell him to stop meddling in Malaysia's domestic affairs.

We don't need him to lecture us and he should accept the fact that he "lost" Malaysia way back in 1965.

http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/index.php?itemid=9147

Lee Kuan Yew Made A Sweeping Allegation:
UMNO Leaders Trying To Topple Abdullah

Singapore’s Minister Mentor, Lee Kuan Yew, was quoted by Bernama today as saying that “UMNO leaders, particularly from Johore” were trying “to topple” Malaysian Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

This is the full Bernama report from Singapore:

Don't Expect Special Treatment In IDR, Singaporean Investors Told

By Jackson Sawatan

SINGAPORE, June 30 (Bernama) -- Singapore companies intending to invest in the Iskandar Development Region (IDR) cannot expect privileged treatment from Malaysia just like the "generous treatment" accorded by China to investors from Hong Kong in Shenzhen province, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said.

"Singapore cannot expect the same treatment from Malaysia," he said in a special interview with Berita Harian to mark the daily's 50th anniversary tomorrow.

Lee, still an influential figure in the Singapore cabinet, said Singapore companies must evaluate whether their presence are welcomed at IDR as there are protests from among Umno leaders, especially from Johor.

"On one side Pas is trying to topple the prime minister but when Umno leaders, particularly from Johor, are also doing the same, Singaporean investors must seriously ask themselves when this attitude will change and whether they welcome us in IDR," he said.

The IDR, straddling 2,217 sq km in south Johor, is a massive project undertaken by the Malaysian government, which many observers say will complement its ultra-modern neighbour Singapore, just like Shenzhen to Hong Kong.

Lee said IDR could pose pressure to Singapore just like Shenzhen to Hong Kong.

The Singapore founding father said Shenzhen was wooing industries from Hong Kong to the province and to nearby towns.

"This has left Hong Kong with only a few manufacturing plants and with high unemployment rate. Hong Kong's economy is now dependent on the service sector," he told Berita Harian, the sole Malay newspaper in the republic.

"If Singapore loses many industries to IDR, we will face serious unemployment problem as not all factory workers can find jobs in the service sector," he said.

He, however, said Singapore would support IDR as the two countries are bound to gain from the multi-billion ringgit project.

"From a wider perspective, we believe it is good for the two countries, with Malaysia savouring the spin-offs from Singapore's economic growth, and similarly Singapore," he said.

Internal politics and protests to Singaporeans investing in IDR are to exploit the issues and to erode support to Abdullah's leadership and the co-operation in the development region, he added.

-BERNAMA

http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/printable.php?id=270520
June 30, 2007 13:10 PM

Comment:

The allegation made by LKY is extremely serious. What is he up to this time? To create chaos in UMNO? To cause instability in Malaysia? To shut up IDR’s critics? Or, is it just a reversed psychological warfare aimed at putting a gag on Abdullah’s critics?

So, what is UMNO’s response to it? How is Abdullah’s administration going to treat such a statement? What is Wisma Putra’s reaction going to be? – Ruhanie Ahmad

Hsien Loong’s Misdemaenour
Abdullah Does The Cleaning?

I had posed a very straight forward and simple question is my recent posting - was it true that Singapore Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong, had said in Langkawi last week, that the Malaysia-Singapore joint committee on Iskandar Development Region (IDR) in southern Johore, was consultative in nature?

I had written a lengthy article about this - There Was A Media Conspiracy On The Slip Of The Tongue Issue? – in www.roncyberprince.blogspot.com Sunday, May 20, 2007.

I wrote the article after I spotted irregularities in two Bernama reports on May 15, 2007, about the joint committee for IDR.

Here is the Bernama report on May 15, 2007, posted at 14:38 pm:

Malaysia-S'pore Agree On Committees To Oversee Joint Cooperation In IDR

By Noor Hayati Muda and Massita Ahmad

LANGKAWI, May 15 (Bernama) -- Malaysia and Singapore have agreed to set up a ministerial-level committee on each side to oversee joint cooperation in the Iskandar Development Region (IDR) in southern Johor.

There will be consultative committees to work on areas such as easy access for investment, tourism and environment cooperation in IDR.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his Singaporean counterpart, Lee Hsien Loong, said this in a joint news conference after a delegation meeting here today.

And, this is the Bernama report, on the same subject matter, on May 15, 2007, but posted at 19:47 pm:

Malaysia-Singapore Agree On Joint Committee To Oversee Cooperation In IDR

LANGKAWI, May 15 (Bernama) -- Malaysia and Singapore have agreed to set up a ministerial-level joint committee to oversee some areas of cooperation between the two countries in the Iskandar Development Region (IDR) in southern Johor.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said today the joint committee would be represented by a minister from each side.

"They will be supported by officials, and at any time that they feel that someone has to be invited to discuss, they can," he told reporters at the conclusion of a two-day unofficial meeting with his Singaporean counterpart, Lee Hsien Loong, here.

Earlier, during a joint news conference, Abdullah and Lee announced the establishment of the committee which would be tasked to further discuss some of the decisions agreed upon by both leaders concerning cooperation in the IDR.

Without any explanation whatsoever, the Bernama report on May 15, 2007, 19:47 pm, had deleted this paragraph - There will be consultative committees to work on areas such as easy access for investment, tourism and environment cooperation in IDR. – which appeared in its earlier report at 14:38 pm.

The Bernama report posted at 19:47 pm had motivated me to find out the reason(s) behind the deletion of the words “consultative committee”. It was a futile effort. I could not get any answers from anywhere or anybody, except from one report from the NST.

Here is the report by the NST May 16, 2007:

Fruitful talks: Special panel to boost investments in Iskandar

By Wan Hamidi Hamid

LANGKAWI: A special ministerial committee will be formed by Malaysia and Singapore to focus solely on bringing in investments and facilitating business and tourism in southern Johor’s Iskandar Development Region.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said the committee would comprise a minister from each country and other ministers will be invited to join in when related issues involving specific projects and programmes were involved.

He said it would be a general committee and not a consultative committee.

A consultative committee could imply the need to refer to each government in making decisions, which would be unfair to Malaysia, as Iskandar is a Malaysian project, and not a joint venture with another country.

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Wednesday/Frontpage/20070516072227/Article/index_html

The above report prompted me to ask these questions: Why the two paragraphs in italic are not found in reports on the similar topic by Bernama, Utusan Malaysia, Berita Harian and The Star? Who said those words then? The NST or Abdullah? If NST, why? If Abdullah, why the other papers and Bernama blacked out these important paragraphs?

I found replies to some of the above questions from Wan Hamidi’s column in the NST May 17, 2007.

Here is the report:

Rising to a new level of understanding
by Wan Hamidi Hamid.

…… Even Tuesday’s discussion in Langkawi created a small furore when Lee used the term "consultative committee" to describe a special ministerial committee between Malaysia and Singapore to help boost the IDR’s growth.

Abdullah cleared the air when he explained that the word "consultative" did not arise at all and it was just a joint committee for both sides of the Johor Strait to ensure the success of IDR.

To some people, "consultative" would mean the committee being answerable to both governments. This is ridiculous because IDR is Malaysian in its entirety and has nothing to do with Singapore. Having to consult Singapore would mean relinquishing sovereignty. This is not the case, of course. That’s why Lee was quick to explain that it was never meant to be a consultative committee and the Singapore media delegation had been informed of the little slip of the tongue.

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Thursday/Columns/20070517075244/Article/index_html

Wan Hamidi’s column verifies that the words “consultative committee” were actually said by Lee Hsien Loong. But, they were later deleted. Why? Because it gave negative implications. Why? Because it definitely made people like me to question the integrity of IDR and IRDA. Why, because it implied that Malaysia surrendered its sovereignty to Singapore.

So, to borrow Wan Hamidi’s words, if “to some people, "consultative" would mean the committee being answerable to both governments,” and “having to consult Singapore would mean relinquishing sovereignty” of Malaysia, why did Lee Hsien Loong, as being reported by the NST “was quick to explain that it was never meant to be a consultative committee” only informed “ the Singapore media delegation” about “ the little slip of the tongue.”?

If Wan Hamidi knew and wrote in his column two days after the event about the so-called “little slip of the tongue”, why other Malaysian newspapers were silent about it? Why Wan Hamidi’s take about the matter was not reported by Bernama and other Malaysia press? Why Lee Hsien Loong only corrected himself through the Singapore press team in his delegation? Why Lee Hsien Loong did not issue official correction about “the little slip of the tongue” made by him in Langkawi to all newspapers?

In addition, why even the NST’s take that “Abdullah cleared the air when he explained that the word "consultative" did not arise at all and it was just a joint committee for both sides of the Johor Strait to ensure the success of IDR” is also not being reported by other Malaysian press?

I have to again raise the above questions because until today Lee Hsien Loong still keeps quiet about his “little slip of the tongue” incidence. Ironically, it is Abdullah who is now being questioned by the Press even while he is in Tokyo.

Here is an example of Abdullah’s statement while in Tokyo:

PM: No Meddling By Singapore

By Saodah Elias

TOKYO: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has brushed aside fears expressed by some quarters of Singapore meddling in the development of the Iskandar Development Region (IDR).

He said the fears arose after Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong inadvertently used the word consultative committee at a press conference in Langkawi last week.

Abdullah and Lee had agreed to set up a special ministerial committee to discuss areas of co-operation including the usage of smartcard for easier travel between IDR and Singapore and the promotion of tourism. A minister will be appointed from each country to sit on the committee.

“That (Lee’s announcement) was a mistake, a slip of the tongue. I have clarified the matter,” he said in reply to a question by a Singapore journalist who had asked him to comment on reports that Johoreans were fearful of Singapore’s involvement in the project during the 13th Nikkei Conference here yesterday.

After that announcement, Abdullah said, the people of Johor were worried that it would mean that any decision that needed to be made with regards to the IDR would have to be referred to Singapore for approval.

“But that is not correct. That will never happen,” he added.

http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/5/25/nation/17834259&sec=nation

I really sympathize Abdullah. It was Lee Hsien Loong who made the boo-boo in Langkawi. But, why is it Abdullah to be the one who has to clear the air? Is this a typical Singapore diplomacy? Or, is it a new Malaysian diplomacy in the context of IDR? Does Malaysia has to stoop this low to please Singapore – the little red dot in the Equator – just because of IDR?

What has Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar to say about this? Doesn’t the Wisma Putra think Lee Hsien Loong has to issue an official explanation about his “little slip of the tongue” issue to relief the burden of explanation from Abdullah? – Ruhanie Ahmad

Joint Committee For IDR:
Shall We Have A Forum?

The latest reaction on IDR is from Renegix. He suggests that an independent group organizes a forum about FDI. It sounds like a good idea.

But who is going to be the organizer? Persatuan Anak-Anak Melayu Johor (PAMJ) which is based in Kuala Lumpur? How many people will turn up? Who will be the main speaker? Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad himself? Will Khairy Jamaluddin allows him to do so?

Well, may be you all can articulate this idea and suggest how to go about it. In the meantime, here is more from Renegix.

“Dy by day, I don’t know anymore how to say or react. I feel like I don’t want to come back anymore. But, that's the place where I have been born, making friends! And the same goes to all of us. And for sure, I will defend it! What had happened actually? Seems like yesterday Tun (Dr Mahathir Mohamad) stepped down as a Prime Minister, in a swift, lots have changed - the policies, projects, etc. Ya Allah, lindungilah negara kami. Pertahankanlah ia, amin!!! Why don’t you or some others organize a talk, forum or anything about this thing (WPI)?”

On second thought, may be it is an excellent move if my dear friend, Raja Petra Kamarudin of Malaysia Today, is willing to organize the suggested forum. What do you think? – Ruhanie Ahmad

Joint Committee For IDR
Getting Fierce Comments

Below are comments from two concerned Malaysians in response to my posting on the setting up of a Malaysia-Singapore joint “ministerial committee” for the Iskandar Developmnt Region (IDR) in southern Johore, which was already agreed upon by Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad and Lee Hsien Loong, in their informal talks in Langkawi two days ago.

Muhammad Ilham:

“This move is just another in the long line of ridiculous decisions our Pak Lah has taken. Yes, I agree that Singapore can be a good and important player in the development of IDR. But, it doesn't mean that it has to be part of the committee that plans and executes decisions. It's as if Singapore and Malaysia are one country, not two different nations. Bit by bit, our sovereignty is being eroded. I want Singapore to be a major player in IDR, along with other interested nations. But, I want it to be on our terms, not theirs. I want Malaysia to be the sole deciding entity, not share the responsibility with Singapore. Want to relax NEP rules in certain sectors of IDR? I can accept. Indeed, I think it is a forward-thinking move, very progressive. Want to use smart-cards for easy entry? Sure, I can still accept. Again, that move is still acceptable and is very progressive. But to form a ministerial level committee to plan the IDR together, that is simply ridiculous. It is as ridiculous as the suggestion months ago, that people can cross into Malaysia from Singapore without going through any immigration control. Well, they backtracked on that suggestion due to fierce opposition from past leaders and grassroots' sentiments. Let's see if we can make this government backtrack on this proposed ministerial level committee.”

Lamandau:

“This is definitely an uncalled for decision. This also strengthens the suspicion that Singapore is having a strong grip on Malaysia for whatever reason(s). I can bet you, we are not getting anything from Singapore in return. Shabery Chik is not competent to give explanation (about this) because he is too junior and ignorant of the interplay of the two nations. What an answer he gave to the Parliament yesterday? May be he thought that all parliamentarians (MPs and Senators) are stupid. Why not he declares on behalf of PM that IDR is exclusively for Singapore only? Day by day stupid decisions are being made by our leaders expecting that the rakyat will swallow them! I have been commenting that the “invisible fingers” of foreigners are slowly, but surely, seen to have influenced our leaders. In no time, will Singapore station its security people as what happened in the water reservoir in Pulai, Johore?”

To access their full comments, please click the link below:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=29933783&postID=1879338811209176830

I have nothing else to add. Except that the voices above definitely represent the concerns of majority of the rakyat who choose to remain silent. Hopefully, Abdullah will read these comments and those from other blogs on the same subject matter. After that, please get the best advice on what needs to be done next. – Ruhanie Ahmad

What Is The Hidden Rationale
Behind IDR Joint Committee?

Everyday, there is a new twist in the bilateral co-operation between Malaysia and Singapore, especially concerning the Iskandar Development Region (IDR) in southern Johore.

The latest, Malaysia and Singapore yesterday agreed to the setting up a “ministerial-level joint committee” to “oversee areas of co-operation” in IDR.

Here are three main paragraphs of a news item about it by Bernama - the national news agency of Malaysia:

LANGKAWI, May 15 (Bernama) -- Malaysia and Singapore have agreed to set up a ministerial-level joint committee to oversee some areas of cooperation between the two countries in the Iskandar Development Region (IDR) in southern Johor.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said today the joint committee would be represented by a minister from each side.

“They will be supported by officials, and at any time that they feel that someone has to be invited to discuss, they can,” he told reporters at the conclusion of a two-day unofficial meeting with his Singaporean counterpart, Lee Hsien Loong. – Bernama

Next, here are some important links about IDR for background reading. They enable us to have a sufficient knowledge about this mega project:

http://www.irda.com.my/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=50

http://www.irda.com.my/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=41

http://www.irda.com.my/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28&Itemid=38

http://www.irda.com.my/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=50

http://www.irda.com.my/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=28

http://www.irda.com.my/pdf/cdp/3._Foreword%20and%20Acknowledgements.pdf

Now, here are my comments about IDR in the context of Abdullah’s statement made in Langkawi yesterday:

IDR is a mega project by Khazanah Nasional - an investment agency of the Malaysian government. Abdullah and Dato’ Abdullah Ghani Othman are IDR’s joint-chairman. IDR also has its own panel of advisers.

So why does the government need to set up a Malaysia-Singapore “ministerial-level joint committee to oversee some areas of cooperation between the two countries in IDR”?

IDR is not limited only to investors from Singapore. It is meant for all investors world wide. So, why only a joint committee with Singapore? Is IDR jointly owned by Singapore?

So what actually is the hidden rationale behind the setting up of this committee? To prove to the world that Malaysia now allows a foreign nation to directly interfere in the development of IDR?

Does the joint committee not giving the impression that Malaysians are not competent enough to manage and develop IDR? Does the government forget that Malaysia is an independent and sovereign nation?

Fellow bloggers and surfers in the Malaysian cybersphere definitely have more comments and questions about the same subject.

The government has to be accountable by furnishing Malaysians with the most satisfactory answers as to why such a joint committee needs to be formed. – Ruhanie Ahmad

Update:
M’sian Workers To S’pore
Already Using Smart Cards

No long after I posted the story about the informal meeting between Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad and Lee Hsien Loong in Langkawi, Alex posted this:

Ron, for your information, tens of thousands Malaysian workers have already used smart cards to enter Singapore since five years ago.

Everyday thousands of Malaysians just insert their smart card into the slot, put our right thumbprint onto the scanner, in less than four seconds, the gate opens (if the thumb print matches pre-record thumbprint stored in the card.)

No immigration officer is in sight to check your passport. That is how Singapore clears tens of thousands of Malaysian workers and students everyday. Read here:

http://www.gemplus.com/pss/id_security/download/Singapore_Immigration_Visa.pdf

– Alex

Thank you Alex for updating me on the latest. And my apology to my readers on the unintentional error in my earlier posting. – Ruhanie Ahmad

Abdullah-Hsien Loong
Talked About Nothing?

Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad had an informal bilateral meeting with Singapore’s Lee Hsien Loong in Langkawi today. They talked about nothing else except Iskandar Development Region (IDR) in southern Johore.

Both prime ministers agreed to the setting up of a Malaysia-Singapore ministerial committee to oversee joint cooperation in IDR.

They also agreed to the use of smart cards instead of passports to facilitate “easy access for people who are travelling between Singapore and IDR.”

Abdullah explained: “that means we do away with the necessity of having to produce a passport and going through immigration which can take a long time."

So, instead of a free access zone (FAZ) in IDR which was scrapped after being heavily criticized by the Malaysia public, including Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia today granted the use of smart cards to enter IDR from Singapore.

Malaysia is an independent and sovereign nation. If FAZ was being heavily criticized because it was construed as giving away Malaysia’s sovereignty to the foreign investors in IDR, what about the use of only smart cards to enter IDR - a territory of an independent and sovereign Malaysia?

Do we think Singapore will ever reciprocate Malaysia’s gesture by granting similar facility – using smart cards instead of passports - to thousands of Malaysians commuting everyday from Johor Bahru to work in Singapore?

So much about Abdullah-Hsien Loong’s informal talks. All about IDR. No discussions on the possible re-construction of the scenic bridge to replace the causeway in Johore Bahru. Nothing on the problem of CPF withdrawal by Peninsular Malaysia workers who had been working in Singapore. Nothing on the revised water agreement. Also nothing on the possible banning of granite and quarry dust exports to the island republic. – Ruhanie Ahmad

Syed Hamid Still Keen
On Bridge Project

THE bridge project to replace the Causeway was scrapped more than a year ago but it is by no means forgotten.

There are senior Malaysian leaders who still want to see it built, and Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar is one of them.

He told The Straits Times yesterday that, as a Johorean, he would like to see the bridge built.

“I think the Causeway is out of date, not in tune with times. We need the bridge. It is not as a gesture of goodwill (from Singapore), but it is good for both countries,” he said.

Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi announced last year that the project had been scrapped as Malaysia could not accept Singapore's requests for sand and the use of airspace in exchange for cooperation on the project.

The bridge - one of the outstanding bilateral issues between Singapore and Malaysia - is not on the agenda for next week's meeting between the two countries' prime ministers.

Nevertheless, there is speculation that it could be revived in the not-too-distant future.

This was sparked by comments from MP for Johor Baru Shahrir Samad several weeks ago.

He said he would not be surprised if Singapore initiated the revival of the project because of its benefits. These were his personal views.

The speculation was bolstered by a private- sector proposal for a high-speed train between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore.

“Definitely if you want to have a fast train, you need a bridge unless it goes underground. It is a private-sector initiative, I do not know (the details),” Datuk Seri Syed Hamid said.

“Whatever it is, we want the bridge.”

By Carolyn Hong
Malaysia Bureau Chief
The Straits Times

http://www.malaysia-today.net/index.shtml

Comment:

Please read my posting on this blog, Sunday, May 6, 2007, The JB-Spo’re Bridge: Is It A Plain Straight Or A Crooked Deal? – Ruhanie Ahmad

Abdullah-Hsien Loong
Meeting In Mid-May
Without Fixed Agenda?

Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said, no fixed agenda had been set for the four-eyed meeting between Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, and his Singapore counterpart, Lee Hsien Loong, in Langkawi on May 15 2007.

"It's up to the prime minister to decide on the issues to be raised in his meeting with Lee," he told Bernama in Kota Tinggi yesterday.

But, he added that though no fixed agenda has been set, issues on bilateral ties may be discussed during the talks.

Asked by Bernama on whether the two prime ministers would dwell on the outstanding issues between the two neighbours, Syed Hamid said, it was up to the two leaders.

Besides Lee, the Singapore delegation to the one-day meeting would comprise foreign, transport and defence ministers, among others.

Don’t we feel strange? Is it not very abnormal for two top leaders of two countries with numerous unsettled problems and pending issues to hold a meeting, although an informal one, without any fixed agenda?

Or, is it because Syed Hamid had said “the May 15 meeting comes at a time when bilateral ties” between Malaysia and Singapore “are at its best” that the two leaders decided to just dwell on any cock-and-bull issues that crossed their minds on that particular day?

May be, just may be, it is not a meeting, including an informal on, that is scheduled to take place in Langkawi on May 15 2007.

As being correctly said by Singapore’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, George Yeo, in Singapore Parliament on Monday, March 6 2007, “Mr Lee Hsien Loong will lead a delegation of ministers up north for a retreat with Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and his colleagues.”

So, is it a meeting or just a retreat where leaders of both countries just rub shoulders, play a few rounds of golf, enjoying the fresh air of Langkawi, and then they split with “feel good feelings” about each other?

But, fine. Datuk Seri Abdullah may raise many things to Hsein Loong while both of them are on the green. But everything is loose and informal in nature. Will they benefit the rakyat?

We still have about two more weeks before the retreat. Let us hope and pray that our leaders will be wise enough to exploit the retreat to the fullest advantage for Malaysia.

Here are some issues to be considered: pending negotiation to re-new Malaysia-Singapore Water Agreement; possible re-negotiation on the construction of a new bridge to replace the existing Causeway in Johore Bahru; payment of Peninsular Malaysia workers’ CPF now being postponed by Singapore.

Other possible issues are no more export of sand, soil and granite to the island republic; imposing levy on Singapore’s vehicles entering Malaysia; rampant encroachments on the Malaysian air-space by Singapore’s military aircrafts.

Three other issues which can also be brought up by Malaysia leaders are the alleged Singapore’s involvement in southern Thailand; the alleged Temasek Group’s buying of Malaysian GLCs shares through proxies; and Singapore’s potential investments in Iskandar Development Region.

So, agenda needs to be set. Issues must be identified and articulated according to priorities. Experts on Singapore affairs have to be mobilized.

The bottom line is that Malaysia must achieve something out of the retreat. And that something must be really worthwhile! - Ruhanie Ahmad

Is The Tiny Red Dot
Really Very Special?

No man is an island. And no nation in the current era of globalization can exist in an absolute isolation. On the contrary, all nations are interdependent in one way or another. This is the dictum of reality that no one can deny - not even Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew (LKY) with his kiasu principles of survival.

Therefore, it is of outmost importance for all nations to peacefully and harmoniously co-exist within their own geo-political and economic spheres - regionally and globally.

So, when LKY described Singapore as “a very special country” which needed a “top grade government” because otherwise the country would just become an insignificant island, he could actually have to stop just there.

LKY has all the rights to mention these words to his people. But, he does not have to say anything further. It is unnecessary for him to say “the biggest mistake any Singaporean can make is to believe that Singapore is an ordinary country and can behave like an ordinary country like Malaysia, like Indonesia, like Thailand, the Philippines, Vietnam, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark...,"

I am of this opinion because the above statement is too generalized, very provocative, definitely subjective, and of course debatable. It is reflective of an arrogance of the highest order.

I also consider such a statement as unpleasant because many people will ask, what extraordinary qualities does Singapore have to merit it being categorized as “a very special state”? And, what special qualities that Malaysia does not have to merit LKY generalizing it as “an ordinary state”?

The same goes with Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam or even the Philippines which were being singled out by LKY in the above statement as “ordinary” countries.

These nations have their strategic strengths and qualities. As members of ASEAN, these nations also have indirectly contributed to the progress of Singapore - at least through the maintenance of the principles of peace, freedom and neutrality in South East Asia.

In the case of Malaysia, how “ordinary” does LKY think about this country? Is Malaysia not the neighboring nation that supplies water to Singapore since times in memorial, without which the island republic may just end up living on re-cycled water?

Is Malaysia not the “rich hinterland” blessed with natural resources, agricultural commodities and petroleum products which fuel Singapore’s international trading activities?

Can Singapore actually become a “very special country with top grade government” if it only exists as a tiny red dot somewhere in the Pacific Ocean?

Can Singapore survive and progress as what it is today if, in not the distant future, Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia, for example, jointly decide to open up a canal cutting through the Ithmus of Kra in southern Thailand, as a short-cut for vessels transporting oil and gas from the Middle East to East Asia and the Pacific Rim?

Or, can Singapore’s financial industry prosper as what it is today if one of these days Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia decide to enact new laws forbidding their tycoons from depositing their wealth and money in Singapore banks?

The above are just a few of the numerous points I can raise in response to LKY’s statement saying that Singapore “is a very special country” whereas Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Vietnam, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark are just “ordinary” ones.

I am not going to elaborate further on this because the debate will be endless, very lengthy, and diplomatically may be sticky.

For example, I can just point out one distinct characteristic of Singapore which I consider it as special – the subtlety of its policies to marginalize the Malays in the island republic.

I know that this observation is subjective, generalized and debatable. But, this is the very point I want to emphasize here – it is important to recognize and accept the fact that any statements made to compare one country’s “greatness” with other nations’ “nothingness” are subjective and susceptible of interpretations which can disrupt bilateral or multilateral relations between the countries in question.

I am very sure that LKY is very much aware about this. He is a respectable leader with excellent vision on nation building. He understands and advocates the significance and the principles of cordial diplomatic relations among nations.

This is clearly reflected in his memoirs From Third World To First: The Singapore Story 1965-2000. In this book, LKY dedicated 72 pages on how Singapore establishes and enhances its bilateral relations, regionally and internationally.

The Singapore’s mission to establish and enhance better diplomatic relations all over the world still continues until today. It is so because Singapore is now searching for more space, influence and dominance – politically and economically. The success of such a mission depends on friends and neighbors – especially the tolerant and considerate ones.

So, this why the recent statement by LKY, saying that Singapore is a “very special country” while some others, including most of its neighbors and friends in ASEAN and the Pacific are just “ordinary nations,” – though might had been said unintentionally - is actually a statement of unpleasant taste. Such a statement should not be repeated. Singapore needs good neighbors and friends forever more in its future quest for a better tomorrow! – Ruhanie Ahmad

Tun Dr. Ismail’s Hypothesis
On M’sia-S’pore Re-Merger

My late father admired Tun Dr. Ismail very much. He said to me one day, Tun Dr. Ismail was a very strict, disciplined and principled leader. Most Johoreans of my father’s generation loved Tun Dr. Ismail. They adored him although Tun Dr. Ismail was not one of Johore’s famous freedom fighters against the introduction of the Malayana Union rule in 1946. My father also once said to me that he had never had the chance to meet Tun Dr. Ismail in person. Nevertheless, Tun Dr. Ismail was his hero.

I came to know Tun Dr. Ismail through his photograph hanged on the wall of my family’s house in Batu Pahat, and through my father’s many conversations with his friends, normally at night, after he had finished conducting his tuition on basic English for my kampung’s youngsters preparing themselves to seek employment in Singapore in early 1960s.

Tun Dr. Ismail passed away while I was studying in England. On that day I happened to be at the Malaysia Hall, 46 Brynston Square, London. My friends and I were about to have our lunch at the dining hall. Suddenly, the was a slight commotion. Minutes after that, we were being informed by the Malaysia Hall’s warden, of Tun Dr. Ismail’s sudden departure.

The reactions of most of us were spontaneous. We were silent in disbelief for a few seconds. Then, most of us just shed tears. I recited al-Fatehah for him. Tears were running down my cheeks.

Articulate

In 1982 I began working as a press secretary to Tun Musa Hitam in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Jalan Dato’ Onn, Kuala Lumpur. And that was the time when I was first introduced to most of Tun Dr. Ismail’s doctrine on honesty, fairness, and disciplines.

In most of the Monday morning prayer session [briefing time] with Tun Musa, he had always reminded all of his personal staff, including me, to understand, articulate and emulate Tun Dr. Ismail’s sets of rules, disciplines, principles and values as a public servant.

Later on, especially after I was elected as a member of parliament [1990-2004], I had always remember Tun Musa’s and Tun Dr. Ismail’s doctrines on public service, especially on punctuality, dedication, honesty, patriotism, racial harmony, public order and national security.

During my years as an MP, I also took the opportunity to dig from the Parliament resource centre, Tun Dr. Ismail’s speeches as being recorded in the hansard [the verbatim report of Dewan Rakyat proceedings]. I had read several of Tun Dr. Ismail’s major speeches. I did this because I wanted to know more about the man, his thoughts and his principles on politics in multi-ethnic Malaysia. This, however, did not help me much with what I wanted to know about Tun Dr. Ismail.

Ysterday, Blogger Nuraina A Samad gave me a copy of the latest book on Tun Dr. Ismail – The Reluctant Politician: Tun Dr. Ismail and His Time – written by Dr. Ooi Kee Beng. And, it is this book that gives me a really deep insights of Tun Dr. Ismail as a man, a father, a diplomat, a leader, and a statesman.

Diplomat

Now I know Tun Dr. Ismail’s politics better. I know he was a true Malaysian. He had no traces of racial prejudice. He had subscribed to the idea of creating a Malaysian Malaysia, though not similar to the one being advocated by the DAP, which originated from Lee Kuan Yew’s vision in early 1960s.

Now, I also know that Tun Dr. Ismail was a superb diplomat. He had excellent leadership ability, qualities and values. He had a far-sighted vision of Malaysia and its rakyat. He had a pragmatic views on how to restructure the Malaysian society which has a very diverse economic and educational backgrounds. He sacrificed his life for his motherland. He played major roles in the formation of Malaysia. And equally vital and significant roles during the separation of Singapore.

However, after reading Dr. Ooi’s book on Tun Dr. Ismail, I am now left with several strategic questions unanswered. These questions are about our future. These questions are based on several hypothesis left behind by Tun Dr. Ismail as being recorded in Dr. Ooi’s book, which I believe, are meant for us Malaysians to think, articulate and provide the answers, whenever we are ready to do so.

Hypothesis

First: In pages 159 and 160 of his book, Dr. Ooi quoted Tun Dr. Ismail’s letter to National Geograpic, dated 22 April 1966. One significant point being written by Tun Dr. Ismail in that particular letter is:

“Singapore and Malaysia are interdependent. Singapore has the finest port in the East and a large portion of her trade depends on Malaysia. At the moment both nations, comparatively speaking, are well off. If they can co-exist for some time, each understanding the other’s point of view, the time will come when they will merge again. It is better to wait for this to come because if they do not do so they will sink together instead of coming together.”

Let me repeat this significant point about the future Malaysia-Singapore relations: “IF THEY CAN CO-EXIST FOR SOME TIME, EACH UNDERSTANDING THE OTHER’S POINT OF VIEW, THE TIME WILL COME WHEN THEY WILL MERGE AGAIN. IT IS BETTER TO WAIT FOR THIS TO COME BECAUSE IF THEY DO NOT DO SO THEY WILL SINK TOGETHER INSTEAD OF COMING TOGETHER.”

And now, let us ask ourselves this question: Will Malaysia and Singapore “merge again” in years to come? Is it true, according to Tun Dr. Ismail, that “if they do not do so they will sink together instead of coming together”?

Second: Also in page 160, Dr. Ooi quoted Justice Tun Suffian about Tun Dr. Ismail’s view on Malaysian Malaysia:

Malaysian-Malaysia

“He was a realist, aware of the prejudices of every community. He agreed with Mr Lee Kuan Yew’s slogan “Malaysia for Malaysians”, but he did not agree that it could be done overnight, he knew that the inborn prejudice and resistance of millions have to be worn down patiently, that the millions from every community have to be convinced slowly, that they have to be persuaded steadily in the delicate process of uniting the various races in Malaysia.”

I view these two hypothesis of Tun Dr. Ismail are interrelated. These, therefore, should lead us to another question: Will the re-merger of Malaysia and Singapore become a reality after the slogan of “Malaysia for Malaysians” has been fully understood, agreed and accepted by all Malaysians in the future?

I will leave these two strategic questions to the people of Malaysia and Singapore to think and ponder. But, I also hope that these two questions will not be left unarticulated by leaders of both nations.

My personal opinion, however, is that the re-merger of Malaysia and Singapore, will possibly come true only if both nations and the rakyat are willing to look ahead to a better future and willing to free themselves from the present day’s prides and prejudices.

Discourse

So, Dr. Ooi, your book The Reluctant Politician: Tun Dr. Ismail and His Time, is actually not only a must-read book to better the existing relations between Malaysia and Singapore. To me, your book should also be considered as an important document which can be used as a basis for further intellectual discourse about the future of both nations.

In conclusion, let us all think why Tun Dr. Ismail had said that if Malaysia and Singapore “can co-exist for some time, each understanding the other’s point of view, the time will come when they will merge again. It is better to wait for this to come because if they do not do so they will sink together instead of coming together.”

Tun Dr. Ismail had left us. He will not be able to further deliberate on this hypothesis. It is now up to us, you and I, Malaysians and Singaporeans, to understand the spirit, hope and aspiration hidden behind these words. – Ruhanie Ahmad