Pages

Share This

Showing posts with label Divide and rule. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Divide and rule. Show all posts

Friday, September 3, 2021

Washington cannot define China-US climate cooperation: Global Times editorial

https://youtu.be/e0bXOp3OgXk 

China calls for cooperation in fight against climate change


Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi meets with the US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry via video link on Wednesday. Photo: AFP

Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi meets with the US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry via video link on Wednesday. Photo: AFP

 

US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry is on his second visit to China this year, hoping to promote China-US cooperation on the climate issue. As the climate issue is a common concern of all mankind, Beijing and Washington jointly promoting the full implementation of the Paris Agreement benefits not only the two countries, but also the entire world.

However, US expectations - separating the cooperation on climate issue from the entire China-US ties, giving such joint work a special hype in disregard of the overwhelming complexity of other aspects of the bilateral relationship, making the Joe Biden administration look righteous and reasonable through the lens of climate cooperation, helping the administration win more points politically - seem quite absurd.

The overall US policy toward China has been so wicked. It has imposed a whole-of-government and wide-scale crackdown on China. Then the US suddenly put on a friendly face on the climate issue, inviting China to cooperate with it as if nothing has ever happened. The US wishes to ask China to make new concessions that go beyond the latter's own promises to coordinate US leadership. As Chinese people often ask, "What on earth are you talking about?"

The US strategic containment against China has severely divided the world and threatened China's long-term security. Objectively speaking, the US has destroyed the foundation for the world to do something great together. The COVID-19 pandemic is surging across the world but countries are acting in their own ways. This is the result of political antagonism in today's world.

The US is, on the one hand, making the utmost effort to divide the world, while on the other, building a drawbridge over the huge gap among the major powers. The rope of the drawbridge is held in Washington's hand. The US lowers the drawbridge when it needs it, and raises it up when it doesn't need it any more. It shows Washington's unscrupulous desire to control the world. Is there any reason for China to let the US get whatever it wants?

China and the US can work together on the climate issue and carry out necessary cooperation. But it is obviously hard for the entire Chinese society to accept placing such cooperation in the arrogant logic of the US' China policy of "competition, cooperation, and confrontation," or letting the US arbitrarily define the political implications of China-US cooperation on the climate issue. The US lacks both morality and justice to do so, and it lacks a compelling force to ask China to offer what the US wants.

Cooperation must be mutually beneficial. This is both the principle of sticking to the facts and a strategic morality. If the US continues its comprehensive containment of China, and keeps pushing the hostility between the two countries, it will create constant pollution in the space for bilateral cooperation. This is common sense and conventional wisdom. Many of the US policies toward China are zero-sum, leaving the world a strong impression that the US would not be satisfied until it suffocates China's development. Under such circumstances, Chinese society's willingness to cooperate with the US can hardly be immune to the impact of vigilance against the US.

Washington should not have thought that showing a little willingness toward cooperation in its comprehensive containment of Beijing is "mercy" to China. If they really think that way, they will find no grateful Chinese.

When it comes to climate, China believes that cooperation is necessary, as stated earlier. But if the cooperation has other extended meanings aimed at boosting Washington's political gains, such cooperation must be considered in the big picture of China-US ties. As China is a powerful major country, it has unique influence in many international affairs around the globe. No matter in which field the US hopes to cooperate with China and at the same time promote the US benefits, such joint work must be linked with the entire China-US relationship.

China wants to improve its ties with the US, but China will not do everything to please the US. The major power relationship between China and the US should be on an equal footing and follow the basic principle of mutual respect. If the US ever attempts to treat China forcefully in this logic - asking China to keep putting up good shows, ones that are thought good enough to satisfy the US, then the US returns the favor by relaxing tensions - it is totally wrong. This is not the way the Chinese people like to deal with other countries, and we do not want such "improvement" in China-US relations at all.

Source link

 

ELATED ARTICLES

 

 Related:

 

  ` ` MAN and nature are running out of time. That’s the core message of the UN Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change ...
 
 
` A recent US CDC report found COVID-19 antibodies in blood samples as early as Dec 13, 2019. With more & more evidence surfacing a...
 
 
Fort Detrick, UNC labs at center of virus origins controversy A member of the Frederick Police Department Special Response Team peers out .
 
 
‘Use science, not politics’   China is concerned that the so-called US intelligence report on the origins of the coronavirus will contain p...
 
 
Suaram adviser questions Pakatan Harapan's funding from the National Endowment for Democracy https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/202...
 
 
  Botched Afghan retreat reveals an America struggling to contain China ` Unable to better China in positive competition and with mil..

Thursday, August 22, 2019

US divides China by playing risky Taiwan card with arms sales that will lead to serious consequences and puts Taiwan at risk

https://youtu.be/SZimM5qjIJ0

White House playing wrong card in its risky game with China


Following its $2.2 billion arms deal with Taiwan that was announced on July 9, the United States Department of State has reportedly "informally" notified corresponding House and Senate committees that it supports the sale of F-16 fighter jets to the island.

Not surprisingly, the Chinese government has lodged "solemn representations" against the $8 billion deal, as it has each time arms sales to the island have been proposed or carried out.

That is because they seriously violate the one-China principle and the three China-US joint communiqués, especially the Aug 17, 1982, communiqué, and interfere in China's internal affairs and undermine China's sovereignty and security interests, as the Chinese Foreign Ministry pointed out on Monday.

Of course, should the deal get the green light and be inked by both Washington and Taipei, the actual delivery will not take place for several years.

Even if they were to be delivered immediately, 66 F-16s will do very little to change the military imbalance between the two sides of the Taiwan Straits.

Given the mainland's asymmetrical and constantly enlarging military advantage against Taiwan, rather than constituting a severe security challenge to the mainland, the surplus F-16s to be sold to Taiwan represent a matter of principle in Beijing's eyes. It holds sovereignty over Taiwan to be a "core interest" as well as a diplomatic redline in its relations with foreign countries.

Not to mention there is the legitimate concern that the Washington may be employing the arms sales to Taiwan, along with the ongoing protests in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, as bargaining chips in its trade talks with Beijing.

However, playing the Taiwan card will more likely than not ruin the prospect of a deal rather than facilitate it. As Beijing has repeatedly stated, a deal will not be made at the expense of such a key national interest.

The only thing the proposed arms sale can do is to send what Washington has time and again been warned are the "wrong messages" to Taipei, encouraging it to edge further toward a military showdown with the mainland, the outcome of which is easily predictable. Such a scenario would be detrimental to Taiwan, the mainland and the US.

Given it announced it would impose sanctions on the companies involved in the July deal, Beijing's response to the latest arms sales has actually been disproportionally restrained so far considering the severity of the matter.

But Washington should stop its grave interference in China's internal affairs, cease selling arms to the island and end all military contacts with it, otherwise China will have to take measures to safeguard its interests depending on how the situation develops. Source link



US arms sales to Taiwan will lead to serious consequences 
 
Gun and Freedom

US President Donald Trump confirmed Sunday that he has approved the sale of $8 billion worth of F-16V fighter jets to Taiwan. According to reports, the arms sales involved 66 fighters of this type, and it was believed that the deal will pass smoothly in US Congress.

It would be the largest single US arms sale to Taiwan in recent years. In 1992, the Bush administration decided to sell 150 F-16A/B fighter jets worth $6 billion to Taiwan. That deal wreaked havoc on Sino-US relations.

Objectively, with the PLA's combat capability constantly increasing, even if Taiwan spends all defense budgets to buy US weapons, it will have no real impact on the military situation across the Taiwan Straits. Taiwan is no longer a military rival of the Chinese mainland. The PLA has the ability to disarm the Taiwan military in a very short time. US arms sales to Taiwan cannot change this basic reality.

However, US arms sales to Taiwan have become the biggest link in strengthening political relations between the US and the island of Taiwan.

Beijing has been consistently opposing US arms sales to Taiwan. This time the Trump administration is doing what the Bush administration did 27 years ago, and it comes at a time of tensions between China and the US. It is expected that China will take strong countermeasures.

The Chinese mainland can take steps in two directions. First, it can crank up military pressure on Taiwan, so that it will become a political liability for Tsai ing-wen and her administration. Second, the more weapons Taiwan buys, the greater the risk. Whoever pushes for arms purchases will suffer politically. The Chinese mainland must act firm to establish a new political understanding of Taiwan's military purchases.

There are many measures that the Chinese mainland can take in this regard. To date, promoting peaceful reunification has been the basic purpose of the mainland’s cross-Strait policies. China's policy toward Taiwan can be changed, given the worsening cross-Strait relations by Taiwan authorities. Ratcheting up military pressure is another option for China. It is very dangerous to use force to resist reunification and serve as a strategic pawn of the US, especially at a time of serious tensions between China and the US.

Beijing should insist that the money for the F-16V sold by the US be deducted from its trade with China. The twists and turns of China-US economic and trade negotiations tell us that the US has no bottom-line, and the longer the battle against it lasts, the more likely it will increase our losses.

We suggest that China directly link US arms sales to Taiwan with China's purchase of US agricultural products in the future. China will buy less US agricultural products for every weapon the US sells to Taiwan. If we make that decision, and stick with it for a few years, it will be American farmers versus arms dealers. It won't be long before there is a domestic backlash in the US against arms sales to Taiwan.

It is a long process from the signing of the arms sales contract between the US and island of Taiwan to its implementation. We must not allow this contract to be implemented comfortably between both parties. We must make both the island of Taiwan and Washington suffer because of it. Source link


Arms purchase puts Taiwan at risk 

The US State Department formally announced on Tuesday that the US government had decided to sell $8 billion in military equipment, including 66 new F-16V fighter jets, to the island of Taiwan. The plan still needs congressional approval but it is unlikely to be turned down.

This is the largest-ever US arms sale to the island, which will definitely impact the China-US relations and the situation across the Taiwan Straits.

Taiwan regional leader Tsai Ing-wen's authorities consider the arms purchase a big political score and will try to use it to convince Taiwan people that the US is reliable in protecting the island and that the radical policy of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is secure, hoping the arms sale could help get Tsai reelected as the regional leader in 2020.

Taiwan's military buildup is meaningless when compared with the People's Liberation Army (PLA), which is getting increasingly stronger. Most analysts believe that it will only take the PLA hours to take down the island if the mainland resorts to force. It doesn't matter what weapons the island has purchased.

What Taiwan needs most to keep itself safe is to hold the political bottom line rather than picking a wrong path that leads to the extreme condition, in which the PLA has no alternative but to take decisive action. The major arms purchase could probably bring the island greater risks instead of security.

Taiwan must never try to promote de jure independence. If the island goes toward the direction with the salami-slicing strategy, it will only accumulate risks for itself. Taiwan must not act as a puppet of the US to contain the Chinese mainland. Otherwise, it will only find a dead end. The US won't be able to protect it and the Chinese mainland will definitely not let it have its way.

Taiwan considers Chinese mainland-US tensions an opportunity to develop its ties with the US. The island has been trying to get involved in the US Indo-Pacific Strategy, proactively enhancing its role as a leverage of the US to strategically contain the Chinese mainland. It is a very risky move.

The higher cost and the risk of resorting to force is an important reason the Chinese mainland upholds peaceful reunification. Once the island's authorities, by cooperating with the US, sharply increase the mainland's cost of maintaining peace across the Taiwan Straits, the mainland will certainly reconsider its peaceful reunification policy and deliberate on other options.

If the Taiwan authorities insist on going their own way, the PLA will likely take action against the island to either liberate the island or deter and alert Taiwan secessionist forces. If the island's authorities are bent on their wrong way, the mainland will increase military pressure on the island. Simultaneously, the probability of cross-Straits military frictions will grow, which will boost the likelihood that the PLA will take forceful military measures to punish the island. The DPP will pay for its ventures. Source link

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pence's threat on HK affairs outrageous

The US wants to revive its domestic economy, but choosing a conflict in such an important direction is bound to lead to a serious distraction of resources and attention. China will stand firm, not fail, and history will conclude: America has chosen the wrong adversary at the wrong time.

Related posts:

More people around the world see U.S. power and influence as a ‘major threat’ to their country

 

A new cold war in trade wars also is a tech war and currency war now !


https://youtu.be/DPt-zXn05ac US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo: "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. We had ent...
A Hong Kong resident (center) holds the widely circulated cartoon featuring a Hong Kong police officer's back as he stands alone agai...
A rioter waves a US national flag in Tsim Sha Tsui district in Hong Kong on August 11. Photo: AFP https://youtu.be/m5xXUsU9oEI The ...

https://youtu.be/SIt7HRPBkC4 Move reflects Washington’s limited options: analysts The US on Monday moved to grant another 90-day .

Trump is the biggest threat

Trump-Washington disorder drags world down, lost humanity's fight for survival against climate change


US divides China by playing risky Taiwan card with arms sales that will lead to serious consequences and puts Taiwan at risk

New U.S. arms sale to Taiwan and rising trends of 'white supremacy' in the U.S

https://youtu.be/yMiBxgtRxnM

White House playing wrong card in its risky game with China


Following its $2.2 billion arms deal with Taiwan that was announced on July 9, the United States Department of State has reportedly "informally" notified corresponding House and Senate committees that it supports the sale of F-16 fighter jets to the island.

Not surprisingly, the Chinese government has lodged "solemn representations" against the $8 billion deal, as it has each time arms sales to the island have been proposed or carried out.

That is because they seriously violate the one-China principle and the three China-US joint communiqués, especially the Aug 17, 1982, communiqué, and interfere in China's internal affairs and undermine China's sovereignty and security interests, as the Chinese Foreign Ministry pointed out on Monday.

Of course, should the deal get the green light and be inked by both Washington and Taipei, the actual delivery will not take place for several years.

Even if they were to be delivered immediately, 66 F-16s will do very little to change the military imbalance between the two sides of the Taiwan Straits.

Given the mainland's asymmetrical and constantly enlarging military advantage against Taiwan, rather than constituting a severe security challenge to the mainland, the surplus F-16s to be sold to Taiwan represent a matter of principle in Beijing's eyes. It holds sovereignty over Taiwan to be a "core interest" as well as a diplomatic redline in its relations with foreign countries.

Not to mention there is the legitimate concern that the Washington may be employing the arms sales to Taiwan, along with the ongoing protests in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, as bargaining chips in its trade talks with Beijing.

However, playing the Taiwan card will more likely than not ruin the prospect of a deal rather than facilitate it. As Beijing has repeatedly stated, a deal will not be made at the expense of such a key national interest.

The only thing the proposed arms sale can do is to send what Washington has time and again been warned are the "wrong messages" to Taipei, encouraging it to edge further toward a military showdown with the mainland, the outcome of which is easily predictable. Such a scenario would be detrimental to Taiwan, the mainland and the US.

Given it announced it would impose sanctions on the companies involved in the July deal, Beijing's response to the latest arms sales has actually been disproportionally restrained so far considering the severity of the matter.

But Washington should stop its grave interference in China's internal affairs, cease selling arms to the island and end all military contacts with it, otherwise China will have to take measures to safeguard its interests depending on how the situation develops. Source link



US arms sales to Taiwan will lead to serious consequences 
 
Gun and Freedom

US President Donald Trump confirmed Sunday that he has approved the sale of $8 billion worth of F-16V fighter jets to Taiwan. According to reports, the arms sales involved 66 fighters of this type, and it was believed that the deal will pass smoothly in US Congress.

It would be the largest single US arms sale to Taiwan in recent years. In 1992, the Bush administration decided to sell 150 F-16A/B fighter jets worth $6 billion to Taiwan. That deal wreaked havoc on Sino-US relations.

Objectively, with the PLA's combat capability constantly increasing, even if Taiwan spends all defense budgets to buy US weapons, it will have no real impact on the military situation across the Taiwan Straits. Taiwan is no longer a military rival of the Chinese mainland. The PLA has the ability to disarm the Taiwan military in a very short time. US arms sales to Taiwan cannot change this basic reality.

However, US arms sales to Taiwan have become the biggest link in strengthening political relations between the US and the island of Taiwan.

Beijing has been consistently opposing US arms sales to Taiwan. This time the Trump administration is doing what the Bush administration did 27 years ago, and it comes at a time of tensions between China and the US. It is expected that China will take strong countermeasures.

The Chinese mainland can take steps in two directions. First, it can crank up military pressure on Taiwan, so that it will become a political liability for Tsai ing-wen and her administration. Second, the more weapons Taiwan buys, the greater the risk. Whoever pushes for arms purchases will suffer politically. The Chinese mainland must act firm to establish a new political understanding of Taiwan's military purchases.

There are many measures that the Chinese mainland can take in this regard. To date, promoting peaceful reunification has been the basic purpose of the mainland’s cross-Strait policies. China's policy toward Taiwan can be changed, given the worsening cross-Strait relations by Taiwan authorities. Ratcheting up military pressure is another option for China. It is very dangerous to use force to resist reunification and serve as a strategic pawn of the US, especially at a time of serious tensions between China and the US.

Beijing should insist that the money for the F-16V sold by the US be deducted from its trade with China. The twists and turns of China-US economic and trade negotiations tell us that the US has no bottom-line, and the longer the battle against it lasts, the more likely it will increase our losses.

We suggest that China directly link US arms sales to Taiwan with China's purchase of US agricultural products in the future. China will buy less US agricultural products for every weapon the US sells to Taiwan. If we make that decision, and stick with it for a few years, it will be American farmers versus arms dealers. It won't be long before there is a domestic backlash in the US against arms sales to Taiwan.

It is a long process from the signing of the arms sales contract between the US and island of Taiwan to its implementation. We must not allow this contract to be implemented comfortably between both parties. We must make both the island of Taiwan and Washington suffer because of it. Source link


Arms purchase puts Taiwan at risk 

The US State Department formally announced on Tuesday that the US government had decided to sell $8 billion in military equipment, including 66 new F-16V fighter jets, to the island of Taiwan. The plan still needs congressional approval but it is unlikely to be turned down.

This is the largest-ever US arms sale to the island, which will definitely impact the China-US relations and the situation across the Taiwan Straits.

Taiwan regional leader Tsai Ing-wen's authorities consider the arms purchase a big political score and will try to use it to convince Taiwan people that the US is reliable in protecting the island and that the radical policy of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is secure, hoping the arms sale could help get Tsai reelected as the regional leader in 2020.

Taiwan's military buildup is meaningless when compared with the People's Liberation Army (PLA), which is getting increasingly stronger. Most analysts believe that it will only take the PLA hours to take down the island if the mainland resorts to force. It doesn't matter what weapons the island has purchased.

What Taiwan needs most to keep itself safe is to hold the political bottom line rather than picking a wrong path that leads to the extreme condition, in which the PLA has no alternative but to take decisive action. The major arms purchase could probably bring the island greater risks instead of security.

Taiwan must never try to promote de jure independence. If the island goes toward the direction with the salami-slicing strategy, it will only accumulate risks for itself. Taiwan must not act as a puppet of the US to contain the Chinese mainland. Otherwise, it will only find a dead end. The US won't be able to protect it and the Chinese mainland will definitely not let it have its way.

Taiwan considers Chinese mainland-US tensions an opportunity to develop its ties with the US. The island has been trying to get involved in the US Indo-Pacific Strategy, proactively enhancing its role as a leverage of the US to strategically contain the Chinese mainland. It is a very risky move.

The higher cost and the risk of resorting to force is an important reason the Chinese mainland upholds peaceful reunification. Once the island's authorities, by cooperating with the US, sharply increase the mainland's cost of maintaining peace across the Taiwan Straits, the mainland will certainly reconsider its peaceful reunification policy and deliberate on other options.

If the Taiwan authorities insist on going their own way, the PLA will likely take action against the island to either liberate the island or deter and alert Taiwan secessionist forces. If the island's authorities are bent on their wrong way, the mainland will increase military pressure on the island. Simultaneously, the probability of cross-Straits military frictions will grow, which will boost the likelihood that the PLA will take forceful military measures to punish the island. The DPP will pay for its ventures. Source link

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pence's threat on HK affairs outrageous

The US wants to revive its domestic economy, but choosing a conflict in such an important direction is bound to lead to a serious distraction of resources and attention. China will stand firm, not fail, and history will conclude: America has chosen the wrong adversary at the wrong time.

Related posts:

More people around the world see U.S. power and influence as a ‘major threat’ to their country

 

A new cold war in trade wars also is a tech war and currency war now !


https://youtu.be/DPt-zXn05ac US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo: "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. We had ent...
A Hong Kong resident (center) holds the widely circulated cartoon featuring a Hong Kong police officer's back as he stands alone agai...
A rioter waves a US national flag in Tsim Sha Tsui district in Hong Kong on August 11. Photo: AFP https://youtu.be/m5xXUsU9oEI The ...

https://youtu.be/SIt7HRPBkC4 Move reflects Washington’s limited options: analysts The US on Monday moved to grant another 90-day .

More people around the world see U.S. power and influence as a ‘major threat’ to their country

 

Trump is the biggest threat


Trump-Washington disorder drags world down, lost humanity's fight for survival against climate change


    Wednesday, September 5, 2018

    Are Malays powering the nation ?

    The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics messed up!

    Old politics: If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist and religious-centric tactics and policies of the past, thinking this is what they need to do to keep the votes, it will just be the repeat of past mistakes of the Umno era.


    Malays are powering the nation


    WE refer to “The real Malay Dilemma” (The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics/Sunday Star, Aug 26) by Siti Kassim. Siti’s rambling diatribe against Malay Muslims can be reduced to two baseless, provocative, insulting and defamatory allegations, namely:

    1. Assimilation of Islamic values in governance is responsible for Malay backwardness and inability to compete with other races; and

    2. Malays, constituting 60% of the population, are unproductive and parasitical, depending on the industry and labour of the remaining 40%, Chinese and Indians.

    On the assimilation of Islamic values in governance, Siti questions whether “a Malay society, more insular and superstitious in thought... can compete on a fair footing with the rest of the Malaysian non-Muslim population.” She writes that Malays have been given preferred places in universities, GLCs and the civil service for over 40 years, resulting in “uncompetitive universities, a significant pool of unemployable Malay graduates and with most being employed by the civil service... failed GLCs and ...corrupt administration...” She asks if more religion would help and continues, “This has been the unintended consequence of the assimilation of Islamic values in governance.”

    What evidence has Siti got to link the above allegations of Malay backwardness to the so-called Islami­sation? Has she conducted any studies or consulted reports and research findings to come to that conclusion? Her claim is just hot air driven by prejudice towards Islam.

    There has been no assimilation of Islamic values in governance as provided by the syariah. Having prayer rooms in government offices, teaching Islam to Muslim students in schools, broadcasting azan on TV or having an Islamic TV channel do not make governance Islamic. The Malaysian state is based on a constitution drafted by secular jurists and not on syariah. Most government leaders and top bureaucrats, products of Western education, are very much influenced by secular ideas and ignorant about Islam and its contributions to civilisations.

    It is the separation of the moral from governance under a secular system that has facilitated the corruption, abuse of power, nepotism and cronyism of our government leaders and administrators. So, why blame Islam?

    Siti condemns Malays as parasites. The Cambridge English Dictionary defines a parasite as a person who is lazy and lives by other people working and giving them money.

    Siti writes that the majority of Malays are satisfied with their lives and carry on being religiously obsessed because they have been “able to live off the teats of the government in one way or another”.

    She continues: “Thirty per cent to 40% of the population cannot sustain 100% of us. You need the remaining, at least majority, of that 60% (Malays) to be able to truly contribute economically and not be consumers of tax from the minorities. And religion is not an economic contributor. It is an unproductive consumer of epic proportions with no returns.”

    Obviously, she has not heard of Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. To Siti, Malay businessmen, professionals, workers, farmers, fishermen, civil servants, police and soldiers do not contribute sales tax, income tax, road tax and other taxes payable under our laws. They are only “consumers of tax from minorities (Chinese and Indians)”. In other words, they are parasites. This is an insulting and provocative lie!

    She claims that the transformation of Malaysia from an agricultural to an industrial nation with liberal economic policies was “powered by an industrious non-Malay population and the liberal segment of the Malay society”. She must have been blinded by prejudice not to see the role played by millions of Malay workers, engineers, surveyors, architects, policymakers and administrators in the industrial development of Malaysia.

    Good public education and healthcare services are essential to becoming a developed industrial society. In 2016, Irina Bokova, then the Unesco director-general, praised Malaysia for “leading the way in South-East Asia in fostering inclusive and equitable education as the basis of sustainable green growth”.

    And in his message on 2018 World Health Day, WHO regional representative Dr Lo Ying-Ru Jacqueline stated that Malaysia has been acknowledged globally for its high-performing health system based on a well-trained workforce, excellent infrastructure and quality service delivery.

    Since independence, infant death has fallen by more than 90% to 6.7 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2016. Maternal mortality has also decreased by 89% between 1963 and 2013.

    Who are these “well-trained workforce”? Mostly “unemployable Malay graduates” from “uncompetitive universities” and other institutions.

    Who are the members of “the liberal segment of the Malay society” who powered the industrial transformation of Malaysia?

    Are they those who are blond and advocating “separation of religion and government; religion must be a private matter and kept private; take out religious education from the public arena”? Or those who call for recognition of homosexual, gay and lesbian rights; criminalisation of polygamy and decriminalisation of adultery; and free sex?

    Sorry Siti, if there was any contribution from this deviant group, it was very minimal as many of them look to green pastures outside Malaysia and migrate. The rapid transformation of the Malaysian economy has been powered by patriotic devout Malay Muslims and the minorities, Chinese and Indians.

    It is not the Malays who face a dilemma in engaging the modern world because their religion teaches them to seek success in this world and in the hereafter (Quran 2:201). It is Siti who faces a serious dilemma on whether to decolonise her thinking and become a true Malay Muslim or remain a Western secular clone.

    By MOHD AZMI ABDUL HAMID President Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization

    Endorsed by:

    Syekh Ahmad Awang, chairman, International Union of Muslim Scholars Malaysia
    Syekh Abdul Ghani Samsudin, chairman, Secretariat for the Assembly of Ulama of Asia
    Assoc Prof Dr Roslan Mohd Nor, secretary-general, Ulama Association of Malaysia
    Datin Ustazah Aminah Zakaria, chairperson, Persatuan Persaudaraan Muslimah Malaysia
    Hj Baharudin Masrom, secretary, Kongres Ummah
    Dr Mohamad Ali Hassan, committee member of SHURA
    Prof Dr Rahmatullah Khan, committee of MaSSa
    Dr Abdul Rahman Ahmad, committee of SUARA
    Datuk Abdullah Mad Din, former director of Islamic Division, Ministry of Education
    Datuk Hadzir Md Zain, former deputy director-general, Implementation Coordination Unit, JPM

    Elaborating the dilemma in today’s terms


    I REFER to the comments from the Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization in response to my latest column “The real Malay Dilemma” (Sunday Star, Aug 26).

    Mine was an opinion piece. It seems the writer of the letter from the Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization and the characters endorsing it cannot differentiate between journalism and opinion. Having said that, whatever I say speak for itself.

    Our former prime ministers Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein and Tun Hussein Onn were all secularists. Our present Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s “Malay Dilemma” and what he continues to say today about how we Malays practise Islam still stands. I just elaborated the dilemma in today’s terms.

    Is our Malay society not more insular or more superstitious than in the 80s? Ask yourselves. I won’t go into the nonsense and tahyul being preached on Malay sites that are popular today; let’s just look at the public universities that are managed and led by Malays. Did we use to have faculties in universities producing anti-hysteria kits or paranormal detection equipment or holding seminars on hell or how to interact with non-Muslims?

    There’s a chief syariah judge proposing to have standard operating procedures for cases with “mystical elements”.

    What is going on? Even in the 70s or 80s, such nonsense was unheard of among Malays leading our institutions.

    Just reading the rants equating liberalism with perverts and everything to do with sex practically tells one of their mindset. They cannot escape from their dogmatic conservative religious notion of what makes a person a liberal.

    They are intent on demonising liberalism so they can impose devoutness as they see it unto society.

    Where were all these defenders of Islam and the Malays when our leaders were robbing the nation blind? Did we hear a peep from them?

    I speak of leadership to change our society. I am so glad, in spite of the recalcitrant conservatives, that the Sultan of Selangor took the mantle of leadership and pronounced that the legal age of marriage be raised to 18 for Muslims. That is liberalism.

    Only liberals have been calling for this to protect the childhood of our girls and to ensure they have the opportunity for education and a full life.

    I am a Malay and a Muslim. I will speak up for the good of our society without fear or favour or intimidation. We need to face our demons and change to progress. Someone needs to tell the inconvenient truths.

    By SITI KASSIM

    National unity – an inconvenient truth?

    Dear new government, if you continue to divide us, you will rue the day.



    TWO events in recent days reminded me what is truly important to this nation.

    The first was the National Day celebration on Friday in Putrajaya.

    Although the euphoria over GE14 has waned, there was still enough to make me want to be part of the National Day celebration even if via my telly. So I did something I hadn’t done in years: got up early just to watch the parade.

    The cameras at Dataran Putrajaya showed thousands of Malaysians who were more excited than me and had taken the trouble to line the thoroughfare to enjoy the spectacle and catch glimpses of members of the new Cabinet.

    Indeed, it was deja vu to see Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as Prime Minister and Tun Dr Siti Hasmah Mohd Ali sitting with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Muhammad V on the VIP grandstand.

    It was also a touch surreal to see several faces we once thought impossible to see in such a setting – Cabinet members such as Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, Gobind Singh Deo, Lim Guan Eng, Mohamed Sabu, M. Kulasegaran and Teresa Kok.

    On the pavement, the opening and closing acts by flag-waving young Malaysians dancing in unison warmed the cockles of my heart.

    I appreciated the effort to ensure all races were brought together to perform in a show of unity, emphasising the slogan: Sayangi Malaysiaku.

    Yes, I do love my Malaysia, as do millions of others who were born and bred in this gracious, blessed land. That birthright is what unites us all.

    And that is the key lesson to the well-being of our nation – unity.

    Which leads me to the second event: the GE14-inspired movie, Rise: Ini Kalilah.

    I caught it on Monday night and relived somewhat that incredible time when Malaysian history was made.

    While not perfectly told and it is a story that only Malaysians can fully understand and appreciate, the movie has enough to keep its audience interested and it ultimately delivers the feel-good factor as it too reinforces the power of unity; that is, what can be achieved when enough citizens unite for a common cause.

    Yet that power was never properly developed because it was politically inexpedient.

    For its own political survival, especially after the 2008 GE, the Barisan Nasional government preferred to use race and religion to divide and rule the nation. That ultimately wreaked havoc on our interracial ties, as stated in local human rights group Pusat KOMAS’ Malaysia Racial Discrimination Report released in March this year.

    National unity, as far can I can remember, was trotted out as important only after something bad had happened.

    It took the terrible May 13, 1969, racial riots for the government to set up the National Unity Council.

    The council was disbanded in 1971 and replaced by the National Unity Advisory Council, whose secretariats were the Department of National Unity and the National Muhibbah Office.

    The two agencies were merged to form the National Unity Ministry in 1972. But it only lasted till 1974, when it was replaced by the National Unity Board.

    The next time national unity took the spotlight was after GE13. The results showed the need to do something to reduce racial polarisation and to build a “united Malaysian nation”. That led to the formation of the National Unity Consultative Council in September 2013.

    The NUCC held a series of meetings with agencies and NGOs to formulate a National Unity Blueprint. In 2014, it proposed three so-called Harmony Bills to replace the Sedition Act.

    But the Act remained and the Bills became mired in controversy since they would make it mandatory for the government and all persons to promote equality and prohibit discrimination based on religion, race, birthplace, gender and disability. That was somehow anathema to the Malay agenda and the Bills went on the backburner.

    It would appear the previous government saw the need for better national unity as an inconvenient truth and continued to use it for “display purposes only.”

    So whither national unity in New Malaysia?

    Political scientist Chandra Muzaffar, in criticising Pakatan for leaving it out in its election manifesto, wants the new government to make its stand known and emphasise the Rukunegara to show “it is serious and sincere about one of Malaysia’s foremost challenges but would have also demonstrated that it is crystal-clear about the direction we should take as a people.”

    But others take a different view. Prolific online commentator T.K. Chua says: “What is the point of declaring unity as our goal when our policies, programmes and actions are doing just the opposite?”

    He adds: “It is time to stop the endless declarations and slogans typical of a third world country. We can’t talk ourselves to national unity. National unity is the product of years of inclusive policies, programmes and actions.”

    And that is what he wants to see in the Pakatan government – action, or in today’s jargon, walk the walk.

    I take both views to be important: talk the talk and walk the walk. In our fractured nation, we sorely need to hear Pakatan leaders openly and loudly embrace national unity as a must-do KPI and then see them implement it in all their policies and actions for the long haul. Only then can we hold them to their words and judge them by their actions.

    For now, Pakatan still seems dazed by its own victory and further stunned to find government machinery that Dr Mahathir says is broken.

    If that is the case, Pakatan has the chance to rebuild the machinery that was abused by its predecessors and set it right. No more “divide and rule” but “one for all and all for one”!

    By June H L Wong


    Related posts:


    The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics messed up!

    Old politics: If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist and religious-centric tactics and policies of the past, thinking this is what they need to do to keep the votes, it will just be the repeat of past mistakes of the Umno era.

    New Malaysia should push for meritocracy

    The Meritocracy Paradox

    Malaysia sacrifices talent to keep one race on top, said Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore


    Are Malays powering the nation ?

    The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics messed up!

    Old politics: If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist and religious-centric tactics and policies of the past, thinking this is what they need to do to keep the votes, it will just be the repeat of past mistakes of the Umno era.


    Malays are powering the nation


    WE refer to “The real Malay Dilemma” (The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics./Sunday Star, Aug 26) by Siti Kassim. Siti’s rambling diatribe against Malay Muslims can be reduced to two baseless, provocative, insulting and defamatory allegations, namely:

    1. Assimilation of Islamic values in governance is responsible for Malay backwardness and inability to compete with other races; and

    2. Malays, constituting 60% of the population, are unproductive and parasitical, depending on the industry and labour of the remaining 40%, Chinese and Indians.

    On the assimilation of Islamic values in governance, Siti questions whether “a Malay society, more insular and superstitious in thought... can compete on a fair footing with the rest of the Malaysian non-Muslim population.” She writes that Malays have been given preferred places in universities, GLCs and the civil service for over 40 years, resulting in “uncompetitive universities, a significant pool of unemployable Malay graduates and with most being employed by the civil service... failed GLCs and ...corrupt administration...” She asks if more religion would help and continues, “This has been the unintended consequence of the assimilation of Islamic values in governance.”

    What evidence has Siti got to link the above allegations of Malay backwardness to the so-called Islami­sation? Has she conducted any studies or consulted reports and research findings to come to that conclusion? Her claim is just hot air driven by prejudice towards Islam.

    There has been no assimilation of Islamic values in governance as provided by the syariah. Having prayer rooms in government offices, teaching Islam to Muslim students in schools, broadcasting azan on TV or having an Islamic TV channel do not make governance Islamic. The Malaysian state is based on a constitution drafted by secular jurists and not on syariah. Most government leaders and top bureaucrats, products of Western education, are very much influenced by secular ideas and ignorant about Islam and its contributions to civilisations.

    It is the separation of the moral from governance under a secular system that has facilitated the corruption, abuse of power, nepotism and cronyism of our government leaders and administrators. So, why blame Islam?

    Siti condemns Malays as parasites. The Cambridge English Dictionary defines a parasite as a person who is lazy and lives by other people working and giving them money.

    Siti writes that the majority of Malays are satisfied with their lives and carry on being religiously obsessed because they have been “able to live off the teats of the government in one way or another”.

    She continues: “Thirty per cent to 40% of the population cannot sustain 100% of us. You need the remaining, at least majority, of that 60% (Malays) to be able to truly contribute economically and not be consumers of tax from the minorities. And religion is not an economic contributor. It is an unproductive consumer of epic proportions with no returns.”

    Obviously, she has not heard of Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. To Siti, Malay businessmen, professionals, workers, farmers, fishermen, civil servants, police and soldiers do not contribute sales tax, income tax, road tax and other taxes payable under our laws. They are only “consumers of tax from minorities (Chinese and Indians)”. In other words, they are parasites. This is an insulting and provocative lie!

    She claims that the transformation of Malaysia from an agricultural to an industrial nation with liberal economic policies was “powered by an industrious non-Malay population and the liberal segment of the Malay society”. She must have been blinded by prejudice not to see the role played by millions of Malay workers, engineers, surveyors, architects, policymakers and administrators in the industrial development of Malaysia.

    Good public education and healthcare services are essential to becoming a developed industrial society. In 2016, Irina Bokova, then the Unesco director-general, praised Malaysia for “leading the way in South-East Asia in fostering inclusive and equitable education as the basis of sustainable green growth”.

    And in his message on 2018 World Health Day, WHO regional representative Dr Lo Ying-Ru Jacqueline stated that Malaysia has been acknowledged globally for its high-performing health system based on a well-trained workforce, excellent infrastructure and quality service delivery.

    Since independence, infant death has fallen by more than 90% to 6.7 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2016. Maternal mortality has also decreased by 89% between 1963 and 2013.

    Who are these “well-trained workforce”? Mostly “unemployable Malay graduates” from “uncompetitive universities” and other institutions.

    Who are the members of “the liberal segment of the Malay society” who powered the industrial transformation of Malaysia?

    Are they those who are blond and advocating “separation of religion and government; religion must be a private matter and kept private; take out religious education from the public arena”? Or those who call for recognition of homosexual, gay and lesbian rights; criminalisation of polygamy and decriminalisation of adultery; and free sex?

    Sorry Siti, if there was any contribution from this deviant group, it was very minimal as many of them look to green pastures outside Malaysia and migrate. The rapid transformation of the Malaysian economy has been powered by patriotic devout Malay Muslims and the minorities, Chinese and Indians.

    It is not the Malays who face a dilemma in engaging the modern world because their religion teaches them to seek success in this world and in the hereafter (Quran 2:201). It is Siti who faces a serious dilemma on whether to decolonise her thinking and become a true Malay Muslim or remain a Western secular clone.

    By MOHD AZMI ABDUL HAMID President Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization

    Endorsed by:

    Syekh Ahmad Awang, chairman, International Union of Muslim Scholars Malaysia
    Syekh Abdul Ghani Samsudin, chairman, Secretariat for the Assembly of Ulama of Asia
    Assoc Prof Dr Roslan Mohd Nor, secretary-general, Ulama Association of Malaysia
    Datin Ustazah Aminah Zakaria, chairperson, Persatuan Persaudaraan Muslimah Malaysia
    Hj Baharudin Masrom, secretary, Kongres Ummah
    Dr Mohamad Ali Hassan, committee member of SHURA
    Prof Dr Rahmatullah Khan, committee of MaSSa
    Dr Abdul Rahman Ahmad, committee of SUARA
    Datuk Abdullah Mad Din, former director of Islamic Division, Ministry of Education
    Datuk Hadzir Md Zain, former deputy director-general, Implementation Coordination Unit, JPM

    Elaborating the dilemma in today’s terms


    I REFER to the comments from the Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization in response to my latest column “The real Malay Dilemma” (The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics/Sunday Star, Aug 26).

    Mine was an opinion piece. It seems the writer of the letter from the Malaysian Consultative Council of Islamic Organization and the characters endorsing it cannot differentiate between journalism and opinion. Having said that, whatever I say speak for itself.

    Our former prime ministers Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein and Tun Hussein Onn were all secularists. Our present Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s “Malay Dilemma” and what he continues to say today about how we Malays practise Islam still stands. I just elaborated the dilemma in today’s terms.

    Is our Malay society not more insular or more superstitious than in the 80s? Ask yourselves. I won’t go into the nonsense and tahyul being preached on Malay sites that are popular today; let’s just look at the public universities that are managed and led by Malays. Did we use to have faculties in universities producing anti-hysteria kits or paranormal detection equipment or holding seminars on hell or how to interact with non-Muslims?

    There’s a chief syariah judge proposing to have standard operating procedures for cases with “mystical elements”.

    What is going on? Even in the 70s or 80s, such nonsense was unheard of among Malays leading our institutions.

    Just reading the rants equating liberalism with perverts and everything to do with sex practically tells one of their mindset. They cannot escape from their dogmatic conservative religious notion of what makes a person a liberal.

    They are intent on demonising liberalism so they can impose devoutness as they see it unto society.

    Where were all these defenders of Islam and the Malays when our leaders were robbing the nation blind? Did we hear a peep from them?

    I speak of leadership to change our society. I am so glad, in spite of the recalcitrant conservatives, that the Sultan of Selangor took the mantle of leadership and pronounced that the legal age of marriage be raised to 18 for Muslims. That is liberalism.

    Only liberals have been calling for this to protect the childhood of our girls and to ensure they have the opportunity for education and a full life.

    I am a Malay and a Muslim. I will speak up for the good of our society without fear or favour or intimidation. We need to face our demons and change to progress. Someone needs to tell the inconvenient truths.

    By SITI KASSIM

    National unity – an inconvenient truth?

    Dear new government, if you continue to divide us, you will rue the day.



    TWO events in recent days reminded me what is truly important to this nation.

    The first was the National Day celebration on Friday in Putrajaya.

    Although the euphoria over GE14 has waned, there was still enough to make me want to be part of the National Day celebration even if via my telly. So I did something I hadn’t done in years: got up early just to watch the parade.

    The cameras at Dataran Putrajaya showed thousands of Malaysians who were more excited than me and had taken the trouble to line the thoroughfare to enjoy the spectacle and catch glimpses of members of the new Cabinet.

    Indeed, it was deja vu to see Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as Prime Minister and Tun Dr Siti Hasmah Mohd Ali sitting with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Muhammad V on the VIP grandstand.

    It was also a touch surreal to see several faces we once thought impossible to see in such a setting – Cabinet members such as Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, Gobind Singh Deo, Lim Guan Eng, Mohamed Sabu, M. Kulasegaran and Teresa Kok.

    On the pavement, the opening and closing acts by flag-waving young Malaysians dancing in unison warmed the cockles of my heart.

    I appreciated the effort to ensure all races were brought together to perform in a show of unity, emphasising the slogan: Sayangi Malaysiaku.

    Yes, I do love my Malaysia, as do millions of others who were born and bred in this gracious, blessed land. That birthright is what unites us all.

    And that is the key lesson to the well-being of our nation – unity.

    Which leads me to the second event: the GE14-inspired movie, Rise: Ini Kalilah.

    I caught it on Monday night and relived somewhat that incredible time when Malaysian history was made.

    While not perfectly told and it is a story that only Malaysians can fully understand and appreciate, the movie has enough to keep its audience interested and it ultimately delivers the feel-good factor as it too reinforces the power of unity; that is, what can be achieved when enough citizens unite for a common cause.

    Yet that power was never properly developed because it was politically inexpedient.

    For its own political survival, especially after the 2008 GE, the Barisan Nasional government preferred to use race and religion to divide and rule the nation. That ultimately wreaked havoc on our interracial ties, as stated in local human rights group Pusat KOMAS’ Malaysia Racial Discrimination Report released in March this year.

    National unity, as far can I can remember, was trotted out as important only after something bad had happened.

    It took the terrible May 13, 1969, racial riots for the government to set up the National Unity Council.

    The council was disbanded in 1971 and replaced by the National Unity Advisory Council, whose secretariats were the Department of National Unity and the National Muhibbah Office.

    The two agencies were merged to form the National Unity Ministry in 1972. But it only lasted till 1974, when it was replaced by the National Unity Board.

    The next time national unity took the spotlight was after GE13. The results showed the need to do something to reduce racial polarisation and to build a “united Malaysian nation”. That led to the formation of the National Unity Consultative Council in September 2013.

    The NUCC held a series of meetings with agencies and NGOs to formulate a National Unity Blueprint. In 2014, it proposed three so-called Harmony Bills to replace the Sedition Act.

    But the Act remained and the Bills became mired in controversy since they would make it mandatory for the government and all persons to promote equality and prohibit discrimination based on religion, race, birthplace, gender and disability. That was somehow anathema to the Malay agenda and the Bills went on the backburner.

    It would appear the previous government saw the need for better national unity as an inconvenient truth and continued to use it for “display purposes only.”

    So whither national unity in New Malaysia?

    Political scientist Chandra Muzaffar, in criticising Pakatan for leaving it out in its election manifesto, wants the new government to make its stand known and emphasise the Rukunegara to show “it is serious and sincere about one of Malaysia’s foremost challenges but would have also demonstrated that it is crystal-clear about the direction we should take as a people.”

    But others take a different view. Prolific online commentator T.K. Chua says: “What is the point of declaring unity as our goal when our policies, programmes and actions are doing just the opposite?”

    He adds: “It is time to stop the endless declarations and slogans typical of a third world country. We can’t talk ourselves to national unity. National unity is the product of years of inclusive policies, programmes and actions.”

    And that is what he wants to see in the Pakatan government – action, or in today’s jargon, walk the walk.

    I take both views to be important: talk the talk and walk the walk. In our fractured nation, we sorely need to hear Pakatan leaders openly and loudly embrace national unity as a must-do KPI and then see them implement it in all their policies and actions for the long haul. Only then can we hold them to their words and judge them by their actions.

    For now, Pakatan still seems dazed by its own victory and further stunned to find government machinery that Dr Mahathir says is broken.

    If that is the case, Pakatan has the chance to rebuild the machinery that was abused by its predecessors and set it right. No more “divide and rule” but “one for all and all for one”!

    By June H L Wong


    Related posts:


    The real Malay dilemma: race, religion & politics messed up!

    Old politics: If the leadership keeps to the racialist, feudalist and religious-centric tactics and policies of the past, thinking this is what they need to do to keep the votes, it will just be the repeat of past mistakes of the Umno era.

    New Malaysia should push for meritocracy

    The Meritocracy Paradox

    Malaysia sacrifices talent to keep one race on top, said Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore