Today our Malaysian National Day in pensive mood: Hate politics taking its toll!

Malaysian raise the Jalur Gemilang during the Amanat Merdeka deliver by Datuk Seri Najib Razak at MATIC..-- M. Azhar Arif/The Star

TODAY is our National Day but the mood in the country is pensive. This has been a year when the mood has been severely dampened by those who spew divisive remarks on a continuous basis.

TODAY is our National Day. I wish I could say that I woke up early to wave the Jalur Gemilang. And that my heart is bursting with pride because it is all pumped up with extra doses of patriotic fervour.

I do recall a time not too long ago when everyone was indeed eager to wave the flag. We even had little flags on our cars and there was a genuine spirit of patriotism. We needed no reminders that we are one as a nation.

Sad to say, the mood in my neighbourhood, and in the country overall, is pensive.

Please do not get me wrong. I am a patriot. And most of us, as citizens of this blessed land, do know what allegiance to the nation means. We not only love our nation but have full respect for the institutions that bind us together.

But on a day-to-day basis, this has been a year when the mood has been severely dampened by those who spew divisive remarks on a continuous basis.

From politicians who seek the limelight for all the wrong reasons to self-appointed champions of race and religion, these people have created an environment to embolden even the lesser-known individuals and instant NGOs to amplify their extremist views.

I dare say that I am more loyal than these people. Many of us wonder why they continue to find space in the media to arti­culate their outrageous views. The publicity given them by some media outlets is akin to providing oxygen to these dangerous elements.

A vibrant democracy should provide space for the healthy discourse of differing views and perspectives. We can certainly benefit by disagreeing without being disagreeable.

But hate politics does not deserve space.

I would like to put on record that like the majority of Malaysians, I am proud that we have come so far as a nation. In just over five decades, we have surely come a long way.

There were many naysayers when we achieved independence who did not give us much of a chance of making it. They predicted that the natives, as we were called, would end up fighting each other and the whole country would end up in chaos.

Well, they thought we would be like one of those countries in Central Africa which are forever locked in a civil war involving one ethnic group or another.

Malaysia has proven them wrong. Not only did we survive but we have progressed well and we remained intact too.

So what is it that disturbs me greatly this Merdeka?

Perhaps it is the sadness over the loss of the two Malaysia Airlines planes within the same year. The meaningless loss of innocent lives on board MH17 is so hard to bear even as we despair over the fate of MH370 where the plane has yet to be found.

It has been a horrible year indeed.

But it is also the never-ending, disturbing and offensive statements from extreme personalities. Many of us wonder why these people can get away with what they say. Shouldn’t they be charged with sedition or do they have powerful backers, as some have questioned?

Sadly, it is not just these politico-types but also ordinary Malaysians who post outrageous remarks on social media. They involve normal people, some of whom I thought I know well enough. But their inability to exercise some form of self-restraint and not add fuel to the fire is highly ­worrying.

No one is spared now. Thanks to social media, these people seem to believe that they can post and put up whatever comments they want without a second thought. They do not care if their sweeping comments affect the feelings of fellow Malaysians.

Everything seems to be fair game. While politicians are expected to take even the harshest criticisms in stride, there has always been an understanding that we do not undermine the various institutions that not only make Malaysia unique but also hold us together as a people.

Even the royalty has been targeted, and many of the remarks made are not only improper but outrightly seditious. It does not help that some politicians are leading by example. If they are in Thailand, they would be in jail now.

I am sure our founding fathers, if they were alive now, would have been shocked, if not saddened, by what they see of us today.

Yes, in terms of physical development and our standard of living, we have been a shining example. We have a huge middle class, unlike other neighbouring countries where the gap between the rich and poor is wide.

This is a country where people have no worries over the next meal although many are unfit because they eat too much. We spend huge sums of money to reduce weight and even bigger amounts to slim down.

We have also become a country of whiners. We complain over our high electricity bills but we want to sleep with the air-conditioners on, while wrapped up in our blankets. Of course, it is much easier to blame the government for increasing our electricity bills.

We should be glad that we have taken away preventive laws such as the Internal Security Act and the famous detention camp in Kamunting has closed down.

But, to some people, this seems to have opened the floodgates for unrestrained remarks, often laced with extreme racial elements, to flourish.

Many of us seem unable to articulate a point or a thought over an issue without dragging the racial element in.

Many of us also cannot draw the distinction between criticism and insult.

Some have become arrogant in their line of comment while some have become so thin-skinned and sensitive that they take offence easily, sometimes blowing up over a minor issue.

I grew up in Penang where places of worship were built next to each other. This is similar in many parts of the country too. We take pride in it. Now we have bureaucrats and politicians who tell us it’s not possible because it is sensitive.

Sensitive to who? The racially twisted bureaucrats and politicians themselves, perhaps? Real people have no issue with one another.

This is a multi-racial country even though the demographic landscape has changed drastically. A plural society is an asset, not a political liability. But we seem to have reached a point where many of us are frightened, not just shy, of upholding such values lest we be seen as going against our own community and religion.

Like it or not, there are certain realities that we, as Malaysians, must accept so we can be realistic in our expectations.

For a start, the Malays are the majority and they are Muslims. We must acknow­ledge and respect their deep reverence towards Islam, the race and the royalty.

But the Chinese and Indians are here to stay, so please stop these nonsensical pendatang remarks. Together with the many other races, and especially the original inhabitants of this land, we are all Malaysians.

We need to focus on real issues within our country, which include education, health, crime and a healthy business environment. Our priority must also be to ponder seriously on how to handle race relations, religious freedom and the sentiments of the people in Sabah and Sarawak who are an integral part of Malaysia.

We need to get our act right so we can compete efficiently as a member of the global community.

We should spend more time thinking, listening and reflecting instead of making silly remarks. We can help chart a better future for Malaysia. Then we will not only fly the flag on Merdeka Day but our heart will always beat as a Malaysian too, all the time.


By Wong Chun Wai On the beat -  The Star/Asia News Network > The views expressed are entirely the writer’s own..

Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now the group's managing director/chief executive officer and formerly the group chief editor.

On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.


Related posts:.

What makes us Malaysian? Happy Mereka!

I always get excited when I meet fellow Malaysians, whether at work or during social functions. - Lee Yee Thian Our sense of belonging ... 

Medicines for ailing MAS: losses RM2bil, 6,000 job cuts, RM6bil capital injection a bailout?

Malaysia Airlines to cut 6,000 staff, new company to be formed 

 

Malaysia's flight MH370 mistakes reflect stagnant politics; Bad apples in NZ sex crime..

Malaysia is poised to escape the middle-income trap, but also ready to fall back into it. Normally the middle-income trap refers to count...

Evaluate enemies and friends

Illustration: Liu Rui/GTChina must evaluate friends and enemies 

Since 2013, China has been engaging in "major power" diplomacy. In the past, the term "major powers" referred to countries such as the US, Japan, Russia, the UK and Brazil, while now the major power is China itself.

The shift in China's diplomatic status means the country's diplomatic approaches face a new challenge: Does diplomacy have to distinguish between enemies and friends?

Before China's non-alignment policy was raised in the report to the 12th CPC National Congress in 1982, China's diplomacy distinguished between enemies and friends.

In the 1950s, based on the different social systems, China categorized other countries into imperialist states, capitalist states, nationalist states and socialist ones.

In the following two decades, these countries were divided into the superpowers, developed countries and developing ones, given the international status of different countries.

These two categorizations differ in standards, but reflected the then diplomatic notion of distinguishing between enemies and friends.

The report to the 12th CPC National Congress also said that "the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence are applicable to our relations with all countries, including socialist countries."

From then, China began to discard the "enemies-or-friends" concept and focus on economic cooperation with all the countries based on an equal footing.

There have been some variations in China's diplomacy, particularly in relation to how it categorized other countries after the Tiananmen incident in 1989.

One means adopted in 1997 classified the countries into neighboring, developing and developed ones. In 2002, the sequence was changed into developed, neighboring and developing countries.

Such categorization adds flexibility to diplomatic principles and, as some believed, fits the globalization era and discards the Cold War mentality that stuck to the old way of distinguishing between enemies and friends.

However, such categorization and sequence also have their flaws. When a principle is too flexible, its guiding role is weakened.

For instance, both Cambodia and the Philippines are China's neighboring countries and belong to developing countries, but the latter can sometimes pose diplomatic trouble for China.

Similarly, Russia and Japan belong to the same category, but we can enhance strategic cooperation with Russia while isolating Japan politically.

In the following decade, the overall national strength of China will remain greater than that of all the other countries except the US. China has to shoulder more international responsibilities and maintain international order by providing public benefit, so as to maintain its own interests.

But if China doesn't distinguish between enemies and friends, it will find it difficult to do so.

Only when China is clear about which country it can hold responsible on certain occasions, or which country can enjoy more public benefits, can it make the right decision.

Any big country, when helping shape international order, will protect its friends rather than enemy countries. It will raise proposals beneficial for its partners rather than competitors, and provide public benefit for those playing by the rules rather than breaking the rules.

If we don't distinguish between enemies and friends, it will also be difficult for us to adopt the diplomatic principle of amity, sincerity, mutual benefit and inclusiveness.

For example, politically we can get close to Russia and Cambodia but not Japan's Abe government or the Philippines' Aquino III government, because otherwise the latter two may dare to adopt even more hostile policies toward China.

Diplomatically, we can stick to the principle of credibility only with countries that we have established diplomatic ties with, but not with those who don't admit China's sovereignty or support the so-called "Taiwan independence." Economically, China can take the initiative to help developing countries rather than the US which has already entered the developed phase.

To build up an international environment that best works for China's rejuvenation, China's categorization of foreign countries can be based on interests.

We can classify all the countries into friendly, cooperative, ordinary or conflicting ones.

To friendly countries, China should lend a helping hand; to cooperative ones, it can offer some preferential policies. We should work on an equal footing with ordinary countries, while taking countermeasures to conflicting ones.

The US is the only country that is more powerful than China. We may consider listing China's relationship with it in a single category as "a new type of major power relationship."

It is a relationship between a rising country and a dominant one, and as the US is more powerful than China, the two should stay equal and be mutually beneficial, which is more favorable to the US. Therefore, this also reflects tolerance of China's foreign policies.

Since the Opium Wars in the 19th century, China has accumulated rich diplomatic experience to counter countries stronger than itself. But in modern times, it lacks the experience of dealing with countries weaker than itself. It tests China's diplomatic wisdom as whether or not to distinguish between enemies and friends.

By Yan Xuetong Viewpoint, Source: Global Times Published: 2014-8-27 18:58:02
The author is director of the Institute of Modern International Relations, Tsinghua University. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

Related post:

China can weigh reconnaissance on US

China and the US started a two-day meeting at the Pentagon on Wednesday to negotiate a code of conduct on the high seas, in the wake of...

China can weigh reconnaissance on US

China and the US started a two-day meeting at the Pentagon on Wednesday to negotiate a code of conduct on the high seas, in the wake of a Chinese fighter jet intercepting a US spy plane near the Hainan Island. Although the meeting was set up before this incident, it is believed the near-miss will make a difference during the negotiations.

Given the fact that Washington's determination to continue its short-range surveillance of China is as strong as China's commitment to drive US planes away, whether the 2001 mid-air collision could recur has become a Sword of Damocles above their heads.

The new strategic trajectory of Asia-Pacific, namely China is growing stronger and a containment circle drawn by the US and its allies is taking shape, is changing the mindsets of both sides to define specific conflicts. If the 2001 incident happened again, the possibility of an all-out crisis between both sides will increase.

China's rise is increasing the odds that China and the US are sliding into "mutual distrust." A feasible way to avoid such a crisis is that both sides should reduce the chances that their vessels and planes engage in confrontation in international seas and airspace.

As of now, the confrontations usually happen in Chinese coastal waters and air spaces. The US takes it for granted, but China feels its core interests are being challenged.

There are two ways to address this kind of disputes: Washington withdraws its surveillance to an extent that China can accept, or China develops its surveillance technology and starts military reconnaissance near US territories. The latter option has become increasingly possible as China's military technologies are advancing.

There is no doubt that Washington will find more evidence to prove that China and the US can only be adversaries, and it is possible that more conflicts will make both sides lose control of the situation. But China has no choice if Washington doesn't restrain itself.

It seems that both China and the US are willing to build a strategic mutual trust, but the communication mechanisms are not working well.

The US says it has no plan to contain China, and China also says it has no intention to drive US out of Asia. But the US wants to maintain its absolute superiority in strength, and China is sparing no effort to bridge the gap.

Thus, it is hard for Washington and Beijing to reach a consensus on this issue, and they have to get used to each other.

But Washington must note that making troubles on China's doorstep can only stir up China's determination to defend its legitimate interests. In this regard, the US is much less determined than China.

China can put up a tough stand against the US in this short-range surveillance matter, and develop its capability to conduct such surveillance to the US as soon as possible, as long as China will not threaten the national security of the US.

Source:Global Times Published: 2014-8-28 0:33:01

Related:

China military aircrafts flys monitering US Japan spy planes fighters over China Air Defense Zone

Reconnaissance damages trust

Unless the US gives up its surveillance missions against China it will be very difficult for the two countries to build the mutual trust needed for healthy bilateral relations.

Surveillance spoils military engagement

China cannot stop US reconnaissance, but can take countermeasures. If the US is sincere about building up a major power relationship with China, it should adopt a more restrained manner.

China's carrier fighter J-15

 

Xi urges innovation in "new military revolution"