Friday, December 10, 2010

A Voice of Tea Party Patriot

I came across to several Tea Partyers websites recently to suggest a model of desirable movement in this country. I also read opinions from various perspectives regarding the third force whereby too much description such as what would be this movement looks like. Whether the force is to be something else, political or non political, popular or non popular, in my thought, these pundits analyses are vehemently underestimating the wishes and choices of every individual. These are, of course objectives statements which they attempts to soothe both Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional. What are they fear with?

I must say start somewhere in small but beautiful probably lead to the open door of the cause of freedom and liberty. I wrote an article in Merdekareview few days ago as a ‘soft launch’ for greater project in times to come. Solid perception of our people towards so called two party systems remains hopeful and many Keadilan's politicians conversation which I participate, they says that there is high possibility for Pakatan Rakyat to unseat Barisan Nasional in Putrajaya instead, we, being perceived as mirage or someone told me ideologues are not the primary objectives therefore you are likely taking huge risk as a repercussion of what we are committed. Not well accepted by the people ? Ignoring us?

However, it will be never ties us down completely ever. I personally believe the man like me is ready to take the fight against despotism government at the apex. I believe we are in the right path to see the ordinary citizens of Malaysia contributing and defending our land from excessive violation and intrusion by the government.

While I suggest our role in current system, we shall not condone anyone including both parties that are not shares our faith and principles. What do we want exactly? We want a democratic country you respect the principles of individuals. Fundamental freedom naturally defines to every one of us must not taken away by the government no matter how. I must be allow to accumulates wealth and own my property and engage in free voluntary trade. Economic freedom and market deregulation are the subjects to boost our country economy for present and future generations. All of us enjoy the fruit of labor. Hard worked is reward in efficient system. Put effort to encourage competition among the businesses benefiting consumers in price. Government and business are separated interest and managed on their own. Rampant and squandering taxpayers’ money for subsidies must be restructured and ensure new system does not carry heavy regulation. Household income increase as wages lies on productivity and efficient allocation of market resources. And I hate bailouts.

The Tea Party Movement in the country also endorses fiscal cuts across the government agencies and constituencies. In many writings, bigger government tends to hijack capitalism for cronyism and enriching wealth of the few. This is treason. I wonder why every politicians votes for bigger spending no matter what particularly in the name of people? I give you bridges, I give you houses, I give you welfare assistance as long as you vote me win, I give you contracts, I wish to increase education fund for better access of education. Want to know why they doing this? Market failure and therefore incentives distribute to unfortunate people assuming as moral behavior. Yes, politically moral and market immoral. And yes, you are noble and respected man. A tea party patriot absolutely repudiates the idea of vote to expanding government. We claims vote to smaller government. I realize that it is hard appeal and my intention solely to discourage our peoples to vote and forget everything.

Tell me, where we could find a bold Malaysian politician like Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne who announced dramatic spending cuts of 25% for all department of government – the steepest reductions in eight decades! He actually has take whatever necessary policy for greater discipline fiscal spending and it was a laudable effort. Rationalizing oil prices and other items? Yes, they must and should adjust according to market price. Unfortunately, they are not serious in rationalizing subsidies for Independent Power Producer (IPP’s). Unfortunately, they are not serious in reducing expenditure in annual budgets. Unfortunately, they are not serious to return in small size of government and overstaffed. Unfortunately, they do not have political will to address corruption and institutional reform. Now, given all these episodes, how much weightage of profligacy money spending cost compare to the amount saving through rationalizing of oil prices?

Dear Zaid Ibrahim and like minded patriots, I have no ashamed to call upon you on common principles and interest; democracy, individual liberty and free market, let us become a new movement bringing true reform based on remarkable faith and sincerity.

Medecci Lineil is 24 years old activist who wish to set up a Tea Party Movement in Malaysia in alliance of Zaid Ibrahim.

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Aku Seorang Patriot

Aku seorang patriot

“…political freedom cannot exist without economic freedom; a free mind and a free market are corollaries” – Ayn Rand (1961)

Aku mungkin mewakili pandangan yang agak terpinggir dari arus aliran pemikiran nasional. Aku sentiasa berharap agar masyarakat sedar dan menerima pasaran bebas dan individualisme dengan lebih rasional, bukan emosional. Seolah-olah aku melakukan suatu jenayah yang cukup besar pula apabila aku mempertahankan premis ini. Aku cuma berniat mendidik rakyat mengenai “the righteous of free market, individualism and democracy

Seorang sarjana sains politik Amerika, Adam J. Berinsky pernah berkata “In the battle between facts and partisanship, partisanship always wins” Benarkah begitu? Aku rasa ramai yang berfikiran bahawa menumbangkan Barisan Nasional adalah misi utama Pakatan Rakyat. Ada pula yang tidak segan silu menyuarakan agar rakyat mengenepikan aliran pemikiran, sebaliknya bersatu mengalahkan kebesaran Barisan Nasional dalam pilihan raya umum yang akan datang. Aku tidak tahu hendak berpolitik, akan tetapi aku tahu untuk melakukan sesuatu yang betul dan tertakluk kepada amalan individualisme, demokratik dan pasaran bebas. Aku tidak kisah sangat dicemuh dan dikritik senyap-senyap kerana aku tidak sempurna.

Populariti kerajaan besar

Di Malaysia umpamanya, fakta adakalanya diketepikan demi meraih populariti undi rakyat. Kerajaan pula seakan-akan dikerah menjadi tempat mendapatkan segala bentuk kebajikan dan wang ringgit mengakibatkan daya kebergantungan terhadap institusi kerajaan bertambah tinggi. Semakin besar kerajaan, semakin bahagia masyarakat Malaysia. Aku bertambah bimbang dengan sistem kerajaan hari ini yang sentiasa menyelamatkan apa jua yang menimpa rakyat semacam Superman. Tidak perlu aku jelaskan segala jenis kebobrokan penyelamatan yang dibuat oleh kerajaan khususnya ke atas pemberian subsidi, projek-projek bernilai berbilion-bilion atau korporat kronisme, atas nama rakyat! Inilah kesannya daripada amalan kerajaan besar.

NEM adalah fakta gerun

Model Ekonomi Baru (NEM) adalah berlandaskan fakta dan betapa gerunnya fakta tersebut apabila ia mampu menggugat mana-mana kuasa politik sekiranya mengambil sikap memejamkan sebelah mata terhadap cadangan-cadangan laporan itu. Walaupun laporan tersebut berjaya dikompromi dalam beberapa hal (hak-hak Bumiputera dikekalkan dek lobi kuat kelompok tertentu), namun dalam kebanyakan kenyataan yang digariskan amat jelas; kerajaan harus kembali berperanan terhad dan bertenaga, sistem ekonomi dipacu oleh pasaran dan sekurang-kurangnya laporan ini telah melontarkan cadangan kritikal untuk meletakkan negara di atas landasan yang tepat. Kawalan dan perancangan pusat ekonomi adalah gagal. F.A Hayek (1944) pernah menulis bahawa Economic control is not merely control of a sector of human life which can be separated from the rest; it is the control of the means for all our ends. And whoever has sole control of the means must also determine which ends are to be served, which values are to be rates higher and which lower, in short, what men should believe and strive for.”[1]

Antara Barisan Nasional dan Pakatan Rakyat?

Sekali lagi, keazaman politik mana yang paling kuat yang sanggup mengambil cadangan laporan tersebut sebagai ketetapan rasmi dasar? Barisan Nasional atau Pakatan Rakyat? Ketuanan Melayu atau Ketuanan Rakyat? Janganlah mempersiak-siakan usaha dan titik peluh ahli-ahli ekonomi terbaik dalam dan luar negara yang terlibat dalam penghasilan dokumen tersebut. Sekiranya kerajaan tidak mengendahkan nasihat mereka, apatah lagi mendengar rintihan rakyat berpatriotik macam aku, petani, nelayan, pencuci, penyapu sampah, dan pelayan.

Seseorang yang berpatriotik harus berdiri menegakkan kebenaran dan menegur pemerintah bilamana kesalahan dilakukan tanpa mengira mengira parti politik. Aku hairan, bagaimana Pakatan Rakyat dituduh sebagai tidak patriotik dan anti nasional hanya kerana kerap kali mengkritik Barisan Nasional dalam dan luar negara? Agaknya Barisan Nasional keliru di antara entiti sebuah negara dan entiti sebuah kerajaan walhal Pakatan Rakyat berbuat demikian untuk menyelamatkan Malaysia yang disayangi daripada dipunah oleh kerajaan yang semakin terdesak.

Kagum kisah politik Ron Paul

Aku amat mengagumi Ahli Kongres Amerika, Ron Paul dalam bukunya berjudul Mises and Austrian Economics: A personal view yang menghuraikan bagaimana beliau menceburkan diri dalam politik negara kuasa besar itu setelah melihat keruntuhan sistem ekonomi dan politik yang ternyata tidak memihak kepada prinsip Mises. Harga dikawal oleh kerajaan yang ketika itu ditadbir oleh Nixon, akhirnya meranapkan sistem gaji dan pekerjaan pula tergugat. Ron Paul tidak memerlukan restu daripada Ketua Umum atau Mursyidul Am untuk bertanding, sebaliknya restu keyakinan dan kepercayaannya telah mendorong beliau untuk mewakili puak Republikan pada awal tahun 1970 an

“At the time I was convinced, like Ludwig von Mises, that no one could succeed in politics without serving the special interests of some politically powerful pressure group. Although I was eventually elected, in terms of a conventional political career with real Washington impact, he was absolutely right. I have not developed legislative influence with the leadership of the Congress or the administration. Monies are deliberately deleted from routine water works bills for my district because I do not condone the system, nor vote for any of the appropriations.”


Inilah perbedaan yang ketara di antara demokrasi matang Amerika dan demokrasi separuh masak Malaysia. Aku memang berharap agar kuasa ketiga yang pernah digembar gemburkan berupaya menggugat status quo sistem dua parti sebelum ini dari segi memiliki kualiti; memperjuangkan kebebasan individu, kerajaan kecil sementara memperkasakan negeri dan mengangkat martabat pasaran bebas.


Harapan keunikan kuasa ketiga

Alangkah malangnya seandainya kuasa ketiga yang bakal diterajui oleh Zaid Ibrahim terus mengikut rentak politik populariti semasa untuk mendapatkan kuasa. Mengapa tidak diusahakan terlebih dahulu idea ini sebelum beralah? Apakah prinsip kebebasan individu, kerajaan kecil dan pasaran bebas tidak mampu dipopularkan sepertimana rasuah, kronisme dan diselitkan dengan amalan sosialisme? Seseorang harus meletakkan batu asas kepada penubuhan gagasan tersebut, biar kecil namun menawan.


Medecci Lineil adalah individu yang bercita-cita ingin menubuhkan Tea Party Movement di Malaysia.



[1] F.A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, page 68

Saturday, December 4, 2010

The Solutions For Malaysia - NEM


Great document crafted by National Economic Advisory Council (NEAC); It is honest, it is bold and it is a way forward recommendation leaving outmoded economic policy which impeding our true potential for too long!

I need something refreshing. I am in reading the final part of New Economic Model until page 55 (public sector transformation). The sublime thoughts to put market and private sectors lead the growth is pivotal ticket in our movement. As I emphasize previously, to succeed, market-driven economy is inevitably principles to ensure everybody’s blessing while present thoughts; peoples first has misconstrued us with taxpayers or citizens on the hook. In short, authoritarian government has jeopardized our own liberty to save, spending and setting up businesses in very perilous manner.

Choice of strident words motivates me to read deeper. A reflection of free economy sounds taking its root here, in Malaysia. The words such as removal subsidies, fairer competition, rationalizing government linked company, liberalizing economic sectors, and more important small businesses are pretty well defined. Now, it is up to the government to take this proposal as official policy or otherwise. But I personally believe the tendency for pick and choose always a preference especially when political weightage been taken hardly.

So far, I truly commend the suggestion for GLC’s divesting their investment, adopting competition model and reducing and eliminating stakes control from the government. In other words, it suggests reforming GLC’s into supportive mode to the role private sector. There are 445 GLC’s in the country which is Federal government owned 332 GLC’s and State government owned 113 GLC’s. In 1987, there were more 1,000 entities of GLC’s. Government must stay out of business once and for all. The era of government knows best is over. Economic planning authority based does not work

Secondly, deregulation of economic activities. It is a burden, costly and painful process. Nobody prefers overregulation. The Malaysia Administrative Modernization and Management Planning Unit (MAMPU) has identified a total of 896 agencies at the federal and state levels that administer over 3,000 regulatory procedures. The time needed for getting regulatory approvals in nearly 50% of procedures is about 14 days each. What’s next? Remove them. Remove all unnecessary legal and acts that holding us down.

Thirdly, small business plays vital role in our economy. They create jobs. They create wealth. They are representing 60% of total workforce and approximately one third of GDP. Help them to grow the profits, you help them create jobs. More jobs more employment. Wage increase and low income groups gradually enjoying nascent standard of living. You feel good and you do not need government subsidies for assistance. You are independent.

However, still Bumiputra courses apparently the intractable issues to deal with. Why there is always political havoc if meritocracies fully apply? Implementation is the key. A policy which benefit only targeted Bumiputra in needs, not fancy Bumiputra; the implementation with greater transparent and accountable to all of us. Good decisions only turn up then because of available information.

Few hours ago, I chatted with Prof Danny Quah in Facebook, man behind the scene of NEM. I questioned him whether this document might alter the entire Malaysia economic policy at least for gradually? And he replied, we will see. Skeptical, I suppose?

What if Pakatan Rakyat succeeding Barisan Nasional in the future? Possibility to embrace free market, individual liberty with DAP and PAS? Yesterday was a dramatic Friday. A Friday of price hike, a Friday of Anwar Ibrahim suspension from Parliament, a Friday of Prime Minister Najib’s release final part of NEM at Putrajaya. I can see many people out there are outrage and frustrate over government decision to raise the price of petrol and sugar. Yes, democracy is fine and hard to exercise. A hint for the government, if you raise the price with the intention to not distorting the economy, I shall say I agree. But if you raise the price to profligate spending money habits, I strongly say I oppose! Whereas I suggest, you raise the price to get a market price, preventing distorting market and reducing expenditure. Get your government in ‘S’ size. Small is beautiful.

Hayek's Scholar Behind NEM - Danny Quah

Doing good for society

By YVONNE TAN

ONE look at Penang-born Professor Danny Quah and you can tell he fits in perfectly with what one already knows about him. He is one of the world’s highly respected economists and head of department and professor of economics at the prestigious London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE).

Quah, a regular contributor to economic journals and highly praised for some of his views on economic growth, is unwaveringly articulate in his mild British accent. In addition, his wave of salt and pepper hair lends him an air of gravitas.

Quah: I try to set an example in doing quality research and speaking out on how I think the world can be improved through my works

Having clearly reaped the benefits of good and solid education, he speaks animatedly about his hopes to extend similar opportunities to others.

“Doing good for society – that drives a lot of what I now do, whether it’s through facilitating excellent higher education and training, or through research and speaking out on how to repair parts of society that have failed,” Quah enthuses.

Giving back

“Where I am (LSE), many of our students come from countries in the world that are rapidly developing but still poor. Providing the best training and education to them is high on my list of priorities.

“Equally important is to figure out how to extend this kind of higher education to individuals in parts of the world that require it desperately, but that cannot come to the LSE,” he tells StarBizWeek in an interview.

Research, which can be academically rigorous and scientifically top-class addresses immediate, real-world problems, Quah says.

“I try to set an example in doing quality research and speaking out on how I think the world can be improved through my works,” he explains.

No doubt, his position at LSE allows him numerous opportunities to travel and share his knowledge and views.

Communicating one’s work

In the early days of his career, Quah recalls that he was regarded as simply a “technical expert”, implying greater focus on technical skills than on communication expertise.

He was determined to “repair” that, which he evidently has.

“I’ve put a lot of effort into that. Over time, I tried to go outside academic economics and sought to engage with stakeholders more generally…holding different views on what constitutes scientific progress, or the concerned public, other professionals, or even interested policy-makers,” he says.

Quah has a string of achievements to his name. He is among other things, specialist adviser to the treasury committee at the UK House of Commons, governor at the National Institute of Economic and Social Research and associate editor of the Journal of Economic Growth.

Some of his weightless economy writings, his pet topic, have been translated into over 15 different languages.

The former consultant to the World Bank has published and continues to publish internationally acclaimed works on pertinent areas of economics like income distribution, intellectual property rights, information technology, inflation and business cycles.

For his efforts, Quah has been featured in the Who’s Who in the World and Who’s Who in Economics (1997).

Indeed, not too shabby at all for a Penang boy from Dato Keramat. But Quah, who schooled at the island’s Penang Free School and Francis Light School, exudes humility when asked how he made it and modestly attributes it to the luck factor.

“I was lucky to be pulled out of a small tropical island and given a scholarship to study at a top world university. I was lucky to be given good technical advice and lucky to be taken under the supervision and guidance of the world’s leading economists,” he says.

“Now, I am just so fortunate to be able to engage with the world’s most respected academics and learn about solving important problems, and communicating properly and persuasively.

“I know many individuals who would by any objective criteria be more deserving than me,” he adds.

Penang boy makes good

After excelling in his Sixth Form examinations, Quah left Penang to study engineering at Ivy League Princeton University in New Jersey, US. After brief flings with engineering and physics, he finally decided on economics.

“Economics strikingly provides the kind of tools, training and insight that allows someone to contribute in many different ways: in academics, in business and corporate life, in policy – both local and global.

“Very few academic areas – technical ones at that – let you do that,” he says.

Having studied and worked in six different cities in the US before moving to London to join LSE in the early 1990s, Quah, surprisingly, still has plenty of Malaysia left in him.

“I love char kway teow,” he gushes. An obvious choice really, given his roots.

On a more serious note, he says that Malaysia has come very far since his days here.

“I think Malaysia has become more confident, self-aware and cosmopolitan over the years.

“But it needs to find its place in the world – it was once the world’s largest exporter of rubber, tin, palm oil...but perhaps, now it needs to be something different, perhaps a centre for Islamic finance or a gateway between cultures.”

He says for the country to continue to move forward, it needs to unleash research and creative thinking at all levels - in particular, in higher education. “If it is going to move ahead in knowledge-based economic activity, it has to allow both dissent and creativity,” Quah adds.

Moving to London has made him more aware of and open to developments in the world.

“Issues, problems, and people from the rest of the world show up at LSE routinely, and I think my research and work interests have become global since my moving to the LSE.

“Britain long ago gave up pretending to be a world power. It stopped thinking it would continue to impose on the rest of the world by force of will or otherwise. Instead it is generally accepting of world sentiment and global outcomes, and takes in ideas and people from everywhere else.”

Balancing act

For this former state gymnast, it is pertinent to lead a balanced life.

“I do martial arts which help keep me fit and alert,” he says, adding that he practices the sport with both his teenage sons – Carter and Mason, with whom he shares a very close relationship.

Does he expect the boys to follow in his footsteps? “That is not important. As long as they are happy, I am happy.”

Perhaps more than their love for martial arts, the father and sons also share similar music preferences.

Quah unflinchingly admits that he likes teenybopper music and lists among his favourites “Girlfriend” by Canadian pop punk singer Avril Lavigne.

“The lyrics are really funny, and I am impressed by the fact that she can sing the song in so many languages,” he says, dispelling very quickly the notion that academics prefer “serious music”.

What are his plans given that he has accomplished so much already? “Well, I enjoy my work a lot so I don’t think I will stop doing this for a long time to come.”

Quah says he wouldn’t mind eventually moving back to Malaysia. His parents still live here while all four siblings are in other parts of the globe.

“We have this joke among us – the one first in a country is supposed to shift to a different country when another one moves in – but so far two other brothers and a sister have moved closer to me in London.

“I’m not going anywhere. But of course, the pressure is now on – will I move back to Malaysia?”

Danny Quah

Age: 51

Place of Birth: Penang

Qualifications: Phd in Economics from Harvard University in June 1986 and undergraduate degree in Economics,magna cum laude, Princeton University in June 1980

Career: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (July 1985 - June 1991) - Assistant Professor of Economics LSE (Oct 1991 - present) -Lecturer (Aug 1996 - present) -Professor of Economics (Aug 2006 - present) - Head of Department of Economics

Hobbies: Taekwon-do, reading

Favourite author and book: Neal Stephenson - Snowcrash

Values: Tenacious, Optimistic and Loyal

Animal Sign: Dog

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Aku dan Kongres Nasional PKR 2010

Buat pertama kalinya, aku menghadiri dalam Kongres Nasional Parti Keadilan Rakyat. Aku bukan anggota Keadilan. Aku juga bukan anak era Reformasi. Aku masih di bangku sekolah pada tahun 1998. Waktu sama ketika Anwar Ibrahim dizalimi oleh Mahathir. Aku baca buku karangan Anwar Ibrahim, The Asian Renaissance di Perpustakaan Sultanah Bahiyah, Universiti Utara Malaysia sebelum bangkit melawan kepimpinan Tan Sri Dr Nordin Kardi pada awal tahun 2009. Ingatkan cerdik orang tua itu, rupa-rupanya masih tidak tahu bezakan minyak dan gas dengan Penjana Tenaga Bebas (IPP). Malu aku mengaku mahasiswa UUM. Apa hendak aku jawab pada orang luar?




Tiga hari aku di sana, aku menumpukan perhatian sepenuhnya dalam sesi ucapan dasar Presiden dan perbahasan para peserta. Banyak sekali ungkapan-ungkapan indah dikatakan oleh pembahas-pembahas baik memuji ketokohan Anwar Ibrahim mahupun mengangkat nilai-nilai reformasi agar kekal segar dalam perjuangan arus perdana parti. Melawan Barisan Nasional habis-habisan juga turut ditekankan.

Banyak juga aku dengar cadangan-cadangan memantapkan parti dan tidak kurang juga yang berucap memperingatkan sesetengah pemimpin parti yang mudah lupa. Ada juga pembahas-pembahas Sarawak yang kelihatannya bersungguh-sungguh menyuarakan rintihan dan kesukaran jentera parti sebagai persediaan dalam pilihanraya negeri yang bakal berlangsung pada tahun hadapan.

Aku adalah anak muda yang berjiwa besar. Yang punya iltizam tinggi melakukan perubahan. Aku mungkin tidak hadir di jalanan pada tahun 1998 bersama-sama dengan teman reformis, tetapi dengan semangat kental dan tidak putus asa aku, aku berjuang akal dengan terus mengenengahkan idea-idea bernas agar Malaysia, pada suatu hari kelak diperintah oleh barisan Pakatan Rakyat yang punya ketetapan kerajaan bertanggungjawab, yang faham akan demokrasi, yang faham akan kebebasan individu dan ekonomi dan yang tidak akan mengulangi kesilapan lampau.

Bagi aku, Anwar Ibrahim adalah pemimpin Pencerahan Asia. Bukan senang hendak aku carikan seorang sosok politik yang suka berfalsafah dan teguh keyakinannya seperti beliau di Malaysia. Kenal Anwar Ibrahim, aku mula berkenalan dengan Pak Khalid dan konco-konconya. Aku sangka aku keseorangan, akhirnya tidak lagi. Teman sesama aliran fikiran bercambah banyaknya di Kuala Lumpur.

Kelebihan Anwar Ibrahim, walau diancam, diserang kiri dan kanan, Anwar Ibrahim tetap Anwar Ibrahim. Tidak ada media Keadilan segagah BN dapat tumpaskan dakyah jahat itu, Anwar Ibrahim belum lagi berkubur. Ada kesempatan, Anwar Ibrahim harus menjadi Perdana Menteri Rakyat Malaysia. Aku puji Keadilan kerana tetap teguh di atas kebenaran, bukan kepalsuan. Utusan Malaysia menyerang tiap-tiap hari. Tugas aku tiap-tiap hari baca Utusan Malaysia dan membuat rumusan. Tetapi, aku tidak bimbang kerana propaganda ini tidak akan meranapkan keyakinan umum terhadap slogan Keadilan Untuk Semua.

Peace Requires Strength

Here is the situation. I decided to write this notes simply because I urge North Korea to be punished for its action against South Korea in recent attacks. I do not know how many are killed, and how many civilians are wounded. We must respond the escalating tensions accordingly that there is no way else for North Korea to stop threatening the region by their nuclear weapon unless the United States of America and allies acknowledges military strike options on the table this time. I shall say a must. North Korea is the axis of evil. They are representing great danger of modern world. They are constantly posing belligerent behavior towards their neighbors. And all these must be addressed with the commitment of disarming completely North Korea from weapons of mass destruction.

Iraq once upon a time ruled by a tyrant and he is no longer here. He is gone. Iraq now, in the transition of a nascent democratic nation and emerges to be respected in the region. I must say that former President Bush has done a costly decision combating terrorism in order to achieve stability and security within quite some time. Is President Obama willing to make tough decision this time around? What choices left then? Sit down in White House watching North Korea dark vision provocation the entire region? Of course, Obama is relatively weak compare to Republican neoconservatives. Robert Gates is losing his key neocon person in planning to combat rogue states like Iran and Burma. America, the declining role of your superiority is the choices, not permanently.

Talks, is absolutely delusion because the more time given to them, the more aggressive they are to conquer our dream as a free nation. I don’t prefer negotiations after negotiations and party talks to persuade North Korea to jettison the nuclear state ambition. It is just a tactical approach to build up more weapon of mass destruction. I actually oppose when you consuming plenty of time to build talks, and they are build up more sophisticated tools for destruction. War is the healthy of North Korea. And it is the responsibility of the United States of America and allies to continue their objectives as the only blessed and powerful nation on earth to protect international community.

Supportive regimes in China, Iran, even Burma toward North Korea which pose risk to erupt a second Korean War is overwhelming. It is frightening and inevitably as I see the intractable political interest. They are subsidizing North Korea with political interest, feeding them with aids under the guise of humanitarian and do whatever it takes to conceals North Korea regimes nukes intention in United Nation (UN) talks. Change Iran, change Burma, and change North Korea.

Malaysia and rest of the world have not strongly condemning North Korea. Disappointing, ironically Malaysia and rest of the world had series of condemnation towards Israel including United States of America particularly President Obama. The struggle of Israel existence on their own sovereign land has caused so much pain and sacrifices among Jewish against intruders. Anti Israel campaigns continues everywhere; campuses, streets and political orations. Life under Hamas is hell, life under Israel is benign. I will not abandon Israel at whatever cost. Abandoning Israel, it is also means you abandoning the frontline of civilization. We shall not disregard the facts that to acquire peace require strength!

Saturday, November 20, 2010

I Give You, Ron Paul

Congressman Ron Paul is the leading advocate for freedom in our nation’s capital. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dr. Paul tirelessly works for limited, constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return to sound monetary policies. He is known among his congressional colleagues and his constituents for his consistent voting record. Dr. Paul never votes for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution. In the words of former Treasury Secretary William Simon, Dr. Paul is the “one exception to the Gang of 535″ on Capitol Hill.

Ron Paul was born and raised in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He graduated from Gettysburg College and the Duke University School of Medicine, before proudly serving as a flight surgeon in the U.S. Air Force during the 1960s. He and his wife Carol moved to Texas in 1968, where he began his medical practice in Brazoria County. As a specialist in obstetrics/gynecology, Dr. Paul has delivered more than 4,000 babies. He and Carol, who reside in Lake Jackson, Texas, are the proud parents of five children and have 17 grandchildren. While serving in Congress during the late 1970s and early 1980s, Dr. Paul’s limited-government ideals were not popular in Washington. In 1976, he was one of only four Republican congressmen to endorse Ronald Reagan for president. During that time, Congressman Paul served on the House Banking committee, where he was a strong advocate for sound monetary policy and an outspoken critic of the Federal Reserve’s inflationary measures. He was an unwavering advocate of pro-life and pro-family values. Dr. Paul consistently voted to lower or abolish federal taxes, spending and regulation, and used his House seat to actively promote the return of government to its proper constitutional levels. In 1984, he voluntarily relinquished his House seat and returned to his medical practice. Dr. Paul returned to Congress in 1997 to represent the 14th congressional district of Texas. He presently serves on the House Committee on Financial Services and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He continues to advocate a dramatic reduction in the size of the federal government and a return to constitutional principles. Congressman Paul’s consistent voting record prompted one of his congressional colleagues to say, “Ron Paul personifies the Founding Fathers’ ideal of the citizen-statesman. He makes it clear that his principles will never be compromised, and they never are.” Another colleague observed, “There are few people in public life who, through thick and thin, rain or shine, stick to their principles. Ron Paul is one of those few.”

Brief Overview of Congressman Paul’s Record:

§ He has never voted to raise taxes.

§ He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.

§ He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.

§ He has never voted to raise congressional pay.

§ He has never taken a government-paid junket.

§ He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

§ He voted against the Patriot Act.

§ He voted against regulating the Internet.

§ He voted against the Iraq war.

§ He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.

§ He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.

Myself And Compulsion

He has confirmed to walk away from the party due to differences after months in PKR. Clashes of personality, or perhaps a distinction between what I want and what do you want. I tell you, if you are new member of the party, do not ever wish to go against so called superior or leadership. Here, we recognized 'subservient' as a norm.

They know best. I, myself is nothing than just a freshmen who need to be taught about obedience and respect the only man in the party. Yes, follow me then you will be secured. Dislike. Myself for the instance, I like to do what I want. I don’t care what they said about me. As I strongly believe, I rather become inefficient and I deserve meet the failure. That’s the only way to progress and become more resilient in the future. Why they need to spread abhorrence in order to epitomizing popularity?

Well, I lose my sense of individualist, what I can do given my best knowledge and what does collectively decide for the greater good. Collective thinking is absolutely violating my desire to create, foresee and emotionally which distorted by majority. Those who advocates ‘togetherness’ and common benefits, I had been in that situation previously, somewhere. It was a moral transgression and absurd!

You don’t agree, you are ‘told’ to quit although no one ask you to do so. In the case of Zaid Ibrahim, I don’t have many things to speak about him but if he thinks that he feels better with quitting the party, let him be. At the other side, who apparently happy with the news, should look forward and rectifying all claims and complaints for a better party. Democracy is fine and hard to exercise. One man, one vote providing us means to convince the people that PKR is a democratic party. What about each of them? Are they democratically elected? Are these means corrupted conscience and individual sense in the party?

A Marxist scholar, don't remember the name but it is likely, obviously the state of alliance between the leadership and intellectual or scholars in nineteenth century House of Hohenzollern at Berlin. As a result, they become venerable and invulnerable institutions. Do they (PKR or PR) emulate this? So? Who afraid now? You or me? They or me alone? Who feels insecure?

One man appears so threatens to the strength of party and leadership just because of freedom and individual liberty. I am not part of reformist age. I wasn’t there on the street screaming for justice and corrupted government to be wiped off. But I have a conviction to say and implement it if they (politicians) have in their mind as mine.

Someone reiterates me since day one; the history of the party must not be forgotten by, especially new members. If you are the member or part of the struggle whether during reformist age, then you are considered experienced and respected. Yes, this is the perception I always deal with.

My conviction and belief is relevant and I think if Zaid’s new party of himself endorses it, I will not hesitate to walk the talk with them. You don’t like him and there is goes saying a technical excuse such as “PKR is very disappointing with him as a result using BN’s media to launch attack against the party”. They use ‘we’ now. What if I say no? What is my platform to say no? Can ‘we’ fulfill my needs and expectation then? Oh, majority takes all! Is the decision irrevocable?

My hope is Zaid Ibrahim willing to embrace our determination of liberal matured democracy. It requires small government, market driven economy, and more vibrant individual liberty. My proposal to him, establish a movement which call more principles rather than political gimmick. Why not? The time has come to let new movement sparking their Enlightening and Reason to shine our beloved nation.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

A Pas Man Should Lead Pakatan: Zaid Ibrahim

Exclusive interview with Zaid Ibrahim

'A Pas man should lead Pakatan'

By Rashid Yusof, Sajahan Waheed and Shuhada Elis

KUALA LUMPUR: Someone from the ranks of Pas should be the leader of Pakatan Rakyat, said Datuk Zaid Ibrahim whose exit from Parti Keadilan Rakyat looks inevitable.

He named in an interview Kelantan exco member Datuk Husam Musa and four Pas parliamentarians -- Dr Hatta Ramli (Kuala Krai), Dr Mujahid Yusuf Rawa (Parit Buntar), Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (Kuala Selangor) and Khalid Samad (Shah Alam) as prospective leaders.

Speaking of Pas and its personalities in general terms, Zaid said they would have to be more assertive, demonstrate greater confidence and step out of the shadows of PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Zaid said PKR had declined following the inroads it had made in the March 2008 general election and this was why he had offered to contest the No. 2 post in PKR.

At the same time, there was a sense that Pas was lacking in confidence as its leaders seemed to think that Anwar was the saviour.

"Pas has always been the strongest Malay party in the opposition."

On the other hand, "if you think Anwar can deliver to you, he is not going to do that, so you might as well face the issues yourself".

Asked if a Malay leader from DAP could hold the reins of Pakatan instead, he said: "DAP will take a longer time to change."

Zaid agreed to the hour-long interview at his house -- the scene of a number of highly-visible press conferences in the past few weeks -- to address allegations and concerns that his actions had weakened Pakatan.

He spoke of those who had asked him to stop criticising Anwar.

He chronicled his political career beginning with his 23 years in Umno, his 17 months, so far, in PKR, including the last tumultuous months. He downplayed his ambitions and made it clear he was not about to go on a rampage against Anwar.

Zaid has dropped out of the contest for the deputy president's post of PKR in the ongoing party elections.

He was asked if he had not known of criticisms against Anwar's leadership style and that the party was deemed to have been founded mainly to pursue Anwar's cause.

"I have never had a close relationship with Anwar, not in Umno, and not now. Initially, we used to discuss about the direction and decision-making in the party but after a while, I began to see that it was difficult to work with him because he changes things.

"Actually, the party itself is Anwar, so if you expect to see empowerment, you cannot see that. It is hard for me accept that."

Zaid said he was surprised that PKR has not sacked him and admitted that he was taken aback by Anwar's faith in his former private secretary and now front-runner for the No. 2 post, Mohamed Azmin Ali.

Asked if Azmin could lead Pakatan, Zaid said: "I just don't think Azmin can be a leader of the pact because he is loyal to Anwar.

"To have someone as a leader, you must be prepared to see things differently.

"I don't think the party will be very strong if Anwar and Azmin stay. In fact, it has declined since 2008.

If you look at PKR membership, they claim to have 400,000 members but people who turned out to vote were very small, probably only 9,000 people up to now."

Asked who actually runs the party, Zaid replied: "PKR is all about Anwar alone. Anwar does not care about what others think and only his views count."

Zaid did not appear flustered as some of the most adverse analyses were thrown at him during the interview -- ranging from the oft-repeated caricature of Zaid Ibrahim the troubled soul who seems to be suggesting he had been hard done by both Umno and PKR.

It was conspicuous during the interview that Zaid hardly discussed the role of PKR president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.

This is interesting because when Zaid gave media interviews starting with Mingguan Malaysia in September, he had publicly asked Anwar to contest the PKR presidency and to exercise power with responsibility.

He had since been subjected to vilification by Anwar, who had among others said Zaid had conspired with Utusan Malaysia.

Yesterday, Zaid told the New Sunday Times that Anwar had a low tolerance of dissent.

Asked if he was now an isolated figure in PKR, he said: "I do not care. As long as my views are important to the public, I will speak up. I am now 60 years old."

His intentions were made obvious, including the possible establishment of a "smallish party" and made admiring references to "Mr Opposition", the late Tan Sri Tan Chee Khoon.

"If I can, I want to go back to Parliament in 2012. I will have to find a seat somewhere.

"If I have to form my own party, I will do it. Maybe not a big party. I will do what I feel."

He said he was an issues-related politician and spoke of the possibility of finding common ground with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

Zaid addressed the issue of "conspiracy" which seemed to have stirred the sentiments of a segment of Pakatan supporters.

"I always come back to the issue of conspiracy because when you talk about Anwar, there is always 'conspiracy' but I can't buy that. Anwar was charged during Pak Lah's (Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi) time.

"He is a good man so he can't be conspiring. I see a lot of PKR people singing to this tune as if they knew the verdict and this is the sort of politics I can't follow.

"There are people who are generally concerned but they don't believe everything the government does is a conspiracy.

"To be an enlightened decision- maker, you need proper facts and analyses, engagement, this is why it is important to have many voices to talk about issues."


-----------------------------------------------
Opening remarks by Zaid: The reason why I wanted this interview was not to talk so much about problems in Parti Keadilan Rakyat but I want to thank well-meaning friends and people who want to see a strong opposition. They are concerned with my action, as if it is counter productive. Some say that I should not have attacked (Datuk Seri) Anwar (Ibrahim). If that is the sort of tendency which people have, then I think I need to explain.


Q: You are talking to the national media at the time when your colleagues from Pakatan Rakyat have banned media organisations from covering functions like the recent case in Kedah. Do you think that they are wrong to do that? Have your statements or remarks been routinely twisted?


A: I am against boycott from before because I think boycott is never effective anyway, whether it is economic boycott or “don’t drink Coca-Cola” boycott. Boycotting the media also is not effective. You lose that opportunity to tell the people your side of the story.

Even if there are distortions or errors, sometimes it is not intended to be so. Even if it is deliberate, it can be rectified. I myself have been subject of criticisms especially during election campaign but I think that politics is like that. You just have to continue to engage and tell your side, if people carry (the story) it will be good.

Q: You must be aware of a perception against you. That you had issues with Umno and now PKR. Are you not concerned that you are said to be a troubled soul?

A: I am not concerned at all because it is not true. There are a lot of people hired to do political smearing against me but you have to look at the facts when you decide on something. I was in Umno for over 23 years. I have gone through a lot. I got suspended, got dropped as a candidate, lost election over 10 year- period before I won but I did not resign. My record is a very tenacious political fighter. I was sacked from Umno because of my views. I am not a trouble-maker but my views have always been different from the mainstream.

I was sacked because of my strong views on the Internal Security Act (ISA). As far as resignation from the Cabinet, I think you understand that the principle of collective responsibility of ministers is a very important principle of governance. Ministers must abide by collective decision of the cabinet and if you don’t, you must resign.

So when the government decided to detain the three civilians under ISA in 2008, I did not agree so I was just following a cardinal principle. Of course, there are ministers who probably shared my view but stayed as ministers, that is their call but that should not make me a coward or troublemaker.

So I joined PKR as it is a party that promised a lot of lofty political ideals. And then we have this election process that is totally flawed and fraudulent in many ways and I did not want to be a part of that because that means I am inconsistent. So I have my political views but that does mean that I have to succumb to these practices because I have different goals that I want to achieve. I have not been a trouble-maker but I just followed certain principles and in the case of the election, I just did not want to be part of it.


Q: You must be aware of (Datuk Seri) Anwar Ibrahim’s political style even before when you were in Umno? You must have been aware that he was described variously as someone big on rhetorics but not on substance, and things like that?

A: If I was mistaken about Anwar, so was (former Prime Minister Tun Dr) Mahathir (Mohamad) and many other people so you cannot fault me by that. I was just an ordinary Umno member. I did not join PKR because of Anwar, I joined a political party that suited my political beliefs and ideals. I thought PKR is the vehicle but I never joined with my eyes closed. It takes a while for you to be convinced of a person. I did not want to be hasty as well. I have heard a lot about him before and when you do not know the person, you give him the benefit of the doubt.


Q: How would you describe your relationship with Anwar now?

A: I have never had a close relationship with Anwar, not in Umno, and not now. Initially we used to discuss about the direction and decision-making in the party but after a while, I began to see that it was difficult to work with him because he changes things. Actually the party itself is Anwar, so if you expect to see empowerment, you cannot see that. It is hard for me accept that. There are many members who joined the party not just because of Anwar but they want to see change for the country and reforms. That is why I have my supporters as well. If everyone in PKR joined because of Anwar, I would not have any supporters.


Q: Does he (Anwar) tolerate dissent?

A: I do not know whether he tolerates or not but only his views count.


Q: There are talks that several hours before submitting your nomination form to contest the deputy presidency, you had a closed-door discussion with PKR president Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and her daughter Nurul Izzah Anwar and there were reportedly some drama.

A: There is no drama. It was only made up by political analysts who do not even know what is going on. They make projections, they take bits and pieces. I know from day one that Anwar wanted (Mohamed) Azmin (Ali) to be the deputy president. And I thought that someone else was suitable but I also knew that I was new in the party. That is why I posted in my blog that (Tan Sri Abdul) Khalid (Ibrahim) should go in but Khalid did not go in. So I said maybe (Nurul) Izzah (Anwar) should do it. I was really serious and there is no drama and tricks. I do not think that Azmin should get it free. Then I met Kak Wan (Azizah) on the last day before nomination, but Khalid did not show interest and Nurul was keen but did not do anything so I was waiting for confirmation. Is this the conduct of a power-crazy guy?


Q: As you said, you were aware that Anwar wanted Azmin as the deputy. So, couldn’t you see that Anwar would do anything to achieve this?

A: My supporters also asked me why I am not contesting. I got nomination from divisions whom I did not even know. I submitted my nomination because I knew that Khalid and nobody else was coming in. Even after the first week when I was leading (in the vote-count), I made a call to stop the election as the election officials were deliberately campaigning for Azmin. This is public record. I said stop it because the process is more important than the outcome. It is in shambles, a joke. If I do not raise all these, what about the other members? For Anwar to say that there is no proof, than it shows that he does not know what is going on.


Q: You had previously said that you were given (Tun Abdul) Ghafar (Baba) treatment. What were you hinting at?

A: I said that I know the preference of Anwar but I tried to warn the party do not be like Ghafar those days where you do not even allow (for) nominations. You cannot be overzealous. If members want to contest, let them, I did not say that I was treated like Ghafar.


Q: Did not you know from day one that you were going against something impossible?

A: You still have to find out, don’t you?


Q: Were you taken aback by the goings on?

A: Yes. It is a disappointment. I do not like to talk about people, it is internal matters and only relevant that it shows Anwar’s style of leadership. I do not want to go into details on how to run a party. The party is run by Anwar, not the family.


Q: Has Wan Azizah or anyone else from the party contacted you?

A: No.


Q: Pakatan allies have been watching the goings on in PKR. Do you think someone like you should be the new leader, perhaps representing DAP?

A: I do not desire or have any experience to be leader of Pakatan. I know myself and I am not a leader of any big political party, I am not even a member of parliament. As I said I just want to see opposition being strong because I believe the government will be more accountable if the opposition is strong. As far as Pas and DAP, they will not be able to progress under Pakatan if Anwar is the leader. Anwar has not done very much in terms of policy. His handling of his own party is such that he cannot handle bigger things. But it is not for me to tell Pas and DAP what to do. They should probably identify someone else, not me of course. Pas has got many good young leaders, like Dr Zul (Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad, MP for Kuala Selangor); Dr Hatta Ramli (Kuala Krai), Dr Mujahid Yusuf Rawa (Parit Buntar), Khalid Samad (Shah Alam) and (Datuk) Husam Musa ... these are leaders who have the potential but they must get out of Anwar’s shadow. The problem is everybody thinks that the future of the opposition depends on Anwar. I think that the future of the opposition depends on the opposition parties. They must not be afraid to reorganise themselves because that is what they should do.


Q: Can you take us through the dynamics of race within PKR?

A: I think that the concept of multiracial party can work and move forward as it has a future. I believe that the leadership can address issues. If the concerns of the community is taken care off, you can make it viable.


Q: Don’t you have a sense now - looking back - that Umno is a much better party?

A: I was sacked. But I thought that I could not change my style if I stayed. I remember in the 90s, I was just an ordinary member in Umno and I talked about the immunity of the rulers and I took some risks. But in my years in Umno, I was always like that. I was a government backbencher (MP for Kota Baru, 2004-08) but they called me “Mr Opposition”. I wanted them to change because I kind of felt that 2008 was coming and I was right. I think that I have been persistent in my political discourse.


Q: Considering the events of the past few weeks, your criticisms that culminated in your withdrawal from the race, are you now an isolated figure in PKR?

A: I do not care as long as my views are important to the public, I will speak up. I am now 60 years old. My style is different than other politicians. I have clear view of what the country needs. If can, I want to go back to the parliament in 2012. I will have to find a seat somewhere. If I have to form my own party, I will do it. Maybe not a big party. I will do what I feel. I am a issue related politician, I will support the PM if I feel so and I am free to criticise BN or the opposition or anyone. I just want to be someone who can help the public to understand the issues and appreciate why certain things need to be done in certain ways. I am not a trouble-maker and that is how I see myself.

Q: Would you consider contesting as an Independent?
A: I remember (Tan Sri) Tan Chee Khoon who was a respected parliamentarian. He was Mr Opposition because the opposition then was very small. But I will have my style if there is a place for that role in parliament.


Q: Some kind of our own Green Party?

A: I would like to go back if I can, whether as independent or small party or yellow party. I hope there is a space for all kind of voices in democracy.


Q: So have you decided whether you will stay or quit PKR?

A: People ask me when I am going to quit but I have small groups of supporters all over the place and I have to talk to them. If there are options to leave I will. They might even sack me. In fact I am quite surprised they haven’t. It’s quite strange because you describe me as a “Trojan horse” then why are you keeping me? That’s very hurting because Umno haven’t paid me a sen but Anwar will come out with something like that. He’s capable with that sort of things which is ridiculous. The latest was that I conspire with Utusan but why would I? I never said “no” to the media because I think reporters have a duty to write, so when they want to interview me I said: “why not?” I have never met former Perlis Mufti Dr Asri Zainul Abidin in my life so how can I conspire with him to ask Anwar to step down? This is the sort of politics I opposed to. You spread lies and perpetuate it. That is not responsible politics and you can’t condone that. The point is I hope this political transformation somehow will take place and I’ll do whatever I can do.


Q: Do you think it is possible that one day you will find a common ground with Umno?

A: I think Umno and BN are already strong and they don’t need someone like me to be there. And I don’t see my role in Umno can add value (to the party), I rather be the voice from outside. I am prepared to support them if the issues are consistent with my views. But I value my independence. That is probably what Umno needs anyway. Sometimes when you have too many yes-men, it will not change you.


Q: Would you say that your days in PKR are numbered?

A: Of course. I don’t think I can work with Anwar, that is why I suggested the solution; Anwar must go. But in reality it is not possible. But I don’t see myself in PKR. I just don’t want to leave now because I want to see my friends around.


Q: There was a time when overnight the a multitude of debate was unleashed. Do you think we could have managed the consequences?

A: (Heightened) political discourse could be a danger because people have different understanding on the same thing, it’s like six blind men discovering an elephant. So is Malaysian politics. Everybody from both side of divide understand different things about the constitution. You have to go through the right understanding of what citizenship means and what rights mean, unfortunately Umno hasn’t been united in certain things. They are only being obedient and compliant when voices in Umno should be welcomed. It’s not my party but I am just saying it from the outside. We spend a lot of time going in circles, always backtracking and defining what social contract means, for example. We should move forward.


Q: What have you got against Azmin?

A: Nothing, but I just don’t think he can be a leader of the pact because he is loyal to Anwar. To have someone as a leader, you must be prepared to see things differently.


Q: There were talks that Azmin’s team had sabotaged your campaign in Hulu Selangor (Zaid was fielded as PKR candidate in the April 15 by-election) and now this. What have you got to say?

A: If we have a proper election I will probably beat him but that will be a matter of time. (laughs) You see when you join an organisation, you know they are not perfect but you somehow think you can do something and re-organise it. It’s not a waste of time but you go through political discourse and sometimes you make narrow judgment about certain things, you can’t be likeable all the time.


Q: How do you see the direction of the party if Anwar and Azmin stay on?

A: I don’t think the party will be very strong. In fact it has declined since 2008, that is why I offered myself to do something. If you look at PKR membership, they claimed to have 400,000 members but people who turned out to vote were very small, probably only 9,000 people up to now. Things like the structure of the party and strength of membership, jentera (machinery) is my interest, I’d like to work on these issues. Anwar is preoccupied with his own case, it’s a distraction, I suppose.


Q: To recap, it is interesting that you specifically said Pas leaders should be projected as the leader of Pakatan. Can’t a Malay leader from the ranks of DAP be considered instead?

A: I think from the reality of our political framework, it has to be a Malay leader. Someone who understand issues and acceptable to all races. Whether Pas can transform as a party and allow such a leader to rise, that is for them to think. I don’t think you can enter national politics unless you are happy to control a few states and become opposition at different level but if you aspire to replace BN, you have to take the giant leap and transform yourself as a national party, image and leader.


Q: Not the DAP?..

A: I think DAP will take a longer time to transform itself. That is why I prefer Pas. I don’t know about PKR because I don’t see how they can get out of Anwar’s shadow. So that is my two cents’ worth.


Q: Is there a sense that non-Malay segment of PKR warms up to you, rather than identify themselves with Azmin?

A: Sometimes image created by outside forces has nothing to do with reality. Maybe because Anwar has been painted friendly to non-Malays so I was painted the same way. I don’t know where Azmin stands though. Probably because he has been telling the Malays that Zaid is not good for the Malays and Muslims. But I never campaign along those lines.


Q: Could the results of 2008 be an aberration?

A: I don’t think it is the sign of the time but you cannot take things for granted. Not BN nor the opposition. The voters are more mobile and interactive with issues, they are more prepared. I think this is good because I believe in vibrant democracy.


Q: You had tossed names of Pas personalities as potential leaders of Pakatan but in the same breath you said they are loyalists of Anwar. Please explain.

A: I think these people lacked confidence, they seem to think Anwar is the saviour. So when you have that mindset, it is difficult for you to move forward and transform yourself. So to be a national party, Pas has to take risks and develop its own leaders and come forward. If you put all eggs in one basket, what if the basket can’t deliver? Pas has always been the strongest Malay party in the opposition although it has conservative and reformist groups. But if you think Anwar can deliver to you, he is not going to do that so you might as well face issues yourself.


Q: We have been speaking to groups of young voters. In your reckoning, do you think they are turned off by politics?

A: I think there is a lot of apathy and a lack of interest. You have to deal with it, young people form the bulk of voters and it is a young country. We must engage with them and get them to be interested, get them on your side. I blame the education system especially the university for the reason on apathy. I think young people have idealism and ideas but you can’t kill that, that is a cause.


Q: When you joined PKR you were garlanded and hailed as a future leader. Seventeen months on do you think you are less popular now that you have gone against Anwar?

A: Popularity is never my concern. I don’t have somebody conducting opinion polls for me, if there is something which requires me to speak, I will. I try not to be their concern. They say I’m a spoiler and I’m trying to break up opposition and go back to BN, but I don’t support the opposition for the sake of opposing. I want a different style and who becomes the prime minister is not my interest. I’m probably less popular now but i didn’t want to be a hero for anybody.


Q: Based on your descriptions of PKR and the opposition, it does seem that it is not issues and policies that galvanise them?

A: A lot of people voted the opposition because they want to see substantive change in the way the country is being ruled. The leader of the opposition should have a sense of responsibility. I always come back to issue of conspiracy because when you talk about Anwar, there is always conspiracy but I can’t buy that. Anwar was charged during Pak Lah’s (Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi) time. He is a good man so he can’t be conspiring. I see a lot of Keadilan people singing to this tune as if they knew the verdict and this is the sort of politics I can’t follow. There are people who generally concern but they don’t believe everything government does is a conspiracy. To be an enlightened decision-maker, you need proper fact and analysis, engagement, this is why it is important to have many voices to talk about issues.

(Via nst.com.my: Exclusive interview with Zaid Ibrahim: 'A Pas man should lead Pakatan')