Nationalism

Having worked here these past few months (and I’m obviously not doing much work at this point in time), I have had varied responses whenever I tell someone that I am from Malaysia. The Caucasians almost always say ‘Ooh…that’s a lovely country isn’t it? I’d love to go there one day’ or something along those lines. And the folks from the developing countries (bearing in mind that I have colleagues from diverse places e.g. India, Algeria and Iraq) associate Malaysia with both the above, along with its image as a modern Islamic country and more often than not, with a brand called Mahathir.

From anecdotal evidence, the viewpoint of many of these (mostly Muslim) individuals is that Tun Dr Mahathir was a man who stood up for the downtrodden Southern Hemisphere, and did not kow-tow to the Western powers that be each time they snapped their fingers.

And how far is this true?

For all the things he might or might not have done, one has to admit that Mahathir was (and still is) one of the more nationalistic individuals around. From his policy of Buy British Last, to looking east at Japan and China, to his call to discard the US dollar for the Euro or gold, to his spats with the leaders of Australia and even the States; he has shown that smaller and economically weaker countries should (and would) not be bullied by bigger countries – even geographically smaller ones like Singapore, who have the backing of the States.

The old man’s primary aim during his entire career in politics was to (supposedly) bring up the Malay race. Which he attempted to do admirably, except for the fact that as much as an astute politician he is, he probably did not count on the fact that at the end of the day, it is human nature to look after your own interests first (read folks like Tajuddin Ramli). Not many people really give a damn about the whole bangsa, agama and Negara ‘crap’. And in his interview soon after he retired, he said that his biggest regret is that even after 22 years as Malaysia’s Prime Minister he had failed to change the Malays. (Read this article).

I have always maintained that politicians will always look after their own interests, but that they will have my support as long as they place national interests above their own. So if you want to award a million-ringgit contract to your darling grandson, go ahead as long as everyone else in the country is not suffering from economic mismanagement.

But having my country’s economic resources being slowly stripped away to the advantage of others (and the detriment of our own people) is not something that brings a smile to my face. How are events like the extremely one-sided FTA with Japan (God knows what they’ll agree with when the FTA with the States comes into place), or having a Singaporean as the chief economist of Khazanah (do you think the Singaporeans will allow a Malaysian to even think of taking over Temasek?) meant to membangunkan our rakyat? I can go on with other examples but I think I should go see if I’m needed at the ward.

At the end of the day, one expects a leader to do what’s best for the country. But that is not necessarily the case, as can be seen from Thaksin’s dealings in Thailand. With a profit to his family of approx 1 billion pounds, he had placed control of Thailand's communications satellites, internet servers, and its biggest mobile-phone network to the wife of Singapore’s PM (who also manages Temasek). And he was aptly rewarded with a military coup in the capital yesterday (after months of demonstrations by hundreds of thousands of people) as he was away in New York for the usual hot air that is a meeting of the UN.

Such a scenario is unlikely to be seen in Malaysia. But perhaps the powers that be should note that even normally placid citizens have a limit to their patience.