Ludah meludah oleh akhbar negara dalam isu 'Kemajuan Melayu Singapura VS Melayu Malaysia' menggambarkan sikap kebudak-budakkan yang begitu meloyakan, Tambah lagi dengan kenyataan pemimpin Umno makin nampak hingus yang meleleh tak sudah-sudah. Nampak sangat kepingin isu yang bergolek ke riba untuk menonjolkan diri sebagai wira orang melayu tetapi tidak kemana juga akhirnya. Mereka bukan hendak memperjuangkan nasib orang melayu, tetapi hendak mengangkat diri sendiri.

Yang menariknya, lawatan oleh Menteri Singapura, Abdullah Tarmugi, ditulis oeh akhbar meloya sebagai 'Utusan Pendamai' sedangkan lawatan itu telah dirancang sebelum krisis itu bermula lagi dan tidak ada kena mengena dengan isu yang hangat itu. Bukan sahaja Abdullah Tarmugi memberi penjelasan akan lawatannya, malah menteri Umno sendiri sudah membayangkan perjumpaan itu telah lama dirancang.

Lapuran Berita Harian mengatakan "Singapura menghantar En. Abdullah untuk menerangkan kenyataan PM Goh bukan untuk memperlekehkan pencapaian orang melayu di Malaysia" atau "meredakan perkelahian".

'The visit is believed to be aimed at easing the tension between Malaysia and Singapore.' - (Berita Harian/NST)

Takkan lah secerdik budak tadika sahaja tahap para wartawan yang bergaji beribu-ribu itu?

Ramai orang berpendapat jika polisis kerajaan Malaysia ternyata gagal dan hanya membuahkan budaya korup dan kerugian, mengapa ia tidak dimansuhkan sahaja?

Mungkin Pak Lah harus meninjau sedikit ke Singapura dalam sesi lawatannya ke Singapure minggu depan.

-MSuri-

Source: The Singapore Straits Times

31st January 2001

The real motive behind those attacks

By Brendan Pereira

MALAYSIA CORRESPONDENT

AFTER fielding questions on Saturday on the dispute with Singapore over the progress of Malays on both sides of the Causeway, Malaysian Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar was tossed a hot potato.

An experienced Malaysian journalist wanted to know how far Malaysia would go to show its displeasure over the episode. The minister explained that his ministry had already summoned Singapore's High Com- missioner to clarify Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong's comments.

Datuk Syed Hamid asked: 'You want to go to war?'

On hindsight, the question from the reporter was not surprising.

Since early December, the Malaysian media has given extensive coverage to Ms Lily Zubaidah Rahim's book, The Singapore Dilemma: Political and Educational Marginalisation of the Malay Community.

For some Malaysian journalists, it is a personal campaign. They harbour suspicion and envy for Singapore. Nothing feels better than provoking a reaction from its neighbour down south.

The little nuggets from the Singapore-born lecturer's book are heaven-sent. It gives them some statistical and analytical ammunition to launch a more credible attack on a cornerstone of modern Singapore - meritocracy.

For the Utusan Malaysia, it was another opportunity to fly the flag of Malay nationalism. This has become all the more urgent at a time when questions like, 'Are you a Malay', or, 'Are you a Muslim', are driving a wedge through the community.

Some politicians also find Singapore- bashing inviting. It is a low-risk exercise with good returns.

Take the current spat. The loudest protests came from a politician who is being attacked from all sides for being weak.

As part of the exercise to rebuild his image, his voice is heard above all others in the festival of vitriol. The irony is that he is probably one of the most moderate leaders in Malaysia.

Then there is the veteran politician who needs such issues to remain relevant on the national platform so that he can burnish his image as a Malay nationalist.

For him and his ilk, it is never about protecting the Malaysian government's impressive track record in lifting the standard of Malays across the causeway.

It is about lifting their own standing in the eyes of their constituents.

--------

ROW OVER MALAYS

Letter writers have say in papers :

While the leaders have moved on, Malaysian readers are still taking PM Goh to task for saying Malays in Singapore are not marginalised

By Brendan Pereira

MALAYSIA CORRESPONDENT

MALAYSIAN and Singapore leaders may have decided to move on, but Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong's statement on Malays here continues to be debated and dissected in the pages of Malaysian newspapers.

The overwhelming view remains that the Singapore leader erred in reaching the conclusion that Malays in the Republic had made better progress than their counterparts in Malaysia.

Two of three letters to The New Straits Times letters page yesterday made the point that the facts and figures presented by PM Goh to his audience in the Republic needed to be analysed and put into a broader perspective.

Mr Hashim Ambia noted that it was stated that 23 per cent of Malay Singaporean workers held administrative, managerial, professional and technical jobs last year, while the figure for Malay Malaysians was 16 per cent in 1998.

He was unsure if PM Goh was referring to the private sector in both countries.

'In the public sector, the percentage in Malaysia is definitely more than 16 per cent, perhaps even more than 60 per cent.

'If I am right, perhaps Goh or anyone else could tell us the percentage of Malay Singaporeans at the higher level in the public sector including those in the armed forces, police and diplomatic service.'

He also wondered what the definition of a 'Malay' in Singapore was.

He said that he had met Singaporeans who were similar to, but not quite, Malay. They had Christian names and could not speak a word of Malay. Instead they spoke pidgin English.

'Just what is this idea of the Malay hybrid culture in Singapore? This is worse than being marginalised...

'Imagine, in Singapore, where the Utusan Melayu was founded, the Asas 50 inaugurated and the land of the Nyonyas and Babas, Malay is no longer even spoken by the Malays. What a mockery.'

Mr Nasir Ahmad, another reader, wrote that PM Goh performed a bit of statistical deception to conclude that Malays in Singapore were not marginalised.

'Take a set of statistics, compare it with a like set for Malaysia and, hey presto, there's the answer.'

He argued that, using PM Goh's reasoning, one could reach the conclusion that native Americans or Afro-Americans were not marginalised.

Most of the newspapers also gave prominent coverage to the point made by visiting Community Development and Sports Minister Abdullah Tarmugi that PM Goh's statement on the state of the Malays here and in the island state was intended for Singaporeans.

The Sun carried Mr Abdullah's comments in a front-page lead report as did Berita Harian.

Utusan Malaysia reported the minister saying he hoped that Malaysia would not overreact to PM Goh's statement but keep focused on long-term bilateral ties.

The influential Malay daily has been leading the charge in covering the spat between Malaysia and Singapore. Over the past 10 days, it has carried numerous articles and letters critical of PM Goh's statement.

On Saturday, Umno Youth exco member Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir said that Malays in Singapore deserved treatment befitting their status as 'genuine' citizens and should be allowed to hold high positions in the public service and armed forces.

---

Peace envoy? Malaysian paper gets it wrong

THE front-page headline said 'Singapore sends minister' and the introductory paragraph suggested that Community Development and Sports Minister Abdullah Tarmugi was in town as a peace envoy.

There was only one problem with the Malaysian Berita Harian report: it was inaccurate.

At a press conference, Mr Abdullah made it clear that his meeting with Malaysian Youth and Sports Minister Datuk Hishammuddin Tun Hussein had been arranged some time ago.

It was definitely way before an exchange erupted between Malaysia and Singapore over Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong's statement that Malays in the Republic had progressed better than their counterparts in Malaysia.

Even the Malaysian minister made it clear that the meeting had been made much earlier.

But the Berita Harian reporter called it differently. The report said that Singapore had sent Mr Abdullah to explain that PM Goh's statement was not meant to belittle the achievements of Malay Malaysians.

'The visit is believed to be aimed at easing the tension between Malaysia and Singapore.' --Brendan Pereira

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg

From The Economist, UK
Issue 1st February 2001

Our Malays are happier than yours

Mahathir and Goh: malaise

WILL they ever learn to get along? Malaysia and Singapore, which separated from each other 36 years ago, continue to spar over everything from the water that Malaysia sells its neighbour to customs posts and air space. On February 7th, Malaysia's deputy prime minister, Abdullah Badawi, is due to kick off a three-day visit to Singapore, in a continuing effort to patch up their differences. But the strait that divides them seemed to grow wider this week, when a fresh row broke out over race relations.

Malaysian officials, dutifully backed up by the local press, have been venting their indignation after some comments that Singapore's prime minister, Goh Chok Tong, made recently to a group of Singaporean Malays. Although ethnic Malays account for some 55% of Malaysia's population, they are only a 10% minority in Singapore, which is predominantly ethnic-Chinese. Many Singaporean Malays resent the Chinese dominance, but Mr Goh suggested that in several ways they were better off than Malays across the strait.

He pointed out, for example, that a quarter of Singapore's Malay workers boast an upper-secondary education or better, compared with only 14% of Malaysian Malays. This, in turn, is responsible for a higher proportion of workers in highly-skilled jobs. In 1998, some 23% of Singaporean Malays held administrative or professional posts, compared with 16% of Malaysian Malays, according to Mr Goh.

These are awkward facts for Malaysia's government, which holds official preferment for its Malay majority of bumiputras, sons of the soil, as sacrosanct: they are given preferential access to university places, and guaranteed 30% ownership of local companies. To what effect? Though Malaysia's economy has grown impressively over the past few decades - thanks to free trade and a competent bureaucracy 'Singapore's smaller meritocracy has grown much more rapidly, leaving everyone there better off.

Malaysia?s foreign minister, Syed Hamid Albar, retorted this week that Mr Goh's remarks were 'full of innuendoes questioning the effectiveness of the Malaysian government'. Many Malays in Malaysia, however, are asking similar questions. If the Malaysian government?s preferment policies lead to waste and corruption instead of higher growth, they say, would it not be better to scrap them? Perhaps Mr Abdullah, who is next in line to lead Malaysia when Mahathir Mohamad steps down, should take a good look around during his visit to Singapore next week.

http://www.economist.com/