Najib: Malaysia committed to defend sovereignty

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia is committed to continue defending its sovereignty said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak on Friday.

He said the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency (MMEA) had also made several achievements in its bid to combat pirates in the Malacca Straits.

"The MMEA has made several achievements in combating pirates in the Straits of Malacca.

“We are committed to defend the country's sovereignty," he said in his latest tweet.

On Thursday, MMEA Air Operations Branch director, First Admiral (Maritime) told Bernama that MMEA had gained international recognition for its competence in combating sea piracy in the Malacca Straits.

When speaking at the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace Exhibition (LIMA 2013), he also said combating pirates in the Malacca Straits was the major success that had boosted MMEA's name. - Bernama.

Winning GE13 is Job No. 1, Umno men say after Dr M’s putsch warning

KUALA LUMPUR, March 25 ― Winning Election 2013 takes precedence over party intrigues, several Umno leaders said today as they sought to play down veteran Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s warning to Datuk Seri Najib Razak that the prime minister may lose his post if the ruling coalition cedes more seats in the next polls.

Seasoned Umno lawmakers contacted by The Malaysian Insider appeared upset that the country’s fourth and longest-serving prime minister had chosen to publicly remind Najib about what he stood to lose with the 13th general election just weeks away, but did not deny that party warlords may push for the sixth PM to be ousted should the Barisan Nasional (BN) suffer further setbacks.

“No one should not talk about things like that, [not] even Tun. Such statements will do more harm than good. I disagree with him. We should be focusing on winning now,” said Umno supreme council member Dr Mohd Khir Toyo.

“What Tun raised is, of course, important, but we can wait for the results of the elections first. We can talk about that later,” the former Selangor mentri besar said.

Dr Mahathir was yesterday reported by international news agency AFP as suggesting that Najib may be unseated by unhappy Umno warlords if he fails to improve on BN’s performance during Election 2008, which had also helped unite the disparate opposition parties into a cohesive political force.

Dr Mahathir also told the news wire that he was worried about a possible regime change, suggesting there would be chaos and religious strife if the BN lost Putrajaya.

“Of course, if he (Najib) does not perform, there will be some necessity to switch horses.

“There could be a lot of disappointment and maybe a move to challenge him. That is normal,” the ex-prime minister who was in office for 22 years was quoted saying.

Pulai MP Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed, also said Dr Mahathir should not have aired Umno’s dirty laundry with the election just weeks away.

But the son of one of Dr Mahathir’s staunchest supporters, the late Datuk Mohamed Rahmat, suggested the 87-year-old was only seeking to protect his legacy by campaigning for a BN win.

“Tun shouldn’t be talking about something negative at this point… I suppose he wants his legacy to continue by making sure BN wins.

“We can win actually (but) we need continuity to ensure BN can continue with its transformation and rejuvenation of its ministers and mentris besar,” Nur Jazlan told The Malaysian Insider.

Dr Mahathir was credited as the political force behind successor Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s premature retirement from office in April 2009 ― despite winning the 12th general elections albeit with the loss of its parliamentary supermajority ― and paving the way for Najib’s rise to the top.

Previously, Dr Mahathir had repeatedly warned the country’s majority Malays that a weak government like Najib’s would give rise to non-Malay dominance, alluding to the liberal policies pushed by Najib and reading them as signs of growing non-Malay encroachment into Malay rights.

But the former prime minister had also called on voters to give Najib a chance, saying restoring BN’s parliamentary supermajority would help the Umno-led federal government consolidate the Malays’ position in the country.

But for some Umno members, Dr Mahathir’s statements could undo Najib’s vigorous push to maintain the party’s Malay powerbase and court the critical young ― seen to be the new kingmakers, according to the results of several surveys conducted in the past few months in the run-up to Election 2013.

“I am not saying he is wrong. I respect him. He is my former boss. But I believe we should be focusing on winning now. I would prefer to stick with positive things for now. Let’s support Najib,” said Padang Besar MP Datuk Seri Azmi Khalid, a former Umno supreme council member and an ex-minister.

Some political analysts have forecasted that BN will retain federal power at the polls that must be called by end-April when the current BN mandate expires, but have said that any win will be slim and unlikely to give it the customary two-thirds majority it enjoyed before Election 2008.

Other pundits, however, believe an opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) win at the polls may be possible, ushering a new regime into power for the first time since Independence in 1957.

Unity among BN members at its peak

BARISAN Nasional is all geared up to defend the Gerik parliamentary seat and Pengkalan Hulu and Temengor state seats in the 13th general election.

With Gerakan returning the Grik seat to Umno, the BN election machinery, particularly from Umno, is up and running and working hard to ensure victory for the BN candidate from Umno.

Gerik Umno division acting chief Datuk Hasbullah Osman is confident BN will retain all the seats as in previous general elections.

Hasbullah said his confidence stemmed from the fact that voters in the Gerik parliamentary constituency had thrown their full support behind BN despite the Gerik seat — traditionally an Umno seat — was given to Gerakan to contest in the 2008 general election.

He said such strong support had allowed Datuk Tan Lian Hoe to win the Gerik seat with a majority of 5,573 votes, the highest among BN members of parliament in Perak.

“For Pengkalan Hulu, incumbent Tan Sri Tajol Rosli Ghazali has left an outstanding track record in the state constituency, besides excellent services provided by BN teams.

“Therefore, even though a new face will be fielded in Pengkalan Hulu this time, I feel strongly that BN will retain the state seat,” said Hasbullah, who had been contesting the Temengor state seat since the 2004 general election.

He said BN was well prepared to counter any national or local issues or accusations brought up by the opposition during campaigning.He stressed that BN had never underestimated the opposition’s strength as it had always provided a stiff fight to BN.“We had the experience of becoming the opposition in Perak for 11 months. We don’t want that.”

He said unity among BN and Umno members was at its peak as grassroots members had learned from the bitter experience after the last polls.

PM: We can’t be too individualistic

UNITED WE STAND: We must have consideration for others, says Najib

PUTRAJAYA: EXTREME individualism will not be healthy for the nation’s wellbeing and development.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said yesterday that the country could not afford to have a society that’s too individualistic.

“Being individualistic will lead to one doing whatever one wants without considering others and this can lead to an extreme situation,” he told the crowd of 20,000 who had gathered for the “Jom Ceria Bersama PM” programme at Dataran Putrajaya.

The prime minister said the nation wanted those who could work together towards nation-building and strengthening the people’s unity.“By doing so, I believe the country will achieve more success.”

Najib added that he subscribed to the saying: “A country which plays together stays together.”

He said through various means, including organising sporting events, the people could tear down the walls that kept them apart, adding that unity among the diversified society would then be stronger.

To stay healthy, Najib also called on Malaysians, especially generation Y, to alter their sedentary lifestyle and become physically active.

He made the call as he was worried about seeing more and more Malaysians suffering from lifestyle diseases such as diabetes and high blood pressure.“The long hours spent in front of computer screens and sitting down while engaging with their smartphones and tablets will make them vulnerable to such illnesses as well as obesity.“My doctor tells me that many of us are suffering from hypertension,” he said, before joining thousands for a 5km walk under the programme.

Present were the prime minister’s wife, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and Sports and Youth Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Shabery Cheek.

Najib urged Malaysians, especially the younger generation, to improve their lifestyle through activities such as the “Jom Ceria” programme and other exercise activities.Rosmah later flagged off the thousands of participants.The event was organised by the 1Malaysia People’s Foundation and Putrajaya Corporation.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak being greeted by the people at the ‘Jom Ceria Bersama PM’ programme at Dataran Putrajaya yesterday

‘Najib’s 1Malaysia is the only way to go’

WITNESS TO HISTORY: Datuk Douglas Lee, who saw the fathers of the nation walk towards independence, reminisces about his brief, but robust involvement with the early MCA, a father who was larger-than-life and the personal moments etched in his memory. Balan Moses writes.

He was sacked twice from MCA by party president, Tun Tan Siew Sin, the Cambridge-educated and English-speaking lawyer, who did not sit well with the politics of the half-Englishman who spoke fluent Chinese.

However, Datuk Douglas Lee Kim Kiu, backed by his father, who was also one of Malaysia’s most illustrious sons, Col Tun Sir Henry Lee Hau Shik, dug in to remain in the nascent MCA, which the elder Lee had co-founded in 1949.

That Hau Shik was joined in the party’s formation by stalwarts like Dr Lim Chong Eu (later Tun and Penang chief minister) and Leong Yew Koh (later Tun and Malacca governor) was testimony to his political status.

“I was a pain in the neck for Siew Sin and his father, Tun Sir Tan Cheng Lock (also a former MCA president), but I did not waver,” the 89-year-old (he turns 90 on Dec 4) says of the epic feuds that he and his father, better known as Tun H.S. Lee, had with the Tans, “who could not speak Chinese while we were both Chinese-educated”.

The Lees, who come from a pedigree of Mandarins weaned on service to the emperor of the day and schooled in the finer graces of court and scholarly behaviour, had an initial edge over the Tans because of their close links with China and the Chinese community here.

But over time, Siew Sin, a Straits Chinese with astute political acumen, drew politically ahead of Hau Shik, who eschewed elected office and preferred the life of a successful businessman (his firm, H.S. Lee and Sons, is going through voluntary liquidation), with a commanding hand in Chinese affairs.

It was not that Hau Shik, who was the only Chinese signatory to the Malayan independence agreement in London, was lesser in social status, having been the scion of a tycoon with a vast business empire, besides having studied with the likes of King George VI at Cambridge University.

To be sure, the eccentric Hau Shik (his children’s Chinese names represent the places they were born in) did not contribute much to his own political life.

He “was aloof, rigid, not well-liked and called a spade, a spade”, which was in direct contrast with Douglas, who is congeniality personified.

It all boiled down to who had the support of the Malayan Chinese community and although the Lees initially held the winning cards, history records that the Tans eventually won in the game of politics.

Nevertheless, the victory was not before Douglas (Kim Kiu means “Cambridge” in Chinese) made his mark on the party as the youngest candidate in the first-ever elections in Malayan history in 1952. He won in the Imbi ward.

Later, he was Salak state assemblyman twice and MCA Youth secretary-general.

Still, that was that for the man who could not find a place for himself in MCA politics (he later joined Gerakan for an uneventful time as an ordinary member) and “bowed out of politics to become a gentleman”.

As for Hau Shik, who had started life by helping his father, Kwai Lim, run a silk trading firm called Kam Lun Tai or “beautiful silk shop”, Alliance leader Tunku Abdul Rahman made him the first transport minister in 1955 and afterwards, the first finance minister in the newly independent Malaya.

Douglas remembers eavesdropping as Tunku, Hau Shik and Tun Abdul Razak, among others, sat around a teak table at 22, Golfview Road (now Jalan Langgak Golf) in Kuala Lumpur, to plan their political strategies for Malaya.

The table is now at the home of his eldest son, Michael.

“Right from the beginning, I joined the right party (MCA). I still support MCA, but not the personalities in it.”

He says this with a forthrightness representative of the mettle that saw him through the difficult days of Malayan politics in the 1950s that mirrored divergent nationalistic and communal sentiments.

Douglas needs only a split second to hark back in time to the heady days when the first seeds of Sino-Malay political cooperation were sown.

The last living candidate from the epochal election that heralded the formation of the Alliance party (and later, Barisan Nasional) and a life-long advocate of multiracial politics, Douglas supports the 1Malaysia concept propounded by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

(MIC came only into the picture in 1955 as the third partner in the Alliance, after having unsuccessfully thrown in its lot earlier with the independence party of Malaya, which was led by charismatic leader, Dato Onn Jaafar.)

“This (the 1Malaysia concept) is the only way to go.

“I was born in Cambridge, England, raised in Zhenlong, China, and came to live in Malaya.

“But I am a Malaysian through and through.

“We are one country, one people,” he says with conviction, almost daring anyone to disagree with him.

I am sitting in Douglas’ office, shared occasionally by Michael, 64, at Wisma Central, one of the last vestiges of the Kuala Lumpur of the 1970s, with its quaint old-world ambience that has withstood the test of time.

Douglas, who used to look like one of the American actors in the 1940s, with his ramrod straight back, wavy salt-and-pepper hair, chiselled good looks and brilliant smile, is speaking to me about his nine decades of life through a haze of cigarette smoke.

Michael, who contributes to the pall hanging over us, is sitting in on the interview, which eventually stretches over two days.

He says he is here “to jog Dad’s memory”.

Douglas darts, instead of walks, to the washroom several times during the three-hour interview.

He is in amazingly good health, with a memory that would put people half his age to shame.

“I am one of those people who have never suffered ill health because I practise moderation in everything,” says the life-long Lion and name held in awe by members of the Malaysian and Kuala Lumpur Kwang Tung Associations.
He has smoked for 75 years and says his only exercise is feeding the koi in his pond at home.

Douglas’ mother, Dawn Kathleen Glen, studied with his father at Cambridge University.

She fell afoul of her mother-in-law, Kam Kwok-Chun, who was a powerhouse of a matriarch who ran her husband’s business empire in China with an iron fist and on two bound feet.

The resultant clash of cultures saw Dawn, who smoked and drove sport cars (“mother was very English”), leaving for home for good.

She took Vivien Leslie, her second son, with her.

Douglas remained with his father in Hong Kong.

Hau Shik eventually remarried, tying the knot with Kwan Choi Lin (“I actually introduced my stepmother to my father”).

She bore him seven children, including former deputy minister from Gerakan, Datuk Alex Lee.

There is a profound sadness that I see in the recesses of Douglas’ eyes when he talks about the mother he never knew (“I do not even remember her”) and the younger brother he only met as an old man for four days on a visit to London.

That trip was 15 years ago.

“I spent all my life trying to find my mother.

“Eventually, I went to see her at her last known address at 42, Clareton Street, London.

“I found that the area had become a park.”

He says this with the characteristic chuckle that signifies his acceptance of the vagaries of life.

Douglas also terribly misses his late wife and former Malaysian Red Crescent secretary-general, Datin Paduka Ruby Ong Chian Kim (nee Lee).

They had met in India, where both families took refuge during World War 2.

Douglas says that their parents did not like each other.

However, he is not one to be fazed by anything.

His zest for life (“I look forward to my beer and nasi goreng with fried egg on top for lunch”) is never unsettled by what life has thrown his way over the years.

I leave Kim Kiu Holdings with a sense of having lived vicariously through Malaysian politics in what was probably its finest hour.

A story, par excellence, told with verve and vim, by a man who saw it unfold.

Don’t waste time on Anwar, says Daim

THIS is final part of the interview with former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin, who helped the Malaysian economy survive the 1997 Asian financial crisis.

Without mincing words, Daim discussed with New Straits Times journalists A. JALIL HAMID, RASHID YUSOF and HARIZ MOHD and photographer ZAHARI ZAKARIA the key events during the “Mahathir Years”, including the events which led to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s downfall.

Question: Media reports suggested at the time of your departure from the cabinet in 1991 that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had three names in mind as the new finance minister — Tan Sri Sanusi Junid, Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Was this indeed the case?

Answer: Rafidah was then the minister for trade, having been appointed to the post after the Team A versus Team B split in 1987. Sanusi was minister for agriculture.

Dr Mahathir wasn’t too sure about Anwar. He said, “I don’t think Anwar can handle the ministry of finance” given his academic background. He was a graduate in Malay studies.

My counter argument went along this line — “I think if you want him to be your successor you have to groom him.

“I can help him and guide him, give advice.”

In the end, I managed to convince Dr Mahathir.

Anwar used to come to my house very often to seek my advice on matters related to the ministry of finance.

He would also bring me to to his house for lunch very often. His aunt cooked my favourite dishes.

Question: Given that Anwar had later named you as the “chief conspirator” leading to his sacking from the cabinet in 1998, when did things actually turn sour?

Answer: There was no fallout between us until he started accusing me of being a chief conspirator. This is an old story. No one is interested in the whys and wherefores. It is the now and the future that people are interested in.

Really, we should not waste time with Anwar. He is past his use-by date. His time had come and gone.

I also think that you should not give so much news space to him. That’s what he likes. He does not like to be ignored, so ignore him I say. He should be left to be the entertainer that he is, dancing and singing at ceramahs. As I said his time is gone, like a burung punggok merindukan bulan, (a dog barking at the caravans, and the caravans have moved on).

But as you keep insisting, I will answer. The best person to speak about Anwar is Sanusi. They were in school together.

They were in Abim (Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia) and in the cabinet, and Sanusi was secretary-general of Umno. Anyway, I promised to answer so I will answer.

Okay, my answer to Anwar — I’m no Cassius. I maybe thin but I don’t have the hungry look. And definitely, I’m no Brutus.

When Anwar claim- ed that I was the conspirator, he knows the truth that I played no part, no role whatsoever. I knew nothing about the case until I was told about it. I might be a busybody, but I do not interfere with people’s private life. I don’t want people to know about mine either. I don’t want to know what people do behind closed doors. I’m not interested. People whispered to me, but I said, “Look, we are all human, we all have weaknesses.”

But I understand he was under pressure, it was his political survival and he was a drowning man, clutching at whatever to keep himself afloat, plus he knew that I would never answer any allegations thrown at me. I thought I was his friend and he was in trouble, and I let it be.

I also thought that it was so farfetched that it was laughable. Anwar, for example said I took out RM2 billion cash by plane. I must be an idiot, and any way how much is RM2 billion cash? Probably a few lorries to transport!

At the end of the day, truth will always prevail. You can’t hide it. If not today, one day, the truth would be told. In the case of his supporters, even if he were to do all that he is alleged to have done, right on the carpet in front of their eyes, they will not believe. To them, everything is a conspiracy.

Anwar’s problem was that his image was whiter than white. When stories got around because he got this image, it’s difficult for people to believe. In life, some things are too strange to be true but they are true.

As Sherlock Holmes said, “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth”.

There was a myth about Kennedy, too, but people did not talk about it during his lifetime. After his death, you read about him and what he did behind closed doors.

Question: There was talk back then that your motivation in ousting Anwar was that you were anxious about protecting your business interests?

Answer: That was his line, that he was this super hero fighting crime and corruption and, therefore, had to be brought down. If you know the things about him that I know, that line of his is hilarious, and the cheek of it all, to claim righteousness.

I had then retired and what business interests did I have? I had to sell all my assets before joining the government in 1984.

But later on, after I had left, when I was made chairman of the northern triangle, there was a clause in the agreement that I would be able to venture into business. I was not a member of the cabinet anyway.

I ventured overseas after my retirement. I didn’t want to do my business in Malaysia. But after my banks overseas became successful I needed to have a bank locally, I bought a bank. You can check, it was very expensive, I paid higher than anybody else. At that time, the highest anybody ever paid for a bank. This was a one-branch bank. Later, I sold this bank, too, when I rejoined the government at the last financial crisis. I really should stop buying banks in Malaysia. Every time I buy one, I’m made minister of finance and have to sell them.

Immediately after my retirement, I went away to Harvard University, in particular to the Kennedy School of Government as a visiting scholar.

Anwar kept calling me in Boston. (He asked) why I stayed there and asked me to come back. He needed me to help him, but I said I was enjoying my stay. I met a lot of people.

It was at Harvard that I met Francis Seow (who once served as Singapore’s solicitor-general). He was writing books. Interesting books. You should read his books. We became good friends and often exchanged views over lunch.

Then it was about the so-called “Daim Boys”.

They were also very close with Anwar after I left.

Most were Malay College old boys. They were in school with Anwar.

Yahya (the late Tan Sri Yahya Ahmad) was his head boy and Halim (Tan Sri Halim Saad) was at the Malay College.

Anwar, through his accusations, repeated the lie that I wanted this contract and that contract, and that because he was in the way, I got rid of him. A lie repeated many times, unfortunately, becomes a truth.

What contract? I want to ask, which contract did I or my family secure? Show me.

Show me one single contract I got from the government.

So I have always maintained, the danger with Anwar is that Anwar is more Sukarno than anything else. All fiery speeches, completely economical with the truth and an instigator at his best.

Question: Was there a turning point, one that had caused a fall- out?

Answer: There was no particular fallout. I was his scapegoat, among many other scapegoats. I was his friend, Dr Mahathir defended him. I told him not to open the Pandora’s box by making a police report but he thought he was clever.

I’ve told you earlier that you should not waste news space on Anwar. But you insist and I’m answering only to make the point that if you have Pakatan and him leading Pakatan, then we are heading down the road to disaster. He was tested during the Asian financial crisis and he failed. I also think that he failed not just because of his policies, but also of his motivation. Dr Mahathir, for example, was totally offended by the crisis. He could not bear to see what he had taken time to build destroyed because of the greed of speculators and financial vultures, and he wanted to make sure the country was safe again.

Question: Some commentators had pointed out that Anwar at the time of the crisis did not help by raising interest rates to such a high level?

Answer: In the case of Anwar, at that time, he was really badly advised.

Because all along we know, Anwar on his own did not know what to do.

He has to get people to advise him and that was OK so long as you get good advice.

And of course at that time he really liked (Michel) Camdessus of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and James Wolfensohn of the World Bank.

And he was also close to Robert Rubin (secretary of treasury of the United States).

All these people later came to endorse him.

But you see, different countries have different environments, different stages of development, different conditions.

It’s not the same.

You look at what happened during that crisis to South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and us.

There’s Singapore, China and Japan.

During that time, Anwar’s stance was “follow what was advised by the IMF and World Bank”.

That would be a normal reaction — in a crisis like this, you need some big fellows to come and advise.

Because if there’s any trouble, the IMF and World Bank will come and assist.

And if America backs you, you are also okay. And America has big influence over the IMF and World Bank.

In the case of South Korea, it wanted to borrow from Japan so that it would not go down.

But America refused to help. America told the Japanese not to help, so it went down and mind you, South Korea was close to the US. Don’t expect the US to support us.

At that time, Robert Zoellick, who was deputy secretary of state, made it known that the doors were open for the American companies to go in to pick up companies at fire-sale prices.

This was the case with Indonesia when they came in and took almost everything they wanted.

They killed Thailand, too.

We saw what was happening. Dr Mahathir understood.

He said: “What we built… will be destroyed”.

Years of growth and stability will be wiped out.

And if we are not careful, there might be riots like in Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand.

Probably worse.

So, he had to think how to stop it.

Question: Based on your articulation on the political scenario, you are troubled not by Anwar’s so- called misconduct but more of his character?

Answer: I’m worried that he has not got the depth on economics.

If he again becomes the finance minister or prime minister, his inclination is to take the American line.

America is in crisis, Europe is in crisis.

He likes to identify with Europe, America and Australia.

He tried to get Australia to support him, to condemn and say our election will not be fair, etc.

He talks of Arab Spring, but he said the Arab Spring here is not a revolution but through the ballot box.

He had been telling the world that he will win this election.

If PR were to lose, it would be because of unfair practices and mobs could then go to the streets to protest. He promised to form the government in September 2008. Everybody got jittery and many believed him. That is his style. He is all talk and promises. Now, he tells the world he will win.

But the government isn’t even responding. There has never been riggings in elections here. Last election, they formed five state governments.

Otherwise, how did the opposition win so many seats if the government rigged elections?

No election is perfect in this world.

But he has started this, and the government must respond.

Anwar is conditioning the minds of the people here and telling the world PR will win but he knows he cannot win.

As I said earlier, I question his (and also Pakatan’s) motivation. His personal ambition is so overriding and an obsession that he does not care that it will be at the expense of peace and stability in his country.

Can you imagine the scenario if Pakatan does not get to Putrajaya? He will go on to claim that it is rigged and then bring on the Arab Spring here. Instigate the people that under Barisan Nasional, their votes were stolen and they have to go out to the streets to reclaim their votes.

This will cause havoc and he won’t care because his ambition overrides all other considerations. And Pakatan doesn’t care, too, because they are on the same ride.