Basking in the Luminaries’ Limelight
M. Bakri Musa

[Initially posted on www.Malaysia-Today.net September 7, 2005]

Malaysia has a penchant for hiring international luminaries. The latest, the International Advisory Panel (IAP), left the country recently singing high praises for the country and its leadership. Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, basking in their limelight, generously patted himself on the back and pronounced that Malaysia is on track to achieving its Vision 2020 goals.

Malaysia never lacks for the “vision thing.” Its problem is one of execution, due primarily to lack of political will and secondarily, the shortage of technical expertise. Foreign experts may be of help with the second; but with the first, that has to come from within.

A few years back, then Prime Minister Mahathir empanelled a similar stellar committee to spearhead the country’s entry into the “high tech” age. Today, Bill Gates probably could not place Malaysia on the map. His and fellow panelists’ sojourn in Malaysia did not even merit an entry on their resumes.

The Malaysian leadership knows what are the right things to do, but not how to do them right. Those experts may be able to show how others have done theirs right; they cannot tell us how to do ours right. That would require them to know us well and appreciate our weaknesses and sensitive points.

These experts can help analyze where and how we have gone wrong, but only if we are willing to learn from our mistakes, and then to change our ways based on that insight. Both are major challenges.

The first requires some degree of humility, and an ability to face and admit one’s mistakes. That is no easy task. The second requires us to be flexible. Change is never easy and always stressful. The default human position is to stick with the familiar. Witness the recent clamor by UMNO leaders for more generous special privileges.

Malaysia has not learned much from Mahathir’s panel of eminent experts. They have not documented their local experiences; their advice was presumably proprietary or protected by intellectual property rights and available only to those who paid for their services. Thus, the learning opportunities for the rest of us not directly involved are limited. These experts’ legacy, the still struggling Multimedia Super Corridor, is for all to see.

Exemplary Use of a Foreign Expert

In the 1970s, Tun Razak engaged an American expert to spruce up the civil service. At the end of his tenure, Milton Esman duly submitted his official report, dry and full of bureaucratese. That document is readily available to Malaysian officials.

Being an academic, the professor also wrote a highly readable account of his experiences in Malaysia. Unfortunately, few locals have read his book, and that is a shame.

In it, the professor had some revealing anecdotes. For example, in a regular meeting of the ministries’ highest officials – Secretaries-General – the bulk of the time was consumed with such trivial matters as who would get which prized government quarters. The foreigner’s presence did not in the least inhibit or embarrass those officials. Obviously to them, those were substantive issues! I would have thought (so did Esman) that there would be some rigorous discussions of major policy initiatives.

In a training session with Treasury officials on solving the backlog of voucher payments (yes, they had that same problem back then), the professor was flabbergasted when he could not get any suggestions from them. It was a dud initial session. It did not take long for the perceptive professor to figure out the problem. It was rooted deep in the Malaysian culture.

To those civil servants, Esman was the exalted expert. They were there to learn from him, and he to teach them how to do it right. When Esman told them that they were the ones best equipped to solve their problems, they were dumbfounded!

Today’s experts on the cultural dimensions of management will recognize this familiar problem immediately. Esman knew it only intuitively then; that is, the huge cultural barrier that makes the transfer of concepts or role models from one society to another problematic.

Those civil servants at Treasury are the cream of the service. If that is the caliber of the personnel at Treasury, imagine the quality of talent at the land office!

Esman was in Malaysia for months; he was totally committed. He had taken a leave of absence from his university. He learned and absorbed local cultural subtleties. Esman’s succeeded in professionalizing the civil service, although one could hardly discern that today.

Abdullah Badawi’s IAP members have fulltime commitments elsewhere; it would be a challenge for them to appreciate local nuances and subtleties.

Choosing Consultants

Consultants are a feature of today’s complex enterprises. We need them to help provide specific expertise not readily available or too expensive to have in house. Nations and companies engage them for a variety of reasons: to validate assumptions, help with specific operating problems, or simply for strategic planning.

Selecting the right consultants involves knowing what we want them to achieve for us. That in itself is a skill. Even more demanding is to evaluate their recommendations and put them into our scheme of things.

Malaysia’s problem is one of execution. Consequently I would favor hiring experts with substantive executive experiences especially in cross cultural settings. The IAP is heavily weighted towards academics. Their forte is reflection, not execution. Granted there are exceptions. Jeffery Garten, the Yale academic, has substantial government and private sector experiences. Another, UC Davis’ economist Woo Wing Thye, is local born and bred.

Seasoned executives bring their own set of problems. As they have their own corporations to manage, we should not expect their full attention.

There is one valuable resource not widely appreciated – retired executives. We are familiar with Jack Welch (GE), Louis Gerstner (IBM) and Paul O’Neill (former Alcoa CEO as well Treasury Secretary) but there are others. Many devote their post-retirement careers to advising foreign entities and the non-profit sector. Being retired, they can be brutally frank with their advice as they need not worry about alienating potential clients or customers.

I am no fan of committees. The more far-flung their members are geographically and philosophically as this one is, the more they would be consumed with simply ironing out their differences. Instead of an advisory panel, I would seek out those retired executives and have them spend substantial time locally in the manner of Milton Esman. When they are finished, apart from their official report, encourage them to document their personal experiences so others too could benefit.

In reading O’Neil’s recent memoir, I am impressed with his practical ideas on rural development gleaned while touring Africa as Treasury Secretary. O’Neill estimated that he could supply all Ugandan villages with potable water at a cost of only a few million dollars. Excited, he sought out the president, only to be told that a few years earlier a World Bank consultant had a blueprint with the estimated cost of over a billion! Stunned, O’Neill reviewed the World Bank’s plans. What he found were details for an ultra modern, high-maintenance facility that far exceeded the standards of the Cleveland Water District! The cost of the report alone could have financed half of O’Neill’s projects.

John Perkin’s Confessions of an Economic Hit Man is a cautionary tale of foreign consultants and their recommendations. O’Neill’s revelation reinforces Perkin’s confession.

With only 15 years left to reaching our Vision 2020, there is no time for Malaysian leaders to bask in the limelight of international luminaries. The focus should be on execution, and only on execution.

Merdeka In All Its Manifestations

[Reposted from www.Malaysia-Today.net (September 4, 2005). This is an expanded version of the one published in the Merdeka supplement of the Sun]

As we celebrate Merdeka Day, we joyfully recall the events that led to it. It is equally important for us to ponder on what did not happen or could have happened. What took place was obvious; Malaysia gained her freedom from colonial rule. What did not take or could have taken place requires some reflection.

Unlike Independence Day celebrations of many nations, we do not have to pay tributes to slain warriors. Thanks to the wisdom of our earlier leaders, there were no “glorious” wars of independence and therefore no fallen heroes. Further, with many nations the dream of freedom quickly degenerated into a nightmare of national tragedies. Malaysia was thankfully spared such horrors.

Gandhi with his nonviolence philosophy humbled the mighty British into granting India its independence peacefully, but he could not tame his fellow citizens bent on massacring each other. The Indonesians fought hard for their independence, only to see their cherished freedom debauched by their egomaniacal president, Sukarno.

True Hero Of Our Independence

Our first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman held true to our prophetic tradition of the pen being mightier than the sword. He resorted to the negotiating table, not the battlefield, and enlisted lawyers not soldiers in our struggle for independence. Honoring fallen heroes of such wars as martyrs, national heroes, or freedom fighters does not lessen the pain their loved ones endure. We owe Tunku a massive debt of gratitude for sparing us such misfortune. He was truly the quiet and unsung hero of our independence.

This fact needs emphasizing, lest we forget. Already there are “revisionist” historians and other commentators intimidating that such an honor belongs to the likes of some obscure failed politicians and former thugs and terrorists. To me, the true hero is not the dashing rescuer who saved the drowning damsel, rather the young boy who kept his finger in the dike and thus prevented a flood.

Tunku went further. Whereas India and Indonesia degenerated into anarchy, Malaysia enjoyed a decade of peace and prosperity following independence. This led Tunku to boast that he was the “world’s happiest prime minister.” God later humbled him and the nation. The 1969 tragic race riot took place during his watch; it remains a blemish on our history.

If Tunku’s wisdom was in sparing us the dream from disintegrating into a nightmare, his successor’s genius was in giving substance to that collective dream. Tun Razak’s bold rural development schemes and imaginative economic initiatives gave Malaysians their greatest freedom – that from privation and poverty. Later, Dr. Mahathir drove development to greater heights, and equally greater excesses.

These leaders have done their part. It would take an even greater measure of genius and wisdom from today’s leaders to fulfill the promise of merdeka in all its facets.

Abridgment Of Our Merdeka

It would be a great irony and outright perversion if today’s leaders were to deprive Malaysians of their personal merdeka in the name of defending the nation’s freedom. Yet today hundreds are being incarcerated without being charged, let alone tried in court. The state has summarily stripped them of their precious rights as citizens and as human beings.

We do not respect nor honor the spirit of merdeka when we arbitrarily abridge the freedom of our citizens. The authorities crudely remind the citizens that they cannot read certain books, attend particular plays, or watch specific movies. For Muslims, the stricture is even narrower: Islam is what the government says it is; we deviate at our own earthly peril.

While lamenting the shortage of books written in Malay, these leaders do not hesitate in banning the works of Malay writers who dare express independent thought. The nation’s foremost thinker, Kassim Ahmad, had his Hadith: A Re-Evaluation banned. He also endured years of incarceration for his political views.

A sinister recent development is the intimidation of journalists through seizures of their computers, and the jailing of writers for what they write. Far from being intimidated, Malaysians continue to express themselves freely through other media, in particular, the Internet. That is a singular tribute to the ingenuity of Malaysians.

The attitude towards our best and brightest is no more enlightened. We want them to think and be creative, but we insist that they conform. Top positions in universities are given to pseudo academics whose chief function is to ensure that faculty members abide by Akujanji (a loyalty oath) rather than to their scholarly duties.

It would indeed be a perversion if not a great tragedy were we to be freed from the yoke of colonial oppression only to be subjugated and suppressed by our own kind. We are ever vigilant of threats from outside, we must remain equally wary of intrusions from within. The best of intentions and the noblest of motives do not prevent their perversion; the proverbial road to hell is paved with the best of intentions. I look askance at the restrictions placed on citizens all in the name of the “public good.”

Loss to the Nation

It is also a sad commentary when the cream of the younger generation leaves us; a loss we can hardly afford. It is even sadder when we fail to develop the young talent in our villages. That represents a double tragedy, for the individuals as well as the nation.

Today’s headlines carry unending tales of financial scandals and shenanigans, from approved permits for importing cars dispensed to cronies to the massive losses at government-linked companies. The waste is colossal. As staggering as that may be, an even far greater loss is the opportunity cost. Had we spent the resources on educating our young, building good schools, and training teachers, there would be no limit to the height of their – as well as the nation’s – achievements.

The first generation of leaders freed us from British rule; the next lifted us from privation and poverty. Tun Mahathir, the last leader, gave us economic freedom, albeit to the exclusion of other freedoms. The challenge for today’s leaders is to give us merdeka in all its manifestations.

Through personal emails:

Dear Bakri,
That is an interesting article by Dr. Musa Nordin! Islam is a religion that can be adapted through all times until the end of this earth, that is, KIAMAT. However, those who want to discuss the true teaching of Islam must first be well versed with the true UNDERSTANDING of the religion. Simply using our AKAL (intellect) or logical thinking to adapt the teachings of Islam might lead people to be more liberal in implementing them. This in turn might destroy their akidah (belief). Like the doctor said, to educate people about medicine would be advantageous to both doctors and patients. The drawback is that if the patient feels that he is well versed with medicine, he might just self prescribe his remedies. This might in turn harm himself. In Islam, the ulama or gurus are needed to guide those who lack the understanding of Islam so that they will understand the religion better and will not deviate from the true teachings.
Sometimes the guidance provided by the ulama might seem outdated and cannot be implemented in our modern times, but we must understand why this is so. Understanding religion is a very complicated matter. It is made even worse if the true Islamic teachings are confused with modern understanding or LOGIC.
Just to share my view on this matter.
Regards,
Syed Zahiruddin

Dear Dr. Bakri,

I am glad that you wrote about this. I have been harboring myself with some of your ideas. I do not think Islam should be put on such a high pedestal that only a few could truly understand it. In many instances, ideas from the so-called laity (are we not all?), have been shot down just because we do not have an Islamic scholarly background. Islam has been made too complicated to my mind.
What is your opinion on why Muslims now are so backward in secular studies? Islam was once at the frontiers of knowledge.
Haniza

I would rather take it this way. Let the professional embark on religious studies before they pursue their chosen field, or pursue both concurrently. I believe that Muslim professionals today are better in their understanding of Islam as compared to those of the 1960s and 70s. Your view may look outdated since there are many professionals who are comparable to the ulama and ulama cum professionals. In Mesir, it is normal for an engineer or doctor who is also a hafiz. Be careful with the term “ulama.”
We need more statistics before we are justified in saying that those ulama know nothing about science and contemporary knowledge. As for controlling of our mind as you mentioned, I do not think that in this era they are so influential. People make up their own mind these days.

NHS

The following are excerpted from Malaysia-today.net

Admiral Tojo said:
Saya amat setuju dengan cadangan ini. Kepercayaan bukan ekslusivity satu satu golongan. Olih kerana ramai yang telah dan sedang mengambil langkah untuk mengetahui apa kah sabenar nya ajaran Islam yang terkandung di dalam Al Quran itu sendiri, banyak lah timbul isu isu, yang pada pandangan saya bernas, yang perlu di perdebatkan dan di kemukakan. Banyak juga isu yang berbangkit sekarang, berkenaan cara penyelaksanaan secara paksa, undang undang yang belainan dengan asas ajaran Al Quran, yang di panggil ‘Islamic’. Syabas Dr. Bakri. Di Malaysia, jikalau dibangkitkan perkara ini, selalu nya yang membangkit kan perkara ini akan di heret ke Mahkamah Syariah. Ini saolah menunjukkan ada ajenda yang ingin di rahsiakan supaya orang ramai tidak akan mengetahui nya.

Ibn Abd Halim:
Apakah ini yang dikatakan kejumudan? Apa maksud alim? Ulamak seharusnya melengkapkan diri dengan ilmu-ilmu ukhrawi dan duniawi demi kemajuan ummah. Syabas Dr.Bakri!

Pro-rights said:
The ummah looks to the ulama/scholars for spiritual guidance and inspiration, but some of them wear several hats. They have political ambitions and sometimes go beyond their normal scope of pastoral duties. Some do not lead by good example.
The other issue is that the same Arabic word in the koran would give rise to several different meanings when translated.

Loganpal said:
Thanks Dr BM! Fine and thought provoking blog; Islam and being Malay. Dr B’s ideas of what an Ulama should be seem such an idealistic and interesting view, in the Malaysians context.
Many US citizens view Islam from an Arabic, not Malay, perspective. I find myself explaining this all the time. Oil and 911 is changing how US views the world. Muslims and Malaysians have a burden explaining this. We have never hated, just envied you. Look at our Malaysian flag.
F*** Osama for f***ing it up and making the US to embrace its right wing nuts. Hope in Hilary.
It not easy to ask an Ulama to learn Mathematics when he wants to be a clergy. I think it is more important to teach a Malaysian version of the Koran. Jihad means personal sacrifice or resisting materialistic gains. Of course Dr BM also hopes that ulamas also understand economics, social science, and the arts and craft.

Awang Kera said:
Dear Brothers, Sisters, and Friends:
I am happy that we Muslims in Malaysia, at least those of us who are open to fresh ideas and new perspectives, are beginning to speak up. We have been too quiet for far too long. In so doing, we are signalling to the ulama, the politicians, and those who parrot them that they do not have a monopoly on the “truths” in Islam.
The same goes to the people in IKIM, JAKIM, JAIS and the other state religious departments. They all should instead be role models–as enlightened thinkers, not doctrinaires or stooges,issuing politically motivated fatwas and interfering in our private lives.
They are in league with the politicians to control and dominate us by imposing their Islam on us. These ulama in particular and their associates are actually scared that they will lose their role in our society if you and I can argue intelligently with them on the basis of our own ability to think and reflect on the Message of the Holy Quran.
To me,when they threaten us with legal action in the Syariah Court, tha is a clear sign of desperation, their basic insecurity and weaknesses. They are losing the battle of ideas with us.
You will note that I put “truth” in quotation marks. What is truth? That question had plagued the Greek and Islamic philosophers and other thinkers for thousands of years. This quest for truth will continue because it is a Divine challenge to man.
Man needs to reflect in wonderment and praise the Majesty of Allah, The Most Merciful and Most Compassionate. Look around us in our physical world, and we will realise that we cannot understand everything that ALLAH created. Because of our ignorance,we take everything including our envirvonment for granted. We even abuse our power because we believe we can be God.
I may be an economist and understand economic development. Ask me about trees, plants animals, ants and other things, and I will plead ignorance and ask for help from those who are knowledgeable. Even in my field, I have to ask for help. For example, I am not an econometrician, or a monetary economist. I have also to regularly review and update my knowledge in my own field.
Our world is a complex ecological system that is constantly changing, sometimes in violent spurts or bangs, but imperceptibly most of the time. But our earth is only one unit in the galaxy of the Sun, Moon,Mars, the other planets and the distant stars, each with its won defined roles, yet existing in harmony.
What we think we know is therefore minute compared to what we need to know, and yet do not know. Whoever this Doctor who is mentioned in Dr. Bakri’s article may be, he has stopped learning and has closed his mind. I for one would not go to this doctor for my medical advice. He would probably make me more sick. I certainly will not deal with someone who seeks to play God with my life.
Fortunately for Muslims, the Holy Quran is the Guide and the Source of Faith. Read, reflect, and try to understand The Holy Quran., but we can never attain perfect understanding of Allah’s message. As a result, the real Islamic man, in his humility, will be constantly challenged to seek the Divine message. He is a seeker of Knowledge, hopefully leading to the Truth.
For those who are interested in reading the intellectual journey of one Muslim man, I suggest Dr. Zaiuddin Sardar’s Desperately Seeking Paradise.
Finally, I wish to state that we must not be scared to be different, to disagree and to express our views. I believe we as individuals can make a difference to our country. The least that we can do is to prevent Malaysia from receding into the Age of Ignorance.
We live in a plural society. As such we must be open, enlightened and tolerant of our fellow citizens and try to earn their respect.
Our ulama must understand that our world is changing and like us, they too must respect the dignity of difference. Like us, they too must look at the world with fresh eyes. If they are true scholars of Islam, they should attempt to eliminate their biases, hangups and big egos. That will take humility, which is in short supply today.
Once again, syabas Dr. Bakri.

Umno Must Take On Itself First

M. Bakri Musa(Reprinted from the Sun, August 2, 2005)

UMNO is the “enabler” for Malays becoming socially and economically dependent. Its policies and practices are directly responsible for the Malay addiction to quotas, special privileges, Ali Babaism and other rent-seeking behaviors, and yes, even corruption.

“Enabler” is the term used in the battered wife syndrome to describe the spouse whose behavior actually encourages her husband to be abusive. Far from discouraging it, she actually reinforces his violence, her protestations and sufferings notwithstanding.

We Malays have been battered for too long. The colonialists told us we were lazy and indolent, and patronisingly called us “nature’s gentlemen.” Today, Umno leaders batter us.

Umno leaders boasted of a brave new world of “Glokal” Malays capable of competing locally and globally, and where meritocracy reigns and social crutches an embarrassment. These aspirations will remain a fantasy unless these leaders critically examine their and the party’s role in encouraging these negative traits among Malays.

A good place to begin instilling competition is the party. Yet top party positions are not contested! The rules for challengers are so burdensome that few try. Competitions are viewed as potentially divisive; a culture rooted in the Mahathir/Tengku Razaleigh rivalry of 1987.

Consequently, there is no mechanism to grade leaders. Challengers provide much- needed reality checks to the delusion of leaders who think they are doing a swell job. Sadly, this “no contest” mentality now permeates the party at all levels.

Even token challengers can subtly remind leaders who wear sarong pelakat (cotton sarong) that they are not donning samping sutera (silk cummerbund). This is important in a culture fearful of telling the sultan that he has no clothes on when his sarong has slipped.

Even when there are contests, the rules are so opaque that there is no meaningful way to judge the candidates. Campaigns are not allowed, reminiscent of Soviet Politburo elections.

Umno’s motto should be: Today, the party; tomorrow, the world! Yet at the assembly there was little discussion on encouraging competition. Hiding behind the mantra of party unity is self serving.

Leaders must realize that the road ahead is uncharted. To be successful they must blaze their own trail. Once leaders learn this vital lesson, it will percolate down to the members.

Related to competitiveness is meritocracy. The Johor delegates voiced their skepticism of it.

Even the distinguished Royal Professor Ungku Aziz weighed in, to my great surprise. Being against meritocracy is like being against virtue. The wise professor surely does not mean to imply that Malays cannot compete, for he is the most illustrious example of that fallacy.

Yet that was exactly what the Johor delegates said; we Malays are “wheelchair bound” and thus cannot compete with the able bodied. Let us keep our crutches!

A more enlightened approach would be to embrace meritocracy. We may legitimately debate what constitutes merit. The Malaysian obsession with examination results is certainly misplaced. Such valuable attributes as creativity, innovativeness and entrepreneurialism cannot be readily tested.

The Chinese dynasty collapsed because of its fixation on test scores. The best and brightest were consumed not with solving society’s problems but on acing their civil service tests. That was how they could get close to the emperor. The test scores of the top Mandarins were even chiseled on their tombstones!

America’s top universities could easily fill their freshman classes with perfect test scorers, but they do not. These institutions recognize other dimensions of merit not easily uncovered by test scores.

God has not destined Malays for mediocrity. The challenge is to nurture every talent, and we cannot do that if our schools are dilapidated and teachers poorly trained. Nor can we encourage innovation if we punish those who dare stray from the paved path.

Isa Samad’s money politics, Rafidah Aziz’s Approved Permit controversy, and Osu Sukam’s gambling debts are but variations of the same theme.

If the Umno-controlled government were to auction off the APs, have open competitive tenders for its projects, and make those politicians actually work for their money, they would then be less likely to squander their resultant wealth. There would then be less money politics, less influence peddling, and even less corruption.

Only then would Umno be a worthy example for Malays. Before taking on the world, Umno must first take on itself.

Discourse in Islam Should be Open to All
M. Bakri Musa(www.bakrimusa.com)

[Reprinted from Malaysia-Today.net August 4, 2005]

Contemporary ulama and Islamic scholars would like us to believe that discourses in Islam are their exclusive preserve. The rest of the ummah (community) need not partake; suffice that we meekly follow whatever they dispense. This is a flawed and shortsighted assumption.

These ulama and scholars contend that Islam, like any other body of knowledge, is highly specialized and has voluminous scholarship. Thus, only experts – themselves – can responsibly discuss the issues. They compare Islam to medicine, where laypersons presumably should not discuss with their physicians details of their malady and treatment. Likewise, the laity should not engage the ulama on matters Islamic.

This particular viewpoint was reiterated recently by the President of the Malaysian Muslim Medical Association, Dr. Musa Nordin. He cited the example of a sick newborn, where only a super specialist like a neonatologist is needed. No ordinary physician, much less a layperson, should have an input.

Learning the Wrong Lesson from Medicine

I humbly admit that my knowledge of Islam is meager, but I do know a bit more about medicine. The ulama’s perception of today’s medicine is clearly erroneous. True, there was a time when the prevailing culture was encapsulated in the saying, “Trust me, I am a doctor!” Thankfully, those days are long gone. Such an attitude is still prevalent in many Third World societies as exemplified by Dr. Musa Nordin’s statement.

Today, patients engage their physicians on details of their therapy. I welcome and indeed encourage such discussions with my patients. A well-informed patient is an important resource. With so much medical information readily available, patients are remarkably well informed.

When patients consult me, I go over all the treatment options, including non-surgical ones, discussing the benefits as well as possible side effects of each. I consider each patient encounter an opportunity to educate my patients and to learn from them. In the end, it is the patient’s decision as to what modality to choose. This is part of the informed consent.

There is no one “best” treatment, only the best treatment for a particular patient under a specific circumstance. Consequently, physicians must respect the patients’ needs and wishes. I have modified therapies based on the patient’s personal wishes, as with a young woman concerned with cosmetic appearance, or Jehovah Witness patients whose religious belief precludes their receiving blood products.

In the intensive care unit of my modern hospital, physicians gratefully acknowledge the valuable contributions of others in the care of our patients, from the social workers and priests to the nurses and respiratory therapists. We physicians do not have a monopoly on the clinical wisdom.

Medicine as a discipline also has been receptive to and benefits from ideas in other disciplines. Research in military aviation resulted in the G-suit for pilots, which gave rise to the “mast suit” used to stabilize patients in shock. A further spin off is the compression stockings used in preventing blood clots in the extremities. From space research, we get the elemental diet used in treating intestinal disorders. Advances in instrumentations come from the seemingly unrelated field of engineering.

If physicians were to adopt the insularity of the ulama and refuse to engage experts in other fields, medicine would not have made such spectacular advances.

Advances also come from the lay public. The American Cancer Society, a lay organization, educates the public and is responsible for the increasingly early detection of cancer. Locally, Marina Mahathir and her AIDS Foundation have done more than the medical profession in raising public and official awareness of AIDS.

If I can engage my patients in complicated medical concepts without being condescending, then surely the ulama could do likewise with their flock. If I can understand quantum physics, then surely I can comprehend the intricacies of Islamic theology.

The voluminous literature and legend of scholars in Islam are a blessing, not a curse. I have learned from the great scholars regardless of their sectarian allegiance or whether they are non-Muslims. I certainly do not need a Muslim Pope wannabe to filter what I can and cannot read. God gives me akal (intellect), and entrusts me to use it wisely and responsibly.

Liberal Education for Future Ulama

I am flattered that our ulama are learning from medicine. Unfortunately, they are emulating a profession of a century ago, not today’s modern medicine. Consequently, they are learning all the wrong lessons.

The ulama could adopt one item from my profession, at least as practiced in America. The education of future ulama, like that of physicians, should be broad based. They should study the humanities as well as the social and natural sciences before embarking on religious studies. That would rid them of their intellectual insularity quite apart from enhancing their understanding of the Holy Book.

If we expose our future ulama to modern economics before they pursue their Islamic Studies, they would then appreciate modern financial instruments like taxes, and be able to discuss their differences and similarities with the Muslim tithe. If they were exposed to the behavioral sciences like psychology, they would be better able to manage the problems of their ummah. Currently, the responses of our ulama to the many problems of modern living have been to recite simplistically the holy texts.

I am a better physician for having had a liberal education before studying medicine. In the same vein, our ulama would be much better informed, more intellectually curious, and most importantly, have greater humility if they were exposed to subjects and disciplines outside of the narrow and traditional confines of Islamic Studies. They would also be better ulama if not human beings if in they were exposed to the wider society during their formative years of intellectual and social development.

In their intellectual and social isolation, these ulama never hesitate to make pronouncements and issue fatwas on subjects they absolutely have no clue. Nor do they have the humility to seek advice from others more knowledgeable.

Polio is back in many Muslim countries simply because some ignorant ulama decreed that the vaccine is made from porcine material, or that it is invented by Western specifically Jewish bent on maiming Muslims. Such idiocies put our children in great jeopardy. These ulama are curiously silent on the serious problems such as AIDS, drug addiction, and corruption facing our society.

Our ulama and scholars would have far greater influence on the ummah by the power and strength of their reasoning and scholarship, not on how tightly they can control our thoughts and thinking.

The Malay Today
Din Merican
[Reprinted from Malaysia Today Thursday, July 28, 2005. www.malaysia-today.net]

The problem is that most Malays today do not read. Dr. Bakri Musa made this observation in one of his books, Seeing Malaysia My Way. To most Malays, as related by Bakri, anything beyond a simple essay is “too difficult and too long, lah.”

Others note that there are not enough books published in Malay. Or that maybe we Malays want to be spoon-fed.

Poor Excuse

If indeed there is a shortage of reading materials in Malay, then learn English, or any other language of one’s choice. Spend your ownmoney and attend night classes if need be. More truthfully, it is a question of attitude and motivation. The Vietnamese for example, are highly motivated; they work during the day and learn English at night. For ten years (1965-1975), the Americans tried to bomb their country into the Stone Age but failed. Unlike the Vietnamese, we Malays have our NEP and NDP now for over 35 years (1970-2005).

We have our share of exemplary Malays as worthy role models. Sadly most were in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. Paradoxically those were difficult times, and those Malays are a vanishing group. They will disappear soon.

What we have today to be the role model for our young are self-serving Malay leaders and the so-called Malay “lingo” nationalists. During the early years of independence, these “lingo” nationalists were in league with ambitious Malay politicians who wanted the Malay Language to be the world’s lingua franca. Malay nationalism was the road to fame and fortune, the consequences be damned.

These “leaders” successfully won the day, with Malay replacig English as the medium of instruction in our schools and universities. Did we have the books, articles and other publications in mathematics and the sciences and other subjects then? No, that would come later, we were assured. We probably thought those things would magically drop off from the sky.

Thus was the national language policy implemented, in earnest without regards to developing the necessary infrastructures and softwares needed to ensure its successful execution. “Dasar dulu dan yang lain semua belakang kira.” (Policy first, all other things can come later)”.

Today we see and bear the consequences of this myopia. We have Malay university graduates who are unemployable, and government officers who are scared to speak at international conferences because they lack the prerequisite English language skills.

Dewan Bahasa and Pustaka was created 40 years ago to accommodate the “lingo” nationalists. Since then it has been on a steady decline. Perversely, while these nationalists were publicly championing our national language, their children are all fluent in English and other languages because they have been educated abroad!

The burden of the national language follies is borne by the poor Malay kids in the kampongs and small towns. Yet these language nationalists are still around today, punching their kerises in the air, and strenously opposing any policy change.

Dewan Bahasa is still active, but preoccupied with doing the same old and outdated things. Vested interests, a feature of all bureaucracies, prevent any meaningful reform or strategic change. I do not deny that we need to develop our language but the vast sums of money invested in this institution were a colossal waste.

A cynic might say that Dewan Bahasa was very successful in fulfilling its mandate, which is to promote the use of Malay in administration and business. That served our domestic needs. But times have changed and in the era of globalisation, it would be a great advantage if Malaysians were fluent in English, Japanese, German, Mandarin, French, and other foreign languages.

Glokal Malays

How can we be “Melayu Glokal” if we lack foregin language skills? If we cannot handle own language, then something must be wrong with us. Of course we can, but what about English, for example?

Our home-grown intellectuals, with few exceptions like Kassim Ahmad, Syed Hussin Ali, Rustam Sani, K.S. Jomo and Terrence Gomez, tend to go along with their political masters. If you watch the television coverage of the recent Umno General Assembly, the guest commentator was an UMNO apologist. He had nothing original or incisive to say. Many others are like him. They shape Malay opinion, advocating a culture of conformism. Hang Jebat goodbye!

Those who dare speak and offer alternative views are marginalized. They are rarely invited to sit on government committees to help shape national policies. Worse, their writings do not appear in the mainstream media which are consumed with self censorship. Or when they are published, the are heavily “edited” beyond recognition. In some cases their books are banned. Fancy banning books and publications in the 21st Century! Even sadder, a few have been imprisoned and suffered police brutality.

Fortunately thanks to the Internet, today we have independent websites like bakrimusa.com, kassimahmad.blogspot.com, malaysia-today.net and malaysiakini.com, to name a few, as well as the many bloggers. They allow us to express our views and discuss our concerns in an open and responsible way.

We will soldier on and get our share of readers. Raja Petra Kamarudin’s Malaysia Today receives some 250,000-300,000 hits daily. Unfortunately, Raja Petra’s house was recently raided by the police because he publsihed articles critical of the Negri Sembilan Royal Family. What is the message here?

I must admit that I do not have time for Malay novelists and writers except for Keris Mas, Tongkat Warrant, Samad Said, Kassim Ahmad and Baha Zain. I have a preference for the classics, biographies and autobiographies of great men of history, philosophical treatises, international relations, and economics. My doing so does not make me less of a Malay. In fact my readings make me very conscious of my “Malayness.”

It is not correct, as one reader put it, we just “simply nag and make noise in our own circles.” You as well others of your generation must write and act, but do so responsibily. To be able to do that, you must first read and and be able to think critically and develop your writing skills.

At my age of 66, I have done more than my share through the years. My contemporaries and I have made it possible for you and your generation to move forward. The question is: Will you and your friends take up the challenge for a better Malaysia and a stronger and more dynamic Malay society?

It is time for action by your generation. By all means, correct our mistakes. Be aware however that even the most well intentioned policies carry their own seeds of destruction, the Law of Unintended Consequences being operative. Politicians and their sycophants choose to ignore this reality. Actually they could not care less of the the consequences, intended or otherwise, of their policies.

Nurture Our Hang Jebats
M. Bakri Musa

[An abridged version appeared in the Sun (Weekend Edition), July 23, 2005]

A culture cannot aspire for greatness if it treats its thinkers and intellectuals with callous disregard. In any other culture, a talent like Kassim Ahmad would be amply rewarded, his achievements widely acknowledged. Yet the best that Malaysia could offer her shining star was a high school teaching position. This was at a time when the number of Malays pursuing graduate work was miniscule. Kassim had taught at the School of Oritental and African Studies, London. Worse, he was once detained under the ISA for daring to espouse his political views.

I first came to know of Kassim Ahamd through his writings while in secondary school way back in the 1950s. His novel and radical interpretation of the Malay classic, Hikayat Hang Tuah, shook the way I – and Malays generally – looked at our traditions and culture.

The traditional thinking was that the hero was Hang Tuah, hence the title. He personified the ideals of a Malay hero, someone loyal to the sultan. Even his name portends great things. Tuah means exceptional, a worthy name for a hero. His protagonist, Hang Jebat, was the traitor who dared challenge the sultan. Even his name rhymes with jahat (rascal), an apt name for a purported villain.

Then came Kassim’s Perwatakan Hikayat Hang Tuah (The Characters in Hang Tuah). It would have remained an obscure academic exercise except for the fact that Dewan Bahasa was desperate to publish works in Malay. It had to resort to publishing student’s theses!

Kassim frontally challenged the orthodox Malay thinking on authority, and royalty in particular. According to Kassim, the real hero is not Hang Tuah, rather the hitherto presumed renegade, Hang Jebat. To Kassim, Tuah is the typical palace sycophant who willingly sells his body and soul to the sultan, a loyalty conveniently reinforced by whatever largesse the sultan could bestow.

Jebat is the rugged individualist, not awed by those who wield power. His loyalty is to institutions, not individuals. To Kassim, Jebat is the true hero, not the prodigal son Tuah.

It is a conflict of commitment to principles and institutions represented by Jebat, versus personal loyalty as presented by Tuah. It is this universal conflict, concretized in the setting of a traditional feudal society, that makes Hikayat Hang Tuah such a powerful and enduring piece of literature.

The impact of Kassim’s Perwatakan is such that a generation later, when the journalist Rehman Rashid was interrogated by the police for possible detention under the Internal Security Act, his tomentors demanded to know from him who the true hero was, Hang Tuah or Hang Jebat. Rehman shrewdly replied, “Hang Tuah,” which may have accounted for his being released!

Kassim’s Perwatakan is one of my most valued possessions, its frayed edges and yellowed pages notwithstanding. I wish somebody would reissue it using modern spelling and syntax, and then distribute it to schools and libraries. If enough Malays read it, it might very well revolutionize our society.

Recently in a social gathering attended by a number of bright young Malay students studying in Ameirca, I inquired whether they had heard of Kassim Ahmad. None had, but they had all read Hikayat Hang Tuah. When I discussed Kassim’s radical character analysis, they were all stunned. Over half a century later, Kassim is still prying open bright young Malay minds and sparking their intellect.

The account of his incarceration, Universiti Kedua (Second University), makes painful reading. A poignant passage describes the guards, under the guise of friendship, taking away for “safekeeping” Kassim’s painfully written manuscript for a new novel. They then proceeded to destroy it in front of his eyes. Such cruelty! The spite of the guards was exceeded only by their ignorance. At a time when published works in Malay literature were sparse, this was an unbelievable act of utter stupidity, if not a crime against our culture.

When reading Universiti Kedua, I could hardly contain my rage against the authorities for their cruelty to this man. I felt great sorrow for Kassim, but far greater sorrow for my own race. A culture that treats its intellectuals with such cruelty cannot aspire for greatness.

The Indonesian writer Pramoedya Ananta Toer suffered through the same humiliation while in prison, but he was unfazed. He committed his novel to memory by retelling it repeatedly to his fellow inmates. When freed, he quickly published his Pulau Buru quartet, as well as his memoirs, Nyanyian Sunyi Seorang Bisu (The Mute’s Soliloquy) to international acclaim. Kassim however, never quite recovered, and the world of Malay literature lost forever Zaman Pencaroba (Era of Crisis).

Kassim’s ability to shake the collective Malay psyche remains undiminished. In 1986, he released his Hadis: Satu Penilian Semula (Hadith: A Reevaluation). I asked my parents to get me a copy right away. True to form, before he could get my copy, the authorities banned the book! Fortunately, an English translation soon became readily available.

My parents warned me about Kassim, and his supposed anti-hadith stand. Later on my vist home, I apprised my parents of what Kassim wrote. To my surprise, they agreed with Kassim! I wonder how many Malays (includinghte censors) who accused Kassimof being anti-hadith have actually read his book.

A few brave souls saw fit to honor Kassim. Universiti Kebangsaan conferred on him an honorary Doctor of Letters. A courageous editor praised Kassim as Intellektual Melayu Terakhir (The Last Malay Intellectual), a tribute to him but a sad commentary on Malay society.

Rustam Sani, then a Profesor of Sociology at the university, gave a very generous and heartfelt public oration for the occasion. As expected, Rustam did not last long with the university.

Kassim is still writing, the Hang Jebat in him still raging. Thanks to the wonders of the Internet, Kassim essays can now be widely distributed (www.kassimahmad.blogspot.com), totally bypassing the Hang Tuahs in the editorial suites.

They Never Learn!
M. Bakri Musa

[Reprinted from www.malaysia-today.net July 15, 2005]

On July 14, 2005, the police raided the home of Malaysia Today’s (www.malaysia-today.net) editor, Raja Petra Kamarudin, and seized his computers. For those with a historical bent, July 14 is Bastille Day, a day to commemorate the storming of the Bastille and the start of the French Revolution.

The Malaysian authorities never learn, not from history nor its own experiences. Two years ago when the police raided the office of Malaysiakini.com and carted away its computers, there was an international scene. The raid made a mockery of the government’s oft-stated commitment to keep the Internet free of official censorship. Then Prime Minister Mahathir had to step in to calm the furor. Only a few days ago the authorities finally returned the last of the computers they had seized during that raid. There were no charges, criminal or civil.

Raja Petra Kamarudin has been doing some remarkable and aggressive investigative journalism. This pursuit is alien to mainstream journalists and media in Malaysia. To them, reprinting ministerial speeches and press releases constitute newsgathering, the staple of their brand of journalism.

Consequently, Malaysia Today has been recording an escalating number of “hits” (readers), consistently exceeding over a quarter million a day. Two particularly hard-hitting recent columns received wide readership and comments.

The first was a two-part series on corruption in the Negri Sembilan royal family. Posted right after the controversy over the suspension of its former Chief Minister Isa Samad, the expose received considerable attention. After the first installment was posted, Raja Petra was “visited” by the police, but interestingly, by its commercial crime division! Far from being intimidated, Raja Petra went on with even more damning reports.

The second was a three-part series on Khairy Jamaluddin, advisor and son-in-law to Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi. Only the first two parts have been published, with the third due any day. Readers eagerly await the final installment.

In both series, Raja Petra named names and cited specific instances. In short, both articles were virtually a road map for the police to investigate the allegations.

If the intent of the computer seizure was to prevent the posting of the final installment, then the authorities have badly miscalculated. Nor have they learned from the humiliation they received locally and abroad over the Malaysiakini raid. That episode put Malaysiakini out of commission temporarily; it was back running within hours using mirror servers elsewhere.

The seizure of Raja Petra’s computer hardly interrupted Malaysia Today’s operation. Articles continued to be posted, and readers were as eager as ever to register their views. They were hardly restrained or intimidated.

We are certain that Raja Petra, like all prudent editors and web operators, has taken the necessary precautions like backing up his files and having mirror servers.

The police have also not learned from their earlier incarceration of Raja Petra under the Internal Security Act a few years back during the height of the Reformasi and Anwar Ibrahim furor. Raja Petra was defiant to the end; he never recanted and never apologized. Such resolve!

The Malaysian authorities are still in their Neanderthal mode. They have yet to learn that they cannot control cyberspace. Not even the powerful and oppressive Chinese government could do it, though not for lack of trying. The mullahs in Iran are trying very hard, yet the most vigorous anti-government websites are in Iran.

Soon after the Malaysiakini raid, Khairy Jamaludin bravely declared that UMNO Youth was not afraid to battle anyone in the marketplace of ideas. He said this while his minions in the organization were gloating over the seizure. Some claimed that Khairy and UMNO Youth instigated the affair. This prompted my comment that we can take bright young Malays from the kampongs and send them to the Oxfords and Cambridges of the world, but more difficult to take the kampong out of them.

I would have thought that had Khairy been offended by Raja Petra’s series, or if what was published were nothing more than trash, he would have made a strong rebuttal or threaten the writer with a mega libel suit. Khairy should have learned that at Oxford. Resorting to the police to do your dirty work is like crying to mamma.

This was not the first time that the Malaysian police had “visited” bloggers and Internet journalists. These visits have been remarkably effective; those bloggers and Internet journalists have disappeared from cyberspace, or if they returned, they were noticeably emasculated.

Far from being intimidated, Raja Petra seems invigorated. Readers of Malaysia Today did not notice anything amiss, except for a short statement to announce the fact of the raid. He even had a new submission of his regular column!

When court documents exposed a former chief minister incurring millions of dollars in gambling debt while in office, the Royal Malaysian Police saw fit to seize the computer of a journalist for daring to expose malfeasance in high places. What a perverted priority!

A while back, the Prime Minister with great fanfare set up the Royal Commission to investigate the police. Chaired by a former Chief Justice, it released its long awaited report only a few months ago. The revelations, long suspected by the public, were still nonetheless shocking. Obviously setting up of that commission was an exercise in futility, for the police have learned nothing.

The cyber revolution has been going on for years but the authorities have missed it. They still think they can control cyberspace, their mind trapped in their own fortress. Unlike the physical fortress of Bastille, this mental fortress of those in authority is much more difficult to storm.

No Longer “Anwar Who?” Readers’ Responses

Reprinted from www.malaysia-today.net

I respect Bakri’s arguments, but I am afraid it will be case of:

Kera di hutan disusukan/Anak dipangkaian mati kelaparan.
[Breastfeeding the moneky’s baby while letting your own starve!]

Aspiring to be the Prime Minister in order to correct the “wrongs” is natural. Every politician worth his salt should aspire for that. To say it would be a failure if that goal is not achieved is surely incorrect. Success can be measured in many ways. If in the process of “fighting” for the prime ministership, Anwar succeeded in garnering momentum for the creation of a truly formidable opposition (i.e. not necessarily rule the country), by Malaysia’s standards, that in itself would be a major major achievment.

Really, if Malaysians were honest, we will realize that there is so much more we need to do and achieve all around as a nation. One would be a more equitable distribution of seats in Parliament between the Government and opposition. After all, “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Dart
—————-

With Dr. Bakri’s thesis, to let someone else other than Annuar Ibrahim to be the Malaysian premier (as much as he accolades him), why in the world would we, the rakyat, settle with someone with less personal assets and rich global networking and goodwill? Malaysia is such a small country and needs others to help it survive and prosper. Someone with Annuar Ibrahim stature would fit the bill, don’t you agree?

There in front of our eyes we are witnessing a group of incompetent and inward-looking bunch of people roaming and staying in the corridors of power in Malaysia. Some are there simply because they were born into that. It was never about personal achievements, merits, let alone credibility. What do we have now? If this trend were to continue, I shudder to think of Malaysia in years to come!

For the majority of MT readers, I assume that we can relocate anywhere in the world for our credentials go beyond national boundaries; but what about those MakCiks and Pakciks? At least in my kampong, and the same goes for all others, the rakyats are now categorized according to their political affiliations and no longer as citizens of a nation. I know children of rich UMNO members who are being given scholarships whereas equally qualified children of PAS members are being denied not only scholarships but also entry to local varsities. Mind you, they are all bumiputras.

My point is we have to stop electing mediocre leaders especially those who champion racial superiority and so-called racial protection. Protection against whom? It is the Malays who deprived other Malays of equal justice and treatment, not non-Malays! It is the Malay ruling elite that plundered the country’s rich resources. It is a Malay who is at the helm of the country since independence, and it is the Malays who screw things up really bad!! Don’t forget this. Racial and religious politics will bring Malaysia closer to some of the African and Middle Eastern countries in terms of turmoil, chaos, rampant abuse, corruptions and all. We need some one with fresh outlook who can think not in terms of race and religion but in the interest of the nation.

UMNO always think of UMNO, and it is a priority even at the expense of the nation. UMNO exists to serve UMNO not Malaysia. So is PAS. And I say, to heck with them.

Anak Kelantan
—————

Who else can repair and rescue Malaysia from the brink of collapse now? Just look at the bunch of leaders from our PM downward. Are they capable to lead and make us stand up as a nation? You and I certainly will agree the answer is a big NO! Our current so-called leaders are no better than the street fighters, they are good at shouting inflammatory slogans. Can we pin our hope on them to lead us out of difficulty and into the 21st century?

I am no Anwar admirer. He too had done wrongs when he was in the government, everyone would do that when one is in power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, one can get drunk with too much power. Hopefully Anwar can see the tao of wisdom after the path that he has gone through. With his kind of leadership quality, without doubt he is our man, our last hope to repair the sinking ship Malaysia. Hopefully he has the courage to cut across the barrier of race and religion and make ALL of us stand high together as Malaysians. We, the non-Bumis, have been yearning to be fully Malaysians for almost half a century; Anwar is our last hope.

Madguyho
—————–

Bakri writes about lofty stuff but sometimes the defensiveness of his unsettled intellect manifests itself.

My translation of his advice to Anwar reads as follows:

Anwar is a talented doctor. Why practice in an archaic society with real pain and suffering. Come and practise your wares in a more enlightened environment (like the great ol’ U.S. of A) where you can bridge misunderstanding Westerners have of us as just little brown ignorant Asians.

Malaria, malnutrition and TB are not the “in” things anymore. Let us go for the more challenging stuff like cosmetic surgery. You will get recognition from real people and not some pitiful scumbags who deserve their fate because of their own fault and lack of motivation. God may have given you talent and skills, Anwar, but its how you use them that defines your person.

In which case, Anwar can still patronize his homeland by advising and writing as an armchair political commentator. Better still, he does not have to get his hands dirty while still being seen to suffer the affinity of his origins and to care and cry for his people.

Sounds familiar, dude?

Kadok Naik Junjong

No Longer “Anwar, Who?”
M. Bakri Musa

[Reprinted from: www.malaysia-today.net, July 3, 2005]

Contrary to my assertion a few years ago that he would soon be “Anwar, who?” Anwar Ibrahim is again in the limelight following his release from prison. Far from being a forgotten figure (except to those whose only source of news is the Malaysian dailies), Anwar is being lauded at such lofty perches as Hopkins and Oxford.

God may just grant Anwar his wish, and then some. He may yet become a household name, but for all the wrong reasons. Anwar successfully scaled the political heights in his previous career, just missing the top slot. If he were to enter politics again, anything less than being prime minister would be a failure. That is a very high bar. Nor would his path be smooth; the grilling he received at his recent BBC interview is a good preview.

If Anwar were to channel his considerable leadership talent to other than politics, there would be no limit to the good he could bring to himself, Malaysia, Islam, and indeed the world. A leader actively courted by the Washington, DC, “neo-cons” as well as by fundamentalist PAS ulamas has much to contribute to bridging the deepening chasm between Islam and the West. A man who quotes Churchill and Confucius at will is uniquely positioned to bring better understanding between East and West.

If Anwar were to opt for politics, he would be just another politician. Malaysia – and the Malay community in particular – has a glut of those. If he fails to get the top job, his legacy will be that of a failed politician. That would be merely a personal disappointment for him; for Malaysia and Malays however, the consequences could be devastating.

His reentry into party politics would open old ugly sores that have just begun to heal. Malaysians, not just UMNO members, would have to take sides. The Bush doctrine of “You are with us or against us” would resurface locally with vengeance; Anwar will be very polarizing. He has become part of the problem, not part of the solution in Malaysian politics.

His supporters and assorted hangers-on at home will try to convince Anwar otherwise. He should not ignore them, but he should try to fathom their motivations. For some, it would be payback time; for others, a chance to recoup their considerable investments – material and emotional – in him. Those are not valid reasons.

Instead, Anwar should ponder what he wishes to accomplish, and then consider whether politics or some other arena is the best route. Saying that he wants to be prime minister to achieve his goals would be the wrong answer to the wrong question. The proper question should first be what he wants to accomplish, not what he wants to be.

Anwar should rightly be flattered that PAS had offered him to lead the opposition. Beware however, of those who flatter you. PAS may be trying to use Anwar, and he may be tempted to use PAS to further his political goals. Of course, Anwar may rationalize that he would merely be trying to drag PAS into the 21st century. After all when he joined UMNO in 1981, Anwar assured his Islamist friends that he was trying to make the party more Islamic! We easily forget the perennial excuse of opportunists everywhere, “I want to change the system from within!”

If anything, Anwar’s experience with UMNO should remind him that exploitative relationships, personal or political, rarely endure.

Anwar still has a large reservoir of goodwill among UMNO leaders and members. That would rapidly evaporate should he align himself with PAS. It would also mean the end of the party led by his wife. I see nothing positive with Anwar’s reentry into politics.

By staying out of electoral politics, the goodwill he commands in UMNO would only expand. Anwar could skillfully parlay that, and end up playing the role of kingmaker in UMNO and be able to influence that organization in ways and on a scale even its president would be unable to do.

If Anwar remains politically neutral, he may be the only person who could reverse the increasingly dangerous polarization of Malays. At the very least, he could damper the coarsening discourse of Malay politics. Anwar is one of the few Malays comfortable reciting tahlil at the local surau as he is at a Western cocktail party (sipping orange juice of course!). Meaning, he is at ease with the ulama as well as liberal Muslims.

Anwar is highly regarded in Bangkok and Manila. He should use his good office to help the two countries resolve their Muslim (essentially ethnic Malay) minority problems. He should convince those myopic governments that suppressions and military actions are not the solution, but economic development and better human rights practices are. He should in turn counsel those insurgents that accommodation, not rebellion, is more fruitful. Peace in Mindanao and Patani would be good for the folks there as well as for regional relationships.

Similarly, Anwar could leverage his excellent reputation in Jakarta to nudge that nation to pursue enlightened economic and social policies. He should also use his good influence on the Sultan of Brunei to prod that feudal state into the modern age. As Prime Minister of Malaysia, Anwar would be constrained from doing all of these. I am suggesting that Anwar’s sphere should extend beyond Malaysia.

When he was released from prison, the Saudi government had an executive jet available to whisk him to Germany for his medical treatment. That gesture was not an affront to the Malaysian government or to Dr. Mahathir, rather a reflection of Anwar’s standing in the Islamic world.

Among his early visitors in Germany were senior Bush administration figures. Anwar is one of the few Asian leaders who understand the nuances of Western, specifically American, leadership and democracy. At a time when the Bush administration could use some help in the Muslim world, there are very few capable volunteers. This is where Anwar’s talent could be of great use. It would be good for America, good for Islam, and most of all, splendid for Anwar.

Anwar’s supporters look askance at his close relationship with the “neo cons;” Anwar in turn is defensive about it. One should always welcome and continually nurture good relationships. Now that the top “neo-con” Paul Wolfowitz is at the World Bank, Anwar should use his experience as a former Finance Minister of a robust economy to steer the bank towards more enlightened lending practices and away from “mega” projects.

Before Anwar could aspire to soar to these stratospheric heights, he must free himself from the gravitational tugs of his supporters. They in turn should realize that they were right in believing in a great leader, but this greatness could never be realized if he permits himself to be tethered to confining emotional ties.

If Anwar could treat his adoring supporters not as anchors that would weigh him down rather as boosters that would propel him into his next trajectory as a leader, then Anwar is destined for greater heights.