> A frank discourse by a bumiputra of Malaysia.
>
> THIS IS A MUST MUST READ: LEE KUAN YEW : AT 85 , THE FIRE STILL BURNS BY
> AHMAD MUSTAPHA
>
> The writer is a nephew of Dr Mahathir.
>
>
> By Ahmad Mustapha
>
> Singapore's Minister Mentor, Lee Kuan Yew, who was Singapore's founding
> father, has always been very direct in his comments. This was the man who
> outsmarted the communists in Singapore (with the innocent help of Malaya
> then and the willing help of the British) and who later outwitted the
> British and outpaced Malaysia in all spheres.
>
> Singapore practices corrupt-free meritocracy and Malaysia affirmative
> action. The former attracted all the best brains and the latter chased out
> all the brains. The Singapore cabinet consists of dedicated and intelligent
> technocrats whereas Malaysia has one of the most unwieldy cabinets. Not
> only that, brain wise it was below par not even good for the kampong.
>
>
> With that kind of composition, one that is very brainy, naturally Singapore
> , with no natural resources could outstrip Malaysia in every aspect of
> development. Malaysia, on the other hand, was too much preoccupied with its
> Malayness and the illusory 'Ketuanan Melayu' and was also more interested
> in useless mega iconic development rather than real social and economic
> development.
>
> Whenever Kuan Yew utters anything that deemed to be a slight on Malaysia ,
> voices were raised admonishing him. Malaysia would never dare to face
> reality. That Singapore had shown that it could survive was a slap on those
> who believed that Singapore would fold up once it left Malaysia . Therefore
> it was natural that these doomsayers would try to rationalise their
> utterances to be in their favour to combat on whatever Kuan Yew commented.
> Its political jealousy.
>
>
> Singapore achieved its development status without any fanfare. But here in
> Malaysia , a development that was deceptive was proclaimed as having
> achieved development status. It was trumpeted as an achievement that befits
> first world status. This was self delusion. Malaysians are led to believe
> into a make believe world, a dream world. The leaders who themselves tend
> to believe in their own fabricated world did not realise the people were
> not taken in by this kind of illusion.
>
> Lee Kuan Yew believed in calling a spade a spade. I was there in Singapore
> when the People's Action Party won the elections in 1959. He was forthright
> in his briefing to party members as to what was expected of them and what
> Singapore would face in the future. Ideologically, I did not agree with
> him. We in the University of Malaya Socialist Club had a different
> interpretation of socialist reconstruction. But he was a pragmatist and
> wanted to bring development and welfare to the Singaporeans. Well! He
> succeeded.
>
>
> Malaysia was so much embroiled in racial politics and due to the fear of
> losing political power, all actions taken by the main party in power was
> never targeted towards bringing wealth to all. Wealth was distributed to
> the chosen few only. They were the cronies and the backers of the party
> leadership to perpetuate their own selfish ends.
>
> Seeing the efficiency and the progress achieved by Singapore caused the
> Malaysian leadership to suffer from an inferiority complex. That Malaysia
> should suffer from this complex was of its own making.
>
> In a recent interview, Kuan Yew said that Malaysia could have done better
> if only it treated its minority Chinese and Indian population fairly.
> Instead they were completely marginalised and many of the best brains left
> the country in drove. He added that Singapore was a standing indictment to
> what Malaysia could have done differently. He just hit the nail right there
> on the head.
>
>
> Malaysia recently celebrated its 50th year of independence with a bagful of
> uncertainties. The racial divide has become more acute. The number of Malay
> graduates unemployed is on the increase. And this aspect can be very
> explosive. But sad
to see that no positive actions have been taken to> address these social ills.
>
> Various excuses were given by Malaysian leaders why Singapore had far
> outstripped Malaysia in all aspects of social and economic advancement.
> Singapore was small, they rationalised and therefore easy to manage.
> Singapore was not a state but merely an island.
>
>
> There was one other aspect that Malaysia practises and that is to
> politicise all aspects of life. All government organs and machinery were
> 'UMNO-ised'. This was to ensure that the party will remain in power. Thus
> there was this misconception by the instruments of government as to what
> national interest is and what UMNO vested interest is.
>
>
> UMNO vested interest only benefited a few and not the whole nation. But due
> to the UMNO-isation of the various instruments of government, the country
> under the present administration had equated UMNO vested interest as being
> that of national interest. Thus development became an avenue of making
> money and not for the benefit of the people. The fight against corruption
> took a back seat. Transparency was put on hold. And the instruments of
> government took it to be of national interest to cater to the vested
> interest of UMNO. Enforcement of various enactments and laws was selective.
> Thus a 'palace' in Kelang, APs cronies and close-one-eye umno MPs could
> exist without proper procedure. Corruption infested all govt departments,
> the worse is the police and lately even in the judiciary.
>
> Singapore did not politicise its instruments of government. If ever
> politicisation took place, it is guided by national interest. To be
> efficient and to be the best in the region was of paramount importance.
> Thus all the elements like corruption, lackadaisical attitude towards work
> and other black elements, which would retard such an aim, were eliminated.
> Singapore naturally had placed the right priority in it's pursuit to
> achieve what is best for its people. This is the major difference between
> these two independent countries.
>
>
> Malaysia in its various attempts to cover up its failures embarked on
> several diversions. It wanted its citizens to be proud that the country had
> the tallest twin-tower in the world, although the structure was designed
> and built by foreigners. Its now a white-elephant wasting away. It achieved
> in sending a man into space at an exorbitant price. For what purpose? These
> are what the Malays of old would say "menang sorak" (hollow victories).
>
> It should be realised that administering a country can be likened to
> managing a corporate entity. If the management is efficient and dedicated
> and know what they are doing, the company will prosper. The reverse will be
> if the management is poor and bad. The company will go bust.
>
> There are five countries around this region. There is Malaysia , and then
> Indonesia . To the east there is the Philippines and then there is that
> small enclave called the Sultanate of Brunei . All these four countries
> have abundance of natural resources but none can lay claim to have used all
> these resources to benefit the people. Poverty was rampant and independence
> had not brought in any significant benefits to the people.
>
> But tiny Singapore without any resources at all managed to bring
> development to its citizens. It had one of the best public MRT transport
> systems and airlines in the world and it is a very clean city state. Their
> universities, health care, ports are among the best in the world.
>
> It is impossible to compare what Singapore has achieved to what all these
> four countries had so far achieved. It was actually poor management and
> corruption, and nothing more. Everything is done for the vested interest of
> the few.
>
> Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines and the Sultanate of Brunei need
> good management teams. They would not be able to do this on their own
> steam. I would advise that they call on Kuan Yew to show them what good
> governance is. Why look East to Japan when it is just next door across the
> causeway.
