Thailand and Muslim rebels begin peace talks

 

First round of talks between Thailand and separatist rebels was marred by violence killing five people [Al Jazeera]

Five people are reported killed as Thai government begins talks with separatists in neighbouring Malaysia.

Thailand and a Muslim rebel group have started peace negotiations aimed at ending nearly a decade of conflict in the country's three southern most provinces.

Thursday’s first round of talks between Thai security officials and representatives of the Barisan Revolusi Nasional rebel group in the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur, however, was marred by a bomb explosion and a shooting incident that killed five people, according to Al Jazeera's Wayne Hay.

Ahmad Zamzamin, a former senior aide of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, is facilitating the talks.

Prior to talks, a roadside bomb exploded in the Chor Ai-rong district of Narathiwat province, 840 kilometres south of Bangkok, killing three soldiers who were patrolling the area, said the 4th Army Region commander, Lieutenant General Udomchai Thammasarorat.

Five other soldiers were also wounded in the ambush.

Authorities say the attack took place in a village that is home to a key leader of the Muslim separatist group taking part in talks with the Thai government.

"We suspect this was the work of local militants who want to discredit the peace talks under way in Kuala Lumpur," Udomchai said.

A separate shooting incident was also reported in Narathiwat killing two Buddhist civilians.

The husband and wife were shot in Tak Bai district, where in 2004 more than 80 Muslim men died in a confrontation with security forces.

"That kind of underscores the difficulty of these talks," Al Jazeera's Florence Looi, reporting from Kuala Lumpur, said.

More than 5,300 people have been killed in the conflict in the majority-Muslim provinces in Thailand, which are under emergency law.

Rebels have carried out shootings and bombings on monks, teachers and village officials as symbols of the majority-Buddhist state.

With friends like Mahathir, you don't need enemies

COMMENT Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak must be mulling the thought that with allies like Dr Mahathir Mohamad he does not need adversaries.

Almost daily, the retired former prime minister has something to say about current affairs, not all of it benign to the interests of the incumbent PM.

Few believed that when he retired in October 2003, after 22 years as PM, Mahathir would go gently into the good night of political retirement and memoir writing.

Still fewer expected that he would continue to stalk the political arena, spewing darts from his blowgun.

After all, he was an advanced septuagenarian when he retired, an age that's not exactly hospitable to a post-race lap. Further, he disclaimed any interest in a Lee Kuan Yew-like minister mentor role.

But just like General Carl Clausewitz's observation that war is the continuation of politics by other means, so too Mahathir's retirement from prime ministerial office is the resumption of political leadership from vantages other than the bully pulpit.

From the sidelines, Mahathir exerted his influence, especially when matters on successor Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's watch were not going according to his taste.

When and if they did, he was loud in remonstrance, even to the extent of threatening to quit Umno.

One is reminded of Kelantan Menteri Besar Nik Aziz Nik Mat's sally that Mahathir was more useful to the opposition if he was still a member of Umno than if he were out, which was what the ex-PM threatened to do at one stage of his harassment of the hapless Abdullah.

In high dudgeon over Abdullah's leadership, Mahathir at one stage threw in his resignation from Umno but was mollified by Najib enough to have it rescinded.

Noose tightening

Just now, Najib must be feeling rueful about that exercise in pacification of Mahathir because it has brought him no dividends.

From the start of his premiership four years ago, Najib has bent over backwards not to offend the supposed retiree, all in the euphoric hope that he won't court the fate of his predecessor Abdullah who had to run the gauntlet of Mahathir's carping criticisms until he caved in to the pressure.

With the latest comments by Mahathir that the PM would have to relinquish his position as Umno president if he but wins GE13 narrowly, Najib must have felt the noose tightening around his neck.

True, Mahathir is no respecter of the proprieties governing intramural political conversation - he only abides by the rules when it suits him - still, his reminder to Najib that the latter is dangling by a shriveling thread must be considered unhelpful, what with Najib facing a tight general election.

Talk of confidence-building measures, this is like telling a friend who faces the prospect of being hung in a few weeks' time that you have withdrawn your support for the abolition of capital punishment.

Najib has misjudged Mahathir's character which is the epitome of Charles de Gaulle's dictum that in politics there are no permanent friends or enemies; there are only permanent interests.

For GE13, Mahathir's interest lies in a Najib victory that is narrower than Abdullah's was at GE12.

That way, Najib will be challenged for the Umno presidency - Mahathir would prefer he vacates it as Abdullah did - by current deputy, Muhyiddin Yassin, whose elevation would pave the way for Mahathir's son, Mukhriz, to rise in the party hierarchy.

Mahathir has taken care to deny any interest in the prospects for upward mobility of Muhyiddin, but that is a denial that is more for the sake of form than for actual content.

Seen as weak and ineffectual

When Mahathir retired in October 2003, he exerted pressure from behind the scenes on successor Abdullah to name Najib as the deputy which Abdullah was reluctant to do, preferring to leave the selection to an elective assembly of Umno that he intended to convene only after seeking his own mandate at a general election.

But Mahathir, to forestall a possible Abdullah preference for Muhyiddin over Najib, forced the PM's hand and had Najib named as deputy PM in January 2004.

Two months later, in March 2004, Abdullah won an overwhelming endorsement at GE11, a victory that would have made his preference of a deputy, subtly conveyed of course, irresistible to Umno delegates at the subsequent elective assembly of the party.

Mahathir's leadership preferences chop and change, but his interests - self more than party-centred - remain permanent. That these are now running counter to Najib's best interests is clear.

Mahathir's comment yesterday that, if he were PM, he would have called the election last year is the sort of smart talk on hindsight that is disdained as cheap by incumbents and retirees alike from high office, especially when they belong in the same side of the political divide.

The comment only serves to emphasise Najib's ineptness in deferring the election to the point that it shows he is scared stiff of the probable results.

His disinclination to offend Mahathir and his dithering over when to call the general election has shown him up as weak and ineffectual.

They have brought him no benefits, underscoring the point that in politics, irresolution is a dead end.

---

TERENCE NETTO has been a journalist for four decades. He likes the occupation because it puts him in contact with the eminent without being under the necessity to admire them.

Impossible for BN to cheat

There is no way the Malaysian authorities would want the country to become another Myanmar.
COMMENT

Malaysia is abuzz with talks that the ruling Barisan National will never accept defeat, or that it is preparing to snatch victory by cheating at the polls with massive voting by foreigners.

However, due to the current global situation and the fact Malaysia plays a very important role in the global sphere, there is serious doubt on these allegations.

How true are claims that the BN will hijack the polls and twist the votes or that it will cause a massive blockade of Pakatan Rakyat voters, to allow pro-BN votes?

The opposition has accused the BN of filling the voter rolls with foreigners, whom it claims have been given Malaysian identity cards to vote for the BN. The number of foreigners set to vote for the BN, Pakatan says, varies between a few thousand and two million.

The opposition produced some ICs that appear to be dubious and fraudulent, and the ongoing Royal Commission of Inquiry on the IC fraud in Sabah does not help the BN.

The BN itself is aware of the limitations imposed on it to remain in power at all cost, and to try to cheat its way in the next general election.

Many of its top leaders have warned the opposition not to trigger an “Arab Spring”. By all means, this is indicative of the fears the BN leaders have of such a possibility.

The mounting criticism of the forceful ways the authorities handled the Bersih 2.0 rally to the disadvantage of the BN has been heard.

However, the Jan 12 rally at Stadium Merdeka was peaceful, successful and sent yet another message to the BN: that the international community is watching and the BN be better prepared to play fair.

The BN is now pretty much aware that the global forces of change will not allow it to twist and turn the results of the upcoming polls in its favour.

The United Nations, for the time being, is watching the situation in Malaysia very closely. There is no way the Malaysian authorities would want the country to become another Myanmar, for example.

The military junta in Myanmar stole the election from the powerful opposition, annulling the polls results and imposing emergency rule. This will not happen in Malaysia; such an act will only destroy the nation’s economy for good.

Malaysia, since the time of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, has depended heavily on foreign direct investment (FDI). This has helped raise the standard of living of the people, putting Malaysia firmly on the world map.

Would the BN do some foolish stuff to destroy this edge that it has helped the country achieve in the past decades?

BN must deliver its promises

The onus is on the BN indeed as any tainting and meddling in the upcoming polls will scare investors away, stop the influx of FDI and surely raise the ire of the population.

Any attempt by the BN to crush the angry mobs – if they were to appear after a BN win in the polls – would only turn Malaysia into a “rogue” nation in the eyes of the international community.

And what about the United States? The most powerful nation on earth has been behind, tacitly or openly, the Arab Spring since its inception on day one.

This country will not close its eyes, if there were to be trouble in Malaysia as a result of a flawed election.

Washington is watching over and any wrong move by the BN – stealing the election and maintaining its grip on power – will surely be unwelcome.

The Barack Obama administration would surely not bet its hands in favour of the BN. That is, if the BN were proven to have stolen the results, as is being feared by many within Pakatan.

Malaysia, being a nation rapidly progressing and developing, cannot afford to be belittled and looked upon as a pariah state. Thus the BN will have to deliver on its promises.

Among these promises, will both sides accept the results of the upcoming election? After all, if Pakatan wins, is it not a group of Malaysian politicians who will take over at Putrajaya?

Will the BN win, or will it lose? Needless to say, only the voters know the secret of their ballots they will cast and whoever comes out the winner, it should be for the betterment of the country.

Ali Cordoba writes extensively on local politics.

Dr M: Najib may need to step down if BN fares badly

Dr M: Najib may need to step down if BN fares badly

Like his predecessor Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak may have to step down if BN fails to do well in the coming polls, contends former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

"I say theoretically, if he does not do well, of course his position will not be stable," Mahathir told reporters at a press conference in Kuala Lumpur today.

He said this when asked to comment on his interview with foreign news service AFP, during which he made the same remark, though the veteran Umno leader explained that this was just his view of things, which may not necessarily pan out.

To another question, Mahathir refused to name any person who should replace Najib as prime minister if he did step down.

"I don't have any candidate (in mind). I don't expect that to happen... I said theoretically only," he explained.
Asked to comment on the ongoing wait for the dissolution of Parliament, Mahathir again said this was up to the PM of the day.

“I have been told that a certain state assembly will automatically dissolve and I think that soon Parliament will also dissolve (automatically).

“Maybe before that, if the PM wants to dissolve, then he can.”
If I was PM, I'd call GE last year
However, Mahathir repeated his belief that the ideal time to dissolve Parliament should have been last year.

“But I do not have power. If I was the prime minister, Parliament would have already been dissolved last year.”

Quizzed about the English language daily New Straits Times’ interview with former finance minister Mohd Daim Zainuddin, on “deadwood” that should be removed from the BN’s cabinet line-up, Mahathir agreed wholeheartedly.

“I agree entirely. Lots of deadwood should be chopped down and thrown away and new trees grown,” he said with his trademark sarcasm.
On the apparent do-or-die bliztkrieg of DAP parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang and senior party leaders into the Umno stronghold of Johor, Mahathir said whether or not the opposition party’s belief in its splendid chance of capturing the state would come true remained to be seen.

“Johor is normally a stronghold of BN. Maybe they have found out something about the feelings of the people of Johor.

“So they think they can win in Johor, but they say the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We’ll see what happens when the election is on,” the wily former premier concluded drily.

Death in custody: Sivarasa quizzed

Subang MP R Sivarasa says the police should not misuse their resources in going only after opposition MPs.

PETALING JAYA: In January, Subang MP R Sivarasa and Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo raised the case of a death in custody of a mechanic at the USJ8 Subang Jaya police station.

For their pains, Sivarasa was summoned by the police here today for questioning over the case, while Gobind was called in last week.

At a press conference here today, Sivarasa criticised the police for “harassing opposition MPs”.

“… I think the [interrogation] is a waste of time…” he said.

“I urged the police not to misuse their resources in this manner [going after opposition MPs],” he said.

Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah, who was also present, said the government should stop using the police force to attack the opposition MPs.

Sivarasa said Subang OCPD Yahya Ramli filed a report against him in relation to the death in police custody of mechanic Chang Chin Te, 30.

Chang was arrested together with three other suspects for allegedly being members of an armed robbery gang.

“Chang was arrested on Jan 10 and was found dead at the USJ8 Subang Jaya police station four days later,” Sivarasa said.

“His wife took photos of him when she found bruises on his face and body but was later ordered by the police and hospital staff to delete them,” said Sivarasa.

He said that Chang’s family who lives in Subang New Village approached him for help to get a second post-mortem done because they suspected foul play.

“They live in my constituency, and it would be a dereliction of my duty if I didn’t help them,” he said a press conference here today.

“But OCPD Yahya made a police report against me for criminal defamation [when Gobind and I raised the issue],” he said, adding that the police should put their resources to better use than to harass opposition MPs.

Sivarasa said that the first post-mortem was done at Universiti Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC), but the family wanted a second autopsy.

He said Chang’s family wanted the second post-mortem to be carried out at the Sungai Buloh Hospital, but was advised to contact UMMC for results of the first post-mortem.

“The first post-mortem by UMMC stated that Chang died of a severe heart attack,” he said.

“The family later decided not to take any action, so we let it be,” he added.

On C Sugumar’s case, Sivarasa said the case was still at an impasse.

“We have tried several ways [of solving the matter], but all have failed. We feel bad for the family. We will just give it one last push and hope for the best,” he said.

Sugumar was allegedly chased, handcuffed and beaten to death on Jan 23, by policemen and several members of the public.

The family wants a second post-mortem to be conducted on the security guard.

When Indians decide not to vote…

Hindraf leader Waythamoorthy, on his 18th day on hunger strike, writes about the option of strategic abstention by poor Indian voters.
COMMENT

P Waythamoorthy

This is the 18th day of my hunger viratham (hunger strike). Today I will be penning my thoughts on the option of strategic abstention by the Indian poor in the forthcoming elections.

Today there is still a lot of residual anger against Umno among the Indian poor. Pakatan Rakyat is capitalising on this and is thinking that the votes of the Indian poor have nowhere else to go but to them.

This thinking shows the way they have treated the Indian electorate recently in their election manifesto flip flops.

Pakatn believes they should get a majority of the Indian votes – not maybe as high as the last time, but still the majority.

Barisan Nasional for their part believe they can buy the Indian vote with the goodies they have planned.

Hindraf’s analysis however is this – the urban educated Indians will largely go for Pakatan. Add to that the beneficiaries from the last election who have personally gained and all those who potentially stand to gain in the forthcoming elections. These votes are with Pakatan.

Then on the BN side, the MIC machinery is preparing to reach out to the local warlords and through them to the poorest among the Indians. They will be throwing a lot of money in the process in doing this

In our estimate all of that will all probably account for 50% of the Indian voters. You can argue about the accuracy of that number, but it surely is in that ballpark, give and take a few percentage points.

The leverage for the Indian poor does not come from those foregone votes. When we say leverage, we mean leverage as in getting the politicians to commit to the specific bottom-up plans laid out in our five-year blueprint for the Indian poor.

This is the key point on which the decision as to where the remaining Indian votes will go will be determined. Hindraf will make sure of that. This is the key point that BN and Pakatan should focus on.

We have a few more days left for BN and Pakatan to take their respective positions, either explicitly or by default on the question of the endorsement of the Hindraf’s five-year blueprint.

If they remain silent or ambivalent, then we in Hindraf will project it to mean they do not support a program of comprehensive and permanent correction to the socio-economic problems of the Indian poor – that they do not care about the Indian poor.

This therefore will form the central message from us to our base.

On the contrary, if either, and I reiterate, if either Pakatan or BN comes up and is willing to endorse our blueprint in a clear binding way, our message to the Indian poor will be to throw their support behind them – whoever they are – Pakatan or BN.

Strategic abstention

What if Pakatan and BN have not endorsed the blueprint by the time Parliament is dissolved?

The message that this sends to the Indian poor is that they both do not have the interest of the Indian poor in their minds.

The proposals in the hindraf blueprint are entirely justifiable. And if they do not want to adopt them and do not show the necessary commitment to implement them, then it does not really make any difference who wins in these elections.

We will make absolutely sure that this is the message that the Indian poor will hear.

Under these circumstances, abstaining from voting either BN or Pakatan becomes a real option for the Indian poor. Both Pakatan and BN cannot complain on any count on the adoption of this option by the Indian poor.

To the Indian poor, the logic is simple. Neither care, so neither deserves anything in return.

What will be the consequence of this move? This strategic abstention effectively means a pullback in the number of votes for both BN and Pakatan in this GE.

What this means in turn is that, all those seats that were won marginally will all be affected. The uncertainty increases. If you take Selangor alone, we see at least (at least) 20 state seats that fall in this category – easily.

The same logic and formula apply in Kedah, Penang, Perak, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang and Johor.

All marginally won seats in the last elections with an Indian voter population of more than 10% are candidates to come into this category. And not all the Indian poor need to abstain. Even if 20% of the Indian voters abstain, the impact will be significant. Strategic abstention can prove to be quite impactful.

By this strategic abstention, the Indian poor will be determining new winners and new losers. The winners will know they won without those votes and the losers will know they lost without those votes.

To both the winner and the loser, the significance of the vote of the Indian poor would have become clearer. This adds to calculations for future elections.

A purposeful option

Will the contenders want to treat the Indian poor vote so cavalierly? Yes they can, but only at a cost. That will become plain.

Extending this logic to the next level, strategic abstention can also be applied to individual candidates in the elections.

If they will announce their stand on the Hindraf blueprint, whether they support it and what specifically they will do in support of the programmes for the Indian poor and put it down formally to Hindraf. Hindraf can then endorse some of these candidates in return. The logistics of this has to be worked out, but this is also another option.

My conclusion therefore is that strategic abstention becomes a purposeful option for the Indian poor in this election.

By this act the Indian poor would have taken the opportunity to show the significance of their votes. Whether we will issue the call for it will be determined over the next couple of weeks, depending on when parliament is dissolved.

Our position is very clear. We do not want to see just changes in faces at the helm of our country; we also want to see real changes in the lives of the Indian poor. And we will take any position that supports our motives.

We will make our decision on what we will do soon as the dust settles for us.

P Waythamoorthy is the Hindraf chairperson. He has been on his hunger strike since March 10.