Malaysia loses the way following the West, politically or economically?

Tweet

Clear vision in uncertain times

Diplomatically Speaking By Dennis Ignatius

In this period of global uncertainty, it is more important than ever for Malaysia to be united behind a common purpose lest we lose our way, be it politically or economically.

THERE is an old saying: “Without vision, the people perish.”

Applied broadly, it means that unless we are united behind a clear vision and are fully committed to doing what it takes to get there, we will invariably lose our way.

Do we have such a vision? Are we united behind a common purpose?

These questions are now more critical than ever before given that we have entered a period of global uncertainty, the likes of which we have not seen in quite a while.

Politically, we are seeing nations rise and fall and power shifting from West to East. Economies that were the drivers of world trade and engines of global growth are suddenly floundering.

The Eurozone, for example, is caught up in the worst crisis in its history. Many are wondering if it can even continue.

The United States, that other great economic powerhouse, is in crisis, rendered impo­­tent by massive foreign debt and deep internal divisiveness. Even China, despite its US$3.2 trillion (RM10.1 trillion) surplus, is not immune.

No wonder economists are worried that the world itself now hovers on the brink of another disastrous global recession.

Suddenly, it’s a whole new ball game out there. No one really knows how it will all play out but one thing is certain: resilient, innovative and competitive nations will do better than those which are not.

In this context, does Malaysia have what it takes to thrive in what management guru Peter Drucker calls a time of “accelerating change, overwhelming complexity and tremendous competition”?

Sadly, as anyone listening in on our national conversation quickly discovers, we are still fighting  yesterday’s battles, seemingly unable to make the critical choices that alone can guarantee our prosperity.



While so many other nations have moved on to bigger and better things, we are still mired in issues of race and religion, unwilling to make the compromises necessary to build unity and resilience, unable to de­­cide whether we are a democracy or a theocracy.

Everything is complicated and complex in Malaysia. Even simple issues take forever to be resolved. Indecisiveness can be crippling for a nation.

And for want of a clear vision, the national fabric weakens, our democratic space diminishes and our national institutions decay.

Unsurprisingly, the same dysfunction finds expression in our economy as well.

Malaysia is steadily losing ground, hobbled by the poor choices we make as well as the hard choices we avoid making.

Fifteen years of successive budget deficits have saddled our nation with a staggering RM433bil debt, amounting to 54% of GDP.

Of course, there are those who say that such debt levels are manageable given our growth rates. That is what they were saying in Europe before reality hit them in the face.

Whether we like it or not, international investors are taking stock of our situation and it is their judgement that will decide our fate as much as anything else.

Clearly, we are going to have to make some tough economic decisions sooner than later.

We can no longer remain indifferent, for example, to the waste and abuse that our Auditor-General chronicles year after year.

How long can we continue to spend money on submarines that cannot submerge or satellites that cannot track?

And how long can we afford those expensive subsidies, particularly the ones that go to well-connected corporations and big businesses, that distort the allocation of resources, weaken our competitiveness and foster yet more corruption?

Is it not time to end the reign of the robber barons?

And then there is our bloated and inefficient bureaucracy, now numbering more than 1.3 million, one of the highest civil servants-to-population ratios in the world.

Public service wages and pensions will cost the country more than RM64bil next year.

Significantly trimming the civil service is a must if we are to reduce the deficit.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has, of course, taken some important steps in the right direction and deserves credit for it.

Some say it is simply to win votes but that is what democracy is all about and must be welcomed.

In order to be effective and meaningful, however, the reform agenda needs to be much wider, much deeper and much bolder.

Undoubtedly, being a reformer in a country like Malaysia is no task for political pygmies.

It takes leadership, vision, courage and conviction, something that Thomas Friedman, the New York Times columnist, lamented recently is sorely lacking in much of the world today.

If there is one encouraging spot in an otherwise gloomy picture, it is that Malaysians are increasingly ready for change.

They are tired of the old template of division, distrust and blame and understand that compromise and accommodation is the only way forward.

Surely the near empty stadium in Shah Alam on Oct 25 was a resounding rebuke to those who want to play the old games of race and religion instead of building for the future.

Related articles

• Malaysia world's No.1 highest civil servants-to ...

• Malaysia still in pursuit of full independence

London Offices Foreign Owned!

Tweet

 Over half London's City offices foreign owned - report

by Andrew Macdonald; Editing by Dan Lalor) Keywords: PROPERTY LONDON

LONDON, Nov 22 (Reuters) - British investors own less than half the office properties in London's City financial hub, with foreign ownership of towers such as the Gherkin likely to continue, a report said.

Property company Development Securities said 52 percent of City office blocks were foreign owned in 2011, up from 8 percent in 1980, with German and U.S. investors hiking their stakes considerably over that period.

'City (of London) offices are perceived to offer quality and transparency -- a 'safe haven' for foreign buyers who have, in turn, deepened liquidity in the market,' chief executive Michael Marx said in the report 'Who Owns the City'.

IPD figures showed property values fell 50 percent during the global financial meltdown to August 2009, subsequently rebounding 25 percent, creating a buying opportunity for cash-rich investors such as sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, insurance firms and real estate investment companies.

'Traditional owners -- livery companies, institutions, established property companies -- have experienced a sharp decline in City office ownership,' Development Securities said, noting these investors now held 17 percent of the office stock, from 29 percent in 2005.



In their place, German investors hiked their market share to 16 percent, from 1 percent in 1980. U.S. investors held 10 percent, from zero, while Middle East investors weighed in at 6 percent, from 3 percent, the survey found.

The 180-metre tall Gherkin tower -- so-called because of its shape, one of the most distinctive in the City -- has been part-owned by German property behemoth IVG Immobilien since 2007.

Foreign ownership increased during the global financial crisis, Development Securities said, noting the changing dynamics of globalisation and international investment would continue to be reflected in City office ownership.

'Such resilience would appear all the more remarkable in the light of the City's associations with the failures of the international financial system. What offsets the systemic risk in relation to the City's lack of diversification is the exceptional liquidity that characterises its office market.'

The Development Securities survey also showed the changing profile of owners, with a growing trend towards private ownership by high-net-worth individuals.

In terms of functional ownership, 41 percent of the office space was owned by companies in the finance, insurance and real estate sectors, and 57 percent by financial and business services firms.

More than half of the City of London's financial buildings are foreign-owned

By Richard Hartley-parkinson

Many landmark buildings in the heart of London's financial district are owned by foreign investors, it has been revealed.

Germany holds the keys to one in five properties across the City including the distinctive Lloyd's Building and Gherkin 

UK ownership is down to it's lowest ever level with just 48 per cent belonging to British people or businesses. In 1980 that figure was 90 per cent.

The Gherkin (right) is owned by a German investment fund Tower 42 (left) looks like it's about to be snapped up by a South African magnate

Lloyds building, famous for having all it's services built outside, is owned by a German bank

The trend is likely to continue in the same direction as more investors look to get real estate in the UK. Tower 42 - also known as NatWest Tower - is currently on the market and South African magnate Natie Kirsh is the frontrunner in the bidding.

Matthew Weiner, executive director of development securities PLC which compiled the report, said: 'It's gone from 40 percent in 2006 to now 52 percent, so every other building in the city is ultimately owned by somebody from overseas.

'What we've seen as well is the rise for the first time in private net worth individuals which we've never been able to identify in all the studies previously and I think that's an interesting dynamic against safe haven assets that London represents.'

More...

• Good news at last as borrowing falls by £1.2bn... but Cameron warns that cutting the debt is harder than he expected
• Driving commuters around the Benz: New York City's wealthiest enjoy hidden luxury in Mercedes vans that take up half the road

Other significant parts of the City that are foreign owned include 10 Gresham Street (50 per cent Canadian), City Point, Moorgate (American), and Paternoster Square (Japanese).

Mr Weiner believes that foreign ownership is actually beneficial to the British economy. He said: 'I think it's good for liquidity in the market and good for London's status as an international capital.

'I think also these investors coming in have got long term investment horizons which gives greater stability to the market which will help the occupational market as well and help London function as a centre.'

Ownership of buildings has also shifted significantly over the last 30 years.
In 1973, 40 per cent of offices in the City were owned by what the report calls traditional owners.

Now, that figure has fallen to three per cent while nearly 10 per cent are owned by individuals.

In the shadow of the very British icon of St Paul's Cathedral, Paternoster Square is in the hands of the Japanese

This table shows how the ownership of City of London buildings has changed since 1980

Around the time of the last recession in 2008, the number of institution owned buildings nearly halved as more specialist real estate groups snapped up property while prices were low.

Despite the economic downturn in Europe London remains the world's top financial centre - ahead of New York and Hong Kong.

The housing market shows a similar pattern as the eurozone crisis continues to hit Greece and Italy, with more and more investors putting their money in London properties.

Greeks and Italians have spent £406m this year on domestic ownership - a 120 per cent increase on 201, according to the Financial Times recently.

This has taken the total number of home-owners from the two countries in the capital to 10 per cent.

There has also been a rise in house purchases by Middle Eastern and North African investors, keen to take advantage of the weak pound.

Vying for dubious achievements?

Tweet

MUSINGS By MARINA MAHATHIR

We are great at railing against idiotic politicians at mamak stalls and on social websites, but when it actually comes to doing something, we make excuses; and with that, we disempower ourselves.

IN 2000, Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book called The Tipping Point, defining it as “the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point”.

It’s that pivotal moment when people decide that enough is enough and actually do something to make a change.

In 2011, we’ve seen lots of tipping points.

It happened at the end of December in Tunisia when fruitseller Mohamad Bouazizi set himself on fire in protest against the confiscation of his stall.

That act of defiance against in­­justice became the tipping point for Tunisians fed up with the sys­­-tem and their rebellion led to the downfall of their president and set off a chain of events in neighbouring countries known as the Arab Spring.

Sooner or later, people reach a tipping point where they will no longer tolerate repression and corruption, pushing them to do something about it, even if it means that lives had to be sacrificed.

I really have to wonder when we Malaysians will reach our tipping point.

Every day, we read so much blatant nonsense from our leaders that the newspapers have truly stopped being readable.

News reports treat us all as people of low intelligence because only imbeciles would believe some of the outrageous claims made by our leaders.

When elections are in the offing, there is no doubt that our politicians immediately start jockeying for positions by trying to outdo one another.



It would be wonderful if they were racing to think up the best policies to manage the country, the economy, social issues, etc.

Instead, they are racing to find the silliest ways to strike fear into our souls and find more ways to oppress people.

I mean, solar-powered talking Bibles, really?

There is a foreign magazine that gives out Dubious Achievements Awards every year.

These are a bit like the Ig Noble awards, the opposite of the Nobel prizes, where people are cited for doing the silliest things.

Malaysia, especially our politicians, seems to be in the running for a lot of dubious achievements this year.
Maybe we should just accept that those are the only achievements we will ever have.

Meanwhile, we the people have to live with these shenanigans.

We find out every year from the Auditor-General’s Report that millions have been wasted on ridi­­-culous items which any fool would know should not cost that much.

The report highlights a “mess” in a government-related company and an unexplained stupendously expensive apartment purchase.

There are also ministers who claim that none of it has anything to do with the Government.

Gee, the Auditor-General must have so little to do that he needs to audit private companies as well.
And wow, they must really think we are dumb.

And while the world is facing an economic recession that will be more severe than anything ever seen, fodder for revolutions everywhere, what do our politicians care about?

Whether people of different sexual orientation should be allowed any space at all to talk about their problems?

Like natural disasters, the last thing economic catastrophes care about is whom you’re attracted to.

And given that most people are heterosexual, the chances are that the people who will be most affected by a recession are the heterosexual and poor.

Shouldn’t politicians vying for votes be concentrating on them?

Perhaps our politicians, unlike voters, don’t read.

They seem not to have noticed that there are protests going all round the world against inequality, especially the ever-increasing gap between the rich and the poor.

Even some business people are saying that things must change or else there will be a global revolution, particularly against exploitative and uncaring corporations.

But as always, our politicians are one step behind the rest of the world.

They’re still dreaming of joining the fat cat 1% and forgetting that the 99% have a lot more votes.

Why do we put up with all this?

Are our tolerance levels for stupidity that high?

Is it because we don’t know any better?

Or are we just lazy and complacent?

We are great about railing against idiotic politicians at mamak stalls and on social websites, but when it actually comes to doing something, we make excuses.

We shrug our shoulders and say we can’t make a difference, only some people can.

And with that, we disempower ourselves, much to the delight of our leaders.

But every now and then, we do rise to the occasion.

I think last July we reached a tipping point of sorts, where lots of ordinary people simply got fed up and decided to make it known, albeit peacefully.

But have our leaders learnt anything from it?

Not much, going by the constant demonising ever since.

So how long will we put up with imbeciles leading us?

How long will we tolerate unbridled greed and hate?

Bush and Blair found guilty of 'crimes against peace' !

Image via WikipediaTweet

Bush and Blair found guilty

By EUNICE AU KUALA LUMPUR euniceau@nst.com.my

Committed international crime by invading Iraq

Chief judge Datuk Abdul Kadir Sulaiman (centre) presiding over the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal against former United States president George W. Bush and former British prime minister Tony Blair yesterday. Pic by Sharul Hafiz Zam

  THE Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal (KLWCC) returned a guilty verdict against former United States president George W. Bush and former British prime minister Tony Blair on a charge of crimes against peace on its final day of hearing yesterday.

  Chief judge Datuk Abdul Kadir Sulaiman, in announcing the verdict, said both the accused had acted with deceit, selectively manipulated international law and committed an unlawful act of aggression and an international crime by invading Iraq in 2003.



  The tribunal found that both the accused had contemplated to invade Iraq as far back as September 2001 and had defied the United Nations Resolution 1441, which clearly did not authorise the use of military action to compel Iraq's compliance.

  Kadir added that the two accused had admitted since the Iraq war that they knew or believed the intelligence reports on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to be unreliable and yet both proceeded to wage war against Iraq based on this false and contrite basis.

  Memoirs of both the accused that had been tendered as evidence during the proceedings were also found to implicate both Bush and Blair, both having admitted their own intention to invade Iraq, regardless of international law.

  It was suggested by the tribunal that the KLWCC file a report with the International Court of Crime against both the accused under the Nuremberg principles and include reports of genocide and crimes against humanity committed by Bush and Blair.

  The tribunal also recommended that the names of both accused be entered into the Register of War Criminals and publicised.

  The KLWCC was tasked to publicise the tribunal's findings to all nations who were signatories of the Rome Statue, so that the two criminals can be prosecuted if they enter the jurisdiction of these nations.

  The KLWCC should also suggest to the UN General Assembly to pass resolution to end Iraq's occupation and request that the UN Security Council pass a resolution to transfer sovereignty back to the Iraqis.

  Earlier, chief defence Jason Kay Kit Leon had argued that Bush had exhausted all means of diplomacy before launching an attack after receiving intelligence briefings on Iraq for two years, suggesting that then president Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and Iraq posed an imminent threat.

  He quoted Bush as having said that  he would not lead his nation to war on a lie which would be easily discernable after the war.

  Kay also mention that  Blair, in his memoir, had said he understood the need for the second UN resolution but knew the difficulty in getting one due to the politics within the UN Security Council permanent members.

  The prosecution had made out a compelling case over the four days.

  Chief prosecutor Professor Gurdial S. Nijar, in his summation, reiterated key documents of several intelligence reports that indicated there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq reported by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

  Neither was there an attempt by Saddam Hussein to obtain uranium from Niger by former United States diplomat Joseph Wilson and weapons inspector David Kay found that Saddam's nuclear facility had deteriorated to such a point that it was totally useless, all discovered well before the UN Resolution 1441.

  The tribunal reached a unanimous guilty verdict after four hours of deliberation.

KL tribunal convicts two former leaders with ‘crimes against peace’

PETALING JAYA: The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal unanimously found former United States president George W. Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair guilty of “crimes against peace”.

The tribunal found that the two had planned, prepared and invaded the state of Iraq on March 19, 2003, in violation of the United Nations Charter and international law.

“The charge is proven beyond reasonable doubt. The accused are found guilty,” read an official media statement from Perdana Global Peace Foundation, organisers of the tribunal.

“War criminals have to be dealt with, convict Bush and Blair as charged. A guilty verdict will serve as a notice to the world that war criminals may run but can never ultimately hide from truth and justice,” the statement read.

The tribunal noted that the UN Security Council Resolution 1441 did not authorise any use of force against Iraq but the US proceeded to invade Iraq under the pretext of the Sept 11 attacks and weapons of mass destruction.

“Weapons investigators had established that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was also not posing any threat to any nation at the relevant time that was immediate that would have justified any form of pre-emptive strike.”

With the findings, the tribunal has ordered that Bush and Blair’s names be included in the war register of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission.

It also ordered the findings of the tribunal to be publicised to all nations who are signatories of the Rome Statute.

The tribunal, held for four days here, was initiated by former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who is also the Perdana Global Peace Foundation president.

The tribunal members were Datuk Abdul Kadir Sulaiman, Tunku Sofiah Jewa, Prof Salleh Buang, Alfred Lambremont Webre and Prof Emeritus Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi.

Prof Niloufer Bhagwat and Datuk Zakaria Yatim were recused as tribunal members.

Related post:

War Crimes Tribunal Tries Bush, Blair for War Crimes against humanity! 

Youngsters rising Net value, goto register & vote!

Tweet

 The rising Net value

ANALYSIS by BADARAN KUPPUSAMY

Whoever wins the hearts and minds of the young will win big at the next general election. And that's why the cyber troopers from both sides of the divide are an important tool of the battle!

WITH nearly 70% of the 4.5 million unregistered voters being in the 21 to 40 age group, Barisan Nasional has sounded the battle cry for its bloggers and social media practitioners to reach out to them with their iPads, iPhones, BlackBerries and laptops.



Besides, about 500,000 youths join the ranks of unregistered voters each year and getting them hooked early to either Barisan or Pakatan Rakyat is half the battle won for the parties as the youngsters will be voters as well as campaign workers.

The youths are the mainstay in any mass political campaign, either as voters, party workers, supporters and even fodder for demonstrations, as seen in the July street demonstration by the Bersih 2.0 coalition.

Making connectio ns: Latest gadgets like the iPad are the weapons of cyber warriors, says Najib. — Bernama

Barisan is taking a leaf from the Pakatan playbook to reach out to the youth in more ways than one.

Even its election cry has been carefully rewritten as BN Pilihan Orang Muda (BN the Young People's Choice), from the previous straight forward Vote for BN.

Prime Minister and Barisan chief Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak launched the campaign to get the young voters by urging pro-Barisan bloggers and social media practitioners to bring out their iPads, iPhone, BlackBerries, tablets and laptops.

“These are your weapons as cyber warriors,” Najib told about 2,000 bloggers and social media practitioners gathered at the PWTC on Sunday at the first-ever social media convention.

Also called the 1Malaysia Social Media Volunteers or myVO1CE they will explain and defend government policies online.

Pakatan has had a head start, being first to embrace social media and harnessing it for political purposes.

The impact was seen in the outcome of the March 2008 polls, when voters gave the alliance 82 urban and semi-urban parliamentary constituencies and four states, in addition to Kelantan.

The battle to win hearts and minds of voters ahead of the 13th general election will be fought with everything the two rival coalitions can throw at each other.

While Barisan sees its cyber war as setting the record straight, Pakatan sees it as a life-and-death matter to change the voting pattern.

Najib said Barisan cannot be content with just the rural support and must also rally the urban votes. But it is easier said than done.

Urban voters have a multitude of avenues for information, from the print media to the Internet and their own participation in social media like blogs and Twitter.

Pakatan simply questions each government information, from the 1Malaysia milk programme for schools to giving RM500 to households earning less than RM3,000 a month.

It casts doubts on the programmes and questions the effectiveness.

Najib said the Barisan-friendly social media practitioners are the coalition's advocates to explain government policies and to correct the falsehood on the Internet.

Whoever wins the hearts and minds of those in the 21 to 35 age group will win big.

And that's why the cyber troopers from both sides of the divide are an important tool of the battle.

While Umno is confident of winning the majority of the Malay voters in that age group, the DAP is sure of the urban Chinese support in the same age group.

That leaves the PKR and PAS to struggle and gain the support of the rural Malays voters and the MCA and Gerakan for the urban Chinese voters.

Cyber troopers from both sides play a crucial role in convincing the 3.2 million new voters to side with them.

Combined with the 4.5 million unregistered voters who did not vote in 2008, the next election could be a close call.