IT is always interesting to see flippant reactions, especially in cyberspace, to major political events.
The tumultuous development in Egypt is not spared.
Most interesting is a "debate" on the Twitter social network in which, someone equated Egypt with Malaysia which led to strong protests by a few others who argued that Egypt is economically in tatters while Malaysia is booming.
Statistically, they are right. Egypt's unemployment rate is three times higher than Malaysia's (and Malaysia's is popularly said to be social and not economic driven).
As also in the case of the poverty line. While Malaysia's population living below the poverty line is capped at five per cent, Egypt's is at 20 per cent.
Other statistics, from inflation to public debt, shows Egypt and Malaysia being poles apart, with the latter showing impressive standing not far off from that of the developed nations.
In fact, Egypt is no comparison to Malaysia by all counts -- be it economic, living standards, political system or social development.
That being the case, how did the issue of "Malaysia being like Egypt" come about?
For some, it is about the hatred for the continued grip the Barisan Nasional and Umno have on the government.
For others, it is the need to spur demonstrations and other extraneous avenues other than the ballot box to bring about changes in the political system.
By equating Malaysia with Egypt, it gives some perverse legitimacy to the need to topple the existing government by whatever means.
In short, the dream of marching to Putrajaya after the 13th general election does not seem potentially realistic any more so much so the need to consider other options, no matter how remote it is.
If politics is the consideration in the need to equate Egypt with Malaysia, a "tweet" from an ardent critic of Kelantan Menteri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat said if there was any similarity with Egypt it should be the Pas-led Kelantan government.
In short, to him, if the Egypt "revolt" should be adopted in Malaysia, it should be replicated in Kelantan where Nik Aziz has helmed for more than two decades and has not shown any signs of wanting to let go anytime soon.
Then again, Nik Aziz and his fans will argue that he has only two decades to his name while Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak has three.
That is for Nik Aziz and his supporters to decide.
After all, Nik Aziz can remain the menteri besar for as long as he wants if the election process and the party favour it.
And this is regardless of how Nik Aziz and his ilk had repeatedly condemned Malaysia's flawed democracy, the very system that has propelled him and several other opposition leaders to the highest political positions they could never have dreamt of as an opposition.
Even though it has been stated earlier that Malaysia is, by all counts, nothing like Egypt, for posterity sake, it is probably necessary to look at the latter's state of affairs so as not to allow such seeds to be sowed in Malaysia.
Egypt is the second biggest recipient of United States aid, next only to Israel.
That makes Egypt and Mubarak American dependents.
With that, Egypt's or rather Mubarak's freedom in decision-making is curtailed and their foreign policies will definitely be streamlined to suit that of the US or at least not to outrightly oppose Washington.
Hence the accusations that Egypt and Mubarak are Washington's lackeys or stooges.
Mubarak's foreign policy, especially regarding Palestine and Israel, has been one of the strong rallying points for the demonstrators wanting the end of his rule.
This is especially with regards to his policies towards Gaza which are seen to be tailored to further impact the siege imposed by Tel Aviv on the Palestinian population.
In short, Mubarak's policies on Gaza are perceived, real or otherwise, as being streamlined to suit and support that of Washington's and Tel Aviv's.
The next question is how did he allow himself to compromise the concerns of Egyptians for the plight of Palestinians and serve the interests of Israel?
It goes back to the perception that he doesn't have much of a choice.
With an economy dependent on US aid, Mubarak may find himself out of office and a totally bankrupt Egypt if Washington chooses to withdraw the financial support.
The next question is, if Mubarak had danced to the tune played by Washington, why is it that the US seems to be abandoning him today?
As in the case of other leaders who had been stooges of the US, their continued rule had always been without popular support and when s uprising occurred, there was nothing much Washington could do to stop the tide.
The next best thing for Washington is to abandon the leader who had outlived his usefulness and start "nurturing" a new stooge.
As it is, there is a lot of suspicions that Omar Suleiman, the vice-president appointed by Mubarak last week, is with the approval of Washington and Tel Aviv.
In that sense Malaysia has been lucky to not end up being dependent economically on the US.
It could have happened in 1998 if Malaysia had turned to the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, both bodies whose policies and strategies are tailored to suit that of the US.
But it did not. But it could, maybe the next time Malaysia is saddled with another crisis.
And there is always a tin-pot American stooge wannabe waiting for the opportunity.
Malaysia, too, is not devoid of such candidates.
The tumultuous development in Egypt is not spared.
Most interesting is a "debate" on the Twitter social network in which, someone equated Egypt with Malaysia which led to strong protests by a few others who argued that Egypt is economically in tatters while Malaysia is booming.
Statistically, they are right. Egypt's unemployment rate is three times higher than Malaysia's (and Malaysia's is popularly said to be social and not economic driven).
As also in the case of the poverty line. While Malaysia's population living below the poverty line is capped at five per cent, Egypt's is at 20 per cent.
Other statistics, from inflation to public debt, shows Egypt and Malaysia being poles apart, with the latter showing impressive standing not far off from that of the developed nations.
In fact, Egypt is no comparison to Malaysia by all counts -- be it economic, living standards, political system or social development.
That being the case, how did the issue of "Malaysia being like Egypt" come about?
For some, it is about the hatred for the continued grip the Barisan Nasional and Umno have on the government.
For others, it is the need to spur demonstrations and other extraneous avenues other than the ballot box to bring about changes in the political system.
By equating Malaysia with Egypt, it gives some perverse legitimacy to the need to topple the existing government by whatever means.
In short, the dream of marching to Putrajaya after the 13th general election does not seem potentially realistic any more so much so the need to consider other options, no matter how remote it is.
If politics is the consideration in the need to equate Egypt with Malaysia, a "tweet" from an ardent critic of Kelantan Menteri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat said if there was any similarity with Egypt it should be the Pas-led Kelantan government.
In short, to him, if the Egypt "revolt" should be adopted in Malaysia, it should be replicated in Kelantan where Nik Aziz has helmed for more than two decades and has not shown any signs of wanting to let go anytime soon.
Then again, Nik Aziz and his fans will argue that he has only two decades to his name while Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak has three.
That is for Nik Aziz and his supporters to decide.
After all, Nik Aziz can remain the menteri besar for as long as he wants if the election process and the party favour it.
And this is regardless of how Nik Aziz and his ilk had repeatedly condemned Malaysia's flawed democracy, the very system that has propelled him and several other opposition leaders to the highest political positions they could never have dreamt of as an opposition.
Even though it has been stated earlier that Malaysia is, by all counts, nothing like Egypt, for posterity sake, it is probably necessary to look at the latter's state of affairs so as not to allow such seeds to be sowed in Malaysia.
Egypt is the second biggest recipient of United States aid, next only to Israel.
That makes Egypt and Mubarak American dependents.
With that, Egypt's or rather Mubarak's freedom in decision-making is curtailed and their foreign policies will definitely be streamlined to suit that of the US or at least not to outrightly oppose Washington.
Hence the accusations that Egypt and Mubarak are Washington's lackeys or stooges.
Mubarak's foreign policy, especially regarding Palestine and Israel, has been one of the strong rallying points for the demonstrators wanting the end of his rule.
This is especially with regards to his policies towards Gaza which are seen to be tailored to further impact the siege imposed by Tel Aviv on the Palestinian population.
In short, Mubarak's policies on Gaza are perceived, real or otherwise, as being streamlined to suit and support that of Washington's and Tel Aviv's.
The next question is how did he allow himself to compromise the concerns of Egyptians for the plight of Palestinians and serve the interests of Israel?
It goes back to the perception that he doesn't have much of a choice.
With an economy dependent on US aid, Mubarak may find himself out of office and a totally bankrupt Egypt if Washington chooses to withdraw the financial support.
The next question is, if Mubarak had danced to the tune played by Washington, why is it that the US seems to be abandoning him today?
As in the case of other leaders who had been stooges of the US, their continued rule had always been without popular support and when s uprising occurred, there was nothing much Washington could do to stop the tide.
The next best thing for Washington is to abandon the leader who had outlived his usefulness and start "nurturing" a new stooge.
As it is, there is a lot of suspicions that Omar Suleiman, the vice-president appointed by Mubarak last week, is with the approval of Washington and Tel Aviv.
In that sense Malaysia has been lucky to not end up being dependent economically on the US.
It could have happened in 1998 if Malaysia had turned to the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, both bodies whose policies and strategies are tailored to suit that of the US.
But it did not. But it could, maybe the next time Malaysia is saddled with another crisis.
And there is always a tin-pot American stooge wannabe waiting for the opportunity.
Malaysia, too, is not devoid of such candidates.
No comments:
Post a Comment