Posted on by Kit

It is Ugly Singaporeans like Bilahari Kausikan who suffer the delusion that they understand the dynamics of what is happening in Malaysia

In the past few days, a top Singapore diplomat had been making waves with his delusion that he understands the dynamics of what is happening in Malaysia, causing him to pontificate on the do’s and don’ts for the Young Chinese in Malaysia.

Bilahari accused the “young Chinese in Malaysia” as being “delusional” if they believe that Malay dominance in politics can be replaced by a change in the system, claiming that this “dominance” will be defended “by any means”, including a possible political alliance between UMNO and PAS.

He said: “It is my impression that many young Malaysian Chinese have forgotten the lessons of May 13, 1969. They naively believe that the system built around the principle of Malay dominance can be changed.

“That may be why they abandoned MCA for the DAP. They are delusional. Malay dominance will be defended by any means.”

It is smart-alecks and Ugly Singaporeans like Bilahari who think they understand what is happening in other countries and even have the impertinence to prescribe how citizens in other countries should conduct themselves, such as expressing dismay that the young Chinese in Malaysia are abandoning MCA for the DAP, who are suffering from delusion.

Can these “delusionists” pretending to be realists state what are the “lessons of May 13, 1969” which he accused the young Malaysian Chinese of forgetting?

Those who follow closely the DAP’s political campaign will know that the DAP had never advocated a Chinese Malaysia but as stressed in the Battle for Gelang Patah in the 13th General Election, the Malaysian Dream which envisions Malaysia as a plural society where all her citizens are united as one people, rising above their ethnic, religious, cultural, linguistic and regional differences as the common grounds binding them as one citizenship exceed the differences that divide them because of their ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural and regional divisions.

As I had the occasion to say last week, whether Najib is ousted as Prime Minister or UMNO replaced as the leading political party in the government coalition, Malay political power is not threatened as a new Prime Minister will be a Malay and new coalition will be Malay-dominated reflecting Malaysia’s demography.
Malaysians accept the reality of a Malay-dominated political scenario but not the concept of Malay supremacy, which is against the bedrock principles of the Malaysian Constitution and the Malaysian Dream.

As rational and responsible Malay leaders in political, economic and social spheres have rightly pointed out, how can Malays be under threat when the government is headed by a Malay, state governments headed by Malays with the exception of Penang, the civil service is mostly made up of Malays, the army and police are mostly Malays and there are also the Malay rulers; and furthermore, the country had been ruled by UMNO for 58 years with a panoply of policies to protect and advance the Malays?

It is unfortunate that Ugly Singaporeans like Bilahari are giving grist to the mill of opponents who oppose Malaysia moving away from the politics of race to be replaced with the politics of issues, by continuing to spread the “delusion” that Malaysian politics is a battle between Malays and Chinese when it is increasingly about issues of freedom, justice, the rule of law and good governance.

[Speech (3) at the DAP Pengkalan Rinting Branch Anniversary Dinner in Johor Baru on Saturday, 10th October 2015 at 9 pm]

23 Replies to “It is Ugly Singaporeans like Bilahari Kausikan who suffer the delusion that they understand the dynamics of what is happening in Malaysia”

  2. If what Spore diplomat Bilahari says is true – ie it was naïve to believe that the system built around the principle of Malay dominance can be changed – it means DAP’s struggle all these years is in vain. He must have touched this nerve . Why else call him an ugly Singaporean, and even his country “mercenary prick” of South East Asia (per Tony Pua quoted)? You can be civil in disagreement.

  3. Bilahari used the word “Malay dominance”, not “Malay supremacy”. Even in this rebuttal article it has been conceded “ Malaysians accept the reality of a Malay-dominated political scenario but not the concept of Malay supremacy” – what’s the difference – dominance or supremacy- if it were not Malay dominance or supremacy, can there evolve 58 years after independence a more Malay dominated scenario than any time in the past?? Today within PR the DAP eschews PAS for betrayal but could not explain why nor do anything about partner PKR cozying up and lobbying for PAS to join Pakatan Harapan. Can this be explained? Bilahari is suggesting do not mix hope from reality. Reality is based on human nature: if you have dominance privileges etc, would you so easily give them up? Saying to get votes from the alienated is one thing, doing, when you have got their votes into power, is another!

  4. Bilahari’s opinion does not give grist to the mill of opponents who oppose Malaysia moving away from the politics of race. Unfortunately it does however undermine the grist of mill of proponents of freedom, justice, the rule of law and good governance over race & religion. His piece is just an opinion that record what he thinks is empirically the reality. He is not concerned in giving grist or undermining any particular political position. Contradict by all means but to react virulently by insults against what he opines only serves to confirm his argument of hope (than reality) and the fragility of that hope.

  16. PAP kakis love 2 C nonMalays in M’sia remain status quo
    No rock d boat

    They truly love d current MSiA serfs, willingly n dying 2 suck UmnoB’s bola n 2 b thrashed by UmnoB, begging 4 a few inconsequential minister posts (even though through back door) n some crumbs fr d gravy train

    They truly love nonMalays remain 2nd kelas citizens here, always kena yelled ‘Balik dis n dat’

    Only then, Singapore can continue 2 selectively pick dissatisfied talents fr M’sia without having 2 spent much on their earlier education

    A strong prosperous united M’sia (imagine 1 SGD = 1 or less MYR) is a disaster 2 d little red dot

  17. IT IS HIGHLY EXTRAORDINARY FOR SINGAPORE POLICY MAKER TO COMMENT CONTROVERSIALLY ABOUT ANOTHER COUNTRY’S POLITICS. Truth is ever since the second generation leader took over, only LEE KUAN YEW have done so and even then he maintained some reserve about commenting with Malaysia understanding full well its impact.

    What is Bilahari doing what only Lee Kuan Yew do? He is a retired policy maker given academic and bench warmer AND secondary Ambassador at large position. His comments are likely selfish in nature but should worry Singapore leaders because it betrays the self-loathing racist streaks in their rank that can lashes out at others because they can’t lash out at their masters because of their own self-dissapointment.

  18. “… expressing dismay that the young Chinese in Malaysia are abandoning MCA for the DAP, who are suffering from delusion.”

    Anybody won’t elect those suckers, who represent and care only for themselves without fighting and safeguarding your rights, needs and benefits, in your constituencies, moron?

Leave a Reply