His desk is one sprawling clutter of printouts and financial analyses helpfully sent daily by an organisation headed by a friend -- a former prime minister of a neighbouring Asian country.
The hallway is in a different galaxy. It is virtually an art gallery. He owns more than 2,000 paintings. Some paintings are now worth 10 times what he paid for. He was chairman of the National Art Gallery before he joined the cabinet. The lawyer-turned-housing developer who later became finance minister (twice) is not selling.
The range of passions is bewildering. He is a fan of Datuk Shah Rukh Khan. Daim is a significant shareholder of a bank with many branches in Africa. He is chairman of the AFC (Asian Football Confederation) audit committee.
At 74, he plays badminton with increasingly younger mates. And, he displays a Manchester United replica jersey autographed by Sir Bobby Charlton.
"I am a busybody," he explained as he greeted New Straits Times journalists -- A. JALIL HAMID, RASHID YUSOF and HARIZ MOHD -- and photographer, ZAHARI ZAKARIA, to kickstart a series of exhaustive interviews.
Daim, who had precipitated a near-crash of the stock market in 1994 with his "sell" advice and later named "chief conspirator" by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, has since sparked a media frenzy for a new reason.
It is political punditry, having correctly predicted the outcome of the March 2008 general election; so the NST prodded him for new predictions. We probed his political allegiance and provoked him even as the sessions shifted focus from one hot topic to another.
By the time we were done, newer perspectives and insights had been gleaned from the political events of the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, the future of Umno, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, Anwar, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Lee Kuan Yew, to the rise of China and the Arab Spring (which he jokingly referred to as "the Arab Fall").
The resultant Qs and As will run in two parts. This instalment deals mostly with the immediate political questions.
"If you ask me, between the two, Najib or Anwar, I would choose Najib."
The second half of the interview, which will be published tomorrow, discusses, among others, key events in the "Mahathir Years".
Question: Tun, since your retirement, you have given a number of interviews to the Chinese dailies, but hardly any to the mainstream media. Any particular reason for this?
Answer: I have been asked to give so many interviews, but all they wanted to know is when will the elections be held and what is my prediction of the outcome. So, before the election, which I predict will be by next month (he laughs), this will be my last interview.
I don't want to give any more interviews because all of you only ask about the elections and it's quite tiresome.
Also, I don't want people to misquote me. I heard people say that I had said BN would win only three states. That is not true. You must read my answers in full. I said BN, in particular Umno, must work hard, stay united and put up the best candidates to win.
Yes, I have given interviews to Chinese press mostly. The Chinese wanted to understand the thinking of the Malays. To address their concerns, I must know what is in their minds, their fears and their aspirations and they wanted to know if our economic policies are right. They want peace in the country and they know to have peace, you need political stability.
Have you read their articles on government policies? Someone will whisper to the government about this or that paper, or that this writer is being anti-establishment.
I say, "Stop!" I have read their articles. While they do criticise, they are not being anti-establishment. You argue with facts and statistics. The process will produce a healthy debate.
Question: So, for you, being critical does not mean one is anti-establishment. Are you also saying that the pattern of voicing out may not necessarily cost Barisan Nasional votes?
Answer: Precisely. That is my central argument. I have always advocated a robust debate. Over the years, I personally do find certain policies objectionable, but I am still a supporter of the government as there are more good policies than bad.
For the rest of the nation, if you disagree with government policies, yes, go ahead and criticise, but constructively. I would fear more for the country if people gave up and didn't care. I believe that it is only when you care that you want things to be for the better, that you voice out. A passive passionless society will be a disaster for the country.
Question: Still on politics associated with the Chinese community, parallels had been drawn between DAP and PAP (People's Action Party). Is this a fair comparison?
Answer: I don't think there is much of a relationship.
I think Lee Kuan Yew does not have much respect for DAP's leadership. The quality is not there. Earlier on, yes, when they had a branch here, when Devan Nair was here, and Zain Azahari joined the PAP. Zain is still around and practises law. I think there were many intellectuals who joined the PAP. That would be the crowd who would follow Kuan Yew.
The PAP is more intelligent and more calculating, very suave in their approach. The DAP is really a Chinese party. It's not a multiracial party. It's chauvinistic, but claims to be Malaysian Malaysia.
You can see in its last party election, members don't want even a single Malay to be in the top leadership.
This is very clear. That is their idea of Malaysian Malaysia. Whatever their leadership may claim, their members are their main drivers.
Pas has similar problems.
When the issue of kalimah Allah cropped up, the leadership thought they could simply follow the lead taken by Anwar. But the grassroots responded by rejecting the stand of its leadership. And the Majlis Syura also said "no".
If the Chinese don't understand this, they will be sorely mistaken when push comes to shove.
Question: What about Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)?
Answer: PKR has always been a one-man show. Its history is a party fighting for Anwar. They are former Umno members. Later, some liberals joined them, taken in by the rallying call of justice and fairness, but it's just pure "sloganeering". It is actually fighting just for one man, not even for justice. Who have they fought for? What cause have they pursued? See the stand on Palestine. It is a question of justice and humanitarian cause. They support Israel.
Question: And Pakatan Rakyat?
Answer: When you are elected to Parliament, you debate in Parliament. We do it in a civilised way. We elect people and we address them as "The Honourable Member". PKR is a party born from the streets. So, it will always return to the streets. That is their culture. So, you can see demonstrations in the streets organised, or supported by them. Pas was never like that. The DAP was never like that.
Anwar had repeatedly said there would be Arab Spring-like demonstrations should Pakatan lose in the next general election because of what they deem as "cheating".
He has set the stage to justify their losses if they lose in the next general election.
Pakatan is prepping the people so that they can scapegoat the government and the Election Commission.
First, we are not an Arab country. And second, if there is rigging in previous general elections, how did Pakatan win five states in 2008?
Arab Spring has turned out to be Arab Fall (for the lack of a unifying leadership and instability it has induced).
Question: Arab Fall?
Answer: You should read the history of Egypt under King Farouk, then only can you understand the mood and feelings at the time of the coup in 1952.
I visited Egypt at the end of my studies in the late 1950s and it saddens me how these freedom fighters had failed to run their countries successfully.
They had failed to raise the standard of living of their people and during my last visit a few years back, there's still the same poverty.
You must read Gamal Abdul Nasser's Revolt of the Nile. It is a small book but it has frightened the West that they compared him with Hitler. We are not from the Arab World. You must understand the background of the Middle East, why it is not happening and will not happen here in the East.
You want deaths in our streets? You want to see bloodshed? (Pan Arab nationalism dated back to July 1952 when Gamal, a colonel in the Egyptian army, led his secret group "Free Officers" to overthrow King Farouk 1, who was the king of Egypt and Sudan.
(His successful revolt was made an example by several other military officers in the Arab world to dethrone their monarchs, including Iraqi General Abd al-Karim Qasim in 1958 (the coup against the Hashemite monarchy) and Libyan Muammar Gaddafi, who led a group of young military officers, to overthrow King Idris 1 in 1969.)
Question: What of Malaysian politics and the changing geopolitical landscape and events elsewhere?
Answer: China and Japan had demonstrated their qualities as genuine friends of this country at the height of the Asian Financial Crisis.
China decided not to devalue its currency, while Japan handed Malaysia a US$5 billion (RM15.6 billion) soft loan. Its then vice-finance minister Eisuke Sakakibara told me not to tell the Americans of the gesture.
The United States did not want to help us, for reasons too numerous to enumerate here.
Anwar has this tendency of toeing the American line.
If anything happens to Malaysia's economy, the US and European countries, whose economies are falling apart, would not bother to help.
If we keep toeing the American line, what would our friends think? They were the ones who helped us, while the US tried to sink us.
China is now the second largest economy and it is growing.
President Barack Obama has quickly visited Myanmar and tilted his foreign policy towards the Pacific, which is about balancing the influence of China.
There is already an economic crisis now in Europe, the US and Japan.
China, India, Brazil and Russia all are slowing down; we must not have the wrong team to manage the economy.
The danger here is somebody with no experience, who has shown no capability of handling the last crisis. There is going to be a big danger that we may go down. And nobody is going to help us. Because the US, their good friend, and Europe will not be helping us. They are in trouble themselves.
It is dangerous if Pakatan under Anwar is to lead the country. I am worried as he does not have the depth in economy, always needed people to tell him -- what to think and what to do.
So far, there has not been even one significant idea from Anwar as the economic adviser to the Selangor government.
Worse, Selangor has badly handled its water issue, which had dismayed developers, investors and the people. Of course, they will blame everything on the Federal Government despite the fact the Langat 2 water project was planned before they came to power in the state.
Why doesn't he become economic adviser to Kelantan and Kedah if Pakatan believes he is good?
Think seriously. Think of our future.
Question: Anwar believes that he is destined to become the next prime minister.
Think seriously. Think of our future.
Question: Anwar believes that he is destined to become the next prime minister.
Answer: Well, destiny is an act of God. You can be only one heartbeat away from that post but man proposes, God disposes. I think God still loves Malaysia (smiles).
Question: What are BN's chances in the general election? Will it be able to secure a two-thirds majority?
Question: What are BN's chances in the general election? Will it be able to secure a two-thirds majority?
Answer: There you go again, the election questions. Well, I would say Barisan will win. It is good that the government (BN) thinks it can get a two-thirds majority. That should be their target.
Umno has about 3.3 million members, MCA about one million and MIC, about 600,000. That's already about half of the voters. Now, you only need some support from the fence-sitters, you should then be able to win. But BN must put new and clean candidates who are acceptable to voters.
But before BN can win, there must be unity within the coalition. If they are not united, Pakatan will do better. That's what happened in 2008.
Stay united, be loyal and don't sabotage. We need a steady and experienced hand. Only BN has the experience.
We have gone through crisis after crisis, and recovered very quickly. We have to tell the Chinese that we cannot experiment. Look at Japan. Look around us. Look at Britain. Study what is happening.
Question: Personally, do you want to see Najib win this election?
Question: Personally, do you want to see Najib win this election?
Answer: If you ask me, between the two, Najib or Anwar, I would choose Najib. I will give Najib the chance. Give him the mandate and see whether he delivers because Anwar has had his chances, but he blew them.
I want Najib to win because I don't think Anwar is the right candidate to be prime minister.
I believe he will mess up the country by getting advice from the likes of the IMF (International Monetary Fund), World Bank and Wolfowitz (Paul Wolfowitz, former World Bank president).
I will support Najib, but he must fight corruption and crime, strengthen the nation's security and review the education system. Make English compulsory in all national schools. Without English, we are dead, especially the Malays. The Malays must realise, without English they cannot compete. We must insist on English as a second language.
It was not a mistake to change the medium of instruction from English to Bahasa Malaysia. It is the language of the nation and of unity. If we don't speak the same language, how do we understand one another?
The mistake was in the policies which were to promote Bahasa Malaysia, it had to be at the expense of English. We should not have to kill English to make Bahasa Malaysia the lingua franca of the country.
If possible, we should learn Arabic, because the rich Arab countries will be where the money comes from.
On the nation's security, every day in the media and on television, there are news reports of murder and crime. You say our country is safe, but if people don't feel safe, they will not believe you regardless of the statistics.
On corruption, tell the rakyat that the government is serious in wanting to get rid of it. But it cannot do it alone, it needs the rakyat's help. Raise the awareness of rakyat on the evils of corruption and get schools involved in it. Educate the students. If the government and rakyat work together, we can succeed. It is a two-way thing. The government alone cannot fight corruption. People must be clean and honest. Don't just blame the government. Tepuk sebelah tangan tak berbunyi. If people are honest and clean, the government, too, can be clean. The government must come down strongly on those who are corrupt.
Question: The pledges and promises Najib made, are they good for the country?
Question: The pledges and promises Najib made, are they good for the country?
Answer: Give Najib a chance. Five years. Test him. Give him the mandate. He is doing a fairly good job. Let's see him deliver and continue with his transformation policies.
Najib should reshuffle the cabinet. Bring in new faces. People think he is carrying too much deadwood in the cabinet. Most are already past their use-by date.
source : nst
Don't waste time on Anwar, says Daim
THIS is final part of the interview with former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin, who helped the Malaysian economy survive the 1997 Asian financial crisis.
Without mincing words, Daim discussed with New Straits Times journalists A. JALIL HAMID, RASHID YUSOF and HARIZ MOHD and photographer ZAHARI ZAKARIA the key events during the "Mahathir Years", including the events which led to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's downfall.
Question: Media reports suggested at the time of your departure from the cabinet in 1991 that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had three names in mind as the new finance minister -- Tan Sri Sanusi Junid, Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Was this indeed the case?
Answer: Rafidah was then the minister for trade, having been appointed to the post after the Team A versus Team B split in 1987. Sanusi was minister for agriculture.
Dr Mahathir wasn't too sure about Anwar. He said, "I don't think Anwar can handle the ministry of finance" given his academic background. He was a graduate in Malay studies.
My counter argument went along this line -- "I think if you want him to be your successor you have to groom him.
"I can help him and guide him, give advice."
In the end, I managed to convince Dr Mahathir.
Anwar used to come to my house very often to seek my advice on matters related to the ministry of finance.
He would also bring me to to his house for lunch very often. His aunt cooked my favourite dishes.
Question: Given that Anwar had later named you as the "chief conspirator" leading to his sacking from the cabinet in 1998, when did things actually turn sour?
Answer: There was no fallout between us until he started accusing me of being a chief conspirator. This is an old story. No one is interested in the whys and wherefores. It is the now and the future that people are interested in.
Really, we should not waste time with Anwar. He is past his use-by date. His time had come and gone.
I also think that you should not give so much news space to him. That's what he likes. He does not like to be ignored, so ignore him I say. He should be left to be the entertainer that he is, dancing and singing at ceramahs. As I said his time is gone, like a burung punggok merindukan bulan, (a dog barking at the caravans, and the caravans have moved on).
But as you keep insisting, I will answer. The best person to speak about Anwar is Sanusi. They were in school together.
They were in Abim (Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia) and in the cabinet, and Sanusi was secretary-general of Umno. Anyway, I promised to answer so I will answer.
Okay, my answer to Anwar -- I'm no Cassius. I maybe thin but I don't have the hungry look. And definitely, I'm no Brutus.
When Anwar claim- ed that I was the conspirator, he knows the truth that I played no part, no role whatsoever. I knew nothing about the case until I was told about it. I might be a busybody, but I do not interfere with people's private life. I don't want people to know about mine either. I don't want to know what people do behind closed doors. I'm not interested. People whispered to me, but I said, "Look, we are all human, we all have weaknesses."
But I understand he was under pressure, it was his political survival and he was a drowning man, clutching at whatever to keep himself afloat, plus he knew that I would never answer any allegations thrown at me. I thought I was his friend and he was in trouble, and I let it be.
I also thought that it was so farfetched that it was laughable. Anwar, for example said I took out RM2 billion cash by plane. I must be an idiot, and any way how much is RM2 billion cash? Probably a few lorries to transport!
At the end of the day, truth will always prevail. You can't hide it. If not today, one day, the truth would be told. In the case of his supporters, even if he were to do all that he is alleged to have done, right on the carpet in front of their eyes, they will not believe. To them, everything is a conspiracy.
Anwar's problem was that his image was whiter than white. When stories got around because he got this image, it's difficult for people to believe. In life, some things are too strange to be true but they are true.
As Sherlock Holmes said, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth".
There was a myth about Kennedy, too, but people did not talk about it during his lifetime. After his death, you read about him and what he did behind closed doors.
Question: There was talk back then that your motivation in ousting Anwar was that you were anxious about protecting your business interests?
Answer: That was his line, that he was this super hero fighting crime and corruption and, therefore, had to be brought down. If you know the things about him that I know, that line of his is hilarious, and the cheek of it all, to claim righteousness.
I had then retired and what business interests did I have? I had to sell all my assets before joining the government in 1984.
But later on, after I had left, when I was made chairman of the northern triangle, there was a clause in the agreement that I would be able to venture into business. I was not a member of the cabinet anyway.
I ventured overseas after my retirement. I didn't want to do my business in Malaysia. But after my banks overseas became successful I needed to have a bank locally, I bought a bank. You can check, it was very expensive, I paid higher than anybody else. At that time, the highest anybody ever paid for a bank. This was a one-branch bank. Later, I sold this bank, too, when I rejoined the government at the last financial crisis. I really should stop buying banks in Malaysia. Every time I buy one, I'm made minister of finance and have to sell them.
Immediately after my retirement, I went away to Harvard University, in particular to the Kennedy School of Government as a visiting scholar.
Anwar kept calling me in Boston. (He asked) why I stayed there and asked me to come back. He needed me to help him, but I said I was enjoying my stay. I met a lot of people.
It was at Harvard that I met Francis Seow (who once served as Singapore's solicitor-general). He was writing books. Interesting books. You should read his books. We became good friends and often exchanged views over lunch.
Then it was about the so-called "Daim Boys".
They were also very close with Anwar after I left.
Most were Malay College old boys. They were in school with Anwar.
Yahya (the late Tan Sri Yahya Ahmad) was his head boy and Halim (Tan Sri Halim Saad) was at the Malay College.
Anwar, through his accusations, repeated the lie that I wanted this contract and that contract, and that because he was in the way, I got rid of him. A lie repeated many times, unfortunately, becomes a truth.
What contract? I want to ask, which contract did I or my family secure? Show me.
Show me one single contract I got from the government.
So I have always maintained, the danger with Anwar is that Anwar is more Sukarno than anything else. All fiery speeches, completely economical with the truth and an instigator at his best.
Question: Was there a turning point, one that had caused a fall- out?
Answer: There was no particular fallout. I was his scapegoat, among many other scapegoats. I was his friend, Dr Mahathir defended him. I told him not to open the Pandora's box by making a police report but he thought he was clever.
I've told you earlier that you should not waste news space on Anwar. But you insist and I'm answering only to make the point that if you have Pakatan and him leading Pakatan, then we are heading down the road to disaster. He was tested during the Asian financial crisis and he failed. I also think that he failed not just because of his policies, but also of his motivation. Dr Mahathir, for example, was totally offended by the crisis. He could not bear to see what he had taken time to build destroyed because of the greed of speculators and financial vultures, and he wanted to make sure the country was safe again.
Question: Some commentators had pointed out that Anwar at the time of the crisis did not help by raising interest rates to such a high level?
Answer: In the case of Anwar, at that time, he was really badly advised.
Because all along we know, Anwar on his own did not know what to do.
He has to get people to advise him and that was OK so long as you get good advice.
And of course at that time he really liked (Michel) Camdessus of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and James Wolfensohn of the World Bank.
And he was also close to Robert Rubin (secretary of treasury of the United States).
All these people later came to endorse him.
But you see, different countries have different environments, different stages of development, different conditions.
It's not the same.
You look at what happened during that crisis to South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia and us.
There's Singapore, China and Japan.
During that time, Anwar's stance was "follow what was advised by the IMF and World Bank".
That would be a normal reaction -- in a crisis like this, you need some big fellows to come and advise.
Because if there's any trouble, the IMF and World Bank will come and assist.
And if America backs you, you are also okay. And America has big influence over the IMF and World Bank.
In the case of South Korea, it wanted to borrow from Japan so that it would not go down.
But America refused to help. America told the Japanese not to help, so it went down and mind you, South Korea was close to the US. Don't expect the US to support us.
At that time, Robert Zoellick, who was deputy secretary of state, made it known that the doors were open for the American companies to go in to pick up companies at fire-sale prices.
This was the case with Indonesia when they came in and took almost everything they wanted.
They killed Thailand, too.
We saw what was happening. Dr Mahathir understood.
He said: "What we built... will be destroyed".
Years of growth and stability will be wiped out.
And if we are not careful, there might be riots like in Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand.
Probably worse.
So, he had to think how to stop it.
Question: Based on your articulation on the political scenario, you are troubled not by Anwar's so- called misconduct but more of his character?
Answer: I'm worried that he has not got the depth on economics.
If he again becomes the finance minister or prime minister, his inclination is to take the American line.
America is in crisis, Europe is in crisis.
He likes to identify with Europe, America and Australia.
He tried to get Australia to support him, to condemn and say our election will not be fair, etc.
He talks of Arab Spring, but he said the Arab Spring here is not a revolution but through the ballot box.
He had been telling the world that he will win this election.
If PR were to lose, it would be because of unfair practices and mobs could then go to the streets to protest. He promised to form the government in September 2008. Everybody got jittery and many believed him. That is his style. He is all talk and promises. Now, he tells the world he will win.
But the government isn't even responding. There has never been riggings in elections here. Last election, they formed five state governments.
Otherwise, how did the opposition win so many seats if the government rigged elections?
No election is perfect in this world.
But he has started this, and the government must respond.
Anwar is conditioning the minds of the people here and telling the world PR will win but he knows he cannot win.
As I said earlier, I question his (and also Pakatan's) motivation. His personal ambition is so overriding and an obsession that he does not care that it will be at the expense of peace and stability in his country.
Can you imagine the scenario if Pakatan does not get to Putrajaya? He will go on to claim that it is rigged and then bring on the Arab Spring here. Instigate the people that under Barisan Nasional, their votes were stolen and they have to go out to the streets to reclaim their votes.
This will cause havoc and he won't care because his ambition overrides all other considerations. And Pakatan doesn't care, too, because they are on the same ride.
Read more: Don't waste time on Anwar, says Daim - General - New Straits Times http://www.nst.com.my/nation/general/don-t-waste-time-on-anwar-says-daim-1.241340#ixzz2OXnjaw7t
No comments:
Post a Comment