Sunday, April 7, 2013

Malaysia's Surreptitious US Funding


Understanding US Funding to Malaysian Civil Society


NILE BOWIE


In 2012, the New Straits Times came under fire for accusing NGOs and actors within Malaysia’s civil society of scheming anti-government activities in an article titled “Plot to destabilise govt,” by journalist Farrah Naz Karim. The NST piece claimed that because various NGOs received funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a non-profit foundation financed by the United States government, this was proof of a foreign destabilization agenda. Online news portal Free Malaysia Today published a counter argument written by Anisah Shukry, “NST report: ‘Ridiculous and rubbish’,” which contained valid refutations by accused figures in civil society who called on the NST to practice greater journalism ethics. Karim’s NST piece failed to substantiate these accusations with analysis and it was no doubt flawed, it is also clear that the author did not personally have a great deal of knowledge about the parties and institutions involved, evident in her erroneously referring to the Israeli government as the “Jewish government”. 


Although this article raised contentious sentiments and leveled serious accusations without a clear explanation, the issue itself should be critically examined. Its no secret that the National Endowment for Democracy has a presence in Malaysia, and according to its official website, it provides over $1 million USD to various projects in Malaysia each year. This funding has been perceived suspiciously because of the overtly political nature of the NED’s programs and the fact that senior US political figures have leading roles in the organizations active in Malaysia. According to the NED’s history statement on its official website, the CIA was responsible for distributing covert funding overseas throughout the 1960s, prompting the Lyndon B. Johnson administration to call for the establishment of “a public-private mechanism” to fund overseas activities openly. Alan Weinstein, one of the founders of the National Endowment for Democracy, was famously quoted in a 1991 interview with the Washington Post reaffirming, “A lot of what we [NED] do was done 25 years ago covertly by the CIA.” 



The National Endowment for Democracy is funded primarily through the US Congress, within the budget of USAID, the US agency for development assistance, which is part of the US State Department – this means that the money the NED gives to foreign countries comes from public funds paid by citizen taxpayers. Funding mostly flows to its two main component parties, the International Republican Institute (IRI) and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), both affiliated with the Republican and Democratic political parties in the United States. While the NED remains accountable to the US Congress and is required to publish its disbursements, this doesn't apply to the organizations that it in turn finances, such as the IRI and NDI, both the main recipients of funding in Malaysia. According to historian William Robinson, "NED employs a complex system of intermediaries in which operative aspects, control relationships, and funding trails are nearly impossible to follow and final recipients are difficult to identify." 

Saturday, April 6, 2013

Ambiga: Stop Deceiving The People

Hantu Laut

This is the problem with people who thinks they are cleverer than everyone else. They drown in their own intelligence and project themselves as unfailing and flawless.

In the case of Ambiga, who thinks she is the doyenne of the legal fraternity and considers Malaysians as plain stupid and easily duped, she must be suffering from "I am holier than thou" syndrome.

So, why not call the bluff, to bluff the people.... here. 

Did Prime Minister Najib inked the contract, or he just announced it, shall I say for posterity sake?

What guidelines is she talking about? 

Her guidelines, is she the law? 

Even countries like U.K and New Zealand did not legislate laws for caretaker governments preferring convention as the rule.

There was no ground rules laid down for a caretaker government in the Malaysian context. 

She is full of bluffs.

Is she eyeing a candidacy?

Najib would have just committed a moral offence if he had inked the contract, which I doubt he would do.

Over to you, Amiga! 

Stop deceiving the people.

Friday, April 5, 2013

Can You Trust Anwar Ibrahim?

Hantu Laut

Just over a month ago he said no witch hunt if Pakatan gets Putrajaya, but have now changed his tune to say otherwise, targeting Mahathir"s son Mokhzani as the first possible victim of the purge.

Look at the chaos he created in the selection of candidates in PKR, no one seems to trust him.Everywhere the same chaos prevail. 

In Labuan PAS has announced its candidate for Labuan when Anwar has promised Ibrahim Menudin of PKR to stand in Labuan.

In Sabah, PKR Sabah warlord Ansari Abdullah has announced his own list of candidates for the Sabah western zone. 

Can you trust this man to keep his word?

I have always said this man is bend on exerting revenge if he comes to power without due care and consideration for the welfare and future of this county. He throws his threat against Mahathir here.

He said "First, within 24 hours of Pakatan's swearing in, we will drop the prices of fuel for the whole country"

Can Malaysia sustain further reduction of fuel prices which have already been subsidised by the present government much below the market price? How much lower can he go? 

He knew very well the consequences of his unrealistic promises, yet he has no qualms in making them to fool the people, largely because he thinks Malaysians are too stupid to understand simple economics.

I can foresee this man will wreak havoc in this country if he is made prime minister.He will be too busy wrecking and breaking contracts and taking criminal actions against UMNO politicians and will have no time to administer the country.

Breaking contract is not as easy as he made it out to be, your break you pay, and it's the people's money, not his money, to pay compensation, or has he gone completely nut, no need to pay compensation.

The simpleton, who can't see beyond his nose will believe in his bullshit. 





Thursday, April 4, 2013

Election 2013: Testing times for Malaysia’s old media



Intended or otherwise, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak’s labelling of election 2013 as the “social media election” may have been acknowledging what is blindingly obvious to Malaysian voters: that the influence of its traditional media has somewhat diminished.

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak. Pic: AP.
As with other countries who have headed to the polls in recent years social media has usurped print media as the main channel to access voters. With more than one-quarter of the Malaysian electorate voting for the first time this year and a Facebook ‘population’ of some 13m, more emphasis has been placed on the social media effect, just as bloggers dominated alternative media ahead of the 2008 election.
But the election might yet prove a watershed for Malaysia’s slavish newspapers, which are struggling to remain relevant in the digital age, with readers and influence ceded to the their more vocal online counterparts such as Malaysiakini and Malaysia Today.
The print and broadcast media in Malaysia remains dominated by large media companies with close links to political parties associated with the ruling National Front coalition, and its international standing has been hammered in recent years.
The country fell 23 places in Reporters Without Borders’ 2013 World Press Freedom Index to 145th out of 179 countries ― the country’s worst showing in the benchmark since 2002. That placed it lower than Southeast Asian neighbours such as Brunei, Indonesia and Cambodia.
While its major English language dailies – The New Straits TimesThe Star and The Edge – have seen readers desert since 2008, they aren’t circling the plughole just yet. But the upcoming election might entrench the idea that the old media hasn’t moved with Malaysian voters.