Permit me to respond to Abdul Malik's letter entitled, "Let us keep our Malay special rights".

Firstly it was strange that this topic should be brought up by Abdul Malik in respond to Khoo Kay Peng's letter entitled, "No room for personal agenda behind peace efforts". (Feb 28, 2003).

Reading Khoo's letter over and over again, I could not find any implication or insinuation against Malay rights or a criticism of Islam. Rather Abdul Malik's response was like a knee-jerk reaction to any comment made by a non-bumi o­n Islam. I stand corrected if Abdul Malik could refer the passage in Khoo's letter that supports his conclusion.

In any event I am glad that he brought up the issue of Malay rights. But before Umno Youth gets the police to raid malaysiakini again to find out my identity for possible charges of sedition, let me say, "I support Malays rights". So please calm down and hear me out.

Malaysia since independence have struggle to find a national identity that all can agreed upon. The British wanted to give equality to all the races in Malaysia. This was rejected by the Malays and some Chinese (Tun Tan Cheng Lock for o­ne). Malay special rights as enshrined in the constitution were deemed necessary to protect the Malays from the more aggressive Chinese and Indians.

The Chinese and Indian newcomers have been toughen by years of impoverishment, famine and political upheaval in their homeland. They survived by not o­nly hardwork but also by using their wits, by legal and illegal means. Corruption is fact of life accepted by the Chinese. So is the concept of "survival of the fittest" and also the idea, "that nobody owes them a living".

Tunku Abdul Rahman, our first prime minister thought he understood his people well. He thought the Malays were not interested in creating wealth. That they would be happy in their kampung, easily satisfied as long as the government provide them with mosques, schools and better amenities and perhaps a little help in their daily lives. He thought the Chinese were not interested in politics, but o­nly in commerce. He thought he had it all figure out and proclaimed himself the "happiest prime minister".

When Lee Kuan Yew and his party, the PAP, started making inroads into Malaya with the idea of a "Bangsa Malaysia" and threatened the political control of Umno, it was necessary to "kick" Singapore out of Malaysia, rather than risk a racial riot. But the problem did not go away. Uniting the nation with o­nly the issue of the Malay language did not satisfy the aspirations of the masses.

Some Malays branded as "ultras" including our present prime minister and Musa Hitam had higher aspirations for the Malays. Many Chinese continue with the "Bangsa Malaysia" idea which necessary meant equality for all.

The May 13 racial riots in 1969 was peculiar. In that the Malays, or rather Umno did not lose political control of Malaysia, but rather saw a huge loss in many of their parliamentary and state seats. The celebration of the Chinese political parties and the racial remarks incited the riots. Some say that the Malays (meaning Umno) were frustrated that they not o­nly do not have control over the economy but now saw the beginning of the end of their political power.

The second prime minister, Tun Abdul Razak, saw that it was necessary to correct the figures. Thus the New Economic Policy was formulated to give the Malays more share in the economy.

With Malay rights and the NEP, Malaysia saw a great mobilisation of resources and social engineering ever undertaken in this world to correct the imbalance of wealth and opportunities.

The end result of the NEP and Malay rights saw a great improvement in the Malays' lot. Some opposition still see it as at their cost. Many question the implementation, and not the rights itself. Does making 100 Malay millionaires just to balance 100 Chinese millionaires equals success of the NEP? That question was later asked by the supporters of our ex-deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim.

Whatever their motive was for raising the issue, the fact was some Malays themselves were questioning the implementation of the NEP. Things got out of point when the issue was changed or rather confused with Malay rights. Some Malays themselves called for the doing away of the NEP, and it came as a surprise when the government announced the demise of the NEP. There was no outcry.

Nevertheless, Malay rights still guarantees the Malay a place in places of higher education and the government sector. The resentment of the non-bumis is still o­ne of proportion. How much should be reserved for the Malays? The focus of complaints of the non-bumis now no longer centres o­n the economy, since our prime minister has brilliantly shown his handling of the economy in recent years at the height of the recession.

Non-bumis complained more of fairplay in the education sector. A brilliant non-bumi student could not get a place of higher learning. Others complained of being given a course that they are not interested. Hence our Education Ministry can easily said that 30 percent of the places in universities were offered to the non-bumis but they chose not to take it up. UTAR, private colleges and overseas education are the wayout for the non-bumis. Nevertheless the resentment remains.

Lately Islamisation of the nation especially the education system has worried many quarters. If not for our PM who voiced his concern, many would not have similarly done so in the newspapers. The private agendas of school principals and the teachers is a worrying factor.

People like our letter writer, Abdul Malik, is going through a guilt or denial process, not quite able to justify his feelings. Let me explain it this way. o­n the o­ne hand, he benefits from the NEP and the reservation of Malay rights and enjoys the benefit of a modern education, which necessarily means exposure to the Western ways of living and thinking. o­n the other hand, he was brought up as a Muslim.

Some, like PAS, feels that the old ways of Islam as practised in the ancient Middle East kingdoms is the best example to follow. Therefore Western ideas are corrupted. To them, Malay rights and NEP are not necessary. Others, like our PM, wants Islam to move forward. The problem is Malaysia has no role model.

Malay rights and NEP had served Malaysia well since independence. It may not have been the best method, but nevertheless it had kept our country peaceful. Malays have a tough question. Can they have what the non-bumis have without compromising their religion? Many Malays now think you can't have both ways.

What threatens the future of Malaysia, and I believe our PM had already foresaw this, is globalisation and the opening of our markets. In the past, Malays may fear the aggressive Chinese immigrants. Today, the world fear the mighty growing economy of the China.

I was in Shanghai recently, and I can say the aggressiveness of the mainland Chinese in business and their rapid development scared me. Malaysian Chinese would not be able to match them. What more can our protected Malays do against the hordes from China? Globalisation necessarily mean no protection and no government subsidies for us Malaysians. Perhaps globalisation is not the best thing for us. All Malaysians will need some protection from China.