Rudyard Kipling"
“When you're left wounded on Afganistan's plains and
the women come out to cut up what remains, Just roll to your rifle
and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldier”
General Douglas MacArthur"
“We are not retreating. We are advancing in another direction.”
“It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it.” “Old soldiers never die; they just fade away.
“The soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and be the deepest wounds and scars of war.”
“May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't .” “The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his.
“Nobody ever defended, there is only attack and attack and attack some more.
“It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
The Soldier stood and faced God
Which must always come to pass
He hoped his shoes were shining
Just as bright as his brass
"Step forward you Soldier,
How shall I deal with you?
Have you always turned the other cheek?
To My Church have you been true?"
"No, Lord, I guess I ain't
Because those of us who carry guns
Can't always be a saint."
I've had to work on Sundays
And at times my talk was tough,
And sometimes I've been violent,
Because the world is awfully rough.
But, I never took a penny
That wasn't mine to keep.
Though I worked a lot of overtime
When the bills got just too steep,
The Soldier squared his shoulders and said
And I never passed a cry for help
Though at times I shook with fear,
And sometimes, God forgive me,
I've wept unmanly tears.
I know I don't deserve a place
Among the people here.
They never wanted me around
Except to calm their fears.
If you've a place for me here,
Lord, It needn't be so grand,
I never expected or had too much,
But if you don't, I'll understand."
There was silence all around the throne
Where the saints had often trod
As the Soldier waited quietly,
For the judgment of his God.
"Step forward now, you Soldier,
You've borne your burden well.
Walk peacefully on Heaven's streets,
You've done your time in Hell."
Making a stand with Hindraf and PSM by Commander (Rtd) S Thayaparan formerly of the Royal Malaysian Navy
Friday, February 08, 2013
"Associate yourself with people of good quality, for it is better to be alone than to be in bad company." - Booker T Washington COMMENT
That's right; it is Indian-bashing season again. This close to
elections Indians are told to get with the Pakatan Rakyat programme by
anonymous DAP apparatchiks and Pakatan kool-aid drinkers. The
Indian vote is depending on the sensibility of the Pakatan supporter is
either considered insignificant or crucial, but the narrative put
forward is that Indian rights groups like Hindraf and the Human Rights
Party, and to a lesser extent Parti Socialis Malaysia (no doubt because
of the heavy Indian presence), are possible spoilers for the Pakatan
quest to Putrajaya.
The
Indian community is vilified with choice epithets like "beggars",
"ignorant","toddy drinkers" "snakes", etc, with middle-class
Pakatan-supporting Indians attempting to cajole their brothers and
sisters into siding with Pakatan as if those poor unfortunate souls are
unaware of the systemic discrimination that they face under the Umno-led
regime. It is the same stupid attitude on display whenever Pakatan
supporters discuss the Orang Asli "problem". The theme this time
is of legitimising marginalised groups. Two examples of how dominant
groups legitimise minority interest is the U-turn by BN on the Hindraf
ban and the reluctance of Pakatan in admitting PSM into its coalition.
Concerning the latter, it would seem a no brainer politically and
morally for Pakatan to embrace PSM as fellow travelers on its journey to
Putrajaya. Politically, because of late Pakatan has credibility issues
when it comes to their principles. There have been far too many
instances where Pakatan has waffled when they should have remained firm,
and has embroiled themselves in unnecessary controversies because of
political ineptness and provided evidence of their racialist tendencies
when they are supposed to be a multiracial, "class" objective coalition. PSM, on the other hand, has remained a credible consistent force when
it comes to its socialist principles and the internal workings of its
political party. They have publicly made stands against the systemic
discrimination that plagues this land and have not wavered even in the
face of political expediency or racial advantage.
Members of
this recent political party have been at the grassroots level opposing
this regime far longer than the newbie but powerful potentates that
Pakatan has created. If real change is the name of the game, then the
players who are aware of how the rules disadvantage a majority of
Malaysians who belong in the periphery of the political game should be
welcomed into the alliance as valuable assets.
The choice is obvious
Of
course, now PSM is involved in a tussle with the influential DAP over
the Jelapang seat in Perak. This no doubt contributes to the reticence
of Pakatan of welcoming PSM into the fold. Whatever ones view on who
should eventually take the seat, right-thinking Malaysian should not
allow these power plays to distract from the fact a credible political
force which could act as a buffer against the baser political instincts
that plague most successful political entities is being denied a seat at
the table.
Morally, the choice should be obvious. The work of PSM leader MD Jeyakumar (left) speaks for itself (and whose speech
at the KL112 Himpunan Rakyat, is a clear indication of the kind of
government the PSM would like to see created) but there are others like S
Arutchelvan who has propagated the cause of grassroots level activism
that has been a great benefit to Pakatan. You do not have to
look very far to witness the passion of PSM adherents like KS Bawani and
the temperament that would be introduced into Pakatan if organisations
like PSM were to be made an integral part of the alliance. At
the end of the day, to any right-thinking Malaysian, the reluctance of
Pakatan in admitting PSM into its ranks says a lot more of Pakatan than
it does about PSM and none of it any good.
Concerning the
government's reversal on the Hindraf ban, the head of think-thank Centre
for Policy Initiatives' Dr Lim Teck Ghee articulates three issues that
are relevant to the discussion at hand. On the political nature of the
reversal, Lim says: "This is obviously a move calculated to win
Indian votes in the coming elections rather than a fundamental shift in
the BN's resolve to address the marginalisation of the Indian community
and the many problems that the community - especially the Indian poor -
face. To deny that this is an election ploy is to insult the
intelligence of Indian and other Malaysian voters." The second issue is the effects this has on the Indian vote, of which he says:
"I do not think so but much depends on Hindraf's response. The movement
is seen by many Indians as one of the few if not sole Indian
organisation committed to the Indian struggle for equal rights and
justice. "Even if the BN publicly accepts Hindraf's blueprint, I
do not see why Hindraf should give BN the nod of approval at this
critical stage. There is in fact nothing to prevent BN from going back
on its promises or for the home minister to declare a new ban on Hindraf
again or to do even worse once the elections are over." And finally the big issue, will the Indian vote shift back to BN? Lim notes:
"The BN has a long history of sweet talk - and often double talk.
Indians especially have been the victim of BN empty promises and the
great majority of Indian voters are fully aware of this. Until there are
fundamental changes in national policies affecting minority communities
- of which there is no evidence - I do not see why Indians should throw
their support behind the BN simply because of the home minister's
change of heart." The better horse to bet on
While I agree with Lim's assessment, there is another issue that needs
to be addressed. Hindraf is a non-partisan organisation. Like any other
rights group, its special interest needs to be addressed and even though
Pakatan may think otherwise, Hindraf does have the support of
marginalised Indian communities across Malaysia. The question
here is which political alliance would best serve that interest.
Ignorant comments are made that Hindraf is not "principled" but as any
right-thinking Malaysian understands, Hindraf would be unprincipled if
they chose to commit to an alliance because it was politically expedient
to do so or politically correct in this partisan climate at the expense
of its stakeholders.
Just as Himpunan Hijau have committed to
working with Pakatan (in Pahang) because the alliance verbally agreed to
shut down the Lynas plant in Gebeng if it came into power, the needs of
other rights groups should be taken into consideration. Since
the alternative alliance is dominated by the other two main ethnic
groups and there is plenty of evidence that the needs of the Indian
community have been marginalised in Pakatan states - P Uthayakumar (left) in my interview with him,
provided a litany of grievances all documented from verifiable sources -
Pakatan (my preferred choice as a Pakatan partisan) should engage with
Hindraf to sustain its multiracial credentials and as evidence that it
is sincere in its social justice cause.
The alliance should do
whatever is necessary to convince Hindraf leadership that Pakatan is the
better horse to bet on, not of winning Putrajaya but rather in its
commitment in solving the problems of the marginalised Indian community
even if only at a state level. Pakatan is labouring under the
misconception that Hindraf brings nothing to table. In an
election that may come down to the wire, every vote counts. While
Hindraf may not for whatever reason choose to engage with BN, another
possibility is that the Indian community may abstain from voting -
choosing neither devil - which could be a very real possibility since
neither coalition seem interested in committing to solving the problems
that only Hindraf and the Human Rights Party highlight in any sincere
way.
Hindraf leadership have been extremely sophisticated in the
manner it has gone about cultivating grassroots support from the Indian
community and the said support is dependent on Hindraf delivering what
it has promised. However as far as dealing with BN, Hindraf has to be
aware that it is never a good idea drinking from the poisoned chalice.
At the end of the day, much will depend on how the Malay vote swings.
Both sides assume that they are the favoured to win the Malay vote. If
Pakatan were mistaken in this belief than every vote, counts and it
would be a shame if a certain section of the Indian community falls back
into apathy because Pakatan (again) made another politically inept move
only this time not recognising the gains Hindraf brings to the table. Malaysiakini
