The pragmatic and professional leaders

In Malaysia, we have seen a new approach towards inter state relations and a pragmatic approach towards economic development under the leadership of Abdullah Badawi. He has single handedly changed the whole mindset of his cabinet, from one of bickering, politiking to one of getting work done in a rational and professional manner. In Indonesia, under the leadership of Yudyoyono and the likes of its Defence Minister Juwono Sudarsono, the picture is very similar. The professional men are in charge and wanted to do so much for their countries. Unfortunately both are facing the same problems of tribal chiefs at the peripheral doing their best to undermine their authority at the central. What the central govt tries to do, the local chieftains will try to destroy. The arrest of Singaporean barges and Singaporeans in the Karimun case was nothing but piracy. And the tone and acrimony against the Extradition Treaty and DCA were just polemics with little substance. And in Malaysia, the opposition to the IDR were in the same vein. They would be lucky if Singapore participates and make the IDR a success. For the IDR can be the most competitive region vis a vis Singapore and can take away a lot of businessess from us. Once it has established itself as a reliable and credible economic zone, it will simply be irresistible for investors not to be there. It has so many comparative advantages if the tribal chiefs could be gagged and prevented from spilling or over turning the pot. The two countries are being held at ransom by the retards of their countries, the 'chiat liow bee' politicians.


Anonymous said...

Hi Redbean, I would like to know why you assume that the success of the IDR has to depend on Singaporean participation.

redbean said...

there are many ways of looking at it. the premises or assumptions of the IDR is to be a shenzhen to singapore, building on the spillover and complimentary relationship. this assumption means it exists through singapore.

also, in investing in malaysia, everyone is looking at singapore. if singapore is unwilling to go in, you can bet the americans and europeans will also hesitate. some will still going in, but the numbers will be greatly affected.

and being the biggest investors in malaysia, we have many small investors that can aggregate up into quite a big number.

all these will point towards the important role singapore will play towards the idr.

they can't be depending on indonesia or the thais to come in right? maybe some arab money will flow in. but the arabs are pretty smart businessmen and they too will be cautious if singapore is not in in a big way.

Anonymous said...

Why, oh why do they site the IDR in Southern Johore? Why not in Port Klang, or Penang or perhaps near the proposed oil pipeline in North Malaysia? There must be a good reason - attracting investors from Singapore. Otherwise why do they have to send Najib down to do the roadshow.

Anonymous said...

They didnt, initially. IDR began to our surprise, we were bystanders looking in from the outside. The atmosphere seemed stiff and unfriendly in the beginning.

But IDR will succeed only as well as their previous mega publicised projects like multi super corridors, bio valleys, offshore financial centers and million other projects did. Amid tall speculations and big dreams, they blow hot ballons and make grand speeches during the project launches. After some initial successes, the dreams usually fade away, died down. The anticlimax is that predictable. So do not over estimate the brains of your neighbors, for talk and posturing are the only things they are good at.

Besides money issues, they have earned the track record of poor execution and short span sustainability in major undertakings. These are the odds facing IDR.

IDR's announcement was a surprise to us, and since they neither plan it with nor invited our participation from the start, why do they change tacks after some time? Why do a country which doesnt believe in win-win, who up till recently are extremely protective, suspicious and unfriendly need to tap Singapore's participation if they could have done it alone?

Surely they must have realised that they dun have a choice, they couldnt get the initial right partners, that the project is too big for them, that they dun have the experience of the huge undertaking,that they lack finances, and that the huge risks they are exposed to are unacceptable .

Singapore on the other hand, being the world's most aggressive developer of international parks and business zones has tremendous resources and experience for projects of this scale. It is not just a one country thing but an entire feeder network of funds and foreign money, the whole works that is coming to Southern Johor, like it did in those Industrial Parks where Singapore has participated.

Without Singapore's participation, the funds that moves into IDR will be in trickles. With Singapore's participation, the entire dam wall is lifted and IDR's success is assured.

redbean said...

malaysia could have been a roaring successful country if they did not allow it to go to the dogs. they have many talented and sensible people. but tribal chiefs are too strong and they refused to use the isa to stop them. the recent threats of bloodletting in parliament is a good example. would foreign investors take this kindly?

the country has been held at ransom by the tribal chiefs for too long. they need to put them behind bars without trial.

only then can malaysia move forward. mind you, it was once the richest and most advanced country in southeast asia, like singapore. but we have gone to the moon and it is still stuck in the mud.

now, can they get rid of their tribal chiefs?

Anonymous said...

Getting rid of the tribal chiefs is I think an unlikely happenning, much like getting rid of the New Econmic Policy favouring the Malays. The Malay mentality is very hard to change now, after so many years of dependence on the NEP. I think Malaysia is regressing, despite the impressive buildings and mega-projects.

Anonymous said...

Hi Redbean, I would also like to know why you allow vulgar posters with his slanderous avatar to participate in your thinking blog.

redbean said...

you are referring to matilah. actually he is quite a nice guy. he doesn't mean to be personal. but he is one in perennial puberty, he needs to show his manhood in his chosen vulgar ways.

at times i like to kick his arse sore. but i know him long enough. he is not an unthinking foulmouth. he can talk sensible stuff.

so when he is bad, just take it that he had a bit too much of toddy. chat with him when he is sober and he can engage you on anything under the sky, quite sensibly and meaningfully.

perhaps when we keep our cool long enough, he will be less of an ass and be more like us: )

he has to grow up one day.

Anonymous said...

I knew just as well, Redbean. Thks for sharing. :)
We can all read here. All the nice attributes of a person can sadly, be overtaken by the way one carries himself or expresses himself.
Like it or not, the Net's not as free as we wish it could be. The anti-establishment/ gahmen/ r-catholicism expressions by him can be seriously damaging to his cause.
He may never get to grow up. :(