Capo di Tutti Capi...

OK,whose brilliant idea was it to suggest that we have a Grand Mufti? I rather expected better from the DG of IKIM.

It's like this...having a Grand Mufti doesn't mean that any of the problems of different interpretations are going to be solved. In fact why don't we stop thinking of the diversity of opinion as problems, and simply accept them as what Islam is all about. And there is nothing wrong with that.

Secondly, I can just imagine the types of power struggles that will ensue the minute an institution like Grand Mufti is established. Who gets to be GM and how? Are they to be selected from the 13 state muftis? What criteria? Do they vote among themselves like Cardinals and then we wait for the black smoke to rise when they have decided?

Let me tell you about my nightmare scenario. The most senior mufti will get to be GM. Now who might that be? The current head of the National Fatwa Committee is, guess who, the Pope of Perak. This pretty much makes him Capo di Tutti Capi. Which means he will naturally become The Godfather.

We can just imagine what sort of fatwas will then ensue. And how much power will such a GM have? It's one thing to have political power where you have to go back to voters every five years. But someone pretty much mandated to represent what he thinks God wants us to be and do? Show me any PM who will go against a GM who claims that everything he says is divinely sanctioned!

The great thing about Islam is that we have no priesthood, no intermediaries between us and God. We are tasked to think for ourselves about our faith, because that process is part of faith, not just blind obedience to what someone else says. Why should we then give that very basis of faith to an institution like GM? A GM is not infallible, he ( and again it will always be a he) is human and can make mistakes. But how are we going to know when he makes a serious mistake? More importantly, how are we going to get rid of him when he makes a mistake?

The GM of Australia ( which by the way is a pretension in itself. He is after all only the GM of Australian Muslims, who are a minority. I even wonder if he represents ALL Australian Muslims.) got into serious trouble for calling women without hijab uncovered meat. Imagine if our GM said the same thing. Are we going to react the same way? As it is, our politicians only react negatively when opposition politicians cum religious leaders say something awful, they never do it if it comes from someone on 'their' side.

There are some GMs that are quite good. I have met the Grand Mufti of Bosnia, Mustafa Ceric who, when I introduced myself to him, responded by giving me a bear hug ( he has many reasons to be grateful to Malaysia ). I've seen him on BBC's Hard Talk talking about the very real religious and political issues in his country, such as the burning of churches etc. He's pretty savvy. But I'm not sure we have a Mustafa Ceric in this country.

So let's just put this idea to rest. What we really need is the open space and freedom of speech for us all, ulama or not, to discuss religious interpretations without fear of being called names or facing death threats. That freedom is what Islam is all about so we should respect that. It's the only way that just and equitable interpretations will come to the fore.

Cut off...from my blog!

Hi all,

Many apologies for not posting anything for the past few days. I am in Jakarta visiting my inlaws and just could not access anything ever since the earthquake in Taiwan.Finally found another server that can access Blogger.

Thanks for all the comments and good wishes! Will resume postings shortly.

Meantime, I wish everyone Selamat Hari Raya Aidil Adha and Happy New Year and may 2007 be brighter and more peaceful than 2006!

Merry Christmas!!

Wishing one and all a very Merry Christmas!

While we eat our turkey and Christmas pud, do spare a thought for the very wet and cold folks down in Johor.

Peace on earth!

More info on getting 'em clean and dry

UPDATE: There have been more floods in Johor and people there are still miserable and need help. The Red Crescent is doing the best they can but they need more, and urgent, help. Raja Zarith Sofia, Chair of Community Services for the Malaysian Red Crescent Society is appealing for money so they can buy stuff. Please send cheques to Persatuan Bulan Sabit Merah Malaysia (PBSMM), Cabang Johor Bahru, Public Bank a/c no 3110939317.




You can also send stuff to the Red Crescent. They have a Bilik Gerakan/ Flood Relief Centre at the Puteri Pacific Hotel, JB. Enquiries and donation Hotlines: 07-219-9995, 07-219-9996.

They need foodstuff, foam mattresses, blankets, disposable nappies, women's underwear, sanitary pads, also cheques and NEW clothes.

Please do pass on this message on your blogs (thanks cosmic freak!) and on sms.

cheers!

Get 'em clean and dry!

Folks,

Down south, mostly in Johor, there are some 75,000 people who have had to leave their homes and are feeling very wet, cold and hungry. So, if you can, please donate blankets, pillows, mats, baby food, underwear ( CLEAN ones only please!) and clothes, baby diapers and other essential items. You can send them to the Dewan Serbaguna at Parliament House, or to the Kontena Nasional outpost in PJ.

Please also pass the message on to whoever you think can help, and can mobilise donations. They don't need money, they need these items urgently.

Thanks a lot.

And we think we're developed?

The following is a remarkable story about what happens when people get really really fed-up;

women launch Zimbabwe People's Charter

Starting from separate locations, more than 800 members of Women Of Zimbabwe Arise and Men Of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA/MOZA) recently marched to Parliament in Harare to launch a People's Charter .

Following the brutality with which police had previously attacked WOZA protests, members, who had come from all around the county to join the march, were surprised upon being told that they could go back to their homes after being warned that they were demonstrating illegally, according to a press release .

"At one stage a senior police officer asked the group who the leaders were and when he was told everyone is a leader, he then took five members from the main group, including two men and an elderly woman on crutches, loading them onto the back of a police vehicle and taking down their names. "

"A Human Rights lawyer who was on site questioned this and some time later the five were made to rejoin the rest of the group."

"The response to the People's Charter from Zimbabweans all over the world has been overwhelming and today was no different."

"Pedestrians in downtown Harare rushed to receive copies of the Charter from the marching groups and in fact, the only WOZA items that remain in custody tonight is the People's Charter and placards including those calling for 2008 Parliamentary and Presidential elections."

"The reaction of the Zimbabwe Republic Police today was a victory for WOZA's non-violent strategy and for the power of social justice."

"The WOZA leadership would like to commend the Zimbabwe Republic Police for showing that they are human beings also requiring social justice in their lives."

The involvement of interactive women's and men's groups in the declaration of a People's Charter furnishes the nation with the opportunity to draft a constitution providing for government comprising women's and men's legislatures presided over by an executive of elders accompanied by courts of women's and men's jurisdiction as the most fair and equitable form of governance.

21 December, 2006

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And just read this incredible People's Charter!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE PEOPLE’S CHARTER
Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA)
07 December, 2006
THE ZIMBABWE OF TODAY

Zimbabweans are living in a state of fear and uncertainty. They suffer discrimination in all its forms and are unable to earn a living. Levels of poverty are high; unemployment is at 82% and inflation at four figures. Non-existent service delivery also makes life difficult. Access to education, housing and other basic needs is now only for the rich. The HIV/AIDS pandemic, which has created thousands of orphans and child-headed households, is a social catastrophe compounded by a failed healthcare system and little or no access to ARVs. Further loss of valuable human resources is happening due to people leaving the country in large numbers. People have been unsuccessful at holding their government accountable due to a raft of repressive laws and shrinking freedom of expression/media space. Corruption at all levels of government and the politicisation of all aspects of society has led to chaos and disorganization in every sector.

WHAT IS OUR MISSION

Women and men of WOZA will initiate a non-violent campaign. Our aim is to mobilise Zimbabweans to demand social justice from their leaders. The time has come to put the past behind us and start building a better tomorrow. We will hold existing leaders accountable and mobilise people to the movement to demand leaders who will deliver all aspects of social justice and a genuinely people-driven constitution.

WOZA CONSULTING ON SOCIAL JUSTICE

Since January 2006, WOZA has carried out consultations on social justice across the country. In 284 meetings, almost 10,000 rural and urban people told us what they want in a new Zimbabwe. We wrote down what they said and the result is the People’s Charter.

This is the Charter below. We want to know what you think about it. Please read it with your family, friends and community and let us know if you agree with what is written. If you do, please sign your support for the Charter and the possibilities it could bring.

THIS CHARTER WAS WRITTEN BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE.
AND PEOPLE MUST DEMAND IT. UNITED WE CAN MAKE IT A REALITY.
Let us know what you think about the Charter by writing to us at WOZA/MOZA, P.O. Box FM 701, Famona, Bulawayo or emailing us at wozazimbabwe@yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DREAMING OF A NEW ZIMBABWE

THE PEOPLE’S CHARTER

Zimbabweans, united and resolute, announce:

That after 26 years of independence, the freedoms and equal opportunities we were promised have not been fulfilled;

The dreams we had of a good life – of dignity, comfort and security - have become nightmares. Zimbabweans must dream once again and turn their dreams into a living reality.

We must keep in mind, however, that we deserve better and we must not be afraid to believe that we have the right to a brighter future and we have the right to contribute to building it.

And therefore, we, the people of Zimbabwe, women, men and children, of all races, tribes and religions, come together with respect for each other and as equals to adopt this Charter, knowing that united we can deliver its possibilities;

And we undertake to work together with strength, courage and hope, until all Zimbabweans can live in a genuinely democratic country in peace and with dignity.

We shall all be Free and Equal

All Zimbabweans shall be equal, regardless of gender, physical ability, colour, national origin or tribe. Women’s and children’s rights shall be promoted and protected;

We shall be educated about the rights and freedoms guaranteed to us by our Constitution and by international law, both regional and universal; and shall enjoy them freely;

We shall be free to meet, organise and speak our minds without fear or intimidation.

People Participating in Governance

People shall be informed of and encouraged to participate fully in all aspects of how the country is managed and run, fully exercising their rights as citizens;

Any person born in Zimbabwe shall be allowed to become a citizen of the country. Birth certificates, national identity documents and passports shall be easily available for all citizens;

People shall be free to choose the leaders they want, without fear and intimidation. Leaders at all levels shall be chosen through free and fair elections, without rigging;

Women must also be encouraged to take up leadership positions to ensure gender balance;

There shall be an independent electoral supervisory commission to oversee the conduct of elections and elections shall be monitored by neutral observers, both local and international;

People shall be free to belong to the political party of their choice and shall not be discriminated against because of the party they support;

All other arms of government, especially civil servants, police and army, shall be non-partisan and shall effectively serve the interests of the people.

The Leaders We Want

All leaders shall be responsible, care for the people they serve and take their issues and problems to heart, taking action to develop their communities;

Leaders at all levels shall respect all people equally, listen to their concerns, consult them when making decisions and feedback to them;

Leaders shall understand that they will be held accountable and accept that the people who elected them have the right to criticise policy;

Leaders at all levels shall publicly renounce corruption and nepotism;

Traditional leaders (chiefs and headmen) shall not be chosen by politicians but by traditional methods. They shall be non-partisan and stay in the communities they serve, rather than sit in Parliament.

Justice in the Law

There shall be a new constitution - written by the people of Zimbabwe for the people of Zimbabwe;

All unjust laws that deny basic freedoms shall be repealed;

There shall be rule of law and no single person will be above the law of the land and everyone shall have equal access to fair and just treatment under the legal system. Law breakers will be pursued, prosecuted and punished without regard to their political affiliation;

The judiciary shall be independent and non-partisan, committed to upholding the law and promoting a culture of justice;

Prisoners shall be treated with dignity, kept in humane conditions and given access to rehabilitation. Juveniles will not be treated as adults by the police, the courts or the prisons.

This Land is our Land

The Land Redistribution Programme needs to start again and land be distributed fairly to any Zimbabwean – of any colour or gender – who will use it properly for the benefit of the country;

There shall be respect for property rights;

Farmers shall be helped with loans and inputs, so that they can develop the land productively;

Farmers shall receive a fair price for their produce and shall be allowed to trade freely.

Wealth and Prosperity

Government shall make every effort to bring development, infrastructure and prosperity to all parts of the country, both rural and urban, equally;

Government shall encourage investment in commerce and industry that shall create employment and promote prosperity for all Zimbabweans;

Government shall make every effort to control inflation by promoting production;

Zimbabweans require a transparent and fair system of taxation with feedback on how their taxes have been spent;

Government shall genuinely act to stamp out corruption and not let it continue to destroy our economy;

Real currency shall return and our money shall have real value once again.

The Right to Earn a Living

All people shall have the right to earn a living so that they can be dignified and do not need to rely on handouts to survive;

There shall be enough employment, with decent working conditions and a liveable wage; equal pay for equal work.

There shall be access to resources to start self-help projects, especially for youth and widows;

People should also be allowed to trade; licenses and stands shall be fairly distributed.

Good Living

There will be enough food for everyone;

All basic commodities shall be available and affordable. If necessary, there shall be price controls to make sure that everyone has access to them;

Every person shall have access to decent, affordable housing. Rents shall be lowered and there shall be respect for property rights;

All areas, both urban and rural, shall have affordable access to the services necessary for safe, healthy living – clean water, proper sewerage and sanitation systems and refuse collection;

All areas, both urban and rural, shall have affordable, regular access to electricity;

There shall be a regular, affordable public transport system that provides adequate coverage of all areas of Zimbabwe. The elderly should be allowed free local travel;

The vulnerable in our society shall be protected; the elderly, widows, people living with HIV/AIDS, orphans and the disabled shall be properly cared for by the state;

All people shall have the right to rest, sports and recreation.

Educating the Nation

Every child shall have equal access to an education without any form of discrimination. Those who cannot afford it shall have access to financial assistance;

Primary education shall be free and secondary education affordable as we were promised in 1980;

All students shall have a good quality education, taught in classrooms with enough resources – books, desks and equipment.

There shall be enough qualified teachers committed to educating the next generation. We must respect their contribution enough to give them a living wage.

We Want to be Healthy

There shall be adequate access to good healthcare, which shall be affordable for all Zimbabweans;

Hospitals and clinics shall have enough medicines and equipment;

Those living with HIV/AIDS shall have adequate access to Anti-Retroviral medication; those who cannot afford to pay shall be given the medicine and, if necessary, food aid for free;

The elderly shall not have to pay for medical treatment or medicines.

There shall be enough qualified medical staff committed to treating people with dignity and care. We must respect their contribution enough to give them a living wage.

People shall be allowed to die with dignity; burial charges must be affordable.

Access to Information

There shall be independent radio stations, newspapers and television stations that shall provide accurate, independent information; News reporting shall be balanced, unbiased and all political parties shall receive equal coverage.

Righting the Wrongs

There should be a meaningful apology made by those responsible for Gukurahundi and a truthful explanation of why it happened;

Survivors of Gukurahundi and family members of the ‘disappeared’ should receive compensation;

The pots taken from the Njelele shrine in Matobo, Matabeleland, must be returned and the desecration reversed with a full apology.

Those affected by Murambatsvina should receive the housing that they were promised; they should also receive compensation;

Leaders who have looted our wealth through corruption should be brought to justice.

Respect for Culture

All people shall have equal right to use their own language and to observe their own culture and customs.

Zimbabweans, especially the youth, should be taught their own and other traditions, so that there can be respect for all different cultures.

Peace and Friendship

Zimbabweans are by nature friendly people – we must once again extend a hand of friendship to our neighbours, regionally and internationally, so that they can help us rebuild our beloved Zimbabwe.

LET ALL THOSE WHO LOVE ZIMBABWE JOIN HANDS TO TURN OUR DREAM OF SOCIAL JUSTICE INTO A REALITY.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We might think of ourselves as so developed and comfortable, and as a result we become complacent and unwilling to rock any boats. In Zimbabwe they have had it with the Mugabe government and they came up with this Charter. I take my hat off to them and wish them every success.

If Malaysians did a People's Charter, what would it look like?

We're Not Alone in This

Here's an interesting op-ed in the New York Times:

Op-Ed Contributor
The Devoted Student

By MARK C. TAYLOR
Published: December 21, 2006

MORE college students seem to be practicing traditional forms of religion today than at any time in my 30 years of teaching.

At first glance, the flourishing of religion on campuses seems to reverse trends long criticized by conservatives under the rubric of “political correctness.” But, in truth, something else is occurring. Once again, right and left have become mirror images of each other; religious correctness is simply the latest version of political correctness. Indeed, it seems the more religious students become, the less willing they are to engage in critical reflection about faith.

The chilling effect of these attitudes was brought home to me two years ago when an administrator at a university where I was then teaching called me into his office. A student had claimed that I had attacked his faith because I had urged him to consider whether Nietzsche’s analysis of religion undermines belief in absolutes. The administrator insisted that I apologize to the student. (I refused.)

My experience was not unique. Today, professors invite harassment or worse by including “unacceptable” books on their syllabuses or by studying religious ideas and practices in ways deemed improper by religiously correct students.

Distinguished scholars at several major universities in the United States have been condemned, even subjected to death threats, for proposing psychological, sociological or anthropological interpretations of religious texts in their classes and published writings. In the most egregious cases, defenders of the faith insist that only true believers are qualified to teach their religious tradition.

At a time when colleges and universities engage in huge capital campaigns and are obsessed with public relations, faculty members can no longer be confident they will remain free to pose the questions that urgently need to be asked.

For years, I have begun my classes by telling students that if they are not more confused and uncertain at the end of the course than they were at the beginning, I will have failed. A growing number of religiously correct students consider this challenge a direct assault on their faith. Yet the task of thinking and teaching, especially in an age of emergent fundamentalisms, is to cultivate a faith in doubt that calls into question every certainty.

Any responsible curriculum for the study of religion in the 21st century must be guided by two basic principles: first, a clear distinction between the study and the practice of religion, and second, an expansive understanding of what religion is and of the manifold roles it plays in life. The aim of critical analysis is not to pass judgment on religious beliefs and practices — though some secular dogmatists wrongly cross that line — but to examine the conditions necessary for their formation and to consider the many functions they serve.

It is also important to explore the similarities and differences between and among various religions. Religious traditions are not fixed and monolithic; they are networks of symbols, myths and rituals, which evolve over time by adapting to changing circumstances. If we fail to appreciate the complexity and diversity within, and among, religious traditions, we will overlook the fact that people from different traditions often share more with one another than they do with many members of their own tradition.

If chauvinistic believers develop deeper analyses of religion, they might begin to see in themselves what they criticize in others. In an era that thrives on both religious and political polarization, this is an important lesson to learn — one that extends well beyond the academy.

Since religion is often most influential where it is least obvious, it is imperative to examine both its manifest and latent dimensions. As defenders of a faith become more reflective about their own beliefs, they begin to understand that religion can serve not only to provide answers that render life more secure but also to prepare them for life’s unavoidable complexities and uncertainties.

Until recently, many influential analysts argued that religion, a vestige of an earlier stage of human development, would wither away as people became more sophisticated and rational. Obviously, things have not turned out that way. Indeed, the 21st century will be dominated by religion in ways that were inconceivable just a few years ago. Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not.

The warning signs are clear: unless we establish a genuine dialogue within and among all kinds of belief, ranging from religious fundamentalism to secular dogmatism, the conflicts of the future will probably be even more deadly.

Mark C. Taylor, a religion and humanities professor at Williams College, is the author of “Mystic Bones.”


Lots of food for thought, huh? The only difference is that here, very often it is the lecturers who are insisting that there can be no discussion on religion. And our obedient students dutifully follow.

It's Our Fault Again!

In The Star today...

Friday December 22, 2006

Public blamed for snatch thefts

THE public is partly to be blamed for snatch thefts, said Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Mohd Johari Baharum.

He said snatch thefts usually occurred when the victims were careless with their property.

“Such an attitude gives snatch thieves the opportunity to strike,” he said when replying to a question from Senator Siw Chun Eam.

Earlier, while replying to a question from Senator Datuk Rizuan Abd Hamid on snatch thefts, Mohamad Johari also placed the blame on women.

“SOMETIMES WOMEN LIKE TO CARRY EXPENSIVE HANDBAGS AND WEAR CLOTHES THAT INVITE TROUBLE ” he said.


Umm Jo...WHERE DID YOU GET THAT IDEA FROM? This is a bit like one letter to the editor about a year ago which suggested that the way to curb snatch thefts is for women to stop carrying handbags!

Honestly, are our politicians so bereft of ideas, so clueless, that they have to resort to unsubstantiated claims like this? Is he saying that the way to stop crime is by keeping women at home? And as far as I know, women with expensive handbags don't walk on pavements, nor ride motorbikes. So it's not the rich women who get their bags snatched, it's the ones who have to walk, or wait for buses and taxis etc. A friend of mine got her bag snatched by a man in a car!

And since when do snatch thieves look at women's clothes before they decide to snatch a bag? Anyone whom they think is vulnerable to having their bag snatched, they will attempt.

The point is really how do we make our streets safer for everyone? Better lighting? Better police patrols? Railings on pavements to put a distance between pedestrians and possible thieves on bikes ? Can't we have more sensible ideas than simply blaming women?

Is Jo Baharum saying that snatch thieves can't help themselves because there is so much temptation out there? What an excuse for poor enforcement of laws!

(And my other question is this: when Senators get dumb replies like this, what do they say? Just "Oh thank you, that's really enlightening" or do they at least give a do-you-think-I'm-stupid look?)

A note to the Bloggerhood

Folks,

Thanks for all the comments. I apologise for the late posting of your comments but as you know I moderate them, which means I have to be in front of my computer to do that. So if, like today, I have a lot of running aeound to do, I don't get to see them til late, hence can't upload your comments til now. Thanks for your patience.

I do welcome all comments, positive or negative. But in the interests of being on topic for each post, I regret that I will not publish comments which stray completely from the topic, are advertisements for events which have nothing to do with the topic ( in fact, any ads at all) and those which are in foreign languages. Only fair to the other commentators. OK?

But thank you for welcoming me so warmly to the bloggerhood. I am still learning how to work this thing, and have yet to work out all the bells and whistles. Some people have complained that it's far too plain. I'd jazz it up if only I knew how. And in fact if any of you can tell me how to put a chart or diagram on a post, I would really appreciate it. (have tried cut and paste and it doesn't work.)

And as for pedas or tak pedas...wait lah...still warming up. You forget, my Star column is once every two weeks so can save up the chili for that one go. Bit harder to do that every day. Besides, I'm really quite a normal person most days, don't spend ALL my time scowling...!

By the way, today the bosses at The Star informed me that after 17 years or so, my column will finally move to the main paper instead of the depths of StarTwo. Hooray! Hopefully that comes with a pay rise as well ;-)

Breath of Fresh Air Award

Anyone who read my column in The Star today will notice my nomination of Dr Asri Zainol Abidin, Mufti of Perlis, for this award. Don't worry if you've never heard of this award, I just invented it. Anyway I thought the gallant young fellow deserves support for his take on things Islamic and for actually not keeping quiet. Of course, his brother Muftis ( and of course, they are all brothers, no sisters) are calling a meeting to discuss what he's said about khalwat. Already the condescending tone has set in -- "he's still young", "it's just his personal opinion" - so no doubt they're getting ready to give him a severe rap on the knuckles for not toeing the line. Already the Perak religious department, led of course by Pope Harussani, is defiantly saying that they will continue to cleanse their state of sins by raiding hotel rooms (by the way, can some lawyer clarify this? Aren't hotel rooming lists confidential? If you call up any hotel, they won't give you any guest's room number.)

We should all make sure that Dr Asri knows that he has support from us all (You could visit www.perlis.gov.my/mufti but it's yet another useless government site.). We need people like him who have the credentials and are brave enough to say what they think is right. My fellow blogger Walski is correct in saying that the way our federation is set up, Dr Asri can only implement change in his own state. And Perlis has enough problems with its eager promotion of polygamy, and the absence of surat taklik (marriage contract) for Muslim brides.

I must say however that I won't become a full-fledged fan of Dr Asri's until I know his stand on two things, women and apostasy. Ulamas are not always consistent, especially when they don't approach things from a rights perspective. (Except when it's the 'right' of religious departments to raid hotels, homes, that sort of thing.) So they might be OK on one thing but very not Ok on something else.

But still, the fact that the National Fatwa Council has had to call a meeting to discuss what Dr Asri said is already interesting. They can afford to ignore when the rest of us say something. But one of their own? They have to either listen to him or quash him. Dr Asri, gambatte kudasai!! ( That's Japanese for 'good luck', though literally it means 'Fight!")

For a giggle...

If ypu'd like to have a little end-of-year giggle, click on this:

http://www.dph.gov.my/aids/

You know, I truly sympathise with the civil servants at the bottom end of the scale who realy could do with a pay rise, especially those who live in expensive KL. But whoever does websites like this one really can't use low salaries as an excuse for shoddy work. Someone on the other side of the world may want to find out about HIV/AIDS in Malaysia and look at this website and ...oh my...No wonder everyone runs to NGOs for quality information.

And by the way, if anyone cares to read the Millenium (NOT Mellinium, dears!) Development Goals report on Malaysia, Chapter 6, that's the one where we got an 'F'.

But the question is, Jo....

Saw this interesting report in The Sun today. I'm really happy to have all these numbers. Our government is great at releasing figures like this, when it suits them. But when I saw the headline, my first question was "Why?". Why are women less susceptible to drug abuse? Even if they are less susceptible, obviously SOME still are. Why is that?

Does this report answer that question? No.....Once again, we have shown that we are great beancounters (when we want to be...) but hopeless on any sort of analysis. If we don't know why, we can't do anything about it!! So what's the point of counting 'em up?

The other good question to ask is, how many of these women drug users are connected to the men drug users, socially, sexually or maritally? Drug users don't live in gender-segregated worlds after all, not even in Kelantan which has rather a lot of them.



Women less susceptible to drug abuse
B.Suresh Ram
KUALA LUMPUR (Dec 18, 2006): Statistics show women are less susceptible to drug abuse than their male counterparts.

Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Mohamed Johari Baharum told the Dewan Negara (Senate) today that between 1988 and last October, only 5,586 female drug addicts were detected in Malaysia.

Replying to a question from Siw Chun d/o Eam, he said this figure represented about 0.04% of the estimated female population of 13.1 million for this year.

He revealed that the average new number of female drug addicts detected for the five-year period between 2000 and 2005 was 574 annually.

"If this increase in the number of new drug addicts continue, then the number of total drug addicts in the next 10 years would reach 11,000," he said.

Johari said in the first 10 months of this year, a total of 372 female drug addicts were detected, which was a reduction of 22.34% compared with the 479 detected last year.

Johari said a breakdown on the number of female drug addicts according to states showed Penang taking the lead with 58 addicts or 0.3% of the 19,369 addicts nationwide.

This was followed by Sarawak (50), Kelantan (47), Sabah (45) and Kuala Lumpur (44).

Johari said women aged between 18 and 39 formed the bulk of female drug addicts, making up 1.38% of the total 19,369 addicts detected this year.

A further breakdown showed 151 women addicts, aged between 20 and 29, formed 0.1% of the number of female addicts.

Johari said 116 women addicts were being treated at the Bachok Rehabilitation Centre in Kelantan.

A total of 4,720 drug addicts are currently being treated at the 20 drug rehabilitation centres nationwide.

Was Hot, Was Not

Now that we are nearing the end of the year, let's look back and nominate what was hot in 2006, and what was not. This would apply to anything, whether it's people, events, fashion, words, concepts, ideas, toys, anything. Give me your ideas of what you think made the year hot, and what was not. (Not hot is NOT the same as cool, know what I mean?).

Here are some examples (see above, right).

Meeting of the Old Peace Horses

Sometimes you just have to ask. I sent off a wistful "wish I could be there" when I heard about the TDM/Soros meeting, and lo and behold, I got back a 'yes'! So that was how I found myself sitting there, not so much a fly on the wall but a lump on the sofa, in a first-time meeting between those two former warhorses, my dad and George Soros.

First we had to get through the media crush in the Marriott lobby. I almost didn't make it up to the Presidential suite since some over-enthusiastic photographer was so intent on blocking my way so he could take a photo of TDM getting into the lift. Up in the suite, we waited..and waited. I started to get nervous. My Dad does not like to be kept waiting. Then a rush at the lift and all of a sudden, someone smaller than I'd expected but with a big smile came up and it was Soros, explaining that he was late because he couldn't find his tie!

Soros is obviously a no-nonsense guy, which suits the other no-nonsense guy perfectly well. After some polite preliminaries ("Your first time?", "Yes, KL is an impressive town"....(TOWN???)), Soros started by saying that he was sorry he has not supported the Perdana Global Peace Forum and KL Initiative which seeks to criminalise war although he agreed that the world is going in the wrong direction. He thinks it is easier to do prevention of war, rather than criminalise it after it happens. Soros cited the doctrine of the responsibility to protect, which was recently accepted by the UN General Assembly. This doctrine meant that sovereignty belongs to the people. But if leaders commit atrocities against their own people, then the international community needs to do something. But the Bush government has made this doctrine more difficult to promote, since now whatever the US proposes, the rest of the world opposes. The US has essentially lost its credibility.

TDM agreed, and insisted that it should be the international community that should take action, not unilateral actions by only one country.

Both agreed that there will be situations which require military action. The problem with the US unilateral action in Iraq leaves everyone else fearful that they could be next. Not a recipe for security and peace.

Soros is of course known for being very anti-Bush. Before the last midterm elections, he spent a lot of money on a campaign to dissuade people to vote for pro-Bush candidates. "The current US foreign policy is an abberration in history, and must change course." The midterm election results recognised that Iraq is a mistake, but, according to him, has not gone far enough because it did not renounce the war on terrorism.

Here Soros had some interesting takes. He really believes that the war on terrorism cannot be won, especially not with more terrorism. "There is a certain weakness in the American psyche and that is the fear of death...(as much as the US is militarily superior), the terrorists are superior because they are not afraid to die." But we need to find out the root causes of why people become like that.

As they warmed up, it became more apparent that these two had very similar views of the world. TDM talked about how he subscribes to Popular Science and Popular Mechanics magazines and has become very disturbed by the amount of research going into developing more and more sophisticated weapons to kill people. This led to discussion about nuclear weapons and the breakdown of the non-proliferation treaties. Both agreed that this will only lead to more war ( and of the worst kind...).

Now that they had established areas of common interest, Soros showed how well briefed he was. He asked about the recent UMNO GA and what this meant for race relations in Malaysia, and about corruption, all very politely, not accusatory at all. He seemed inclined to find areas of common interest and genuinely interested to know how we deal with problems. TDM of course is not one to get defensive about anything so he said he was not happy about the last GA, was worried about how young people are being brought up without much interaction between the races, and said that yes we do have corruption, though perhaps not as bad as some countries.

At this point, Soros brought out "one issue that stands between us - and that is your anti-semitic remarks". He explained that he is often in conflict with many others of the Jewish faith in the US, especially the neo-conservatives who are the architects of the current US foreign policy. So not all Jews in the US agree with one another and there is no such thing as a Jewish conspiracy. TDM explained that he has been labelled anti-semitic by the Western media even though, as often as not, he complains about Muslim attitudes as well. Citing his speech at the OIC meeting in KL in 2003, he said that much of it was about how Muslims had to change attitudes and in fact emulate Jews, but the media only cited his remarks about Jews.

Soros said that he also sometimes gets misquoted by the Western media. He was once asked his opinion on the growing anti-semitism in Europe, particularly in France. He explained that this was related to US and Israeli policies in Palestine. People were angry with Israel, therefore they equated it with all Jews. The media headlines then came out as "Soros blames Jews for Palestine problem." He has had longstanding disagreements with a large segment of American Jews because they have been too supportive of Israel irrespective of what Israel does. He cited the excessive influence of the American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) which lobbies for Israel in Congress as a major problem. ( And apparently has started, or is starting, another PAC to counter AIPAC with other prominent American Jews).

Both agreed that the problem of Palestine is territorial and not religion and that there needs to be a political solution. The current policy of heavy militarisation does not deal with the root causes of the problem. But the trouble is, we are often captives of extremists on all sides, who don't want solutions.

This was getting on to almost an hour already and neither seemed inclined to stop. I thought that intellectually these two are complete equals even though they may not agree with one another 100 percent. There didn't seem to be a whole lot of principles that they disagreed on.

One thing that they did NOT talk about, but which came up in the press conference afterwards, was the economic crisis in 1997/98. As we all recall, TDM famously blamed Soros for the currency speculation that caused the crisis. At the press conference, TDM explained that he had accepted Soros' explanation ( done at some other time, not this meeting) that he was not personally responsible for the speculation. (This is not the same as not blaming currency speculation for the crisis, by the way). And Soros said that he thought TDM did the right thing at the time. But the focus of the meeting was really on the state of the world and how to bring about peace, particularly in the Middle East. And on that issue, they could almost be of one mind.

Obviously this meeting was the hot ticket of the day in KL today, just judging by the number of press who turned up, both local and international. I don't blame them really since I was pretty excited myself when I heard I could attend. Who would want to miss a meeting of the old warhorses, except now they're peace horses...;-)

Stop Being so Chicken, Just Do It!

For all of you who have memories of your bersunat and the sheer embarassment of having to walk around in your kain pelikat for days, and those of you who think this is a really dumb thing to do, here's the good news. (Funny, it took some Mat Salleh to find this out. And before we Muslims claim too much, I guess Jews have pretty low rates of HIV too.....).

Circumcision Halves H.I.V. Risk, U.S. Agency Finds

By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr.
Published: December 14, 2006

Circumcision appears to reduce a man’s risk of contracting AIDS from heterosexual sex by half, United States government health officials said yesterday, and the directors of the two largest funds for fighting the disease said they would consider paying for circumcisions in high-risk countries.

The announcement was made by officials of the National Institutes of Health as they halted two clinical trials, in Kenya and Uganda, on the ground that not offering circumcision to all the men taking part would be unethical. The success of the trials confirmed a study done last year in South Africa.

AIDS experts immediately hailed the finding. “This is very exciting news,” said Daniel Halperin, an H.I.V. specialist at the Harvard Center for Population and Development, who has argued that circumcision slows the spread of AIDS in the parts of Africa where it is common.

In an interview from Zimbabwe, he added, “I have no doubt that as word of this gets around, millions of African men will want to get circumcised, and that will save many lives.”

Uncircumcised men are thought to be more susceptible because the underside of the foreskin is rich in Langerhans cells, sentinel cells of the immune system, which attach easily to the human immunodeficiency virus, which causes AIDS. The foreskin also often suffers small tears during intercourse.

But experts also cautioned that circumcision is no cure-all. It only lessens the chances that a man will catch the virus; it is expensive compared to condoms, abstinence or other methods; and the surgery has serious risks if performed by folk healers using dirty blades, as often happens in rural Africa.

Circumcision is “not a magic bullet, but a potentially important intervention,” said Dr. Kevin M. De Cock, director of H.I.V./AIDS for the World Health Organization.

Sex education messages for young men need to make it clear that “this does not mean that you have an absolute protection,” said Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, an AIDS researcher and director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Circumcision should be used with other prevention methods, he said, and it does nothing to prevent spread by anal sex or drug injection, ways in which the virus commonly spreads in the United States.

The two trials, conducted by researchers from universities in Illinois, Maryland, Canada, Uganda and Kenya, involved nearly 3,000 heterosexual men in Kisumu, Kenya, and nearly 5,000 in Rakai, Uganda. None were infected with H.I.V. They were divided into circumcised and uncircumcised groups, given safe sex advice (although many presumably did not take it), and retested regularly.

The trials were stopped this week by the N.I.H. Data Safety and Monitoring Board after data showed that the Kenyan men had a 53 percent reduction in new H.I.V. infection. Twenty-two of the 1,393 circumcised men in that study caught the disease, compared with 47 of the 1,391 uncircumcised men.

In Uganda, the reduction was 48 percent.

Those results echo the finding of a trial completed last year in Orange Farm, a township in South Africa, financed by the French government, which demonstrated a reduction of 60 percent among circumcised men.

The two largest agencies dedicated to fighting AIDS said they would now be willing to pay for circumcisions, which they have not before because there was too little evidence that it worked.

Dr. Richard G. A. Feachem, executive director of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which has almost $5 billion in pledges, said in a television interview that if a country submitted plans to conduct sterile circumcisions, “I think it’s very likely that our technical panel would approve it.”

Dr. Mark Dybul, executive director of President Bush’s $15 billion Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, said in a statement that his agency “will support implementation of safe medical male circumcision for H.I.V./AIDS prevention” if world health agencies recommend it.

He also warned that it was only one new weapon in the fight, adding, “Prevention efforts must reinforce the A.B.C. approach — abstain, be faithful, and correct and consistent use of condoms.”

Researchers have long noted that parts of Africa where circumcision is common — particularly the Muslim countries of West Africa — have much lower AIDS rates, while those in southern Africa, where circumcision is rare, have the highest.

But drawing conclusions was always confounded by other regional factors, like strict Shariah law in some Muslim areas, rape and genocide in East Africa, polygamy, rites that require widows to have sex with a relative, patronage of prostitutes by miners, and men’s insistence on dangerous “dry sex” — with the woman’s vaginal walls robbed of secretions with desiccating herbs.

Outside Muslim regions, circumcision is spotty. In South Africa, for example, the Xhosa people circumcise teenage boys, while Zulus do not. AIDS is common in both tribes.

Nelson Mandela’s autobiography, “Long Walk to Freedom,” contains an unnerving but hilarious account of his own Xhosa circumcision, by spear blade, as a teenager. Although he was supposed to shout, “I am a man!” he grimaced in pain, he wrote.

But not all initiation ceremonies are laughing matters. Every year, some South African teenagers die from infections, and the use of one blade on many young men may help spread AIDS.

In recent years, as word has spread that circumcision might be protective, many southern African men have sought it out. A Zambian hospital offered $3 circumcisions last year, and Swaziland trained 60 doctors to do them for $40 after waiting lists at its national hospital grew.

“Private practitioners also do it,” Dr. Halperin said. “In some places, it’s $20; in others, much more. Lots of the wealthy elite have already done it. It prevents S.T.D.’s, it’s seen as cleaner, sex is better, women like it. I predict that a lot of men who can’t afford private clinics will start clamoring for it.” (S.T.D.’s are sexually transmitted diseases.)

Male circumcision also benefits women. For example, a study of the medical records of 300 Ugandan couples last year estimated that circumcised men infected with H.I.V. were about 30 percent less likely to transmit it to their female partners.

Earlier studies on Western men have shown that circumcision significantly reduces the rate at which men infect women with the virus that causes cervical cancer. A study published in 2002 in The New England Journal of Medicine found that uncircumcised men were about three times as likely as circumcised ones with a similar number of sexual partners to carry the human papillomavirus.

The suspected mechanism was the same — cells on the inside of the foreskin were also more susceptible to that virus, which is not closely related to H.I.V.

The Napoleon of Insinnuendo

I like reading Vanity Fair. It's a hi-brow gossip magazine that actually has some good investigative articles in it. What's more, the editor Graydon Carter is rabidly anti-Bush and totally in-your-face about it, which works for me.

In the December 2006 issue there is a very interesting article on Karl Rove, the White House ( and Bush's) chief strategist (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/12/rove200612). If you want to know how a devious mind works, there is probably no better example today than Rove.

Apparently he has some fans in this part of the world too. Take this quote:"In war, weakness emboldens your enemies and is an invitation to disaster." Sounds familiar doesn't it?

Mind you, he also says this: "People may not agree with you, but if they know where you're coming from, they'll have respect for you that they will not have if they think you're weak and indecisive."

But even Karl Rove doesn't always get it right, as the American mid-term elections showed. Might be a lesson for Rove-wannabes on our shores?

"Poverty is the Absence of All Human Rights"

This is the speech given by Prof Muhammad Yunus when he and the Grameen Bank received the Nobel Peace Prize last Sunday in Oslo. Read and be humbled. If you want to congratulate him, go to www.grameenfoundation.org.

Nobel Lecture, Oslo, December 10, 2006.

Your Majesties, Your Royal Highnesses, Honorable Members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,

Grameen Bank and I are deeply honoured to receive this most prestigious of awards. We are thrilled and overwhelmed by this honour. Since the Nobel Peace Prize was announced, I have received endless messages from around the world, but what moves me most are the calls I get almost daily, from the borrowers of Grameen Bank in remote Bangladeshi villages, who just want to say how proud they are to have received this recognition.

Nine elected representatives of the 7 million borrowers-cum-owners of Grameen Bank have accompanied me all the way to Oslo to receive the prize. I express thanks on their behalf to the Norwegian Nobel Committee for choosing Grameen Bank for this year's Nobel Peace Prize. By giving their institution the most prestigious prize in the world, you give them unparalleled honour. Thanks to your prize, nine proud women from the villages of Bangladesh are at the ceremony today as Nobel laureates, giving an altogether new meaning to the Nobel Peace Prize.

All borrowers of Grameen Bank are celebrating this day as the greatest day of their lives. They are gathering around the nearest television set in their villages all over Bangladesh , along with other villagers, to watch the proceedings of this ceremony.

This years' prize gives highest honour and dignity to the hundreds of millions of women all around the world who struggle every day to make a living and bring hope for a better life for their children. This is a historic moment for them.


Poverty is a Threat to Peace
Ladies and Gentlemen:

By giving us this prize, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has given important support to the proposition that peace is inextricably linked to poverty. Poverty is a threat to peace.

World's income distribution gives a very telling story. Ninety four percent of the world income goes to 40 percent of the population while sixty percent of people live on only 6 per cent of world income. Half of the world population lives on two dollars a day. Over one billion people live on less than a dollar a day. This is no formula for peace.

The new millennium began with a great global dream. World leaders gathered at the United Nations in 2000 and adopted, among others, a historic goal to reduce poverty by half by 2015. Never in human history had such a bold goal been adopted by the entire world in one voice, one that specified time and size. But then came September 11 and the Iraq war, and suddenly the world became derailed from the pursuit of this dream, with the attention of world leaders shifting from the war on poverty to the war on terrorism. Till now over $ 530 billion has been spent on the war in Iraq by the USA alone.

I believe terrorism cannot be won over by military action. Terrorism must be condemned in the strongest language. We must stand solidly against it, and find all the means to end it. We must address the root causes of terrorism to end it for all time to come. I believe that putting resources into improving the lives of the poor people is a better strategy than spending it on guns.


Poverty is Denial of All Human Rights
Peace should be understood in a human way 3/4 in a broad social, political and economic way. Peace is threatened by unjust economic, social and political order, absence of democracy, environmental degradation and absence of human rights.

Poverty is the absence of all human rights. The frustrations, hostility and anger generated by abject poverty cannot sustain peace in any society. For building stable peace we must find ways to provide opportunities for people to live decent lives.

The creation of opportunities for the majority of people − the poor − is at the heart of the work that we have dedicated ourselves to during the past 30 years.


Grameen Bank
I became involved in the poverty issue not as a policymaker or a researcher. I became involved because poverty was all around me, and I could not turn away from it. In 1974, I found it difficult to teach elegant theories of economics in the university classroom, in the backdrop of a terrible famine in Bangladesh . Suddenly, I felt the emptiness of those theories in the face of crushing hunger and poverty. I wanted to do something immediate to help people around me, even if it was just one human being, to get through another day with a little more ease. That brought me face to face with poor people's struggle to find the tiniest amounts of money to support their efforts to eke out a living. I was shocked to discover a woman in the village, borrowing less than a dollar from the money-lender, on the condition that he would have the exclusive right to buy all she produces at the price he decides. This, to me, was a way of recruiting slave labor.

I decided to make a list of the victims of this money-lending "business" in the village next door to our campus.

When my list was done, it had the names of 42 victims who borrowed a total amount of US $27. I offered US $27 from my own pocket to get these victims out of the clutches of those money-lenders. The excitement that was created among the people by this small action got me further involved in it. If I could make so many people so happy with such a tiny amount of money, why not do more of it?

That is what I have been trying to do ever since. The first thing I did was to try to persuade the bank located in the campus to lend money to the poor. But that did not work. The bank said that the poor were not creditworthy. After all my efforts, over several months, failed I offered to become a guarantor for the loans to the poor. I was stunned by the result. The poor paid back their loans, on time, every time! But still I kept confronting difficulties in expanding the program through the existing banks. That was when I decided to create a separate bank for the poor, and in 1983, I finally succeeded in doing that. I named it Grameen Bank or Village bank.

Today, Grameen Bank gives loans to nearly 7.0 million poor people, 97 per cent of whom are women, in 73,000 villages in Bangladesh. Grameen Bank gives collateral-free income generating, housing, student and micro-enterprise loans to the poor families and offers a host of attractive savings, pension funds and insurance products for its members. Since it introduced them in 1984, housing loans have been used to construct 640,000 houses. The legal ownership of these houses belongs to the women themselves. We focused on women because we found giving loans to women always brought more benefits to the family.

In a cumulative way the bank has given out loans totaling about US $6.0 billion. The repayment rate is 99%. Grameen Bank routinely makes profit. Financially, it is self-reliant and has not taken donor money since 1995. Deposits and own resources of Grameen Bank today amount to 143 per cent of all outstanding loans. According to Grameen Bank's internal survey, 58 per cent of our borrowers have crossed the poverty line.

Grameen Bank was born as a tiny homegrown project run with the help of several of my students, all local girls and boys. Three of these students are still with me in Grameen Bank, after all these years, as its topmost executives. They are here today to receive this honour you give us.

This idea, which began in Jobra, a small village in Bangladesh, has spread around the world and there are now Grameen type programs in almost every country.


Second Generation
It is 30 years now since we began. We keep looking at the children of our borrowers to see what has been the impact of our work on their lives. The women who are our borrowers always gave topmost priority to the children. One of the Sixteen Decisions developed and followed by them was to send children to school. Grameen Bank encouraged them, and before long all the children were going to school. Many of these children made it to the top of their class. We wanted to celebrate that, so we introduced scholarships for talented students. Grameen Bank now gives 30,000 scholarships every year.

Many of the children went on to higher education to become doctors, engineers, college teachers and other professionals. We introduced student loans to make it easy for Grameen students to complete higher education. Now some of them have PhD's. There are 13,000 students on student loans. Over 7,000 students are now added to this number annually.

We are creating a completely new generation that will be well equipped to take their families way out of the reach of poverty. We want to make a break in the historical continuation of poverty.


Beggars Can Turn to Business
In Bangladesh 80 percent of the poor families have already been reached with microcredit. We are hoping that by 2010, 100 per cent of the poor families will be reached.

Three years ago we started an exclusive programme focusing on the beggars. None of Grameen Bank's rules apply to them. Loans are interest-free; they can pay whatever amount they wish, whenever they wish. We gave them the idea to carry small merchandise such as snacks, toys or household items, when they went from house to house for begging. The idea worked. There are now 85,000 beggars in the program. About 5,000 of them have already stopped begging completely. Typical loan to a beggar is $12.

We encourage and support every conceivable intervention to help the poor fight out of poverty. We always advocate microcredit in addition to all other interventions, arguing that microcredit makes those interventions work better.


Information Technology for the Poor
Information and communication technology (ICT) is quickly changing the world, creating distanceless, borderless world of instantaneous communications. Increasingly, it is becoming less and less costly. I saw an opportunity for the poor people to change their lives if this technology could be brought to them to meet their needs.

As a first step to bring ICT to the poor we created a mobile phone company, Grameen Phone. We gave loans from Grameen Bank to the poor women to buy mobile phones to sell phone services in the villages. We saw the synergy between microcredit and ICT.

The phone business was a success and became a coveted enterprise for Grameen borrowers. Telephone-ladies quickly learned and innovated the ropes of the telephone business, and it has become the quickest way to get out of poverty and to earn social respectability. Today there are nearly 300,000 telephone ladies providing telephone service in all the villages of Bangladesh . Grameen Phone has more than 10 million subscribers, and is the largest mobile phone company in the country. Although the number of telephone-ladies is only a small fraction of the total number of subscribers, they generate 19 per cent of the revenue of the company. Out of the nine board members who are attending this grand ceremony today 4 are telephone-ladies.

Grameen Phone is a joint-venture company owned by Telenor of Norway and Grameen Telecom of Bangladesh. Telenor owns 62 per cent share of the company, Grameen Telecom owns 38 per cent. Our vision was to ultimately convert this company into a social business by giving majority ownership to the poor women of Grameen Bank. We are working towards that goal. Someday Grameen Phone will become another example of a big enterprise owned by the poor.


Free Market Economy
Capitalism centers on the free market. It is claimed that the freer the market, the better is the result of capitalism in solving the questions of what, how, and for whom. It is also claimed that the individual search for personal gains brings collective optimal result.

I am in favor of strengthening the freedom of the market. At the same time, I am very unhappy about the conceptual restrictions imposed on the players in the market. This originates from the assumption that entrepreneurs are one-dimensional human beings, who are dedicated to one mission in their business lives 3/4 to maximize profit. This interpretation of capitalism insulates the entrepreneurs from all political, emotional, social, spiritual, environmental dimensions of their lives. This was done perhaps as a reasonable simplification, but it stripped away the very essentials of human life.

Human beings are a wonderful creation embodied with limitless human qualities and capabilities. Our theoretical constructs should make room for the blossoming of those qualities, not assume them away.

Many of the world's problems exist because of this restriction on the players of free-market. The world has not resolved the problem of crushing poverty that half of its population suffers. Healthcare remains out of the reach of the majority of the world population. The country with the richest and freest market fails to provide healthcare for one-fifth of its population.

We have remained so impressed by the success of the free-market that we never dared to express any doubt about our basic assumption. To make it worse, we worked extra hard to transform ourselves, as closely as possible, into the one-dimensional human beings as conceptualized in the theory, to allow smooth functioning of free market mechanism.

By defining "entrepreneur" in a broader way we can change the character of capitalism radically, and solve many of the unresolved social and economic problems within the scope of the free market. Let us suppose an entrepreneur, instead of having a single source of motivation (such as, maximizing profit), now has two sources of motivation, which are mutually exclusive, but equally compelling 3/4 a) maximization of profit and b) doing good to people and the world.

Each type of motivation will lead to a separate kind of business. Let us call the first type of business a profit-maximizing business, and the second type of business as social business.

Social business will be a new kind of business introduced in the market place with the objective of making a difference in the world. Investors in the social business could get back their investment, but will not take any dividend from the company. Profit would be ploughed back into the company to expand its outreach and improve the quality of its product or service. A social business will be a non-loss, non-dividend company.

Once social business is recognized in law, many existing companies will come forward to create social businesses in addition to their foundation activities. Many activists from the non-profit sector will also find this an attractive option. Unlike the non-profit sector where one needs to collect donations to keep activities going, a social business will be self-sustaining and create surplus for expansion since it is a non-loss enterprise. Social business will go into a new type of capital market of its own, to raise capital.

Young people all around the world, particularly in rich countries, will find the concept of social business very appealing since it will give them a challenge to make a difference by using their creative talent. Many young people today feel frustrated because they cannot see any worthy challenge, which excites them, within the present capitalist world. Socialism gave them a dream to fight for. Young people dream about creating a perfect world of their own.

Almost all social and economic problems of the world will be addressed through social businesses. The challenge is to innovate business models and apply them to produce desired social results cost-effectively and efficiently. Healthcare for the poor, financial services for the poor, information technology for the poor, education and training for the poor, marketing for the poor, renewable energy − these are all exciting areas for social businesses.

Social business is important because it addresses very vital concerns of mankind. It can change the lives of the bottom 60 per cent of world population and help them to get out of poverty.


Grameen's Social Business
Even profit maximizing companies can be designed as social businesses by giving full or majority ownership to the poor. This constitutes a second type of social business. Grameen Bank falls under this category of social business.

The poor could get the shares of these companies as gifts by donors, or they could buy the shares with their own money. The borrowers with their own money buy Grameen Bank shares, which cannot be transferred to non-borrowers. A committed professional team does the day-to-day running of the bank.

Bilateral and multi-lateral donors could easily create this type of social business. When a donor gives a loan or a grant to build a bridge in the recipient country, it could create a "bridge company" owned by the local poor. A committed management company could be given the responsibility of running the company. Profit of the company will go to the local poor as dividend, and towards building more bridges. Many infrastructure projects, like roads, highways, airports, seaports, utility companies could all be built in this manner.

Grameen has created two social businesses of the first type. One is a yogurt factory, to produce fortified yogurt to bring nutrition to malnourished children, in a joint venture with Danone. It will continue to expand until all malnourished children of Bangladesh are reached with this yogurt. Another is a chain of eye-care hospitals. Each hospital will undertake 10,000 cataract surgeries per year at differentiated prices to the rich and the poor.


Social Stock Market
To connect investors with social businesses, we need to create social stock market where only the shares of social businesses will be traded. An investor will come to this stock-exchange with a clear intention of finding a social business, which has a mission of his liking. Anyone who wants to make money will go to the existing stock-market.

To enable a social stock-exchange to perform properly, we will need to create rating agencies, standardization of terminology, definitions, impact measurement tools, reporting formats, and new financial publications, such as, The Social Wall Street Journal. Business schools will offer courses and business management degrees on social businesses to train young managers how to manage social business enterprises in the most efficient manner, and, most of all, to inspire them to become social business entrepreneurs themselves.


Role of Social Businesses in Globalization

I support globalization and believe it can bring more benefits to the poor than its alternative. But it must be the right kind of globalization. To me, globalization is like a hundred-lane highway criss-crossing the world. If it is a free-for-all highway, its lanes will be taken over by the giant trucks from powerful economies. Bangladeshi rickshaw will be thrown off the highway. In order to have a win-win globalization we must have traffic rules, traffic police, and traffic authority for this global highway. Rule of "strongest takes it all" must be replaced by rules that ensure that the poorest have a place and piece of the action, without being elbowed out by the strong. Globalization must not become financial imperialism.
Powerful multi-national social businesses can be created to retain the benefit of globalization for the poor people and poor countries. Social businesses will either bring ownership to the poor people, or keep the profit within the poor countries, since taking dividends will not be their objective. Direct foreign investment by foreign social businesses will be exciting news for recipient countries. Building strong economies in the poor countries by protecting their national interest from plundering companies will be a major area of interest for the social businesses.


We Create What We Want
We get what we want, or what we don't refuse. We accept the fact that we will always have poor people around us, and that poverty is part of human destiny. This is precisely why we continue to have poor people around us. If we firmly believe that poverty is unacceptable to us, and that it should not belong to a civilized society, we would have built appropriate institutions and policies to create a poverty-free world.

We wanted to go to the moon, so we went there. We achieve what we want to achieve. If we are not achieving something, it is because we have not put our minds to it. We create what we want.

What we want and how we get to it depends on our mindsets. It is extremely difficult to change mindsets once they are formed. We create the world in accordance with our mindset. We need to invent ways to change our perspective continually and reconfigure our mindset quickly as new knowledge emerges. We can reconfigure our world if we can reconfigure our mindset.


We Can Put Poverty in the Museums

I believe that we can create a poverty-free world because poverty is not created by poor people. It has been created and sustained by the economic and social system that we have designed for ourselves; the institutions and concepts that make up that system; the policies that we pursue.

Poverty is created because we built our theoretical framework on assumptions which under-estimates human capacity, by designing concepts, which are too narrow (such as concept of business, credit- worthiness, entrepreneurship, employment) or developing institutions, which remain half-done (such as financial institutions, where poor are left out). Poverty is caused by the failure at the conceptual level, rather than any lack of capability on the part of people.

I firmly believe that we can create a poverty-free world if we collectively believe in it. In a poverty-free world, the only place you would be able to see poverty is in the poverty museums. When school children take a tour of the poverty museums, they would be horrified to see the misery and indignity that some human beings had to go through. They would blame their forefathers for tolerating this inhuman condition, which existed for so long, for so many people.

A human being is born into this world fully equipped not only to take care of him or herself, but also to contribute to enlarging the well being of the world as a whole. Some get the chance to explore their potential to some degree, but many others never get any opportunity, during their lifetime, to unwrap the wonderful gift they were born with. They die unexplored and the world remains deprived of their creativity, and their contribution.

Grameen has given me an unshakeable faith in the creativity of human beings. This has led me to believe that human beings are not born to suffer the misery of hunger and poverty.

To me poor people are like bonsai trees. When you plant the best seed of the tallest tree in a flower-pot, you get a replica of the tallest tree, only inches tall. There is nothing wrong with the seed you planted, only the soil-base that is too inadequate. Poor people are bonsai people. There is nothing wrong in their seeds. Simply, society never gave them the base to grow on. All it needs to get the poor people out of poverty for us to create an enabling environment for them. Once the poor can unleash their energy and creativity, poverty will disappear very quickly.

Let us join hands to give every human being a fair chance to unleash their energy and creativity.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me conclude by expressing my deep gratitude to the Norwegian Nobel Committee for recognizing that poor people, and especially poor women, have both the potential and the right to live a decent life, and that microcredit helps to unleash that potential.

I believe this honor that you give us will inspire many more bold initiatives around the world to make a historical breakthrough in ending global poverty.

Thank you very much.

Yay for Prof Yunus!

Congratulations to Prof Yunus for winning the Nobel Peace Prize!!! He is a truly great individual for all the things he's done through his Grameen Bank and microcredit.Microcredit has helped so many women around the world get out of poverty and become more independent, including in Malaysia ( although we should take a closer look at Amanah Ikhtiar Malaysia, our microcredit institution, and see how it's doing. Despite having mostly women clients, it is run by men...). Last October I was at a conference in France and there was a whole session devoted to how microcredit is helping so many people, and it was a true endorsement of Prof Yunus' genius.

In the news recently, someone suggested that since banks are so reluctant to give loans to people with no track record, why not start microcredit schemes for them? The thing about microcredit is that the loans are really small, and probably not what those unable to get loans really want. The other thing is that microcredit schemes really work on a cooperative basis. People work in groups and ensure that whoever has a loan does pay it back, or else it will affect someone else in the group. Although there is no interest to be paid, there are mechanisms to guarantee that the loans are paid back. Mostly it relies on people's consciences and guess what? Women have really strong consciences and that's why they are such good borrowers.

When I was at the Malaysian AIDS Foundation, we started a small microcredit scheme for people living with AIDS or their families. The idea was to help them supplement their family income since much of it goes to treatment costs. The way it works is that the applicants have to be recommended by one of our partner organisations ( NGOs who are members of the Malaysian AIDS Council) who also act as guarantors. The loans are small, only RM1000 each, and the repayment programme is negotiated with each applicant. So far everyone has paid in full and on time, except for one person ( a man...). (If someone doesn't repay on time, it falls on the partner organisation to pay it back. So the incentive to keep an eye on the borrower is there.) The money has been used to do simple things like start a pet grooming business, upgrade a clothes ironing business, kuih business and that sort of thing. Not very sophisticated but it's made a difference to the family income by assisting them to earn enough to top up what is used up for medical expenses. We'd like to expand it and maybe even have business training programmes for applicants so they can also upgrade their business skills but we'd really need to have a fulltime person doing it.

Now my question is this: obviously Prof Yunus is a really towering Muslim by any standard, even though he himself does not emphasise his religion. Is the OIC and other Muslim organisations going to celebrate him?

Let's be Inconsistent (and it ain't just the politicos)

After the Majlis Perbandaran Kota Bharu wanted to fine women for sexy dressing, we see lots of protests from women's groups, politicians ( though the cynical side of me wonders what Shahrizat would have said if Harussani had said the same thing) and many many very sensible letters in the press. There are several good letters in The Star today, which is heartening. There are sensible people in our country.

But this doesn't seem to extend to whoever edits Star Two. Take a look at the feature called Funk and Flounce on pg T8 today. It talks about Islamic fashion although only one photograph shows anything resembling what Nik Aziz might approve of. Worse still, take a look at some of the quotes.

From Jeny Tjahyawati, fashion designer: "There are more and more women wearing Muslim fashion to parties (in Indonesia). It can provide comfort since it is loose and it can also protect women from perverted men if they walk alone at night."

The article continues: Some designers and models (models!) said modest Mulsim clothing was approrpiate to prevent crimes against women such as rape, touting an argument often used by clerics to convince women to cover up.

Said Samira Mochammad Bafagih, 25, a journalist," Men are not likely to seduce women in veils. Thus I feel more comfortable if I walk alone at night. I agree that women without veils are more likely to be seduced. There are quite many rape cases, aren't there?"

Oh God, deliver us from stupid people!

I can understand small articles slipping through an editor's pen. But a whole page? Filled with such tripe? Not only is it editorially inconsistent, even the photos don't match! Are fashion designers just taking the opportunity to make money because apparently the market for "islamic' fashion is growing? There's the only excuse I can think of for exceedingly stupid reasoning. They never thought of it until someone asked them.

And another thing, since when is rape seduction? Which rapist tries to woo you before they jump you? ( we don't recognise marital rape in this country so let's not talk about that). People have such fuzzy minds. It just goes to show that there are people who think that rape is sex, and not a violent demeaning act meant to exhibit power. All those Chinese-Indonesian women who got raped after the fall of Suharto were not 'seduced' because they weren't wearing veils. It was an act to exact vengeance against a perceived advantaged group of people. Pure racism, that's all.

Let's be Inconsistent (as always)

Yesterday the Deputy Minister of Health, Dr Abdul Latiff, told Parliament that there are no plans to do premarital HIV testing on any other couples apart from Muslims ( oh poor us Muslims). He should take a look at his own Ministry's National AIDS Starategic Plan because that's exactly what they say they will do. So does this mean that a) the politicos at the top don't read their own documents ( not surprising, it is stupendously boring), or b) they say one thing and the civil servants below them do something else. Do we have to wait til the Auditor-General complains about it?

Talking of whom, our Auditors-General seem to be the straightest and most straight-talking civil servants we have these days. I loved that snippet about how undeserving civil servants get promoted and given titles. How many have I known already! Yet despite their total incompetence, their rank and title allows them to act as if they are Lords of the Manor. I remember going to a workshop ( for that same National Strategic Plan) and we were supposed to start at 8.30am. All of us were dressed, breakfasted and ready but at 8.25am our LotM was just going up to his room ( he had come down in t-shirt and slippers) to do his business, get dressed and then leisurely come down. Unsurprisingly, we started 30 minutes late. And we were all in the same hotel with no traffic jams to blame!

The same guy gave me half a day's notice to put together a presentation on other countries' successful national strategic plans for after dinner. Which I dutifully spent a whole afternoon doing, presented a powerpoint, and then in our usual feudal manner, the MC said that we surely couldn't end the day without a word from our beloved Dato'. And LotM gets up and says that my presentation was all very nice but " of course, we cannot do the same here". Without giving any reason apart from us being so sensitive here.

Luckily this guy has actually been stalled by his own incompetency. He's retiring in a couple of days and I seriously doubt that he'd be one fo those who would be offered extensions.

Funeral Decorum

Gee, am I glad they gave Rayappan's family his body back! Nothing is more unseemly than tussling over a dead body. I really wonder how it helps anyone's cause when you subject a family to so much trauma and refusing to let them bury their loved one. Having just been through a funeral myself, and all the emotion that goes with it, I can empathise.

But now I hear there are other people wanting to exploit this 'win' by making some sort of show at the funeral. Honestly, can they just leave the family alone to grieve? Bad enough they had to suffer so much over the past week or so, then all sorts of busybodies want to come and make a big deal of what should be a private moment. When we buried my aunt yesterday, there were reporters ( and also non-reporters) pointing cameras at my Dad, my other aunt and all the family as we listened to the prayers at the graveside. It is sooooo intrusive! So I can just imagine how horrible it would be if total strangers turn up at a funeral and start holding press conferences and everything!

We need to learn to respect people especially their privacy. Put ourselves in their shoes and imagine how they would feel. If it's something we don't want to happen to us, then we damn well should not be doing it to them.

By the way, what if the bodysnatchers had actually succeeded in burying him and then found out they were wrong? What would happen? Would they have to dig him up again? It must be sinful to not let someone rest in peace like that.

My Star column yesterday

Thanks for the nice comments, everyone. And thanks for the comment on yesterday's column. Actually there is a background to it that I hinted at only in the very last paragraph. I'll try and explain it here.

Health policy in this country is made by the Federal Ministry of Health, except for certain emergency situations eg a cholera outbreak in a certain area etc. But this mandatory premarital HIV testing for Muslim couples is actually unusual and important for us to understand the implications.

Leaving aside the public health arguments against mandatory HIV testing, there are other things at play here. In 2001 the Johor Islamic religious department decided to start mandatory premarital HIV testing for Muslim couples getting married. The basis for this was to protect women from becoming infected by men, because there were purportedly all these HIV-positive men coming out of Pusat Serenti in Johor ( which has quite a few of them) wanting to get married. ( I have to wonder at the naivety of people who think that these men would actually wait til they got married to have sex and infect someone!). Anyway, that was the excuse.

Now mandatory means if you don't do the test, you cannot get married. It is part of the marriage requirement, like the premarital course. Once you do the test, you give your results to the person at the Pejabat Ugama and if you're both HIV-negative, you go ahead and get married. If you're HIV-positive ( either one, or both), then you're supposed to go for counselling. But if you still want to get married, they can't stop you.

The thing is this, Johor began this program in November 2001. There has never been an evaluation of whether it has worked in preventing HIV transmission to women. They never do any reports at all. If you ask the MoH, they can't tell you anything because the numbers of people diagnosed HIV+ from that programme is dumped in with the reports of all others diagnosed HIV+ in the state. So we actually don't know how many people have been found HIV+ through this programme, and what percentage they are out of the total number of people undergoing it.

There have been some newspaper reports of what the Johor government touts as a success story, and last year in 2005, the former Director of Health Johor (now Perak) Dr P. Senan presented a paper at the Asia Pacific AIDS conference in Kobe, Japan where he got roundly criticised ( even if his arguments had any substance, which they didn't, it was an extraordinarily bad paper and it was amazing that he never expected people to react badly to it.). Basically, they have found very small numbers of HIV+ people through this programme ( which was entirely predictable because they are testing a pretty low-risk population). BUT what was interesting was that they found that about a third of them were women ( so much for protecting women from men!). Furthermore, except for one couple, all the rest got married and then experienced all sorts of marital problems, including refusal to even live together.

Now without access to these couples, we can only surmise what happened. In all likelihood, they were not given enough counselling so did not understand what it means to have HIV in the marriage, what precautions to take etc. Hence the marital discord. Also it is quite likely that, because of the stigma attached to AIDS, couples tested HIV+ decided to get married anyway because to not do so would raise all sorts of awkward questions. We also have anecdotes of couples running off to other states to get doctors to falsify their test results ( they were turned down).

So, based on this non-success, as I would call it ( and let's not even calculate the cost of all this), other states have followed suit. No evaluations, no reports, nothing. Yet lots of people in the general public, including women, think this is a good idea. I really wonder how many people, getting married to the one they supposedly love, will simply change their minds once they know their fiance/cee's status? Not many women, let me tell you.

But the other issue is this: why is the religious department making health policy, especially one with budgetary implications on another department? I asked the Minister of Health this once, and although he does not agree with this testing, he says it is a service they have to provide when asked, much like other agencies have to provide electricity and water. And shouldn't we be testing everyone, not just Muslim couples? But they target Muslims first because we are the only ones who can be 'regulated' by a government body. (By the way, I guess nobody has noticed that the Ministry of Health's National AIDS Strategy includes mandatory premarital testing for ALL couples, regardless of religion. So, we will be even more in contravention of WHO recommendations soon.)

So after health policy, what next for our religious departments? Economic policy? Foreign policy? Business? Is this the back-door Islamisation of the state administration? Interestingly enough, Kelantan, with its PAS government, only started mandatory premarital testing this year, a full 5 years after Johor and the other Barisan states.

Another interesting thing: when Dr Senan went to talk to the Mufti of Perak about starting this there, the Mufti rejected it because he said you can't deny people the right to get married. Which is well and good, but not the same as wanting to protect people, especially women, from HIV. (Of course, he also thinks that if you do get HIV, then you should be put on an island...) I don't have a problem with testing, as long as it's voluntary, is accompanied by counselling and is completely confidential. But this type of testing is seen by the public as punitive. After all, the only other people who have to undergo mandatory testing are drug users, sex workers, prisoners and migrant workers. So it's not something you would willingly submit to unless you have no choice. If you want to have legal sex, by getting married, then you have no choice. Great huh?

Why don't we just educate people about HIV/AIDS with accurate information and tell them about safer sex? So much cheaper than all this testing and certainly more effective. As it is, our numbers are still rising and I doubt we will see any downturn for a while, despite official optimistic predictions.

Sorry, this is longwinded but I never get a chance to really explain this to the public. I just have to sit in frustration as Malaysia does things without any scientific basis and thinks it is being so clever.

Farewell Mak Bibi

Hi all,

I meant to post something yesterday but as you may have read, my beloved aunt Habsah (more fondly known as Mak Bibi) passed away yesterday at the ripe old age of 90. She will be greatly missed by my family, especially my father, because we all adored her for her affectionate and gentle ways and her ever-smiling face. She was buried this morning next to her late husband Abdul Ghani (Pak Nani) and her parents, my Tok Mat and Tok Wan, and near her son, Roslan.

By the way, the report in the NST today said that she was one of five children, two boys and three girls. This is not true and for the sake of accuracy and to respect my other uncles, I just want to correct that. My late grandfather Mohamad Iskandar had eight children: a son the late Murad and a daughter (also now deceased) I called Khala ( Aunty) by his first wife. After she died, he married my grandmother Wan Tempahwan and with her he had my oldest aunt Rafeah (Mak Teh), the late Mak Bibi, the late Mahadi, the late Mashahor, the late Mak Yon, and my Dad. So now there are only two of them left.

Anyway, this is all part of life. I am just grateful that I have a whole lifetime of fond memories of my Mak Bibi to keep.

Here I am!

Hello world, yes tis me, pulled kicking and screaming into the world of blogging...at last! Why am I doing this after being sceptical for so long? Well, for one thing, someone else started a 'blog' called musingwithmarinamahathir which everyone thinks is me. And it's NOT! I don't mind it very much because as people keep telling me it's much more convenient to have all my columns on one site ( there goes my next book...:-( ). I just mind that Sambal Belacan never asked me if he/she could do this! I would have said yes probably.

Secondly, after seeing all the comments to 'Kak Marina', I thought I better respond in case they all think I'm so sombong or something. So...by default, here is my very own blog.

Now I don't promise that this will be earth-shaking stuff. I have no idea what I will write about at any given time. But if you notice, this one is called Rantings. Having mused for so long and getting angrier by the week, as well as being frustrated by the word limit I have at The Star (800 words), I thought this might be a useful space for me to really rant, rave and rage. And really confirm to all my detractors that I really am a nasty smart-alecky woman, ha, ha.

Anyway I am going to write about all my favourite stuff like the state of our beloved country (breaks my heart), human rights issues ( including that of half of humanity, women), religion ( hey, I actually have one so I should be able to talk about it!), HIV/AIDS ( because it allows me to talk about all the above through a very particular perspective...and because you all need constant reminding)....and maybe politics (because I don't normally). And maybe I will tell you what my daughter said today that was so cute ( and often perceptive), what music I'm listening to (women! Go out and get Sean Ghazi's new album Semalam! Guys, get it for your girlfriends and wives!!!), what movies, that sort of thing. Why not? We are all full and complete people aren't we?

OK, enough already for an introduction. Let's see how it goes.