Our support is what they need most NOT THE HOLLYWOOD UNITY: We all have a role to play even if we are not on the front line, by Leslie Andres

BELEAGUERED interim Chelsea manager Rafael Benitez has had his ups and downs since taking over the London football club in November.

His team has won some, drawn some and lost some. He has come under fire from Chelsea fans since he took over and he has fired his own salvo every now and then against the fans.

But if there is one thing "Rafa" has done right was a press conference he gave a couple of weeks ago in which he said his criticism of the fans was merely meant to rally them round the team in order to help Chelsea finish in the top four of the Barclays Premier League.

"The fans are really important for the team. We need the atmosphere we had against Arsenal (in January) and Napoli."

Whether or not he was speaking the truth about his criticisms being meant to rally the troops is beside the point. The fact is that Benitez recognised that without the support of the fans, the team would not do as well as they could.

Having the support of the fans is one of the most important things for any sports team. A boisterous group of fans can be the "12th player" in a football team, or the "sixth" in a basketball team.
In much the same way -- only in a more critical area -- the security forces of any nation need to have that nation's citizens behind them.

One only has to look at the Vietnam War in order to understand this. The United States' involvement in Vietnam was a wildly unpopular war in America. Soldiers came under fire from American civilians and this translated into demoralised troops on the front lines.

Things became even worse when the North Vietnamese Army and the Viet Cong launched what became known as the Tet Offensive in January 1968, deep in South Vietnamese territory. Tet is the Vietnamese Lunar New Year and, prior to 1968, this had always been a period of relative calm as both the North and the South celebrated the biggest holiday in Indochina.

What the Tet Offensive "proved" to the American people was that the US and its South Vietnamese allies were not winning the war. From then on, an unpopular war grew more and more unpopular as more and more US servicemen died.

Those who survived returned home not to a hero's greeting or ticker tape parades, but to scorn and derision, even among their own kin. Many would never recover from what they had gone through in Vietnam, more so because they did not have the support of loved ones.

Draw these parallels here, with what has been happening in the east coast of Sabah. There have been voices of dissent, of derision. There has been a lack of support for our men and women in green, white and blue (and black, in some cases).

Thankfully, this has only been a small segment of our generally patriotic society. But any negative element can be a cancer which can take on a life of its own and grow into some ugly, monstrous being devouring anything in its path.

There is nothing worse for a soldier or policeman than to know that his countrymen, the ones for whom he is fighting and dying, are not behind him.

The fact that their comrades have been killed. The fact that some of these comrades were decapitated and mutilated. These are not what demoralises a fighting man. These things make him fight harder. These things make him more determined.

These things are nothing compared to knowing that your countrymen do not support you. Why fight and die for someone who does not appreciate it?

The greater part of Malaysia is grateful to our security forces right now. On social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, the outpouring of love for and pride in our men has been overwhelming, even from among those who have vehemently criticised them in the past for even the smallest mistake, real or imagined.

Everyone will have his or her opinion, of course. But an appeal must go out to all those with negative opinions to withhold them, at least for public consumption. Keep these opinions to yourselves.
We may not be over there fighting, but we still have a role to play. Let's do all we can to bring our boys home in one piece.

'Tis the time to rally behind the flag' GENEROUS LOT: This country is never short of those who will contribute to a worthy cause by Ahmad A Talib

RAMZI sounded anxious and impatient. The  attack by the Sulu terrorists on the Malay-sian state of Sabah had caught most people by surprise. Most were angry and felt violated.

The attack claimed the lives of 10 Malaysian soldiers and policemen. Scores of Sulu terrorists were also killed and more have surrendered.

So, on his own initiative, Ramzi started to raise funds for our fallen heroes in Kg Tanduo in Lahad Datu and Semporna. In the last couple of weeks, corporations and individuals have come forward with their contributions.

Ramzi gathered his friends, customers and associates. In less than a week, he collected some RM20,000 which he deposited into the Tabung Wira Lahad Datu Media Prima. The handover was at a simple ceremony at Ramzi's kopitiam, Killiney's, at the Amoda Building in Bukit Bintang.

As if the killing of our security personnel wasn't enough, there are also individuals who go around belittling the efforts of our policemen and soldiers.

Not to mention certain politicians who make irresponsible and mischievous statements that the terrorist attack was orchestrated by the government.

Also at the Killiney's Kopitiam was our kapcai solo rider, Hadi Hussein, who had gathered at the kopitiam with fellow bikers for breakfast. The bikers passed the hat around and they collected almost RM400 that was duly deposited into the same fund.

You may recall that Hadi rode his kapcai from Kuala Lumpur to London three years ago and then made a solo ride following the equator crisscrossing Malaysia and Indonesia earlier this year.

This country is never short of generous individuals who will contribute cash to a worthy cause. In a space of less than two weeks, we have collected almost RM1.5 million from generous Malaysians in support of the grieving families of our fallen heroes.

The story is also told of pupil Chong Jin Hui who diverted her savings of RM180 for a class excursion to the Tabung. This is not a big amount but it certainly reflected the young lass' big heart where helping others are concerned.

Ramzi's way of raising funds was based on the daily revenue at 20 of his kopitiam outlets. A small percentage of the daily sales was set aside for the Tabung. The company added some money which led to the RM20,000 donation.

Our national carrier, MAS, is also allocating a small percentage of its ticket sales to Tabung Wira Lahad Datu. Its group chief executive officer, Datuk Ahmad Jauhari Yahya, over coffee, told me this would be the airline's contribution to the families and survivors of the soldiers and policemen who gave their lives so that others may live.

The big givers have their photographs published in the newspapers. But the small, individual donors are just as important. Collectively, they have contributed more than half a million ringgit to the Tabung.
They did this by depositing the cash straight into the Tabung's account at Maybank via account number 5142-7133-9000.

Another way of raising funds for our heroes will be announced next week. At this point, we must all rally behind our security personnel.

And don't forget to raise the flag as well. Watch out for the new initiative in support of our fallen heroes next week.

Ahmad A Talib

Read more: 'Tis the time to rally behind the flag - Columnist - New Straits Times http://www.nst.com.my/opinion/columnist/tis-the-time-to-rally-behind-the-flag-1.236181#ixzz2No6O5jIM

The Opposition's seven deadly sins. UNSTABLE PACT: In the lead-up to the general election, Pakatan Rakyat is tripping over itself with blunders

WHEN the Pahang  authorities briefed Chinese investors about the landmark multi-million-ringgit Malaysia-China industrial park in Gebeng, none of them raised concern over the Lynas rare earth plant that had  just opened in the vicinity.

In fact, they wanted the industrial park to be moved closer to the Kuantan port and nearer to the Lynas plant.

The only group that seems unable to make up its mind on the Lynas project is Pakatan Rakyat. There have been incredible flip-flops by the opposition bloc, the latest by Parti Keadilan Rakyat vice-president Fuziah Salleh.

Drawing on Pakatan's election manifesto, she insisted last week that Pakatan would shut down the plant if it ever came to power.

"We shall shut down Lynas once Pakatan Rakyat gets to form the Federal Government," the first-term Kuantan member of parliament declared.

Didn't she realise that her own leader, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, recently came out to publicly renege on Pakatan's promise to halt the plant just weeks after it unveiled its manifesto?

In a major policy reversal, Anwar told Australia's Sydney Morning Herald: "If Lynas can come out with a convincing argument that there is no risk to public safety and security, I will be the first to champion the plant there."

Anwar is probably aware that all scientific studies prove that the plant is environmentally safe and that further opposition to the project is not likely to gain much political momentum.
Fuziah, a firm critic of Lynas, may also soon realise that Lynas is a non-issue, as far as Kuantan voters are concerned.

In the 2008 general election, Fuziah defeated incumbent Kuantan MP Datuk Fu Ah Kiow with a majority of just 1,826 votes. Ironically, the three state seats in the Kuantan parliamentary constituency were won by Barisan Nasional.

The Lynas episode illustrates the government's point on why voters should not trust Pakatan when it comes to keeping its promises.

INABILITY to deliver on its promises is one of the seven great sins of the opposition, according to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

Exposing Pakatan's sins of omission and commission at a mammoth gathering in Kelantan on Friday, the BN leader also listed out six other sins committed by the opposition. They are:
ALLOWING the term "Allah" to be used by non-Muslims;
ALLOWING DAP leaders to get land in Lojing Highlands in Kelantan;
INDISCRIMINATE clearing of highland forests;
PAS compromising on its own Islamic struggle;
PKR'S Tian Chua's remarks on the armed intrusion into Lahad Datu; and,
THE unholy political alliance between Pas, PKR and DAP.

Opposition supporters must be fuming over a series of blunders by their leaders, the latest being Tian Chua, whose uncalled for remarks on the Lahad Datu incident had crossed the line and could cost some votes for Pakatan.

At the same time, there are some unanswered questions on the links between Anwar and Moro National Liberation Front's Nur Misuari following their secret meeting in Jakarta in July last year.
Both must have met on the sidelines of an international forum on "reconciliation" put together by Strategic Review, a quarterly journal of policy and ideas published in Jakarta. Other top speakers included Jose Ramos-Horta, the former president of Timor Leste, and former Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

WikiLeaks' revelation on the link between Anwar and Misuari that went as far back as 2007 and even longer must have certainly raised eyebrows, both in Manila and Putrajaya. WikiLeaks had exposed diplomatic cables sent by the United States embassy in Manila to the US State Department.

This general election could be Anwar's last hurrah in his bid for power. But with a series of unpleasant events in recent weeks that have really tested Pakatan's mettle, the opposition bloc could be struggling to repeat its 2008 performance.


Read more: The opposition's seven deadly sins - Columnist - New Straits Times http://www.nst.com.my/opinion/columnist/the-opposition-s-seven-deadly-sins-1.236177#ixzz2No56Dxp9

A small contribution will go a long way in honouring our fallen heroes

A small donation for families of our fallen heroes

Sabah It’s time to close the chapter. A major shift in Malaysia's position on the Philippine claim to Sabah is needed.

THE Philippines Government officially announced their claim to North Borneo (now Sabah) on June 22, 1962. Despite numerous attempts to settle the issue, it still festers on, exemplified by the latest tragic events unfolding on the east coast of Sabah.

The Philippine claim is based on two documents dated Jan 22, 1878. By the first document, Sultan Muhammad Jamaluladzam granted (pajak) all his territorial possessions in Borneo (tanah besar Pulau Berunai) to Gustavus Baron de Overbeck and Alfred Dent Esquire as representatives of a British Company for a yearly payment/ quit rent (hasil pajakan) of five thousand dollars (Spanish dollars).

By the second document, the said Sultan appointed Overbeck as “Dato' Bendahara and Rajah of Sandakan” with the fullest powers of a “supreme ruler” (penghulu pemerintah atas kerajaan yang tersebut itu).

Descendants of Sultan Muhammad Jamaluladzam (the number cannot be ascertained, but is large), represented by the Kiram Corporation and the Philippine Government, have always claimed that this 1878 grant was a lease (pajakan) and not a cession as claimed by Malaysia. The continuous annual payment of the quit rent or cession monies of five thousand dollars (now RM5,300) to these descendants is cited as further proof of this contention. Based on these grounds, they claim, Sabah belongs to the Philippines/ the Sultan of Sulu's descendants.

Before discussing how Malaysia has been responding to this assertion and how it should alter its position drastically, a little bit of historical narrative is in order.

Without going too far back in time, it is suffice to say historical documents confirm that both the Sultanate of Brunei and the Sultanate of Sulu exercised political control over parts of present-day Sabah (there was no State or Negeri Sabah at that time) in the late 19th century. Brunei had defacto jurisdiction on the west coast from Kimanis to Pandasan, while Sulu ruled the east coast from Marudu to the Sibuku River. The interior was largely independent under local indigenous suku chiefs.

Both Sultanates, however, claimed dejure jurisdiction from the Pandasan on the west coast to the Sibuku River on the east. Both Sultanates were also in a state of decline. Brunei was suffering from internal decay while large parts of its territories were being swallowed up by the new state of Sarawak under the Brookes.

In the Philippine region, the Spanish authorities in Manila had been trying to subjugate the independent and powerful kingdom of Sulu for three centuries without success. In 1871, the Spaniards launched another exerted campaign to conquer the stubborn kingdom.

It was in this kind of environment that a number of European and American speculators became interested in obtaining territorial concessions from the two weak Sultanates for speculative purposes. Among them were Lee Moses and Joseph Torrey of America; and Baron von Overbeck and Alfred Dent who had formed a company called the Overbeck-Dent Association on March 27, 1877 in London for the purpose of obtaining land concessions in Sabah and selling them for a profit.

Overbeck and Dent acquired Brunei's jurisdiction over its Sabah possessions in five documents dated Dec 29, 1877 from the Sultan of Brunei and his ministers. After this, Overbeck sailed to Jolo where he also obtained the rights of the Sultan of Sulu in Sabah through two agreements concluded on Jan 22, 1878.

Why was Sultan Muhammad Jamaluladzan prepared to lease/ grant/ pajak his territories in Sabah to Overbeck and Dent? Sulu was on the brink of capitulating to the Spaniards and as such Sultan Muhammad was hopeful of obtaining some assistance from the Overbeck-Dent Association and possibly even from Britain. Placed in such dire straits, he was therefore not adverse to giving Overbeck and Dent territorial concessions in Sabah with some hope of salvation.

In the event, no such aid came either from the Overbeck-Dent Association or the British Government. Six months after the Overbeck-Dent grants were concluded, Sulu was conquered by the Spanish authorities on July 2 1878. With the fall of Sulu, the said Sultanate ceased to be an independent entity as it was incorporated as part of the Spanish colonial administration of the Philippines.

In 1898, Spain lost the Philippines to the United States by the Peace of Paris (Dec 10, 1898), which ended the Spanish-American War. The US ruled the Philippines till 1946 when independence was granted.

Meanwhile, in 1936, the US colonial administration of the Philippines abolished the Sulu Sultanate upon the death of Sultan Jamalul Kiram II (1894-1936) in the same year in an attempt to create a unitary State of the Philippines. Jamalul Kiram III is a self- appointed “Sultan” with a dubious legal status.

Now, coming back to the question of Malaysia's ongoing treatment of the claim, and why and how it should completely alter this position. Since the official announcement of the claim by the Philippine Government on June 22, 1962, Malaysia has been pursuing an ambivalent policy. On the one hand, it has persistently rejected the Philippines claim, but on the other it has compromised Malaysia's sovereignty by agreeing to settle the “dispute” by peaceful means (such as the Manila Agreement, Aug 3, 1963) and a number of other mutual agreements between the two countries.

Most damaging of all is Malaysia's willingness to honour the clause in the 1878 Sulu grant pertaining to the payment of the annual quit rent or cession monies as Malaysia says, of RM5,300, to the descendants of the former Sulu Sultanate. To this day, Malaysia is still paying this quit rent, lending credence to the claimants' argument that the 1878 grant was a lease and not a cession and therefore it still belongs to them.

If Malaysia continues to follow this policy, there will be no end to this problem except to buy out the rights of the descendents of the Sultan of Sulu. But this course is fraught with danger as it will lead to further legal complications with the Philippines and even endless litigation with the descendants.

My proposal is that Malaysia should go by the laws of “effectivities”, as in the case of the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) judgement pertaining to the issue of sovereignty over the Sipadan and Ligitan islands, and the law of acts of a'titre de souverain as in the case of Pulau Batu Puteh. No title, however strong, is valid once the original owner fails to exercise acts consistent with the position of a'titre de souverain. The opposite is true, that is, the holder of the lease may not have original title but he ultimately gains permanent possession of the lease by virtue of continuous state “effectivities”.

In this case, the Sultan of Sulu and its successors including the Philippine government have failed to conduct any acts of a'titre de souverain since 1882, and so they have legally lost their title.

On the other hand, the successors of the Overbeck-Dent Association, that is the British North Borneo Company (1882-1946); the British Colonial Administration (1946-1963); and Malaysia, (from 1963) have been exercising continuous acts of a'titre de souverain for a period of 131 years.

Since we have all this evidence on our side, Malaysia should now take a new stand by totally rejecting the validity of the 1878 grants on the grounds of “effectivitie” and a'titre de souverain. It should also immediately stop paying the so-called annual quit rent or cession monies. This payment has always brought huge embarrassment to Malaysia and has in fact compromised its sovereignty.

We should also never agree to go to the International Court of Justice not because our case is weak (it is very strong), but because we don't want to trade the fate of sovereign territories and people through the judgment of any court, even the ICJ.

There's one more point that should be pondered upon. No country or state or nation which has obtained independence has ever paid ownership monies to its former masters. The 13 Colonies of America did not do so, India did not do so, the Federation of Malaya did not do so.

Sabah became an independent state on Aug 31, 1963 and decided to form the Federation of Malaysia with three other partners on Sept 16, 1963. It is strange indeed, if not preposterous, that a sovereign state is paying ownership or cession monies to certain people based on a colonial, pre-independence treaty that is 131 years old!

Emeritus Prof D. S. Ranjit Singh is Visiting Professor at the College of Law, Government and International Studies, Universiti Utara Malaysia (ranjit@uum.edu.my).

Philippines: Peace Agreement Between Manila and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF)

The Peace Accord to be signed in Manila on the 15th of October 2012 between the Philippine Government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) is of tremendous significance to the Philippines nation. If it succeeds, it will not only bring to an end a decades-old conflict which has claimed at least 150,000 lives but also resolve the larger question of the rights and dignity of the Muslim populace in a land that they once ruled —- a question which is deeply rooted in the tragic history of Spanish colonialism and American occupation.
The Accord addresses the primary concerns of both the Manila Government and the Muslims of Mindanao. For the Government it preserves the territorial integrity and the geographical unity of the nation in accordance with the Philippine Constitution. Besides, the Government will retain authority over foreign policy, defence, security, monetary matters and citizenship. Mindanao Muslims will exercise some control over revenues, enjoy an equitable share of the benefits of taxation, and manage local-level law enforcement within an autonomous Bangsamoro region which will come into being in about two years.

The Peace Accord will be finalised in 2016 by which time details about the extent of the Bangsamoro territory and the laws governing the region would be worked out. The next few years will also witness a plebiscite to be followed by an election. A Ministerial form of Government will most likely take shape.

Given the challenges that lie ahead before peace becomes a reality, one can only be cautiously optimistic about the future. After all there have been many other attempts in the past to reach a settlement. The Tripoli Agreement of 1976 failed to end the violence when the late President Ferdinand Marcos violated its terms. In 1989 the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) was created but was never really implemented. Then in 1996, the Philippine Government and the Mindanao National Liberation Front (MNLF) signed an agreement which gave some substance to the ARMM. Again, the implementation was hobbled by elements on both sides of the divide. From 2002 to 2010, the Manila-Mindanao conflict blew hot and cold with peace talks punctuating escalating military confrontations on the ground. Finally, in August 2011, President Benigno Aquino met up with MILF chief, Al Haj Murad Ibrahim, in Tokyo and resumed peace negotiations which in spite of setbacks here and there culminated in the present Peace Accord.

If we reflect upon the failures of the past, it is apparent that the lack of sincerity on the part of critical groups and individuals among the principal protagonists at the level of implementation has been the main stumbling-block. President Aquino and Al Haj Murad appear to be determined to ensure that the Peace Accord succeeds. Their political will is going to be a critical factor.

Equally important would be the immediate and effective implementation of people oriented socio-economic programmes that will help overcome problems of poverty, unemployment and social immobility in those parts of Mindanao that will eventually become Bangsamoro land. It is not just the Philippine Government that will have to play a role in this. Its ASEAN partners must be willing to come forward. Malaysia, in tandem with the Philippine Government, should take the lead in mobilising both the public and private sectors in ASEAN to meet the challenge of fulfilling the basic aspirations of the Bangsamoro people. After all, it is Malaysia, more than any other ASEAN state, that has been adversely affected by the protracted turmoil in Mindanao which has seen thousands of Filipinos crossing the border to Sabah over a period of almost four decades.

It is also true that Malaysia had played an important part in the quest for peace in Mindanao. Malaysia’s second Prime Minister, the late Tun Razak Hussein, was the first ASEAN leader to raise the question of the plight of the Mindanao Muslims in ASEAN circles in the early seventies. The fourth Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, as the host to the peace talks from 2001, was instrumental in keeping the dialogue going in very difficult circumstances. From 2010, the current Prime Minister, Dato Sri Mohd Najib Razak, showed a firm commitment to the peace negotiations — a fact that was acknowledged by Aquino when he announced the Accord in Manila on the 7th of October 2012.

Indeed, the role that Malaysia has played in facilitating the Manila-Mindanao Peace Accord is a reflection of the emphasis it has given since Independence to the peaceful resolution of territorial disputes involving the nation itself and other nations. There are few other countries in the world that have demonstrated through deeds such an unwavering commitment to peace among nations, a peace that shuns war, violence and bloodshed. Malaysia’s outstanding contribution to major UN helmed peace-keeping missions since 1961 and its principled opposition to wars such as the Iraq War of 2003 would testify to this. Our regional and international record on behalf of peace is in a sense an extension of our dedication to the maintenance of inter-ethnic peace in one of the most complex multi- ethnic nations in the world —- a feat which has few parallels on earth.

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is a Malaysian political scientist and President of the International Movement for a Just World (JUST)

BN hopes to wrest back Selangor

PETALING JAYA: Barisan Nasional hopes to wrest back Selangor from the Opposition and turn it into the first to achieve the Economic Transformation Programme target of a high-income state.

Selangor Barisan Nasional coordinator and election deputy director Datuk Seri Mohd Zin Mohamed said they hoped to win back the country's richest state by engaging the grassroots and making the necessary adjustments based on their feedback.

“To do that, the people must realise that the political equation in Selangor cannot be separated from that of Putrajaya,” he said on SwitchUp.tv's GE 13 Showdown: Mother of all Battles, hosted by Anne Edwards.

Mohd Zin said that Selangor would need to synergise with the Federal Government to achieve high-income status.

There are two million voters in Selangor, 50.3% of whom are Malays, 34% Chinese and 14% Indians. The age group 31-40 and 41-50 have about 480,000 voters each. The 21-to-30-year-olds make up 400,000 of the voters while those over 50 comprise around 645,000 voters, he said.

He added that the younger voters were more Barisan-friendly as they had been in contact via social media and other methods.

He said that the Barisan hotline received many complaints from the residents, especially regarding issues under the jurisdiction of local councils.

On Barisan Selangor's manifesto, Mohd Zin said that it was in the final stages of drafting and would address the welfare, education and economic needs of the people.