THE atrocities inflicted on the Palestinian people are foremost on the minds of most Malaysians. Visuals on television and newspapers are filled with news on innocent children and women being killed or injured; the lack of food and medicine, and above all, the people being helpless as the violence carries on unimpeded, no thanks to a world which is watching it all happen with their arms folded. Our sympathies are with our fellow human beings. But war or violence, wherever it be, in Palestine, Sudan, Congo, Sri Lanka, Colombia or even at our doorstep, in southern Thailand brings no benefit to anyone except the perpetrators.
Almost every local politician worth his salt has given his views on what’s happening in the Middle East and his solution which inevitably centres on one magic word which all of them think is the only way to stop the carnage which is going on. That magic word – boycott – has unfortunately been abused and misused in the name of justice and I will put up my hands and "plead guilty" to such a charge.
About 15 years ago when the price of dressed chicken spiralled upwards, I spearheaded a "No Chicken Day" campaign in a column in another newspaper. I reasoned that if every Malaysian did not touch chicken for a day, we would be able to bring the breeders, the wholesalers, the middlemen and the retailers to their knees. They would be saddled with hundreds of thousands of chicken and they would have to bring the prices down. To cut a long story short, it did not happen. While a group of hardcore supporters went vegetarian or opted for fish, I think 99.999% of Malaysians couldn’t resist the ayam madu in Bangsar; the chicken perattal in Jalan Gasing, the ayam goreng in Kampung Baru or the kai fan in Birch Road.
From that one and only "boycott" campaign, there were several lessons to be learnt. Firstly, if there is nothing beneficial for them, generally Malaysians do not want to walk the extra mile. Secondly, the feeling of "can one man make a change" syndrome is still in place in the hearts and minds of people. Thirdly, and more importantly, the attitude of "why should I give up something I like" is prevalent in our society.
I can only guess that the vociferous politicians and their cronies who were issuing press releases used Microsoft Word to compose them. So, if they are screaming blue murder and asking for a boycott of US products, shouldn’t they have ought to have used an Olivetti typewriter or written their press releases? To those who used Coral Draw or Adobe for the posters and banners, where did you think these programs come from?
They want us to stop consuming Coca-Cola but not Pepsi but the irony is that both are US-based products albeit bottled locally. They want us to boycott McDonald’s but don’t utter a word on other fast-food chains which are franchises of US food chains. Sometimes, you begin to wonder whether there is an "udang sebalik batu" because of such selective "persecution". Are competitors behind the smearing of well-known brands and companies which have nothing to do with what’s happening in Gaza with their might, influence and money?
The boycotts won’t work; the demonstrations won’t help; the rhetoric will fall on deaf ears and Israel has taken a "shout till your hearts’ content and we don’t care" attitude. So, what will work?
If anything is needed, it is affirmative action by our leaders a’la our first prime minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra who spearheaded the international campaign against apartheid policies by getting South Africa expelled from the Commonwealth in 1962.
In confidential papers kept by the Canadian government on the Tunku’s official visit in 1962 (which have since been declassified) they say the following:
"The Tunku has been anxious to demonstrate by concrete action the opposition felt in Malaya to the racial policies of the South African Government. In a speech to the Malayan House of Representatives on June 20, the Tunku disregarded precedent and quoted excerpts from the confidential record of the 1960 Prime Ministers’ Conference in order to show that he had made every effort to force a discussion of South Africa’s racial policies. He then announced that he was writing to the prime ministers of all democratic countries asking for their views on positive action to be taken against apartheid. He also suggested informally that limited representation for Africans should be introduced in the South African parliament — possibly 10 members on a limited franchise. This representation could later be gradually enlarged.
"Subsequently in a letter, the Tunku reiterated his concern about apartheid and announced his country’s prohibition of the import of South African goods. He suggested that other nations might wish to consider taking positive individual action as well, or alternatively they might prefer a conference to discuss at greater length what action should be taken. Malaya was prepared to act as host to such a conference if it were generally felt it would be useful."
In this instance, rhetoric will not work. The answer lies in a global stance against not only Israel but any nation or group which indulges in violence against its own people. Are we ready to spearhead a United Nations resolution to expel nations which carry out crimes against humanity? If the Commonwealth joined hands to keep Pakistan out and later expelled Zimbabwe, the question is: Why can’t Malaysia seek support to pressure the Commonwealth nations to move such a UN resolution?
R. Nadeswaran has seen enough violence of war the world over and the destruction and harm it inflicts on innocent people, thanks to satellite television. He’s disappointed that there’s more talk than action. He can be reached at: citizen-nades@thesundaily.com
1.gif)
08052009NEW.gif)
.jpg)