What winning is to Christians

Kee Thuan Chye has argued that Christians were on the winning side on the Al Kitab and Allah issues. Wrong. His worldview is based on a win-lose paradigm limited by human perspectives.

The Christian worldview is a triple-win paradigm; not one limited by the space and time paradigm of worldly matters. Even other worldly matters do matter; even if they are not matter per se .

My professor, Peter Vaill, wrote that ‘Winning is what we define winning to be!’ I agree. Winning for Christians on the matter of the Al Kitab and the Allah word is about truth matters. It is not about winning or losing ego battles.

It is about the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. It is about the entire history of the nation of Israel and her people over the period of pre-His-Story (i.e. BC or Before Christ) and their inability to ‘be faithful and obedient to their God’. They finally ‘won’ when the promise of God to Abraham was fulfilled in ‘the seed of David’, who Christians believe is the God-Man Jesus Christ.

Winning for Christians is, by faith and through the Grace of God, choosing to follow the lived example of Jesus. Christians believe that he came to demonstrate the truth that matters, and demonstrated that this truth of a forgiving God can be experienced because of His life, death, and resurrection from earth.

Truth for Christians is therefore to live by faith, speak the truth in love, and believe that one day Jesus will come to judge the whole world. Even Muslims believe that Jesus will come to judge the world.

Therefore, Kee, Christians won in a win-lose sense of your definition but not in their own hearts and minds. In their hearts, they will each have their own imagination and personal perspectives and convictions, which we will hear about from time to time, but rest assured that they will not march on the streets over this matter.

They will vote against the BN government in Sarawak if they are not happy about the situation but they will not carry cow heads or pig heads or even goat heads.

Theologically, I believe Idris Jala quoted the most apt passage of Jesus’ teaching about how many times Christians must forgive, and rightly pointed out that it is seven times 77 times. He obviously brokered a deal over an impasse for the time being, also because he rightly believes that certain polarities cannot be bridged but merely managed.

The final settlement for Christians will be for the attorney-general to drop the government’s appeal against the Allah issue and accept the verdict as decided by the learned High Court judge. Then even the SIB case in the High Court will drop. And, most importantly, the rule of law will prevail in Malaysia, finally.

As for Sarawak, my urging is for Christians to review the BN government’s antics, as led and driven by the Umno leadership, and simply vote on conscience regarding local issues. Much like in Cairo or Tunisia or Libya, the real question is, are the people of Sarawak getting the development they deserve? That is the only question for this state election.

After 30 years of Abdul Taib Mahmud’s leadership and after 46 years of BN leadership, are the long houses better off today? Are they getting piped water, or is it really that their rivers and God’s water supply are even drying up because of the many damned dams being built for pecuniary benefit of powers-that-be?

Fat cats in Sarawak

I first visited Sarawak in 1974 when I was assigned to study ‘the jungle boots problem’ raised to premier Abdul Razak Hussein by the soldiers of the Ranger Regiment in Sarawak. Their boots could be pierced by jungle thorns.

For military warfare in the jungles of Borneo this was a totally unacceptable predicament. On my fact-finding mission, the instructions of my boss in KL were simple: Go and find the truth and report the truth on all matters.

At that time, strangely and coincidently, my immediate neighbour in KL, next to the Tugu Negara, was none other than Taib and his wife with some young children. Other than exchanging a casual greeting, I never got to know them; Taib’s sons were my juniors in RMC but I had never met them.

From my visits and investigations, the facts were uncovered and in fact, the jungle boots were of a sub-standard issue. The further investigations were carried out by Defence Ministry (Mindef) but the problem definition and issue recognition was done within the ICDAU of the Prime Minister’s Department.

The uncovering of this issue was so sensitive that once when I was in Mindef for a budget meeting, I was summoned by the deputy secretary-general and questioned as to why I had not sought his views over the matter before reporting to the PM about it. I said this was beyond my jurisdiction and such issues were directly under my big boss, and asked the Senior Office to talk to him.

Even today, the biggest issue in Sarawak is still the culture of corruption and abuse of power and authority. I am told that the so-called leaders are not community leaders any more but closet politicians who make promises but do not deliver and most choose to become fat cats for their own interest. They obviously lack integrity.

My view is that they must be judged for what they have not done in the last 30 years. How many villages and longhouses have no electricity and water? Why?

Does it also mean that Razak’s development model did not reach the very ends of Sarawak? Why not?  Can we then call Razak the Father of Modern Development in Malaysia?

Or, should we just call him ‘father of Malayan development’ or, worse, only ‘father of Malay development’, with Mara, Felda and PNB to his genuine credit? How many Malaysians have fully benefitted from such development in Malaysia? And why haven’t the Sarawakians and the other Orang Asal of Sabah and Malaya received the same quality of development?

Development in Malaysia must be done with equity and fairness. I am sorry, but this is not visible in Sabah and Sarawak. The rural countryside of both states is not in good stead. I believe that it is time we change all that by allowing more and stronger representation of the opposition in Sarawak and Sabah.  

Let us start with change in Sarawak, and then we can move to Sabah. The peoples of the Middle East have risen to demand their rights for a quality of life which is decent and somewhat equitable. It is a fair request.

Wealth cannot be squandered simply by the greed of bad and poor leadership; wherever such poor leadership is found. Let us therefore pray for change in Sarawak. The simple and ordinary people must speak now before it is too late. This is my prayer.

May God bless Sarawak with good clean leadership!