Am I being a racist? Or, simply a realist? Yes, my question is a real and honest one. When we were in the Royal Military College (RMC), only two of the eight Senior Under Officers (or SUOs) in 1968 were Chinese. Why?

We were three Malays, two Chinese, and three Indians. Why not?

If we use the race-based theory, then it should have been 4-3-1, as per the racial quota for most things by the ruling government. The RMC then only had 30 percent non-Malays, not even 45 percent – except for the case of Singaporeans in our intake.

They had one each, apart from the fact that they were the first and last three ever to be in the RMC after Singapore left Malaysia. But, we had zero Sabahans and Sarawakians; I wonder why?

I have a clear definition for who is a real or serious Malaysian – apart from all those holding blue Malaysian ICs.

They must be at least a second-generation Malayan and must be Malaysia-born – i.e. born in Malaya, Sabah, or Sarawak after 1963. In the case of Singapore, it is only those born between 1963 and 1965. Then, they chose to move out of Singapore to live in Malaysia.

Next, who is a true blue Chinese (or Malay, or Indian) Malaysian and therefore, not a mere migrant of the \’pendatang\’ variety?

I offer a simple, but justifiable demarcation line. To me, their grandparents must have migrated to Malaya – or the rest of Malaysia – more than 90 years ago. 30 years is usually taken to mean one generation; so a three-generation heritage in Malaya or the Borneo states is needed, at the very least.

Therefore, these are Malaysians of the fourth generation – i.e. those who can claim true and real \”Malaysian-ness\”.

In my case, only our grandson Mikhael Elisha Isaacs is a true blue Indian Malaysian, going by my definition. The rest of us are ‘pendatangs’, as is so many of my Malay and Chinese RMC classmates, too, and one was even a chief secretary.

After the last general election, BN Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak asked the rhetorical question: “Apa lagi Cina mahu?” (or what else do the Chinese want?)

It was presumably a real and honest question; it was honest because the noticeable majority of Chinese voted for the opposition parties and their coalition partners.

But then, so did the majority of Christians, or for that matter, the majority of urbanites. But why didn\’t the Umno president ask the other groups the same question?

A serious joke

The Indian parties of Malaysia, on the other hand, are a serious joke; every one of us knows that, but do not speak in this way.

In fact, please do not even misunderstand my heritage – my dad is a founder member of Kedah MIC. But, so what? I never believed that their MIC was ever interested in the cares and concerns of the truly poor and marginalised – even if only framed in ethnic terms.

Its founding leader was a Malayalee, but why is it that today most Malayalees do not join the MIC?

MIC has become irrelevant, and most qualified and smart Malaysians do not join or associate with the party. Why?

All the other Indian Malaysian parties are not even worth one sentence, other than this one.

The real reason is that they are irrelevant to the life issues of most Malaysians – unless one still lives in the estates or former plantations and attend Tamil schools, or lives in the country side. MIC does not want urban members, who are too smart.

Consequently, MIC today is mainly made up of Tamilians, and not even Telugus, Gujeratis, or even Bengalis. Why? Please apply the same reason and logic.

Therefore, my logic as for why the Chinese have become the focus of \”Malay political anger\”, is because they are still an organisable community of individuals from the historical mainland of China, but who have become politically astute and involved in Malaysia politics.

In my father’s time, only urban and English-speaking Chinese were politically active, and most of them did not mind playing second fiddle, so to say.

Today they are mostly Malaysians capable of speaking three languages, being at least the fourth generation, and they have no fear about most events or circumstances in life.

They are already global citizens and can walk towards anywhere else in the world – as necessary by differing circumstances, although most have chosen or elected to make Malaysia their home.

Those who chose otherwise – at least more than a million of them – are all either in Singapore, Australia, or Canada.

Right now, I am only interested in the political leadership of this nation. Political leadership of this nation is at its lowest ebb. There is an adage: statesmen focus on the next generation, while politicians keep their eyes upon their next re-election.

Not sure if this is true, but it appears that once people are elected or appointed into positions of new and formal leadership, most seem to lose their capacity to demonstrate real and critical leadership.

\’Political will, skill and strategy\’

In all matters of strategy, we at the National Institute of Public Administration (Intan) have a saying: “It takes political will, skill and strategy.”

My question to the DAP leadership, since they have the most significant political support of the Chinese Malaysians: will you provide a quality of leadership which demonstrates unquestionable political will, tactical skill, and a transformational strategy to move Malaysia beyond the race-based politics of the past?

And neither is PAS alone, the bad boy of Pakatan; the bad boys and girls are PAS or PKR members who were cultured by \”the politics of race during their time of love affair with Umno\”, and they have thus lost their capacity to make distinctions between right and wrong, and truth or falsity.

All good leadership must cut through this \’political noise\’ and look at issues from a strategic perspective, as the times and seasons require even better models of leadership quality.

Let us once and for all forget the race-based model of the Hasan Alis and the Ibrahim Alis – they are part and parcel of a political rhetoric of the past. Let us bury them and May 13 in the past.

In fact, for the record, ex-MCA president Ling Liong Sik ( right ) was the only non-Malay to become the interim chairperson of BN after the old Umno was closed down. Let us never forget, even if he is a free man now.

Our future belongs to the Nurul Izzah Anwars, the Hannah Yeohs, the Steven Sims, the Ariff Sabri Abdul Azizs, and the Zairil Khir Joharis.

Let us, therefore, not focus on other Malaysians of different origins and ethnicities anymore; but let us instead focus on the next-generation leaders and their quality of leadership.

We face a very different world now – one in which people like the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) kill and demonstrate evil of every unthinkable kind.

We must, and can only move forward as a country, if we (the majority) remain moderate and address every issue regarding extremities with the same vigour of rejection and hatred as for all evil wrongdoings.

Such stark, naked banality of evil was made visible for all of us to see even at home. The Al-Ma\’unah group, too, did exactly that in Malaysia.

So, let us all please take care with our middle, moderate Malaysian spaces. As National Unity Minister Joseph Kurup said: \”Please handle such spaces with care.\” May God still bless Malaysia.