www.wansaiful.com

Some discussion here: http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=2099

Perdagangan bukan perkara asing bagi rakyat Malaysia. Para petani dan penoreh getah di kampung-kampung semuanya menjual hasil titik peluh mereka. Tidak sedikit juga yang membuka kedai makan atau kedai runcit di merata-rata tempat. Ada juga yang menjalankan perniagaan yang lebih besar seperti membuka pasaraya, atau mengurus korporat multinasional.  

Bagi umat Islam, perdagangan bukan perkara asing. Rasulullah (saw) dan Saidatina Khadijah (r.a) merupakan ahli perdagangan yang berjaya. Rasulullah s.a.w dikatakan pernah menyebut bahawa “sembilan per sepuluh punca rezeki adalah daripada perniagaan”.  

Apabila negara kita berdagang dengan negara-negara lain, rakyat Malaysia secara keseluruhan mendapat faedah. Barang-barang elektronik yang diimport daripada China adalah lebih murah dan membolehkan rakyat membeli pelbagai jenis alatan yang menambahbaik kualiti kehidupan. Apabila pasaran ekonomi kita dibuka, maka faedah yang diterima oleh rakyat juga bertambah. 

Usaha kerajaan mengadakan perjanjian perdagangan bebas bilateral dengan Amerika Syarikat dan negara-negara lain adalah satu usaha yang boleh membawa kebaikan kepada rakyat yang miskin atau kaya.

Secara umumnya, liberalisasi pasaran samada secara multilateral, bilateral ataupun unilateral adalah satu perkara yang baik.  Tetapi, golongan sosialis dan lain-lain golongan yang berkepentingan pasti akan membantah liberalisasi pasaran. Mereka menakut-nakutkan rakyat dengan menuduh bahawa perjanjian perdagangan bebas akan membawa impak negatif kepada negara.  

Golongan sosialis mahukan ekonomi negara dikawal oleh puak-puak tertentu. Mereka tidak mahu wujud persaingan kerana persaingan akan mereka kehilangan pengaruh. Mereka hanya mementingkan kantung golongan tertentu sahaja dan tidak memikirkan faedah yang lebih luas yang akan diterima oleh rakyat jika pasaran kita dibuka. Mereka mendesak kerajaan melindungi industri mereka walaupun barangan yang mereka keluarkan lebih mahal dan kurang bermutu.

Jika kerajaan terus melindungi mereka ini, maka yang akan menanggung bahana ialah para petani, penoreh getah, golongan berpendapatan rendah dan rakyat terbanyak. Kita akan terus menerus terpaksa membayar harga mahal untuk barang-barang yang rendah kualitinya. Inilah kezaliman sosialisme! 

Pembukaan pasaran kita akan memperhebat persaingan dalam negara, menurunkan harga barang keperluan, membawa masuk lebih banyak pelaburan antarabangsa, dan mencipta pelbagai peluang pekerjaan. Semua ini baik untuk rakyat.  

Malaysia Think Tank London baru-baru ini mengeluarkan satu laporan bertajuk “Menghapuskan Sekatan Perdagangan: satu tuntutan moral”. Laporan ini ditulis oleh Professor Julian Morris, pengarah eksekutif International Policy Network yang berpusat di London. Laporan tersebut menyatakan bahawa sekatan perdagangan adalah salah dari segi moral.  

Menurut Professor Morris, penghapusan sekatan perdagangan membawa potensi pembangunan ekonomi negara yang pesat. Golongan miskin akan mendapat faedah besar daripada liberalisasi ekonomi kerana harga barang-barang akan turun dan kuasa membeli juga akan meningkat. Peningkatan ekonomi negara akan mempelbagai peluang pekerjaan dan perniagaan. Hasilnya, kita semua akan menikmati kualiti kehidupan yang lebih baik.  

Menurut Professor Morris, “Perdagangan bebas membebaskan manusia. Perdagangan bebas membolehkan rakyat secara keseluruhan menambahbaik kualiti kehidupan mereka. Perdagangan bebas boleh membantu membasmi kemiskinan” 

Ulama Islam juga tidak menggalakkan kawalan ekonomi. Ibn Khaldun mengatakan bahawa “aktiviti perniagaan yang dijalankan oleh kerajaan adalah merbahaya kepada rakyat dan boleh merosakkan pendapatan dan pentadbiran kewangan negara”.  

Ibn Khaldun menjelaskan bahawa jika pihak-pihak tertentu menguasai ekonomi, maka akan wujud monopoli yang akhirnya memaksa rakyat membayar harga yang tinggi. Situasi sebegini membebankan rakyat. 

Jika rakyat Malaysia benar-benar mahu mengamalkan sistem ekonomi yang baik, maka langkah pertama ialah memastikan sistem pasaran bebas kembali diletakkan ke tempatnya. Usaha kerajaan kita untuk menghapuskan sekatan perdagangan, baik secara multilateral, bilateral ataupun unilateral, perlu disokong selagi mana ia dijalankan dengan telus. 

Menghapuskan sekatan perdagangan merupakan satu kewajipan atas kepada semua manusia tanpa mengira agama atau bangsa. 

Liberalisasi ekonomi akan merangsang inovasi dalam pelbagai sektor, mempertingkat produktiviti, seterusnya memacu perkembangan ekonomi negara ke arah menjadikan Malaysia sebuah negara yang gemilang.

See also malaysiakini report here.

Trade and business are not alien to Malaysia. Our farmers and rubber tappers all sell the products of their efforts to consumers. Many run retail shops, foodstalls, or restaurants. Some ventured into bigger ventures like supermarkets or multinational businesses.

Trade is also customary among Muslims. Prophet Muhammad and his wife, Khadijah, were both successful entrepreneurs. The Prophet was claimed to have said “trade is nine tenth of sustenance (income)”.

When nations like Malaysia trade with other countries, Malaysian as a whole benefit. Cheap electrical equipments from China allow improvement in our quality of life. If our economy are opened up, everyone, rich and poor, would benefit.

Our government’s trade negotiations with various countries are a good step forward, as long as they are done in transparent manner. The ongoing free trade negotiations with America must be welcomed by all. In fact, trade liberalisation is generally good - be it multilateral, bilateral or even unilateral.

Socialists and some other parties with vested interests would obviously campaign against what our Ministry of International Trade is doing. Typically, their scare-mongering tactics would include telling the people that FTAs bring destruction to our economy.

Socialists and vested interests want our nation’s economy to be controlled by certain quarters only. They abhor competition for they fear being weeded out. They reject the open market as they fear losing control.

By opposing competition, they seek to guarantee only their own sustenance, and deny the public like you and me the benefits of free markets. They campaign for the protection of certain ineficient sectors despite the fact that these sectors maybe producing expensive yet inferior goods. If the government succumbs to their campaign, the victims would be farmers, rubber-tappers, villagers, and those with low household income.

Simply put, the vast majority of Malaysians would be victims of continued protectionism. We would have to continue paying higher prices for inferior products and services. This is socialistic oppression! The reality is, opening up our economy would drive up competition, improve productivity and lower prices. Foreign investment would increase and so will job opportunities. All these are good.

In a report “Penghapusan Sekatan Perdagangan: satu tuntutan moral” published by Malaysia Think Tank London in January 2007, the author professor Julian Morris explains that removing trade barriers brings significant potential for economic development. The poor would particularly benefit from economic liberalisation as the prices of household items would be reduced and their purchasing power would increase. Our economy and national productivity would grow tremendously and we will have more new jobs and new industries.

The outcome of liberalisation is for all of Malaysians to enjoy.

Towering figures like Ibn Khaldun and Friedrich Hayek has argued that the market should be left free from unnecessary interference. Economic control brings the possibility of monopoly by certain groups, which ultimately victimises the people at large.

In controlled economies, the people cannot exercise choice. They are forced to accept whatever high price charged by the monopolies. This is clearly unacceptable.

If we truly want to help improve our national economy, then we should support multilateral, bilateral, or unilateral efforts to liberalise our economy so long as it is done tranparently. This is a moral imperative for everyone, regardless of race and religion.

As Professor Morris said in the report published by Malaysia Think Tank London, “Free trade frees people. It enables all to improve their lives and has the potential to eliminate poverty.”

I was hoping to write about my search for Ibn Khaldun’s house in Fez back in November 2006. Yes, after three days of asking (mainly using sign language) around, I did find the house and took some pictures. I also visited the house of Maimonides.

But it is becoming increasingly difficult to find time to blog. Twenty four hours is not enough. I struggle to find time to jot anything worth publishing.

So, I am going to take some time off blogging.

Malaysiakini has also published the piece on school choice and competition.

I think it is a good follow-up on Ahmad Sobri’s Sickening State of Nation’s Healthcare.

See The Star

A Malaysian to head Commonwealth Secretariat?

Note: This article was written using some points from the speech of The Rt Hon Lord Howell of Guildford (Conservative Foreign Affairs spokesperson in the House of Lords) and the writings of Richard Bourne (Associate Fellow, CPSU).  

Kofi Annan completes his second and final term as Secretary General of the United Nation on 31 December 2006. Replacing him is Ban Ki-moon, a South Korean with some 37 years experience working in national and international politics. We wish him well. He is taking over a very difficult job. Kofi Annan once said “I am expected to be the world’s chief diplomat, and to run a large and complex organisation in my spare time”.  

As Kofi Annan leaves office and Ban Ki-moon takes over, one wonders if there will be any significant changes in the United Nations. Ask anyone who works in international politics and they will tell you that the United Nations needs a serious shake-up. Its bureaucracy is huge and its responsibilities are aplenty. But its finances are small.

To illustrate, the budget for the UN’s core functions is around USD$1.25bn per annum. This is almost USD$1bn less than the cost of running Tokyo’s Fire Department and USD$3.7bn less than the annual budget of New York’s State University system!  

There are many other problems besetting this bureaucratic behemoth. It talks about promoting global democracy yet its Security Council is more like a dictatorship of five than a democracy. It talks about appreciating diversity yet the big powers in the UN hardly tolerate diversity of opinion. It advocates rule of law yet it is controlled by countries who shamelessly flout international law.  

But, as a Malaysian, I despair not. For we have an institution whose potentials are not yet fully realized – the Commonwealth.  

The Commonwealth is a unique network of fifty three sovereign states. Its members are all regarded as equals. The Commonwealth does not use force to coerce or threaten another member state – persuasion, peer group pressure and non-confrontational negotiations are its trademark. Unlike the United Nations or the World Trade Organisation, the Commonwealth provides member countries with a comfortable space to negotiate and to air concerns.  

More importantly, within the Commonwealth, countries rich or poor, developed or developing, big or small, all share a common heritage such as the legal framework, administrative system and education system. The majority of Commonwealth countries use English on regular basis. The Commonwealth Business Council estimates that it is 15% cheaper for companies in one Commonwealth country to do business in another Commonwealth country due to these similarities. All these provide for easier transfer of knowledge and technology between nations. 

It is unfortunate that today the Commonwealth’s potentials are not fully realized. Many of its members are key players in various international organisations. Some of the most important emerging economic powerhouses are located within the Commonwealth. Thirty percent of the world’s population – Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, and others - lives in the Commonwealth. And, even countries that have never been part of the British Empire – like Rwanda and Algeria – have shown interest to become a member.  

As a network of equals, the Commonwealth does not have a ‘lead’ country. However, its main intergovernmental agency is the Commonwealth Secretariat, based in London. The Commonwealth Secretariat facilitates consultations and co-operation among member states. The head of the Secretariat is the Secretary-General – currently The Rt Hon Donald McKinnon, former Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand. However, he is about to retire at the end of 2007. 

Before Donald McKinnon, previous Secretary-Generals were from Canada, Guyana and Nigeria. It is about time that the next one comes from South East Asia. In fact, the next Commonwealth Secretary General should be Malaysian. 

At a time when the world is faced with dire conflicts and serious developmental needs, there is a lot that Malaysia can offer. Religious intolerance, racial discord, income inequalities, social exclusion, problematic delivery of education, the need for economic development, inefficient healthcare, and many more, are problems frequently encountered in many Commonwealth and non-Commonwealth countries. And these are problems that we in Malaysia have had to deal, or are dealing, with. A Malaysian leading the Commonwealth Secretariat will be able to bring in the wealth of experience for the benefit of the wider Commonwealth family. 

The challenges waiting the next Secretary General is vast and diverse. The Commonwealth needs to set itself as an international power capable of balancing United States’ domination of global politics. It needs to act as the bridge between East and West. It also needs to utilize its diverse membership such that it can be the bridge between the Muslim world and others - we should remember that twelve of the fifty seven OIC members are also members of the Commonwealth.  

The Commonwealth should also make itself a beacon of decentralised power – showing how it is possible to respect national sovereignty and allowing each country to follow its own path, while recognising the imperatives of interdependence. And it should use its diverse membership to show how free trade between countries can catalyse economic development, social progress and technological advancement throughout its network.  

Let us not be fooled into thinking that the next Commonwealth Secretary-General should simply transpose all that has been done in Malaysia into the Commonwealth. On the contrary, we need someone who is able to admit that, despite all that Malaysia has achieved, we have at times made mistakes and we have had some failures too. We need someone who is not afraid to say “it was a mistake to have done so and so, and therefore the lessons are such and such”. We need a statesman who can show the world what Malaysian leadership is. 

Malaysia is certainly not short of towering figures. We have individuals who have played important roles within our country and also internationally, be it in ASEAN, the Muslim world, or the global scene. One name that immediately comes to mind is Tun Musa Hitam. But, whoever it is, our government needs to act quickly and start lobbying hard, now.