This story reminds me of my own experience in Indonesia as a news correspondent. In July 1987, I was abruptly told by the Indonesian government that my visa as a correspondent of the Far Eastern Economic Review will not be extended for another year, without giving any official explanation as to why. The Information Ministry officials argued that I wasn't "officially" being "deported," only that my "visa extension will not be approved." I had been assigned to Jakarta following the expulsion of another Review correspondent a year earlier, so it came as double shock. Privately, some Indonesian officials suggested that it was not my story or stories that had offended them, but "stories done by other correspondents filing for Review, and that I as Review's bureau chief should be held indirectly responsible for objectionable articles" printed in my publication. That of course was absurd as no one during my tenure there had written any article considered hostile to the Suharto regime. On my vigorous protest, they gave me a week's time to cancel my rental, clear banking accounts and packing. As a background, my expulsion had also happened against the backdrop of reports circulating that foreign news correspondents being expelled from one Asean member nation should not be allowed to report from another Asean member country. Thus when I landed in Singapore en route to Hongkong, immigration officials meticulously noted down how long I planned to stay and which hotel I was going to be billeted. Expelling foreing correspondents was becoming contagious in the 1980s and 1990s; South Korea among them, not to speak of Indonesia and Cambodia. It coincided with the period of high official corruptions and democratisation campaigns. Today, nearly four decades later, we find Indoneisa and Singapore still trapped in this absurd political landscape. The same army-authoritarian rule, the same official corruptions, the unchanging habit of expelling correspondents. Indeed, something never changes. Shim Jae Hoon.
No government has the right to bar anyone from leaving or entering any territory. To place restrictions on our freedom of movement is a violation of our human rights. Passports — visas — exit permits — residency rights — all these formalize restrictions on our freedom of movement across this planet which now belongs to all of us.
There are no illegal aliens—only illegal borders.
If it is wrong to bar people from leaving their countries it is also wrong to disallow people from coming into countries. The issue of "illegal aliens" is a complex global matter and it will not go away by simply attempting to seal borders.
As more and more nations are finding out it is now impossible to stop people from sneaking across borders. In the age of helicopters —small private aircraft—motorboats—mass travel borders have lost meaning. You can spend millions to shut down your borders—people will still come in.
Freedom of movement is or ought to be a basic freedom. This is our planet. We should have the right to go anywhere we please. National frontiers are nothing more than pissing borders charted by dogs. "This is my territory because I peed here first."
The billions of dollars currently dissipated by many nations in futile attempts to stop the flow of "illegal aliens" should be re-channeled to help raise everybody's living standards so that people will travel not because of economic or political pressures but to spread out and grow.
We do not want secure borders. We do not even want open borders. We want no borders.
If governments do not do away with borders—modern technology will.
I guess when that series of articles appeared in WSJ, the shit hit the fan, huh? As much for you (and your family) but more so for that incorrigible or and sill unreconstructed Malaysian Malay tyrant, Mahathir Mohamad. I use "Malay" and "tyrant" in the same breath because Mahathir had always thought of himself not so much as "the doctor in the house", as some Malaysian analysts have crazily described his tenure in that country's racist politics, but as a modern-day Malay feudal lord. Easy when you're on of those and rode a mule to control the populace through means of coercion and rule-by-law persecution.
The same thing in neighboring Singapore: recall how the PAP one-party dictatorship of "Confucianist Chinese" would routinely persecute dissenters, the opposition and any other critics from the foreign press and even foreign academics using the PAP's most plaint judiciary. Recall the cases involving the longtime-defunct Far Eastern Economic Review and the International Herald Tribune, among others), and the American academic Christopher Lingle who'd criticized as much as critiqued Singapore's authoritarian capitalism, among other things. Or how he went after the Canadian-born Murray Hiebert, the FEER correspondent in Kuala Lumpur. Some things never change.
Mahathir, the so-called and wrongly ascribed father of Malaysian development was also the father of Malaysian state-sponsored racism and, needless to say, the father of Malaysian state-sponsored corruption that has, under his tutelage, run amok, with ministers and their underlings, and even a former prime minister, robbing the country blind to the point of almost, so some so ignorantly suggest, bankrupting the country. Somehow, governments never seem to be bankrupt any more than, therefore, countries. And Malaysia certainly never was -- not under Mahathir despite insane corruption scandals such as Bank Bumiputera and Najib Razak's and his wife Rosmah's personal wealth fund, 1MDB. The one fascinating element in all the corruption that has taken place in Malaysia since the mid 1960s, is that the perpetrators are all Malay-Muslims. This spells out Mahathir institutionalizing corruption. In effect he licensed Malay-Muslims to systematically defraud the country's wealth. This included those Malays (Mahathir's capitalist boys and other rentier-class Malays): he had handpicked and placed to run the UMNO-affiliated state-owned enterprises.
So it's no surprise that he'd come after foreign journalists or those journalists writing for the foreign press. He'd always thought that whatever happened in corrupt and racist Malaysia was nobody's business but its own, and yet he desired being recognized -- stupidly -- as an international statesman. Not a bad title for a Malay-Muslim feudal tyrant who, at almost 100 years old, can't seem to shed his stripes. But foreigners aren't the only ones Mahathir has worked up a sweat to try and beat them down. He's still hounding UMNO, his former party, the very party that had tossed him out on his ass. But corrupt and racist UMNO deserves nothing less than be kicked in the ass. It's a party of morons, for morons. They behaved like Donald Trump, and still do. Their leader Hamidi is hopelessly corrupt but Anwar has spared him, for Anwar's own politically desperate reasons. Anwar needs crutches to stay in power, the way most Malays need state crutches to survive in economic terms. And Mahathir's been going after Anwar Ibrahim, still thinks Anwar's alleged sexual proclivities are Mahathir's business and that he should be flogged or stoned, Taliban-style.
The really weird thing is that are many Malays, and not a few Chinese and Indians (mostly ignorant old-timers) who would think Mahathir is the country's demigod, that his autocracy is still needed, that Malaysia needs to be run by a tyrant. But a tyrant who promoted racism, corruption and the on-crutches mentality? Don't worry. They have rabid, Islamic conservative, crudely populist Anwar Ibrahim to fill the gap.
The fact that dictators like Mahatir (and innumerable others) seem to live longer than anyone else makes me secure in my non-belief in benificent deities. The devil tho... maybe 🤔😁
A very poignant and powerful account John. Been writing for you for a while now, yet this is the first I've heard of what happened to you at the hands of Mahathir. Puts it into perspective a lot why you were willing to stick your neck out and embody the aphorism of speaking truth to power as a journalist.
This story reminds me of my own experience in Indonesia as a news correspondent. In July 1987, I was abruptly told by the Indonesian government that my visa as a correspondent of the Far Eastern Economic Review will not be extended for another year, without giving any official explanation as to why. The Information Ministry officials argued that I wasn't "officially" being "deported," only that my "visa extension will not be approved." I had been assigned to Jakarta following the expulsion of another Review correspondent a year earlier, so it came as double shock. Privately, some Indonesian officials suggested that it was not my story or stories that had offended them, but "stories done by other correspondents filing for Review, and that I as Review's bureau chief should be held indirectly responsible for objectionable articles" printed in my publication. That of course was absurd as no one during my tenure there had written any article considered hostile to the Suharto regime. On my vigorous protest, they gave me a week's time to cancel my rental, clear banking accounts and packing. As a background, my expulsion had also happened against the backdrop of reports circulating that foreign news correspondents being expelled from one Asean member nation should not be allowed to report from another Asean member country. Thus when I landed in Singapore en route to Hongkong, immigration officials meticulously noted down how long I planned to stay and which hotel I was going to be billeted. Expelling foreing correspondents was becoming contagious in the 1980s and 1990s; South Korea among them, not to speak of Indonesia and Cambodia. It coincided with the period of high official corruptions and democratisation campaigns. Today, nearly four decades later, we find Indoneisa and Singapore still trapped in this absurd political landscape. The same army-authoritarian rule, the same official corruptions, the unchanging habit of expelling correspondents. Indeed, something never changes. Shim Jae Hoon.
In the words of famed futurist FM 2030:
No government has the right to bar anyone from leaving or entering any territory. To place restrictions on our freedom of movement is a violation of our human rights. Passports — visas — exit permits — residency rights — all these formalize restrictions on our freedom of movement across this planet which now belongs to all of us.
There are no illegal aliens—only illegal borders.
If it is wrong to bar people from leaving their countries it is also wrong to disallow people from coming into countries. The issue of "illegal aliens" is a complex global matter and it will not go away by simply attempting to seal borders.
As more and more nations are finding out it is now impossible to stop people from sneaking across borders. In the age of helicopters —small private aircraft—motorboats—mass travel borders have lost meaning. You can spend millions to shut down your borders—people will still come in.
Freedom of movement is or ought to be a basic freedom. This is our planet. We should have the right to go anywhere we please. National frontiers are nothing more than pissing borders charted by dogs. "This is my territory because I peed here first."
The billions of dollars currently dissipated by many nations in futile attempts to stop the flow of "illegal aliens" should be re-channeled to help raise everybody's living standards so that people will travel not because of economic or political pressures but to spread out and grow.
We do not want secure borders. We do not even want open borders. We want no borders.
If governments do not do away with borders—modern technology will.
I guess when that series of articles appeared in WSJ, the shit hit the fan, huh? As much for you (and your family) but more so for that incorrigible or and sill unreconstructed Malaysian Malay tyrant, Mahathir Mohamad. I use "Malay" and "tyrant" in the same breath because Mahathir had always thought of himself not so much as "the doctor in the house", as some Malaysian analysts have crazily described his tenure in that country's racist politics, but as a modern-day Malay feudal lord. Easy when you're on of those and rode a mule to control the populace through means of coercion and rule-by-law persecution.
The same thing in neighboring Singapore: recall how the PAP one-party dictatorship of "Confucianist Chinese" would routinely persecute dissenters, the opposition and any other critics from the foreign press and even foreign academics using the PAP's most plaint judiciary. Recall the cases involving the longtime-defunct Far Eastern Economic Review and the International Herald Tribune, among others), and the American academic Christopher Lingle who'd criticized as much as critiqued Singapore's authoritarian capitalism, among other things. Or how he went after the Canadian-born Murray Hiebert, the FEER correspondent in Kuala Lumpur. Some things never change.
Mahathir, the so-called and wrongly ascribed father of Malaysian development was also the father of Malaysian state-sponsored racism and, needless to say, the father of Malaysian state-sponsored corruption that has, under his tutelage, run amok, with ministers and their underlings, and even a former prime minister, robbing the country blind to the point of almost, so some so ignorantly suggest, bankrupting the country. Somehow, governments never seem to be bankrupt any more than, therefore, countries. And Malaysia certainly never was -- not under Mahathir despite insane corruption scandals such as Bank Bumiputera and Najib Razak's and his wife Rosmah's personal wealth fund, 1MDB. The one fascinating element in all the corruption that has taken place in Malaysia since the mid 1960s, is that the perpetrators are all Malay-Muslims. This spells out Mahathir institutionalizing corruption. In effect he licensed Malay-Muslims to systematically defraud the country's wealth. This included those Malays (Mahathir's capitalist boys and other rentier-class Malays): he had handpicked and placed to run the UMNO-affiliated state-owned enterprises.
So it's no surprise that he'd come after foreign journalists or those journalists writing for the foreign press. He'd always thought that whatever happened in corrupt and racist Malaysia was nobody's business but its own, and yet he desired being recognized -- stupidly -- as an international statesman. Not a bad title for a Malay-Muslim feudal tyrant who, at almost 100 years old, can't seem to shed his stripes. But foreigners aren't the only ones Mahathir has worked up a sweat to try and beat them down. He's still hounding UMNO, his former party, the very party that had tossed him out on his ass. But corrupt and racist UMNO deserves nothing less than be kicked in the ass. It's a party of morons, for morons. They behaved like Donald Trump, and still do. Their leader Hamidi is hopelessly corrupt but Anwar has spared him, for Anwar's own politically desperate reasons. Anwar needs crutches to stay in power, the way most Malays need state crutches to survive in economic terms. And Mahathir's been going after Anwar Ibrahim, still thinks Anwar's alleged sexual proclivities are Mahathir's business and that he should be flogged or stoned, Taliban-style.
The really weird thing is that are many Malays, and not a few Chinese and Indians (mostly ignorant old-timers) who would think Mahathir is the country's demigod, that his autocracy is still needed, that Malaysia needs to be run by a tyrant. But a tyrant who promoted racism, corruption and the on-crutches mentality? Don't worry. They have rabid, Islamic conservative, crudely populist Anwar Ibrahim to fill the gap.
The fact that dictators like Mahatir (and innumerable others) seem to live longer than anyone else makes me secure in my non-belief in benificent deities. The devil tho... maybe 🤔😁
A very poignant and powerful account John. Been writing for you for a while now, yet this is the first I've heard of what happened to you at the hands of Mahathir. Puts it into perspective a lot why you were willing to stick your neck out and embody the aphorism of speaking truth to power as a journalist.