A Bridge Too Far?

PM Ahmad Badawi believes that in the future, there will be many bridges built to link Malaysia and Singapore just as there are more than 2000 over bridges in New York and over 20 over the Han River in Seoul, Korea, the STAR (May12, 2007).

While we can only speculate the basis to the PM's belief (since beliefs need no factual foundation), I would beg to differ if bridges per se are the solutions to the actual problem of process bottle necks arising from he necessary and unnecessary CIQ (Customs, Immigration and Quarantine) processes and procedures, given the sovereignty and pride of both nations to symbolize it through their separate CIQ processes: Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore are TWO different countries, they used to be together as ONE, albeit for a brief moment in history in the 1960s.

One of the common basis on the need for another bridge is the perennial traffic congestion, but the question is what causes the congestion on the Causeway in the first place and what is it that a bridge can solve that a causeway could not?

Is there magic in a Bridge that a Causeway has not?

The so called "Second Link", a bridge built more than 15 years ago as the answer to the traffic congestion problem on the Causeway hardly even ever solve an iota of the problem on the Causeway; it only solve the problem on the Bridge because commuters found Bridge's toll too expensive and also too out of the way for most people on either side of the Straits.

The Second Link remains under utilized, even up till today, no surprises though. But what baffles me is that certain people see Bridges as the solution to traffic congestion: build a bridge and there will be no congestion on it; build a causeway and it will be a sure way to ensure congestion!

What logic!

Sigh! On the other hand, in Bolehland, even the absurd is plausible!

The Second Link costs more than 10 times more, is inaccessible unless you are prepared to drive.

The congestion on the Causeway is in juxtaposition to the Second Link Bridge because of economics and convenience, nothing magical in that a bridge will somewhat chase all the congestion away!

The other causes to the congestion is the necessary CIQ clearance on both sides of the Causeway, a problem inherent in linking two countries together, because each country wants to stamp their sovereignty through at least some form of rudimentary CIQ clearance.

Therefore, unlike New York or Seoul where the bridges are within the same domain and need no CIQ clearance, the bridges that are believed by the PM to be built in the future, can only be pipe dreams, unless of course, he is not saying that Singapore will in the future be part of Malaysia again.

It sometime baffles me as to what material or the lack of it that politicians are made up of.

They get elected to office not because they are people of substance and integrity, but because they know how to play the political game well and be popular rather than effective.

Where are the JFKs and Indira Ghandis of Malaysia?

Alas, I hope there is still hope for Malaysia, for if our leaders could not even see the clear black and white issues about a simple logistics problem over two domains but continue to hallucinate and dream in fancy rainbow vividness, will Malaysia ever be able to be lead out of its current murkiness?

God, have mercy on the people of Malaysia!

Pipeline PipeDream?

I have just heard on Channel News Asia (07May2007) that the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Ahmad Badawi has just announced that Malaysia will be building a couple of billion Ringgit worth pipeline to channel crude oil carried on ships from the Middle East at a point on the western side of northern Peninsular Malaysia to another point on the north eastern side to be processed into refined petroleum for export to the Far East (China, Japan, Indo-China, Taiwan etc).

News had it that this is in response to the increasing unease about security in the Straits of Malacca, ranging from piracy, terrorism and treats to the environment in the event of an accidental of man made oil spillage.

If and when the project materialises, the implications are major for member ASEAN countries bordering the Straits of Malacca, chiefly Singapore, who in one way of another benefit from ships transiting at en route to the Far East.

We may recall that way back in the late 1800's, there was already a plan proposed by one English gentleman R.W. Duff to build a canal ala the Suez and Panama to cut shipping time by omitting the Straits of Malacca: the Isthmus of Kra Canal.

Three years back, while searching on the Internet for information about the Isthmus of Kra, I was pleasantly surprised that the idea of a canal is not new, it even predates that of Duff's.

It was in fact promulgated by a King of Siam (King Narai the Great, 1677) long before King Mongkut. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kra_Isthmus)

The Kra Canal never got off the ground because the British were dead against it, for it will spell the death of Singapore, their revenue center at the tip of Asia where all sea traffic sailing West to East and vice-versa has to pass through it and pay toll.

The death of the Kra Canal was sealed when the British got the Siamese to sign a treaty in 1897, agreeing never to build a canal that could threathen the survival of Singapore.

Once in a while, the idea of a Kra Canal will pop up but somehow, the Thais show no passion about it though it was first mooted by a Thai King long ago.

The Isthmus of Kra is actually a very narrow strip of land, no more than 50km at its widest and given the technology we have today, building a canal to handle even the biggest of the super tankers will take no more than 1 year.

Of course cutting the Kra is like cutting the umbilical cord that connects Bangkok to the restive south, not a good idea when Bangkok is at wits ends on how to win back the breaking away southern territories.

But on the other hand, making a cut is also tantamount to containment, sending a message that Bangkok is containing the south so that it can be better controlled.

Rationally, the Kra Canal is better idea, economically, logistically, strategically etc as not only oil tankers can use it, but all kinds of sea going vessels.

With an area less than 50km long, it is also easier to secure.

It will be interesting what will conspire these coming weeks.

Will Singapore gang up with Thailand to build the Kra Canal with US blessings, since if you are going to lose business, you may as well mitigate potential losses by sharing future profits?

From the point of conservation, sustainable and renewable development, the Kra Canal is long overdue. Everyday, needless travel have to be done by thousands of ships sailing from the West to the East or to the South by passing through the narrow and pirate infested Straits of Malacca and if traffic continues to increase, it is a matter of when, not if a major oil spill will occur, impacting on the environment and life here in at least three countries: Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore.

Well, for all we know, the PipeLine Project could well be just a PipeDream Project but we can be certain that Singapore will not be sitting pretty...something is in the pipeline...and will be happening soon.

Jeffrey Sachs, Al Gore, Global Warming, Climate Change & Sustainable Development

I have been following Prof. Jeffrey Sachs' 2007 Reith Lectures on the BBC Radio and had just watched two life changing movies: Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" and another Sundance's movie "Who Killed the Electric Car".

Really, at the way we are "developing" by raping the Earth reminds me of a scene in the Lord of the Rings' movie where Saruman's war campaign spike up the production of weapons that sucks up vast amounts of energy from felled timber.

The scene is one of utter environmental devastation: destruction of the eco-balance.

Are we already in or at the brink of the no return road of unsustainable development?

I honestly think so.

Look at the pressure on fresh water.

Next it will be food, shelter, services and even the very air we need for survival.

The law of Nature is Equilibrium, Nature will sustain to the point of sustainable balance.

In other words, when we tip the balance, death and destruction will naturally occur until a new balance is attained.

If we take a moment to think, Earth is a self contained sustainable and renewable entity floating in sterile Space.

The eco-system of the Earth is self sustainable and renewable: the hydrological cycle, carbon cycle, nitrogen cycle or death to sustain life of one's organism waste as another organism's food etc and the original source of energy powered by the Sun.

If, say at an instance all human life on Earth is wiped out, will other life forms continue to prevail on Earth. The answer is a resounding "YES".

But not the other way round.

The Earth needs no Homo Sapiens to keep it viable and sustainable, but we need the Earth to live.

Strange that even when we know there is no other Earth near us that we can shift to in case life on planet Earth becomes unsustainable and yet we keep on destroying it for short term economic gains.

Unless we are of the persuasion that we need to destroy Earth to hasten the advent of Heaven, we ought to preserve the only heaven that we know of that exists on planet Earth.

The Kingdom of Heaven will come in God's perfect timing, it is the sole prerogative of God, as for us mortals, we are to be His good and faithful stewards in managing Earth well, which is our duty and responsibility.

National Disgrace

I have the utmost respect for Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye personally and for his leadership to the team of people running the Malaysian National Service (NS), but what he wrote and was published in the STAR today (Sunday, 28Jan07) perturbs me to the core!

What is the matter really with the whole NS concept, planning, implementation and review?

After a good many years of running the program, anyone would have expected the basic teething problems to have been tackled, yet we see basic failures still persisting, from transport arrangements to food and accommodation blunders.

Also, the recruitment of girls for the NS. What's the basis and necessity? It is challenging enough to keep an eye on boys under group behavior in training, combined this with girls in group behavior, and a pair of eyes is not even sufficient!

The last straw that broke my back and compelled me to write is the Chairman of the National Service Training Council's clever reliance on the Health Ministry's "pointing" that, I quote, "...a majority of our youths are actually healthy (more than 95%)" and that it is why it is not viable to conduct medical examinations on all potential trainees.

How unimaginative, uncreative and lacking in "thinking out of the box initiative" with a tinge of irresponsibility that statement and attitude is, if you like.

Safety, security and the avoidance of sickness, injury or death to any and all participants and trainers ought to be paramount priority because human life is priceless!

Please do not insinuate the caring and compassionate intrinsic attributes of us Malaysians!

Medical examination for all potential NS candidates not only protects the individual participants, it also benefits all, provided the relevant parameters are correctly selected and tested. The last thing any NS participant wants is to catch a high contagious and communicable disease (like tuberculosis, HIV, hepatitis etc) from living and training in very close proximity and quarters where injuries with open wounds makes it viable for diseases to be passed on from one to the other.

For potential participants who already know they are not healthy, this is not a problem, they would have applied for an exemption with supporting medical certificates, the hidden dangers are for those who are not aware that they are not medically fit for NS training and have not the resources to undergo voluntary medical screening.

If we do not have the resources (which all of us know is untrue, we are not a poor country), then we should not even bother to have a half baked NS programs.

There are so many clinics well distributed all over the nation offering medical screenings and I am sure every General Practitioner will be more than happy to be of service for a reasonable fee. I am also confident that if called upon, the medical profession will be more than willing to contribute their part of the national service. I am confident that all doctors are doctors because they first felt a call to serve. With a little "thinking out of the box", I am sure esteemed organizations like the NS Council would have thought of offering opportunities to doctors to contribute their services to the National Service Program. MMA and individual doctors, please feel free to comment.

The point is simple, if something is worth doing, it is worth doing right, can you disagree on this, Mr. Chairman and members of his Board of Council?

Bridge Over Troubled Water?

In the Malaysian STAR newspapers of 25Apr2007, the MP for Johor Bahru was reported to have commented that it is a matter of time Singapore would acquiesce to a bridge to replace the Causeway, inter-alia when Singapore has amortized the capital investment in their CIQ infrastructure.

With due respect to one of the wiser and more learned MPs of Malaysia, and speaking from the position of a common citizen who is born and bred in Johor Bahru and also a frequent user of the Causeway, Datuk Shahrir, has missed the point.

The political vision, mission and culture in Singapore vis-a-vis Malaysia is almost in opposition.

Lest we forget, the latest Singapore CIQ was designed and built on the premise of an earlier agreement with Malaysia that the KTM will terminate at Woodlands, Singapore.

Not a single notion was even hinted at having a common Bridge to replace the Causeway.

When Singapore does something, she has to justify her actions with cost and benefit based on purpose, the guidance has always been on the basis of purpose, justification, value, equity, accountability and responsibility.

So what is the whole real purpose of replacing the Causeway?

What is the single most important reason for still having the Causeway when there is already the Second Link Bridge somewhere beyond the yonder from Johor Bahru city itself?

The Causeway is the life-link for hundreds of thousands if not millions of people in Johor Bahru and Malaysia.

Hundreds of thousands of people commute daily on the Causeway, to work, to study, to seek medical treatment, to visit friends and relatives, to shop, to dine, to catch an international flight because our so called international airport in Senai is only international in name! and etc.

To me, I see the whole issue in a very simple paradigm: the purpose of the link be it a bridge or a causeway or even a ferry crossing is communication, transport and logistics.

Therefore, the justification for any changes to the status quo ought to be if the replacement adds value.

What is it in a Bridge (straight or crooked) that can achieve but a Causeway cannot?

Ought not the priority be in the fast and cost effective mass rapid transit of people, goods and services across the Link?

A rethink is needed here.

We need no new bridge, just the will to serve the rakyat better.

Start with a common centralized CIQ processing (common in many European borders), one in JB and one in Singapore where customs, immigration and customs clearance are commonly cleared at a single location.

Another is a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system to transport people traffic from JB to Singapore and vice-versa.

All the infrastructure in Singapore is ready to extend its time tested MRT system to Johor Bahru, but as usual, the business lobby in Malaysia will oppose this to protect their own pockets at the expense of the rakyat.

I can clearly see that if the MRT is extended to Johor Bahru, many motorists would give up their motorbikes and cars and take public transport and coupled with the efficient CIQ processing system, the issue of the Bridge to replace the Causeway would be a thing of the pass.

There will be win-win-win for all, the rakyat wins, governments win and the environment wins in terms of the better energy efficiency and less pollution.

Would wisdom prevail? Not, I guess, unless and until Malaysians are ready to change our mindsets and shift our paradigms.

Until then, Singapore will surge forward while we remain stagnated in our own parochial darkness.

Helping Hands Without Destroying

One of the attributes of a civilized and cultured person is: Compassion.

Compassion that that is beyond mere words, empirically verifiable by practical and effective actions, one of which is in rendering help to others, a Helping Hand or Two.

Helping Hands not only benefit the recipients, it also blesses the giver, as the saying goes: “It is more blessed to give than to receive”.

The irony of it all is there seems to be a lack of “Blessed Givers” and more wanting Receivers.

Helping others is a universal cross cultural value and there is no culture anywhere in the world, then, now or even in he future, which condemns or denounces the giving of aid to the less fortunate, although there are many cultures that do not encourage and would in fact prohibit helping one's rivals or enemies.

True Helping Hands helps irrespective of creed, class, color, species, race, religion or even relationship or the lack of it.

The litmus test is helping others in need even when the other party is your enemy or an animal, all because True Helping Hands are intrinsically altruist in object and motivation.

It may surprise us now, but as late as the mid Sixteenth Century CE, people groups like the Red Indians of the Americas and Blacks of Africa were classified as “barbarians” fit only for “natural slavery” as they are no better than animals and therefore justified to be kept as slaves and treated like farmed animals.

We may look back and realize quite intuitively that this was an erroneous notion, but alas, humanity may not have progresses any further from the identical mindset that hatch such inhumane paradigm.

It therefore should not surprise us why many people in the Twenty First Century CE still treat animals like we treat other people groups then, who may appear to differ from us, as animals.

True Helping Hands helps because help is needed at that exact point of time and space where the Helping Hands happen to be the neighbor where help is needed and could be rendered without any peril to the life and limb of the Helping Hands, or even at the risk of it, because Helping Hands care enough to support compassion with action.

The Teacher of Love and Compassion said some two millennium ago, “Love thy enemy as thyself”, always lending a helping hand to heal, to set free and to empower individuals to achieve their up most best, Jesus Christ of Nazareth, while hanging and dying being crucified on the Cross for crimes he did not commit, not only did not utter an unkind word to his enemies and accusers, but asked God to forgive them, because they were ignorant.

On the other hand, Helping Hands can also become unintentional “Destroying Hands”, when dependency became the end result of good intentioned aid. This is evidenced in many aid recipient countries in Africa where the people who were initially too weak to fend for themselves are now made too strong and lazy to look after themselves.

As the whole purpose of extending a pair of Helping Hands is “empowerment” and not mere “aid” per se, extending aid ought to be what the Chinese Sage, Confucius advocated more than 2000 years ago: “Give a man a fish and he eats for a day, Teach him to fish and he eats a lifetime”.

Helping Hands can also come full circle, we help wherever we can, for who knows we may have unknowingly helped angels in the process. But whatever it is, when we have the opportunity to be Helping Hands to our neighbours, we are all blessed, the giver, the receiver and also the Creator of both.

Frugality for Sustainability

The Confucius ideal of frugality probably stems from the entrenched Chinese Cultural Value of conserving resources as a contingent against possible future natural calamity like floods, earthquakes, famines etc that constantly plaque China of the old and the now.

The idea of not lavishing one's wealth but saving for the future, makes no coincidence the nations in Asia with a majority ethnic Chinese population the nations with the biggest propensity to save and therefore to invest: Singapore, Taiwan and even China itself.

In a setting that is beset by the uncertain vagaries of Nature, the inhabitants of that peculiar habitat have disciplined themselves to make do with little and be contented to postpone present consumption and gratification for the sake of the future and their future generations.

Nothing is wasted and nothing is put to waste.

Imagine a people who is able to feed itself and with very little arable land vis-a-vis the huge population at hand and even before the advent of the so called modern agricultural methods, systems and processes: chemical fertilizers and mechanization.

The secret? No secret, only the philosophy of Harmony and the conscious effort in maintaining a harmonious balance (homeostasis) between Man and Nature, between using the land and returning to the land, what we have taken from her, between taking and also giving.

In the whole philosophy of the Way (Tao) of Harmony, the waste of one organism becomes the food of another and the cycling of Nature to and fro is maintained within the Cycle of Life, Death, Renewability for Sustainability.

For example, the return of human waste to the vegetables field is a long held successful farming practise and this has successfully allowed China to feed her millions upon millions of people and be in self sufficient in food production for thousands of years and without the use of chemical fertilizers.

Look what we have put ourselves into in the name of "modern farming methods".

We lock up our own excreta in expensive sewage systems and uses huge amounts of good potable water to maintain it, only to mine more minerals to make fertilizers and burn more green house gases fuel to create energy to manufacture them, at the expense of the environment so that we can continue to pollute the Earth with our necessary sustenance activities. A loss-loss-loss situation that we have trapped ourselves in: Loss for the people, loss for the environment and loss of scarce resources.

The only winners in this so called "modern agricultural movement" are the people involved in the mining, manufacturing and distribution of chemical fertilizers.

Honestly, if there were to be sustainability, there must be renewability and the cutting down of consumption to a basic frugal level that we use up Earth's resources only up to the very basic minimum so that the Earth can recycle itself, before we tip the balance to the point of no return.

Being frugal in the context of sustainability, even when there is renewability is a wise habit of choice because really, we don't own the Earth, past, present and future generations are co-stewards of the Great Planet Earth and if we are wanton enough to destroy the Earth to satisfy our own selfish present gratifications with no regard whatsoever for other people or now or the future, we ought not the right to live here on Planet Earth.

The only way to a sustainable future to me is the Way of Frugality, the cutting down of consumption to the barest minimal and the conservation of resources through and deliberate sustainable and renewabilty lifestyle choices and let it start today, even, not tomorrow, next week or next year. For procrastination is indeed the thief of time.