Laksanakan tender terbuka spekrum mudah alih

Oleh: Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed
[The article was first published on The Malaysian Insider dated 17 June 2014]


Kepesatan industri telekomunikasi mudah alih di negara ini tidak boleh dipertikaikan lagi dengan jumlah pengguna yang menggunakan perkhidmatan ini, tidak lagi terhad kepada golongan kaya semata-mata tetapi turut menjangkau segenap lapisan rakyat.

Malah, kadar penggunaan telefon mudah alih di Malaysia dikatakan antara yang tertinggi di dunia dan ia dibuktikan dengan statistik Suruhanjaya Komunikasi dan Multimedia (SKMM) bahawa penggunaan telefon mudah alih di negara ini melebihi jumlah rakyat di Malaysia.

Namun sejak kebelakangan ini, rata pengguna telefon mudah alih mula berdepan dengan pelbagai masalah yang melanda talian mereka, terutama sekali yang menggunakan perkhidmatan data.

Masalah seperti “dropped calls”, kelajuan data tidak mencapai kelajuan optimum seperti  diiklankan walaupun berada dalam lingkungan liputan 4G seperti yang didakwa syarikat telekomunikasi menyebabkan ramai pengguna yang merasakan tertipu.
Saya sendiri tidak terkecuali daripada masalah berkenaan walaupun menggunakan talian Celcom milik syarikat Axiata yang juga sebuah syarikat berkaitan kerajaan (GLC) melalui Khazanah Nasional.

Walaupun berada di rumah berdekatan dengan Parlimen dalam kawasan Kuala Lumpur, talian telefon mudah alih yang mudah terputus atau “dropped calls” terus menghantui saya, dan lebih teruk lagi, kadang-kala, telefon mudah alih menunjukkan tiada sebarang liputan walapun berada di Kuala Lumpur.

Keadaan ini, benar-benar menyebabkan saya merasa tertipu dengan perkhidmatan yang ditawarkan dan percaya, ia bukan perasaan saya seorang bahkan dikongsi ribuan pengguna talian mudah alih ini.

Pengumuman syarikat telekomunikasi mudah alih ini, yang baru-baru ini, membuat pengumuman untuk membuat pelaburan sebanyak RM1 bilion bagi menaik taraf perkhidmatan liputan talian mudah alih sepatutnya sudah lama dilakukan.

Ini kerana pengguna talian mudah alih di negara ini, berkembang dengan begitu pesat malah statistik SKMM mendapati pengguna talian mudah alih di Malaysia menjangkau hampir sekali ganda daripada jumlah penduduk negara yang berjumlah kira-kira 28 juta orang.

Sebagai bekas Pengarah syarikat TM Bhd, saya pernah dimaklumkan semua syarikat talian mudah alih diwajibkan memberikan tahap mutu perkhidmatan sekurang-kurangnya 98% sentiasa terpasang setiap masa daripada apa yang mereka tawarkan kepada pengguna.

Jika mereka gagal memberikan perkhidmatan berkenaan, kerajaan melalui SKMM berhak mengenakan denda kepada syarikat terbabit dan ia dibuktikan dengan kenyataan SKMM beberapa syarikat talian mudah alih ini telah didenda kerana gagal memberikan perkhidmatan seperti yang ditawarkan kepada pengguna mereka.

Bagaimanapun, isu berkaitan industri telekomunikasi mudah alih ini, dilihat amat rumit untuk difahami penggunanya dan terpulang kepada kerajaan melalui SKMM untuk mengawal selia syarikat telekomunikasi daripada terus membebankan rakyat tanpa memberikan perkhidmatan setimpal dengan bayaran yang dikenakan.

Rungutan terhadap mengenai isu “dropped calls”, kelajuan data yang perlahan walaupun frekuensi menunjukkan isyarat penuh LTE atau 3G, kerap kali menjadi sungutan pengguna rangkaian mudah alih yang dilihat tertipu dengan perkhidmatan selular yang ditawarkan.

Selain itu, sesuatu yang memelikkan apabila pengguna telefon mudah alih sentiasa dihujani panggilan daripada telemarketer yang mendapat maklumat mengenai pengguna talian berkenaan sekaligus menyebabkan saya mengesyaki wujudnya sindiket menjual maklumat peribadi pengguna yang mungkin didalangi kakitangan syarikat telekomunikasi mudah alih kepada pihak ketiga.

Sedangkan, semua data serta maklumat peribadi pengguna talian mudah alih ini dilindungi Akta Perlindungan Peribadi dan seharusnya, SKMM turut melihat masalah ini bagi melindungi kepentingan pengguna.

Sebenarnya, apa yang berlaku dalam industri telekomunikasi mudah alih ketika ini, syarikat telekomunikasi dilihat lebih membuat pelaburan kepada “front end” sistem mereka serta mengabaikan keperluan untuk memperluaskan paip rangkaian mereka yang disambung kepada pusat sambungan rangkaian (NOC).

Keengganan syarikat telekomunikasi untuk membuat pelaburan terhadap sistem “back end” ini, iaitu memperbesarkan paip rangkaian menyebabkan kelajuan data tidak dapat dioptimumkan sekaligus ia suatu bentuk penipuan kepada pengguna.

Suatu ketika dulu, pengguna telefon mudah alih di negara ini banyak bergantung kepada panggilan suara atau sistem pesanan ringkas yang tidak memerlukan penggunaan sistem rangkaian yang besar dan laju.

Namun apabila berlaku evolusi dalam perkhidmatan telekomunikasi mudah alih dunia, dengan Internet mula boleh dilayari di telefon mudah alih, ia menuntut kepada jaringan rangkaian yang lebih laju dan besar.

Kegagalan untuk memperbesarkan infrastruktur utama rangkaian ini, dengan penyediaan paip rangkaian yang lebih besar untuk untuk disambung dengan NOC mengakibatkan berlaku kesesakan dalam pengunaan telekomunikasi mudah alih sekaligus menyebabkan isu seperti “dropped calls” berlaku.

 Justeru, saya berpendapat SKMM perlu memainkan peranan lebih aktif dengan memastikan atau mewajibkan semua syarikat telekomunikasi mudah alih membuat pelaburan bagi meningkatkan keupayaan rangkaian data mereka demi kepentingan pengguna.

Majoriti penguna masih tidak mengetahui perkhidmatan LTE memerlukan keupayaan kapasiti transmisi yang besar memandangkan jarak frekuensi talian ini tidak jauh.

Sekirannya, syarikat telekomunikasi mudah alih mahu memperluaskan perkhidmatan LTE ini, mereka perlu membina lebih banyak stesen pemancar dan penerima selain jumlah kuasa yang lebih kuat untuk memancarkan frekuensi ini.

Ia sekaligus akan meningkatkan kos operasi syarikat ini, yang sebenarnya tidak merasa tekanan untuk meningkatkan keupayaan perkhidmatan mereka memandangkan pengguna mereka kurang terdedah dalam perkara teknikal seperti ini.

Atas sebab itu, isu ini terus berlarutan dan syarikat terbabit terus mengaut keuntungan walaupun perkhidmatan tidak mencapai seperti apa yang ditawarkan kepada pengguna.

Selain itu, SKMM juga perlu melihat sama ada berlaku tindakan “oligopoli” antara syarikat telekomunikasi mudah alih di negara ini dalam menentukan kadar caj panggilan atau data kepada pengguna.

Ia disebabkan setiap tahun, kita mendengar dan membaca semua syarikat telekomunikasi di Malaysia terutama sekali syarikat telekomunikasi gergasi mengumumkan keuntungan beratus juta ringgit sedangkan tahap perkhidmatan yang disediakan seringkali menjadi rungutan kepada pengguna.

Malah, jika kita pergi ke negara lain, perkhidmatan telekomunikasi mudah alih yang ditawarkan mempunyai lebih banyak pilihan selain harga yang ditawarkan lebih rendah berbanding di negara ini.

Sehubungan itu, saya merasakan adalah penting untuk SKMM untuk mendenda syarikat telekomunikasi mudah alih yang tidak mematuhi kualiti perkhidmatan (QOS) yang ditawarkan kepada pengguna.

Saya juga ingin mencadangkan kepada kerajaan supaya melaksanakan tender terbuka kepada syarikat telekomunikasi yang mahu mendapatkan tambahan spektrum mudah alih kerana ia sebenarnya adalah aset berharga kepada kerajaan.

Ketika ini, kadar bayaran yang dikenakan bagi mendapatkan spektrum ini adalah rendah dan jika proses tender terbuka dilakukan kerajaan akan dapat memastikan perkhidmatan telekomunikasi mudah alih yang lebuh berkualiti.

Buat masa ini, syarikat telekomunikasi dilihat beroperasi dengan amat mewah dan mampu membayar gaji serta bonus yang tinggi kepada pengurusan syarikat seperti yang berlaku di Celcom.

Namun perkhidmatan telekomunikasi mudah alih yang ditawarkan seringkali menjadi rungutan kepada penggunannya sehingga menimbulkan persoalan ke mana wang keuntungan yang diperoleh dibelanjakan.

Kerajaan perlu memastikan bahawa syarikat telekomunikasi ini merasakan mereka “besar” melebihi SKMM yang bertindak sebagai badan pengawal dalam industri telekomunikasi di negara ini.

Sudah sampai masanya, SKMM memperlihatkan ketelusan kepada rakyat dalam mempamerkan bagaimana syarikat telekomunikasi ini mendapatkan lesen mereka dan beroperasi mengikut mutu perkhidmatan yang mereka janjikan kepada pengguna.

Pulau syubhat untuk galakkan industri halal

Tulisan oleh: Dr. Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin

Ada yang bertanya saya, setelah kita ketahui pandangan Majlis Fatwa Eropah (European Council for Fatwas and Research), European Fiqh Council, dan Persidangan Fekah Perubatan di Morocco 1997 dan lain-lain tidak mengharamkan istihalah khinzir yang terdapat bahan perubatan, makanan dan gunaan yang lain, sementara al-Fiqh al-Islamiy berpusat di Jedah pada keputusan tahun 1986 dan sebahagian pembesar ulama Arab Saudi pula mengharamkan gelatin khinzir yang terdapat dalam bahan perubatan dan makanan, apakah pendirian yang wajar kita ambil?

Pada asasnya, istihalah yang telah menukar sesuatu bahan najis kepada bahan yang lain seperti bangkai kepada abu, mayat yang sudah menjadi tanah, arak kepada cuka, baja najis kepada pokok yang subur dan seumpamanya diiktiraf dalam Fekah Islam sejak dahulu.

Cumanya, ada mazhab yang menyempitkan asas istihalah ini seperti Syafi’yyah dan Hanabilah (Hanbali).

Ada pula yang meluaskannya seperti Hanafiyyah dan Zahiriyyah juga Malikiyyah. Tokoh-tokoh muhaqqiqin (penganalisis) seperti al-Imam Abu Bakr Ibn al-‘Arabi, Ibn Taimiyyah, Ibn Qayyim, al-Syaukani, Sadiq Hasan Khan dan lain-lain menyokong dan meneguhkan hujah bahawa peroses istihalah boleh menukar najis kepada bahan yang bersih.

Disebabkan umat Islam tidak menjadi pengeluar, kita asyik menjadi pengguna, maka bahan berasal khinzir tersebar begitu luas dalam pelbagai aspek kehidupan manusia; makanan, perubatan, bahan kecantikan dan lain-lain.

Kehidupan manusia, termasuk umat Islam terpaksa berkait dengan bahan-bahan yang berasal dari sumber bahan yang haram. Fatwa dalam hal ini sudah pasti diperlukan

Maka, fatwa tentang hal ini dikeluarkan oleh ulama termasuk yang membabitkan isu istihalah. Berikut teks kesimpulan fatwa Majlis Fatwa Eropah (European Council for Fatwas and Research) yang mengizinkan bahan yang berasal haram tapi telah berubah melalui proses, begitu juga alkohol yang sedikit yang terdapat dalam makanan tertentu yang tiada kesan:

Fatwa (34)

Q) The ingredients of some foods contain items which are denoted by the letter "E" and a string of numbers. We were told that this denotes items manufactured from Lard or Pork bone and marrow. If this is true, what is the Shari'a ruling on such foods?

A) The items which carry the letter "E" and a string of numbers are additives. Additives are more than 350 compounds, and could be either preservatives, colouring, flavourings, sweeteners, etc. These are divided into four groups according to their origin:
First: compounds of artificial chemical origin.

Second: compounds of vegetal origin.

Third: compounds of animal origin.

Fourth: compounds dissolved in alcohol.

The ruling on all these compounds is that they do not affect the status of these foods being Halal, due to the following:

The first and second groups are Halal because they originate from a permissible origin and no harm comes from using these items.
The third group is also Halal, because the animal origin does not remain the same during the process of manufacturing. In fact it is transformed radically from its original form to a new clean and pure form through a process called "chemical transformation". This transformation also affects the legal ruling on such ingredients. Therefore, if the original form was unclean or Haram, the chemical transformation changed it to another ingredient which requires a new ruling. For instance, if alcohol changed and was transformed to vinegar, then it does not remain Haram, but carries a new ruling according to the nature of the new product, which is Halal.
As for the fourth group, these items are usually colourings and are normally used in extremely small quantities which dissolves in the final product form, which deems it an excused matter.

Therefore, any foods or drinks that contain any of these ingredients remains Halal and permissible for the Muslim's consumption. We must also remember that our religion is a religion of ease and that we have been forbidden from making matters inconvenient and hard. Moreover, searching and investigating into such matters is not what Allah (swt) or His Messenger (ppbuh) ordered us to do.

Anggota Majlis Fatwa Eropah terdiri dari mereka yang berikut:

Profesor Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, Presiden ECFR (Mesir, Qatar)
Yang Arif Sheikh Faisal Maulawi, naib presiden (Lebanon)
Sheikh Hussein Mohammed Halawa, setiausaha agung (Ireland)
Sheikh Dr Ahmad Jaballah (Perancis)
Sheikh Dr Ahmed Ali Al-Imam (Sudan)
Sheikh Mufti Ismail Kashoulfi (UK)
Ustaz Ahmed Kadhem Al-Rawi (UK)
Sheikh Ounis Qurqah (Perancis)
Sheikh Rashid Al-Ghanouchi (UK)
Sheikh Dr Abdullah Ibn Bayya (Arab Saudi)
Sheikh Abdul Raheem Al-Taweel (Sepamyol)
Judge Sheikh Abdullah Ibn Ali Salem (Mauritania)
Sheikh Abdullah Yusuf Al-Judai (UK)
Sheikh Abdul Majeed Al-Najjar
Sheikh Abdullah Sulayman Al-Manee’ (Arab Saudi)
Sheikh Dr Abdul Sattar Abu Ghudda (Arab Saudi)
Sheikh Dr Ajeel Al-Nashmi (Kuwait)
Sheikh Al-Arabi Al-Bichri (Perancis)
Sheikh Dr Issam Al-Bashir (Sudan)
Sheikh Ali Qaradaghi (Qatar)
Sheikh Dr Suhaib Hasan Ahmed (UK)
Sheikh Tahir Mahdi (Perancis)
Sheikh Mahboub-ul-Rahman (Norway)
Sheikh Muhammed Taqi Othmani (Pakistan)
Sheikh Muhammed Siddique (Jerman)
Sheikh Muhammed Ali Saleh Al-Mansour (UAE)
Sheikh Dr Muhammed Al-Hawari (Jerman)
Sheikh Mahumoud Mujahed (Belguim)
Sheikh Dr Mustafa Ciric (Bosnia)
Sheikh Nihad Abdul Quddous Ciftci (Jerman)
Sheikh Dr Naser Ibn Abdullah Al-Mayman (Arab Saudi)
Sheikh Yusf Ibram (Switzerland)

Walaupun para ulama bersetuju pada asasnya proses istihalah itu, mereka kadang-kala berkhilaf pendapat tentang apakah sesuatu proses itu benar-benar merubah sifat bahan-bahan najis itu ataupun tidak.

Ada bahan yang diyakini telah berubah, ada yang diandaikan tidak. Dalam soal gelatin babi umpamanya, sarjana fekah masa kini berfatwa berdasarkan kepada taklimat saintis kepada mereka.

Kadang-kala berlaku khilaf. Majlis Fatwa Eropah (European Council for Fatwas and Research) tadi yang terdiri dari tokoh-tokoh Islam dari Arab dan ulama Islam yang menetap di Eropah, begitu juga Europen Fiqh Council dan beberapa orang tokoh ilmuwan Islam antarabangsa menganggap telah berlaku istihalah.

Sementara sebahagian ilmuwan pula menganggap proses istihalah bagi gelatin itu tidak sempurna. Maka, jadilah isu gelatin di sudut itu perkara yang syubhah.

Sesiapa yang mengelakkan sesuatu yang syubhat -sekalipun tidak sampai ke peringkat haram- merupakan perkara yang baik untuk diri dan agamanya.

Namun, dia tidak boleh berkeras mengharamkan untuk umat Islam yang lain yang mempunyai pandangan yang berbeza. Dalam soal makan-minum, perubatan, pakaian, perhiasan, kebudayaan setiap pihak mesti mengakui keluasan fekah Islam dan mengiktiraf khilaf fekah yang berasaskan hujah.

Tidak boleh hina-menghina dan bermusuhan dalam persoalan amalan peribadi yang seperti ini selagi semua pihak beramal atas dalil yang diyakininya.

Selagi, umat Islam mempunyai sumber yang pasti halal, mereka sepatutnya mengelakkan sumber yang syubhah. Di Malaysia umpamanya, gelatin halal wujud dan boleh didapati, maka memulaukan yang syubhat dapat menggalakkan industri halal.

Umat Islam hendaklah berusaha menjadi pengeluar, bukan sekadar pengguna.

Kelemahan industri umat Islam adalah punca berleluasanya bahan yang syubhat dan juga mungkin haram.

The Prospects for Democracy in the Asian Century

Introduction
When one mentions Asia, the refrain ‘freedom and democracy’ doesn’t naturally come to mind. It is true that Asia does have the world’s two largest democracies. There is India which in sheer numbers dwarves the entire European and American democracies put together. And we also have Indonesia, touted as the world’s largest Muslim democracy. But we know that the test of democracy is not in quantity but in quality.

And while we’re in the numbers game, let us not forget that Asia also has the world’s largest non-democracy. The dragon has awakened. It is now the fastest growing, and soon to be the largest economy in the world.

In his poem “The Statues”, William Butler Yeats was concerned with more than just calculations and numbers when he wrote about “All Asiatic vague immensities.” He appreciated the importance of the cultural and civilizational aspects of what we call soft power.

For in terms of size, there is still the trinity of the Orient: namely Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. They are quality democracies and they seem established enough to remain so. They have vibrant civil societies, some like Japan’s Sasakawa Peace Foundation, actively promoting freedom and democracy across the region. But, as nations, they seem to adopt a policy of political abstinence, eschewing any aspiration of being drivers of democracy for the rest of Asia.

The fact remains that autocratic regimes still litter the geopolitical landscape of Asia. They may be absolute monarchies, or dictatorships from a dynastic line, or autocracies that have monopolised power for years. They may also be so-called emerging economies with veneer of all the trappings of democracy but which, in truth, are mere sham democracies governed by political elites bent on retaining power.

A classic statement on democracy, almost a cliché, is attributed to Winston Churchill which I think is worth repeating. He said: “Many forms of government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect… Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government – except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

Democracy, freedom and justice in the Asian Century
As for the so-called “Asian Century”, there is no consensus on what the criteria are. Many would agree that impressive growth for the last three decades should count as a major indicator. In spite of the 1997 Asian financial crisis, Asia’s economic performance has been on the ascent and if it continues for another two decades, may well become a force that could bring about a power shift. And this seems to be sufficient precedent for establishing the Asian Century.

Of power shifts and Soft power
But when it comes to soft power, the jury is still out. For three decades, China had many opportunities to take a lead role in geopolitical affairs but it did not measure up to the challenge. Its priority has always remained economic growth. Who is to say that this is a right or wrong move? But in terms of its potential to garner soft power, this is counts as under achievement.

Nevertheless, some say that China is incapacitated from leading even Asia in geopolitical matters because of foundational issues of governance. In spite of a more open market and foreign direct investment growing by leaps and bounds, there should be no mistaking that it remains the world’s largest and most powerful autocracy. Well, Vladimir Putin may dispute that but that doesn’t change China’s track record as far as human rights and other fundamental liberties are concerned. This is quite apart from the border disputes that China is embroiled in that are now serious flashpoints of conflict in the East.

In the context of our discussion today on the Asian Century, this is indeed an intractable problem. As well as economic power, China may also be able to deliver on culture as one aspect of soft power but I doubt that will be enough to cloak China with moral authority.

So what about India? Given its track record in the political arena, India, with its vibrant democracy, seems a more obvious choice. Rule of law, independence of the judiciary, separation of powers, free and fair elections. These are all the plus points for India. But India’s economic infrastructure is still weak. And just like China, it is very protectionist.

Having said that, a small caveat is in order: in the Western media, when it comes to Asia, it is called “increasing protectionism” but when it’s the USA or Europe similar measures are called “economic patriotism”. The great Chinese Sage, Confucius or Master Kung, was absolutely spot-on in advocating the rectification of names. The proper designation of things ensures social harmony not just in domestic affairs but in international relations as well.

Still, while Asian countries can look at India respectfully for its economic performance, the greater focus should be on its democratic values and the principles of pluralism and inclusiveness. But as Amartya Sen has pointed out India has a glaring contradiction: the continuing grinding poverty of its masses contrasts sharply with its alleged economic success. After all, it was a poor economy coupled of course with recurrent corruption scandals that propelled the BJP to such a grand victory in the elections. Nevertheless, with the increasing gap between the rich and the poor, and growing demands for social justice, India’s prospects of being emulated by others will be dim until some major progress is made in this area.

Inequities of wealth distribution
To talk of democracy divorced from the social context would be pointless. We have seen Occupy movement that spread around the world. It is an example of the cracking of social cohesion and stability even in established democracies when wealth and economic opportunities are monopolized by the rich and powerful. The signs are already there in various parts of Asia. In another decades, one can imagine, how much deeper and wider this gap will be, unless some major redistribution is made to assure social justice.

It is true that issues about evolution of inequality and wealth concentration in the hands of a few are easier asked than answered. In his Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Thomas Piketty shows that modern economic growth and the diffusion of knowledge may not have led to inequalities of the scale warned of by Karl Marx, but the main driver of inequality is unbridled free market economics. This tends to generate returns on capital that exceed the rate of economic growth. Today, this threatens to generate extreme inequalities that stir discontent and undermine democratic values.

The problem of governance
Aside from the threat posed by extreme inequalities, I believe the problem of governance is the greatest impediment as Asian nations get richer and the reins of power continue to be concentrated in the hands of the upper echelons.

Though there is no correlation between corruption and geography, the scourge of corruption happens to be most rampant in Asia, Latin America and Africa. China and India have been hit by high profile corruption cases and many argue that one of the biggest factors that brought down the Indian National Congress party was corruption.

Southeast Asia, needless to say is riddled with corruption. This is an area Indonesia also must seriously examine. However, unlike its neighbours, Indonesia has taken many strides towards full democracy. Complaints of some localised incidents of vote buying notwithstanding, their elections are by far superior to others in the region in terms of being free and fair. In the last elections, there was no widespread systemic fraud and if challenged in the Constitutional court, unlike her neighbours, there is no question of a judiciary being subservient to the ruling party.

Corruption, however, remains a key issue. Yet, equally, we can see the earnestness and independence of the anti-corruption agency in discharging its duties without fear or favour.

Middle East, Turkey
As for Turkey, I believe that politically, the system is in place with the institutionalizing of democracy, the rule of law and proper governance. Economically, its growth trajectories are far better than its European counter parts, and in certain respects are as impressive as that of the Asian tigers and dragons. And with an increasingly more sophisticated middleclass, its potential in this regard cannot be underestimated.

It is true that recent events appear to have cast a negative light on the state of its democracy. But Turkey is facing exceptional circumstances caused in no small part by elements within the state bent on destabilize what is essentially a viable democracy under a progressive Muslim government.

Egypt, however, tells a different story. In the aftermath of the 3rd July 2013 military coup which toppled the democratically elected government of Morsi and the missteps in Libya and Bahrain, many have cynically dismissed the “Arab Spring” as an “Arab Winter”.

Indeed, now that the illegitimate government of Field Marshal al-Sisi is going into overdrive to ‘legitimize’ itself with the latest sham elections, all eyes are on America and the EU – how will they respond to this phase of what is essentially a protracted military coup. Will America and the EU repeat the errors they made for decades with Mubarak? That is a question begging for answer.

Speaking of military coups, let us not leave out Thailand which has fashionably slouched back to its old habits. In many ways, the people of Thailand are caught between Scylla and Charybdis. But as a firm believer in freedom and democracy, under whatever circumstances, the military has no business to be in government.

Tunisia, on the other hand, has managed to come out of the storm, walking tall as a new nation liberated from decades of virtual dictatorship. But the Arab spring not only brought down oppressive regimes. It shattered the misconceptions about Islam and democracy. The general view was that it would take some time before we could see a convergence of Islam and democracy in the Middle East. There was the history, the cultural conditioning and the prejudices on both sides of the proverbial divide that contributed to this general scepticism.

Turkey and Indonesia had already settled this issue, nevertheless, the Arab states were always seen as the exception. So, the case of Tunisia should put the matter to rest. It has crossed its first major hurdle with the ratification of its new constitution on 27 January 2014 and we await the general elections due by the end of 2014.

Conclusion
If an Asian century draws nigh, a power shift from the West to the East would appear to be on the horizon. But these are suppositions conditioned by many eventualities. To be worthy of the name such a century should be about more than exercising the fruits of growing economic power. It has to mean more than them or us calculations – calculations driven by insistence on a false dichotomy of West and East. An Asian Century should be built on the solid sustainable foundations of enhancing civil society, delivering good governance and increasingly liberties and freedoms to the people of Asia along with rising living standards. If it becomes a zero sum game of they win therefore we lose – everyone is the poorer. Invest in and support the quality and forget the width. Therein lies our best hope.

Thank you.