Sunday, 29 August 2010

RPK too Hard for BBC Hardtalk

BBC drops RPK from Hardtalk to appease Putrajaya

August 30, 2010
Raja Petra, too hot for the BBC. - Reuters pic
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 30 — The BBC has cancelled its plan to have Raja Petra Kamarudin on its Hardtalk programme this Wednesday. According to a statement posted on Raja Petra’s website Malaysia-Today, BBC’s Bridget Orborne had called the blogger yesterday to inform him of the decision.
The statement claimed that BBC decided to drop Raja Petra after the network’s lawyers advised them that the show would expose BBC to legal action and upset the Malaysian government.
“Bridget added that the questions they would delve into, which would be very sensitive in nature and critical of the government, would run foul of the Malaysian government,” said the unsigned statement.
“The fact that the programme would be accessible in Malaysia, said Bridget, makes this a problem for the BBC,” it said.
“It looks like RPK is too hot even for HARDtalk and BBC said it is a rare occasion that they have had to drop a programme,” the statement added.
Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and former Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar are local personalities who have appeared on Hardtalk, a 30-minute interview programme.
Raja Petra, who was facing a criminal defamation trial, was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal in November last year by the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court after the police failed to serve warrant of arrest.
He was believed to have fled the country in May last year after he was charged with defaming Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, the wife of the prime minister.
He had allegedly published an article linking the murder of a Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu to her.
Raja Petra made his first public appearance in London last July with Pakatan Rakyat leaders where they spoke to over 200 people.
MI

What the Fuss about?

Harakahdaily   
KOTA BHARU, August 29: Drawing parallels from Prophet Muhammad's practice, PAS Murshidul Am has demolished the argument that non-Muslims were forbidden from entering Muslim prayer houses.
Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat said as such, the recent controversy sparked by Serdang member of parliament Teo Nie Ching's presence inside a surau last Sunday stemmed from ignorance of Islam among those who condemned her.
“Because we have grown so much apart from Islam, let alone to learn the religion, these issues can turn into controversies.
“If we care to study the history of Islam, we will find that the Arab non-believers used to meet the Prophet in the mosque. They even slept and had their meals in the mosque," said Nik Aziz commenting on condemnations from UMNO over Teo's presence.
Teo, expressing  disappointment that the issue had been politicised, had explained that she was there to brief members of the surau about the Selangor state government's education initiative as well as to hand over contributions to the surau committee.
Nik Aziz explained that to invite a non-Muslim to a mosque had been one of the Prophet's methodologies in propagating Islam.
"This is not wrong in Islam. In fact, it was one of the Prophet's ways to disseminate the message of Islam," he said, adding that the polemics caused by the Teo's visit only underlined how Islam's noble values had been eclipsed by racial and partisan sentiments.

“What's the fuss? Non-Muslims can enter mosques, they can also give speeches. It's not a problem," he added.
He said politicising the issue not only went against the spirit of the Prophetic Sunnah (examples), but could also push non-Muslims in Malaysia further away from Islam.
“Prohibiting non-Muslims from entering the mosques is a part of our tradition, not that of the Prophet."
Nik Aziz also clarified that the term mu'alaf, usually used in Malaysia to refer to new converts to Islam, consisted of three groups of people: those who had recently embraced Islam, those who have yet to convert but interested in learning about the religion, and those non-Muslims who respects Islam and do not wage war against Muslims.
“In our case, we only use one of these three aspects of the term. The result is a wedge between our (Muslim) society and the non-Muslims," said Nik Aziz.
On criticisms that Teo was not wearing proper Islamic attire, Nik Aziz said it related to the surau caretaker's responsibility to ensure such rules were followed.

Kelantan Oil Royalty Lawsuit

Kelantan oil suit claims Petronas in constitutional breach

August 30, 2010
The Kelantan oil royalty tussle is expected to weigh on Najib in the coming general election. — file pic
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 30 — By not making any cash payments for oil obtained offshore Kelantan, global oil giant Petronas is not only in breach of a slew of laws but also the Federal Constitution, the Kelantan state government charged today. The state also upped the ante in its continuing battle for oil royalties, alleging in court documents that Petronas is unfairly discriminating against the east coast state because it is controlled by Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS), a political party in opposition to the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition.
By throwing the discrimination charge into the mix, the state government is sending a signal that the battle in the court of public opinion will be as important in this case as the fight in the High Court.
Kelantan’s demand for cash payment for petroleum found off its shores has gained significant traction in the state and is likely to be one of the top issues when Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak seeks a mandate.
Petronas and the BN federal government have argued that Kelantan is not entitled to royalties for oil obtained offshore, preferring instead to offer the state a token goodwill payment. But the state government today said that it is owed oil royalties from at least four offshore areas from which oil has been extracted from. These are Kelantan, Kelantan-Thailand, Kelantan-Vietnam and Kelantan-Terengganu.
In court papers filed today, Tommy Thomas, the lawyer for the Kelantan state government, sketched the background of the Petroleum Development Bill. He noted that petroleum had been commercially exploited off the waters of Sarawak and Sabah before the formation of Malaysia in 1963.
In 1973-1974, a dispute arose between the federal government and the Sarawak government over the question of oil royalties.
Sarawak claimed that oil obtained offshore belonged to Sarawak and royalty should be paid to the state, exclusively. Sabah adopted the position of Sarawak. To break the impasse, the federal government appointed the late Tun Dr Ismail Ali and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah to come up with a new national petroleum policy.
Against this backdrop, the then-Solicitor-General Datuk (now Tun) Salleh Abas drafted the Petroleum Development Bill on the basis of economic development, equitable rights of states, and the pooling and sharing of resources.
The Bill’s fundamental provision was that ownership of petroleum, whether onshore or offshore, should not be property of either federal or state governments but be vested in a limited liability company. In return for vesting of ownership in the company, the company would pay cash payments to the federal government and state governments where petroleum was found. The Bill was not only confined to Sarawak and Sabah but all states because of the equality provision under the Federal Constitution. The Petroleum Development Act (PDA) was passed on October 1 1974.
By virtue of PDA, Petronas became the sole owner of petroleum offshore and onshore for 13 states.
Further, on May 9, 1975, Petronas entered into an agreement with Kelantan where it agreed to make cash payments yearly amounting to the equivalent of five per cent of the value of petroleum obtained onshore and offshore Kelantan. In consideration of Petronas agreeing to make cash payments, it was granted exclusive rights and privileges of obtaining petroleum in the state under the Kelantan Grant.
“Such relinquishing of ownership of petroleum resources belonging to and vested in the state of Kelantan from time immemorial was done in good faith and for valuable consideration, namely, the half yearly cash payments. It was not a gift to Petronas,” said the state government.
As such, the Kelantan state government contends that under the PDA, Kelantan Petroleum Agreement and Kelantan Grant, Petronas is obliged to make cash payments twice a year for all oil obtained offshore Kelantan.
In addition to failing to make an account of all oil obtained offshore Kelantan to date, the national oil company has also informed the state government that it was not entitled to any cash payments.
In contrast, Petronas made cash payments to BN-controlled Sarawak, Sabah and Terengganu (stopping only in 2000 when the PAS controlled the state).
“Such conduct on the part of Petronas constitutes unfair discrimination which has resulted in severe financial loss to the Kelantan state government and will continue to do so,” said the state government in its writ of summons.
By not treating Kelantan equally with Sarawak, Sabah and Terengganu, Petronas is in breach of Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, the state government charged.
Kelantan is seeking the following relief against Petronas:
* specific performance of the Kelantan Petroleum Agreement;
* an account or an inquiry to make a full and frank disclosure of all the relevant facts relating to cash payments payable to Kelantan, including the period from which petroleum has been produced, won or obtained offshore Kelantan;
* an order that an arrears of all cash payments be paid to Kelantan within one month of an order of the court;
* general damages.
MI

Kerja Paksa Seumur Hidup Mantan Presiden

Mantan Presiden Madagaskar Divonis Kerja Paksa Seumur Hidup
Mantan Presiden Madagaskar Divonis Kerja Paksa Seumur Hidup
Reuters/Finbarr O'Reilly/vg
ANTANANARIVO--MI: Mantan presiden Madagaskar Marc Ravalomanana yang tinggal di pengasingan, Sabtu (28/8), dijatuhi hukuman kerja paksa seumur hidup karena terlibat dalam kejadian yang dikenal sebagai pembunuhan 7 Februari 2009.

"Ravalomanana telah djatuhi hukuman tanpa kehadirannya untuk kerja paksa seumur hidup karena pembunuhan dan tambahan pada pembunuhan itu," kata Hanitra Razafimanantsoa, pegacara presiden yang dijatuhkan itu, yang berada di pengasingan di Afrika Selatan sejak Maret 2009.

Pada 7 Februari 2009, pengawal presiden itu telah menembak tanpa peringatan pada satu kerumunan massa yang sedang melakukan jalannya ke kepresidenan, sehingga menewaskan sedikitnya 30 orang dan melukai lebih dari 100 orang. Dari ke 18 orang yang dituduh bersama di pengadilan itu, yang terjadi pekan ini di ibukota Madagaskar, Antananarivo, 14 orang telah dijatuhi hukuman kerja paksa seumur hidup.

Para tertuduh dibela oleh dua penilai setelah pengacara mereka memutuskan untuk walk out pada awal pemeriksaan dengan alasan "pelanggaran mencolok atas hak-hak asasi pengacara", kata Razafimanantsoa. Ia menambahkan bahwa dirinya dan kliennya belum memutuskan apakah mereka akan naik banding.

"Baginya itu bukan putusan yang diambil dengan serius bagi sistim pengadilan yang telah dibantu oleh rezim." "Tujuannya adalah untuk menghukumnya agar dia tidak dapat pulang ke Madagaskar dan mencalonkan diri dalam pemilihan mendatang."

Pemeriksaan pengadilan itu telah membuat gelombang di ibukota dengan para pendukung dan penentang presiden yang dijatuhkan itu hadir dalam jumlah besar di pengadilan.

Pembunuhan Februari 2009 dipicu ketika penguasa Madagaskar sekarang ini, Andry Rajoelina, saat itu walikota Antananarivo, tapi mengklaim akan memimpin negara itu, menunjuk seorang "perdana menteri" yang ribuan pendukungnya ingin tempatkan di kepresidenan.

Pulau di Lautan India itu telah terperosok ke dalam krisis politik sejak akhir 2008. Krisis itu telah menyebabkan jatunya Ravalomanana pada Maret 2009 dan penggantiannya dengan Rajoelina, yang pada waktu itu mendapat dukungan militer.

Hukuman terakhir itu tanpa kehadiran Ravalomanana yang ketiga kalinya sejak kejatuhannya. Ia diganjar empat tahun penjara dan denda untuk kasus konflik kepentingan dalam pembelian sebuah pesawat presiden dan lima tahun kerja paksa karena pembelian tanah.
Media Indonesia

Visiting Mosque in Islam

Queen Elizabeth visited mosque in Istanbul

Hostage Protest in HK

HK furious; OFWs fearful

80,000 marchers demand justice

Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 00:14:00 08/30/2010

HONG KONG—Tens of thousands marched in Hong Kong on Sunday in honor of eight Hong Kong residents killed in a bus hijacking in Manila, denouncing the Philippine government for botching the rescue operation and demanding justice for the dead.
President Benigno Aquino III has “begged for understanding” and ordered a thorough investigation into the Aug. 23 bloodbath, but that has done little to stem growing anger in this wealthy southern Chinese territory where violent crime is a rarity.
About 20 Hong Kong legislators led the crowd gathered at an urban park in a short ceremony honoring the dead before setting off on a march to the central financial district. Police didn’t estimate the size of the crowd, but organizers said about 80,000 people took part, radio RTHK reported on its website.
“Today’s protest expresses our deep mourning and our strong desire for the Philippine government to take the matter seriously,” Jasper Tsang, president of the Legislative Council, told the crowd.
“That 80,000 people can show up in such a short period of time—it shows the anger and unity of the Hong Kong people,” lawmaker Cheung Man-kwong said.
Dismissed Philippine Senior Insp. Rolando Mendoza commandeered a bus carrying a 22-member Hong Kong tour group visiting Manila last week, hoping to reverse his dismissal from the force on what he said were bogus robbery and extortion charges.
He released several children and elderly hostages early in the 11-hour standoff broadcast live on television, but later opened fire on the tourists. A police sniper shot and killed Mendoza—but not before eight tourists were killed in the gunfire.
The bloody ending stunned Hong Kongers, who blasted the Manila police for what they called an amateurish rescue attempt. They also accused President Aquino of indifference in angry online messages.
“Everyone saw how the Philippine government mishandled the situation before TV cameras and the chaos in the country. As a Chinese person, I need to demand justice,” 49-year-old worker Andy Wong said at Sunday’s protest.
“I am furious,” said 56-year-old Law Wai-hing. “I don’t think we will be ever told the truth when the President (Aquino) is as appalling as he is.”
Probe results in 3 weeks promised
Herminio Coloma, Philippine presidential spokesperson, said on Sunday that his government respected the right of the people of Hong Kong to express their sentiments. He promised to announce the results of a “comprehensive, fair and accurate” investigation in three weeks.
Survivor Lee Ying-chuen, who along with her mother escaped with light injuries, said in an article published in Ming Pao Daily News that the tourists thought about subduing Mendoza, but never acted because he seemed friendly and promised to release his hostages in the afternoon.
“If we didn’t wait for the police rescue operation and acted decisively, there might have been a different outcome. But the horrible thing is there are no ‘ifs’ in history,” Lee wrote.
Fears over backlash
There are concerns that local anger could boil over and the some 120,000 Filipinos working as live-in domestic helpers for Hong Kong families would face a backlash. So far, there have been no reports of violence.
Protest organizers urged participants not to target Filipinos in the former British colony.
“My feelings toward the Philippine people haven’t changed. This is not a problem concerning the entire Filipino race,” said protester Carl Chiu, a 20-year-old university student.
Solidarity
In a gesture of solidarity, local Filipino activists organized an interfaith service in memory of the victims earlier Sunday where they lit eight candles—one for each victim.
“We ask the Hong Kong people who are watching us not to blame us for what happened because we also did not want this kind of thing to happen. This is why we are holding this prayer—to send our sympathy and condolences to them,” said migrant worker Elma Oliva.
Philippine Vice Consul Val Roque said a text message was sent to members of the Filipino community asking them to “set aside what they are doing” and attend memorial Masses “to express their grief and sympathy.”
Roque downplayed fears of retribution against Filipinos, saying there had been no confirmed reports of harassment or physical abuse. But Filipinos in the territory said they had been warned to stay away from Chinese crowds.
“We are very worried to be living in a Chinese community now,” said Joy Fajardo, 30.
In a sign that feelings are running high, the message “Stop hiring Filipino domestic workers!!!” has sprung up on Facebook sites set up by Hong Kong people to mourn the hostage victims.
Frenzy of fear
A series of unconfirmed reports of Hong Kong employers trying to vent their anger by sacking or attacking their helpers has been widely circulating among Filipinos.
Fajardo said text messages had been exchanged saying that more than 30 Filipino maids had been sacked following the tragedy, including one whose contract was terminated allegedly because her family name was the same as the gunman’s.
On Friday, Fajardo said she received reports that three maids had been killed, with one of them having acid splashed over her face.
“We don’t know if these cases are true. But we are very scared,” she said.
Another Filipino worker, Julie, said her 60-year-old employer, for whom she has worked for 14 years, did not speak to her after the hostage crisis.
“She watched news on TV about the hijacking. She did not talk to me and did not give me dinner on Wednesday,” she said.
Berated on public transport
Many Filipino workers also complained about being berated on public transport in the aftermath of the siege.
The hysteria reflects the vulnerability of Filipino domestic workers, who underpin the city’s economy by taking care of the children and elderly relatives of working parents.
Under the law, a domestic worker must be paid a minimum salary of HK$3,580 (US$460) and a food allowance of HK$750 each month. They have to be given one day off every week.
“They do not want to return home because their salary in Hong Kong is higher than a police officer or a professor in the Philippines,” said Fermi Wong, founder of Unison Hong Kong, a group that helps ethnic minorities.
Deplorable conditions
Some domestic workers endure deplorable working conditions just to keep their job. These include being made to serve more than one family—a practice that is now illegal—and to live in uninhabitable quarters.
Wong said there were reports of workers being sexually or physically abused, and in one case, a Hong Kong employer banned his maid from using their washroom at night for “hygiene reasons.”
Cases of maids stealing from their employers or abusing their children behind their backs have raised levels of mutual mistrust.
“Filipino maids have a very low status in our city,” Wong said.
Yet Filipinos remain the largest group of domestic workers in the financial hub, because of their proficiency in English.
‘We’re not to blame’
Wong said she hoped Hong Kong people would not allow their anger and grief to transform into long-term hatred against the Filipinos.
“They were vulnerable even before the hostage siege. Now they feel even more vulnerable because they are guilty and ashamed. They feel they are morally responsible for what their government has done,” he said.
Diana Delossandos, a 30-year-old domestic helper, voiced the same hope.
“We are also shocked and angry with the way the Philippine government handled the hostage crisis. The reaction of our president is so disgusting, and our police are so stupid,” she said.
“But we are not supposed to be blamed.” Reports from Associated Press and Agence France-Presse

Krisis Maritim RI-Malaysia

Opini
[ Sabtu, 28 Agustus 2010 ]
Anti-Malaysia di Indonesia
Oleh: A. Eby Hara*

Hari-hari ini masyarakat kembali marah kepada Malaysia. Demonstrasi pun kembali muncul dan kali ini lebih brutal. Mereka menginjak bendera Malaysia dan melempari Kedubes dengan kotoran. Masyarakat juga menyalahkan pemerintah yang lambat dalam menangani masalah itu dan tidak menunjukkan wibawa sama sekali sehingga diremehkan.

Hubungan yang baik -apalagi sesama rumpun, satu keluarga, dan satu sejarah- adalah hubungan yang saling menghormati, mengikuti aturan, mengerti, dan membangun dalam berbagai bidang. Namun, kini masyarakat -mulai pelajar, mahasiswa, sampai khalayak umum- tidak lagi mengerti hal tersebut. Mereka hanya ingin melibas Malaysia, mereka makin mengerti bahwa konfrontasi seperti yang dilakukan Soekarno adalah penting.

Itu menyedihkan. Sepuluh tahun lalu semuanya masih menyenangkan. Malaysia sering dilihat sebagai tempat orang Melayu asli yang tradisional dan ramah. Lagu-lagunya mengingatkan senandung orang-orang di Sumatera. Malaysia dirindukan karena mewarisi tradisi Melayu yang kental. Sementara itu, di Indonesia tradisi tersebut makin terkikis dan melebur ke dalam budaya nasional.

Mungkin dulu juga ada banyak masalah, tetapi semuanya terkendali. Sudah banyak penangkapan dan perlakuan buruk terhadap para pekerja pada zaman PM Mahathir Mohamad. Berbagai operasi sudah dilakukan. Mereka yang mulanya dibiarkan -termasuk yang ilegal karena secara politik tidak penting lagi- mulai ditertibkan. Penertiban itu susah dilakukan tidak saja karena mereka ilegal, tapi juga mereka dianggap membawa penyakit sosial di masyarakat. Karena itu, kemudian tercipta istilah indon yang selalu diasosiasikan dengan prilaku asosial.

Saat itu tidak ada yang protes karena kuatnya kontrol pemerintah dan hubungan government to government (G to G) yang kukuh. Pemerintah dapat menetralkan masyarakat dan media. Saat ini berbeda. Peran media menjadi sangat besar. Mereka jugalah yang secara tidak langsung menghangatkan suasana. Hampir semua laporan media sekarang negatif jika berkaitan dengan Malaysia.

Seperti dalam kasus terakhir, tiga anggota DKP itu menjadi terkenal karena media mengejar mereka dan menanyakan detail kejadian yang dialami. Walaupun mungkin itu perlakuan standar terhadap tahanan, tetap saja ada hal yang dianggap tidak wajar oleh media. Bagi masyarakat yang emosi, sedikit saja laporan perlakuan yang kurang berkenan sudah cukup untuk menjustifikasi kemarahan mereka. Masyarakat dan anggota DPR yang memang susah kalau membela rakyat miskin yang banyak atau mengatasi korupsi tampil ke depan, mereka membela tiga orang yang sempat diborgol itu.

Dalam sepuluh tahun terakhir ini citra Malaysia pun jatuh di mata rakyat Indonesia walaupun berbagai kerja sama dibuat dan jutaan TKI mencari nafkah di sana. Namun, itu semua tidak signifikan. Kalau ada survei tentang negara yang paling dibenci Indonesia, sangat mungkin Malaysia ditempatkan di peringkat pertama.

Sebelum ini, mungkin tidak ada negara yang dibenci separah ini oleh bangsa Indonesia. Belanda mungkin dibenci karena menjajah, tetapi rakyat tetap senang mendukung kesebelasan Belanda yang bertanding dalam Piala Dunia. Kini, karena Jepang membantu pembangunan, orang lupa betapa kejamnya romusa. Tiongkok juga mungkin dibenci karena dikaitkan dengan komunis, tetapi sekarang terdapat hubungan dagang yang baik dengan negara itu. Sebenci-bencinya, masyarakat dalam sejarah tidak pernah melempari kedutaan besar negara-negara itu dengan kotoran.

***

Jadi, apakah yang sudah dicapai dan diinginkan dari mobilisasi anti-Malaysia sekarang? Toh di Malaysia sendiri, orang sana sepi-sepi saja, tidak ada reaksi berarti, tidak tahu, dan tidak mau tahu kecuali beberapa orang yang menyayangkan mengapa sampai najis dilempar ke Kedubes Malaysia. Yang responsif itu pun susah melihatnya langsung karena demo dan media dibatasi. Tapi, mungkin menarik bila melihat pandangan mereka lewat respons online di internet terhadap kasus terakhir.

Dalam situs berita online seperti juga di Indonesia yang memungkinkan orang memberikan komentar, tanggapan mereka datar, lucu, dan seperti mengerti yang terjadi dan akan terjadi. Misalnya, walaupun ditampilkan foto bendera me­reka diinjak-injak dan kantor kedubes dilempari kotoran, sebuah komentar mengatakan, "Tak apalah... Orang Indonesia ni sebenarnya memburukkan nama baik mereka... Sebab tu, kita di Malaysia hanya berkata, mereka ni memang orang bodoh". Bahkan, komentar itu seperti mengetahui demonstran yang melakukan hal tersebut, "Semuanya orang yg tak bekerja yg diupah untuk buat kacau".

Tanggapan di atas dikutip untuk menunjukkan bahwa orang Malaysia sudah semakin terbiasa dengan kemarahan orang Indonesia dan sudah paham pokok perkaranya. Mereka juga tidak terlalu dipusingkan dengan berbagai ancaman di tanah air. Mereka juga menganggap semua itu permainan media. Sebuah komentar mengatakan, "...perkara biasa lah media indon sana tuh. Hal kecik camnie pun nak kecoh satu kampung, yg derang (dia orang, Pen) tuh pulak sentiasa menceroboh perairan negara kita selalu dan saban hari takpe lak. Mujurlah kita masih lagi waras dan bersabar, kita tak ikut perangai budak sekolah sana tuh...kedutaan derang kat sini pun kita tak kaco, dan xde demonstrasi murahan".

Jadi, apakah yang hendak dicapai dengan mobilisasi anti-Malaysia? Memang iklim demokrasi memberikan peluang bagi rakyat untuk menjadi aktor dalam politik luar negeri. Mereka dapat menyuarakan kepentingannya dan berhak diperhitungkan dalam perumusan keputusan politik luar negeri. Para pengamat menyebut mereka social factor dalam politik luar negeri. Tetapi, faktor sosial itu di banyak tempat diwakili oleh perwakilan mereka dalam kelompok-kelompok berpengaruh seperti lobi Yahudi yang kuat di Amerika Serikat dan lobi bisnis. Mereka tidak sporadis dan anarkis. Dengan kata lain, mereka mempunyai saluran yang tepat.

Namun, itu agaknya masih jauh. Sebab, kita senang ramai-ramai, marah, dan emosi, lalu reda. Cara itu saja sudah cukup. Pemerintah lalu jadi sibuk. Menlu yang semula merasa sudah cukup melakukan sesuatu seperti mengirim nota protes harus mencari cara lain agar rakyat puas. Semuanya menjadi reaktif. Presiden pun dengan gayanya yang khas lalu tanggap. Dia memanggil Menlu dan menanyakan alasan keterlambatan merespons, seolah-olah ingin mengatakan bahwa si staf lelet. Sementara itu, dia tetap wibawa dan komit menjaga kewibawaannya dan kewibawaan Indonesia dari setiap campur tangan asing.

Kalau itu yang diinginkan, kita akan terus menyaksikan demonstrasi yang berulang-ulang, protes, dan kebencian dalam hubungan dengan Malaysia. Ciri kental jingoisme, premanisme, militerisme, dan kerusuhan sosial pun terus melekat pada bangsa yang sudah merdeka 65 tahun ini. (*)

*) A. Eby Hara, TKI di Malaysia