I DID not do justice to the haze last week. It is far worse, invading almost every aspect of our lives: I mentioned the effects on health, productivity, tourism, transport and education but we’ve also had cancellations of sports events and routine meetings have been (perhaps less justifiably) been postponed ‘due to haze’, causing more economic damage. Some might say it’s becoming a handy excuse for the lazy, but I don’t think I’m imagining the irritation to my eyes, the stuffier breathing or my throat’s increased calls for water.
The politicking has really ratcheted up too, with various parties blaming our government for the situation.
The gentler critics say that our government is not doing enough to get Indonesia to put out the fires, while harsher detractors accuse the government of deliberately letting the haze linger.
According to one theory, this is to deter people from participating in anti-government rallies – perhaps the size of the crowd at Padang Merbok last Saturday would have been larger without the haze.
However, another accusation is that there is collusion between Malaysian and Indonesian political and business elites to enable the forest fires to continue for profits’ sake, and Malaysian companies are involved in the burning.
Anti-capitalists are particularly keen on the latter theory, to the point of placing greater blame on Malaysian companies and our government, rather than on Indonesia.
A more moderate approach has been the call for us as consumers to be mindful of the companies we are rewarding.
In any case, while it may be true that Malaysians are involved (but don’t they have families who breathe the same air?), the primary onus is on Indonesia to enforce their laws and punish the culprits, whether they are foreign owners of big corporates, smallholders or private individuals.
Expecting the Malaysian government to take action against Malaysian lawbreakers in other countries because their laws ‘aren’t good enough’ is also reminiscent of the colonial concept of extraterritoriality, where citizens, even if overseas, would be judged according to the home nation’s laws.
So if we accept that Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia are equals as sovereign nations – and aspiring democratic nations at that – then the presumption is that the governments wish to see the rule of law fully applied in their territory. If that fails to be the case, resulting in other countries being affected, then it’s reasonable for help to be offered.
As I write, our Natural Resources and Environment Minister is in Jakarta to offer the use of our aircraft to be used as water bombers and discuss ways to end the problem – quite an opportunity for Datuk Seri G Palanivel to show some results.
Of course there is scepticism, but it would be a small breakthrough if, for instance, Indonesia finally signs the Asean Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution I mentioned last week. It was noteworthy that the language used by the Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudyohono in apologising for the haze was much more conciliatory in contrast to that earlier employed by his Environment Minister in blaming Malaysian-owned companies.
Amidst these developments the anger and insults from Malaysians and Singaporeans continues unabated, abundantly evident on social media.
Even the comedian Chris Tucker of ‘Rush Hour’ fame, who was in Kuala Lumpur for one night, succinctly observed: “Y’all wanna kick Indonesia’s [posterior]right now!”, eliciting one of the loudest cheers of the evening. Unlike some of the previous spats over culture that the two countries have had, sentiments on the haze are shared across far more widely and deeply felt.
And while few apart outside the aforementioned conspiracy theorists would accuse the airborne incursion of being deliberate, the perception of inaction is certainly being seen in a hostile light.
At the extreme end I have even heard people proposing that war would be the best option on economic, environmental and libertarian grounds.
This is why the diplomatic efforts are so important.
Certainly, these are not the open skies the proponents of Asean integration refer to in order to facilitate better movement of people. But amidst our complaints, we would do well to remember that from the 12th to 19th centuries there were no modern national borders between Sumatra and the Malay Peninsula.
Thousands of families who sought new opportunities across the straits were able to come, settle and import their political and cultural institutions.
Perhaps a better realisation of this shared history will help us share the responsibility of dealing with the problem while fully respecting each country’s sovereignty.
Tunku Abidin Muhriz is Ideas president.