New Straits Times columnist and assistant political editor Shamsul Akmar has been rebuked and chastised by Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar as being unprofessional in making personal derogatory remarks against him and his ministry in the former's column 'Saturday Notes' entitled Highlighting the unknown in Iraq.

The controversy began in the wake of a kidnapping incident involving three journalists and two Malaysian Medical Relief Society (Mercy Malaysia) volunteers in Iraq.

The foreign minister had made a statement that as a result of the incident Malaysian journalists wanted to return to Malaysia.

Shamsul said that he (Hamid) insinuated that they (journalists) were in fear after what had happened to three of their colleagues.

In this incident Hamid could be misinformed.

As reported by malaysiakini, two journalists from Tamil-language newspapers Malaysia Nanban and Tamil Nesan had indicated initially their intent and asked permission to return.

Although Acting Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had expressed hope that the handful of Malaysian journalists wanting to return would reconsider their plans, it was still left to them to decide "according to the situation".

As it turned out, they had since changed their minds to remain o­n their mission and journeyed into Baghdad for further reporting.

According to Shamsul, the Malaysian journalists were not desirous of returning home and it was they who were being asked to return and not the other way round.

We can believe what Shamsul said because I assume he was there o­n the ground and it might well have been a point of professional pride to be made that Malaysian journalists were intrepid and would not quit merely by reason of the unfortunate incident. The dangers came with the territory and precautions were taken and planning gone into such a mission.

Besides it would be a joke o­n our Malaysian journalistic endeavour to make a big hullabaloo over the mission, o­nly to flee back when confronted by such an expected occupational hazard that is faced by journalists world over. National mantra 'Malaysia boleh' will become immediately 'Malaysia tak boleh'.

One can therefore understand why Shamsul was riled by Hamid's inaccurate conclusions and public statement that the Foreign Ministry should know better the implications before issuing them.

Having said that, as a bystander and reader, I agree with the Foreign Ministry and Home Minister's views that some of Shamsul's remarks were derogatory and uncalled for.

Even though the foreign minister had not got his facts right and "jumped the boat" in his conclusions about Malaysian journalists resolving to stay o­n in Iraq, there was no justification for Shamsul to say that "if the foreign minister could be so misinformed over matters concerning citizens of his own country, o­ne wonders if other information he dispensed about other nations and their people may be more misleading".

Shamsul added "At last, the likes of Syed Hamid who are the least qualified to talk about what is going o­n in Baghdad when no o­ne from his ministry dared to step into Iraq had decided to jump o­n the publicity wagon to get a share of the limelight".

This is an unwarranted remark to directly denigrate Foreign Ministry officials' bravery or lack thereof compared with our journalists in Iraq and to cast them in the unsavoury light of publicity seekers whilst at the same time indirectly insinuating our journalists' bravery in contrast.

Bravery it probably is for this batch of Malaysian journalists sponsored by the Foreign and Information Ministries in war coverage that makes Shamsul so proud about it - and correspondingly so riled by Hamid's statement imputing the contrary - when others in CNN, BBC, Times, Newsweek and of late al-Jazeera have been taking risks and losing lives without a murmur.

I would imagine that, as a matter of motive, the first thought of the Foreign Ministry was safety of Malaysian journalists in the light of questions raised o­n adequacy of preparations against the dangerous anarchic and fluid conditions prevailing in Baghdad at the material time. It is hard to think of the Foreign Ministry's seeking publicity as the primary motive.

What benefit does such publicity bestow o­n the ministry? When it co-sponsored the mission, any act of quickly aborting it (for publicity) because of such an incident o­nly serves to boomerang o­n the ministry's own credibility as regards whether it knew what it was doing in the first place.

It would be fair comment to criticise Syed Hamid that as the foreign minister he should check the ground facts in Baghdad before making a public statement here that might compromise the intrepid resolve of Malaysian journalists like Shamsul in Baghdad.

It is unwarranted for Shamsul to impute that "the likes of Syed Hamid" "are o­nly interested to see his name in print and not get to the real facts of the matter" which "boils down to what kind of leadership the minister provides".

The next salvo was against the Foreign Ministry itself - "Syed Hamid may have come to his conclusion that the Malaysian journalists were in fear based o­n his assessment of some of his people from the ministry who feared for their safety if they entered Baghdad".

How does Shamsul know? It is very childish to talk about who is braver.

This has nothing to do with New Straits Times being controlled ultimately by Umno and its journalists should abstain from criticising government ministries and ministers. Criticism is good and no minister should be so "thin-skinned" to take personally criticisms of the manner they carry out official functions.

But a line must be drawn where we do not make personal derogatory remarks and conclusions not o­nly about public figures but anyone drawn merely from o­ne's own aggrandisement of o­ne's own bravery and imputation of "lack of courage" or "publicity-seeking tendencies" of the other, either unsupported by the facts or for which an alternative explanation of concern for safety for Malaysians might have been possible.

Shamsul's criticism of Syed Hamid and his ministry is disproportionate to Hamid's mistake in not checking the full facts. Other ministers have uttered greater distortions in the past and I don't see them so severely chastised.

I am not siding anyone, least of all a government minister, but it seems to me that in respect to this controversy, Shamsul was in all likelihood overreacting based o­n emotions and he should apologise to close this matter.