I refer to you report Build or burn bridges with 'Ethnic Relations' .

Rarely would the expression 'I told you so' be so applicable than in this most damaging and dangerous situation, where most embarrassingly, the teachers of this course themselves are apparently not up to the mark. In my view, the course is on a fault line and unless undone immediately, is likely to result in permanent damage to the scientific field of race and ethnic relations in Malaysia.

Indeed, what is worse is that being a required course, it is really worrying as to whether the course may be creating irreversible racial and ethnic prejudice (and even hatred) that amply qualifies for self-fulfilling prophesies.

I wish to mention that I taught the first (and last) full major and minor race relations course at any local university way back in the mid-1970s. I had called for such a course to be taught at universities repeatedly over the past 10 years.

I had written to the minister for higher education, the vice-chancellor of USM (with a course synopsis), the vice-chancellor of UPM and a number of articles in the media offering my services to help build this course but to no avail.

Therefore, it is pertinent for me to request all those who wrote the textbook for this course, as well as to ask the lecturers, whether they had attended any full-time university course in race and ethnic relations, taught any such courses before or done any research in this area in Malaysia leading to books or journal publications.

The reason I ask this is because just picking the May 13 and Kampong Medan incidents in isolation from the theoretical and social historical background is certainly not the way to teach this course. This amounts to an insult to academia.

If the 'academics' who designed the course and teach the subject feel otherwise, I should be very happy to 'challenge' them to a public debate. This is a very serious matter that undermines the building of an integrated Malaysia.

On another topic, I would like to strongly endorse the very cogent and defining views expressed by Tan Sri Dr BC Sekhar in his letter regarding the Tun Abdul Razak Research Centre (TARRC) in Brickendonbury, UK.

Indeed, I will say that no other Malaysian is qualified and experienced enough to understand the meaning and negative implications behind this RM490 million sports academy proposal and therefore Tan Sri has made an important submission that I believe the government must take serious concern of, and act accordingly.

And speaking on rubber, perhaps I might be allowed to comment on what appears to be a contradiction in the government's proposal to re-emphasise agricultural development under the 9MP, particularly for rural smallholders, including rubber smallholdings as a cash crop.

Indeed it is now becoming increasingly clear that the government's recent 'back to rubber' policy needs to be given very serious attention not only as a smallholder cash crop but more importantly, for research for both upstream and downstream for the development of processed, value-added products to bring the small rubber producers into the mainstream modern sector of the economy.

The importance of research at the TARRC R&D centre for this purpose therefore cannot be over-emphasised. In developing the rubber sector, the government needs to remember that the Malay rubber cash crop smallholders were deliberately discriminated against by the colonial government, often with the support of the Malay ruling class and we certainly do not want this to happen again.

Without sounding frivolous, I strongly advise the minister for youth and sports not to take a page from the many local councils that seem to have a great sense of imagination when it comes to spending taxpayers money on questionable projects.

The writer is a former government consultant to the Johor and Pahang Regional Master Plans and UNDP consultant for Social Impact Assessment (Felda).