The Economist of April 3, 2003 provided a very insightful survey o­n Malaysia. I am puzzled that some are making an issue of it almost three weeks after the magazine hit the stands.

The writer of the articles seems to have rather good grasp of the Malaysian situation but I

must add something which he overlooked. The articles fail to draw any reference to Malaysian Indians. And this, after a rather good article in an earlier edition about their plight. Although tiny in population size, the aspirations of Indians is as important as those of anyone else.

I also believe that the threat of Islamic fundamentalism is perhaps over-exaggerated. Yes, PAS has certain ways of doing things but if you care to notice in Terengganu and Kelantan - the states it controls - nothing untoward has happened to non-Muslims.

Yes, superficial rules o­n wearing tudung in advertisements and separate queue in supermarkets seem ridiculous, but so is the current federal government proposal to o­nly allow maids to work with employers who share the same religion.

I believe the greatest threat to non-Muslims' liberty comes from callous officials within the BN government who keep upsetting non-Muslims with petty rules. First, it was the demolition of temples, then came the clampdown o­n pubs (mind you, the licensed o­nes as well), then came the wearing tudung in certain school/higher institutions, followed by the proposed same-religion rule o­n maids and initial the ban o­n the Iban Bible (since lifted).

Where will this end? While we are so preoccupied by PAS, zealots in the ruling coalition are creating havoc. This is where the danger lies. Umno, in its haste to prove its Islamic credentials, is being insensitive to the needs of its BN partners.

And it certainly does not help when MCA is preoccupied with o­ng Tee Keat and Soh Chee Wen and MIC is hell bent o­n Kayveas and Pandithan.

I have always maintained that there are more moderates in Malaysia who will not wish to see their rights eroded by any over-zealousness. It is a mistake to compare Middle Eastern nations to Malaysia as people in those countries do not have any freedom and their leaders allegedly plunder the nation's wealth.

Another argument is that Pak Lah will not be able to match Mahathir in steeliness and ruthlessness. For years now, critics have been hammering Mahathir for his 'iron-fisted' rule. Now, the same critics are expressing doubt over Badawi's demure mannerism, quiet and non-antagonistic approach.

Give the man some time. The same argument was put forward when (former British premier) John Major took over from Margaret Thatcher. We all know what happened - John Major won a crushing victory over his Labour opponent Neil Kinnock.

The time has perhaps come for someone who is a bit more palatable, cordial, less imposing and an all-round 'people' person, and that man may be Pak Lah.

I do not know what the future will hold and most certainly nor does any pundit. What I worry about is that this gloom-and-doom talk may actually take its own course.

Sometimes, people start worrying about things that are not there, and in the process create a problem.