I was starting to doze off in the middle of class while the gentleman in front of me was passionately explaining how we detect proteins. The room was cold, most of us still had our jackets on and we stared blankly at the board in front us. I then decided to go to the Malaysiakini website, and have a quick look as to what the headlines were.

Rarely is Malaysian news worth reading, as it is the same old nonsense every day. Someone is corrupt, someone was racist, someone was trying to blame a Jew, someone was enforcing forced religion on the masses. It’s all so cliched that it just doesn’t stimulate my thinking nor interest.

Then out of nowhere I stumbled upon a gem of an article . I only clicked on it for the reason that it had managed to garner about a hundred comments on the site. This was something very odd! So clearly the article wasn’t genuinely a token of gratitude, it was most probably something that was controversial.

Then I thought to myself, what could possibly be controversial about Clare Rewcastle-Brown, Tony Pua or Rafizi Ramli? It made no sense! Hence, my eyes gleamed, my heart rate went up, I may have even broken into a sweat at the excitement of this letter. Into paragraph 3, I realised the disappointment that this was the ramblings of a five-year-old. A juvenile rant by the progeny of Malaysia’s greatest Indian ‘Leader’.

Oh dear.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) did in fact report on Jan 27 that a Saudi source said that the donation was made due to concerns in Riyadh about the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Now this statement alone is enough to raise several important questions that the author failed to acknowledge in his rant. I am instead going to give you my concerns which I hope will make some sense to you. Instead, I have no desire to garner controversy, nor do I need to make petty schoolyard statements to refute nor defend the government. All we need is some critical thinking and principle, both somewhat lacking in the article I read.

Firstly, we need to correct some misconceptions and I will whip up the appropriate reasons required for one to be statesmanly. The author accuses political leaders from both sides of the divide of attempting to behead the government. This is simply misguided.

Clare, Tony and Rafizi are merely keen investigators who uncovered sensational newsworthy information. None of this could result in government collapse, as we all know that office-bearers in this country can cling on to power as long as they desire no matter what the situation, until a general election is called and Parliament dissolved. This is cynical, but fact.

The author was right when he labelled Xavier Justo as a criminal who attempted the retail of sensitive confidential corporate information belonging to PetroSaudi. However, the author fails to acknowledge that the this data should have been investigated as 1MDB’s multi-billion dollar debts were in the public interest. It is common knowledge that 1MDB is state-owned, therefore publicly-funded, ergo and ethically, subject to public scrutiny and praise.

‘All money belongs to the people’

The government has no money for itself, all money belongs to the people. If only Xavier wasn’t so greedy, we could have crowned him a whistleblower. None can argue the significance and importance of whistleblowing in civil institutions, especially when things start getting somewhat shady. Unfortunately for Xavier, prison awaits him.

Then the author proceeds to rail about lying and being deceitful. Again the he fails to acknowledge and consider important questions. What is the severity of moving middle eastern money into our country? Who is the liar if international funding for anti-terrorism wasn’t disclosed and hushed up?

In fact, an initial question should be on the merit of accepting Saudi money for Malaysian use. Who are these so-called ‘Saudis’ who can throw money around internationally to further their own interests? On this plain matter, the author has no principle when considering how money and politics work on both a national and international scale. It is as if that there’s nothing wrong with such a large-scale movement of money.

We have to consider what Saudi Arabia is. The vast majority of intellectuals, journalists and political scientists consider this country the ‘back-stabbing ally’ of the west. In 2015, Roy Greenslade called Saudi Arabia the father of IS.

The vast majority of problems sustained from the radicalisation and conservatism of Malaysian Islam is due to the constant export of Wahhabism by the Saudis for the past 50 years. This has happened all over and is extremely dangerous. Surely as a ‘kafir’ like me, the author could have expressed some concern on this?

So what is Wahhabism? It is a branch of Sunni teaching which has been denied its vicious roots here in this country, thanks to moderate Islamic leaders. In early 2015, the National Fatwa Council said that there is no place for such an ideology in this country, and yet the author does not realise what damage Saudi money and interests could do to our people. The author must have a poor awareness of the world around him.

Wahhabism is far different from historical Islam which enforced the schools of law such as Hanafi, Maliki, Shafii and so on.

Each of these ‘fiqh’ guided people and helped society understand the subjective meaning behind literal interpretations of scripture. This supported thinking, growth, the richness of culture, science, mathematics, the list is indefinite. The Saudis unfortunately realised that this wasn’t suitable and relied on a literal interpretation of scripture. From this people were misguided and hate festered.

This is the country that gave us the majority of terrorists responsible for the Sept 11 attacks in 2001, they gave the world Osama bin Laden, this is the country that flexes its muscles due to the control of holy sites and oil.

Then we must ask ourselves, Why are we organising and implementing Saudi funds for the prevention of the Muslim Brotherhood/Ikhwan Muslimin? This organisation was established in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, aimed at political activism and charitable works. Though the society has strayed from its original roots, it was somewhat of a force of good in the middle east, especially in Egypt.

In fact this movement gave the world people like Mohamed Morsi who in 2011 became a democratically elected president of Egypt. He was one of the very few Islamist leaders who pledged to uphold the civil constitution, defend the freedom of religion and proclaimed all Egyptians would have equal rights.

Middle east sociology utterly different

Unfortunately I cannot approve nor condone this movement because of their defence in the use of violence as a means to achieve their goals. However, in the middle east, who hasn't resorted to violence? The sociology is utterly different, and one would echo Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s view that democracy may not work in all parts of the world.

Regardless, the overthrowing of a democratically-elected Morsi and the declaration of the brotherhood as a terrorist organisation is not sincere, nor is it totally true. It was far too convenient for the Saudis and their Wahhabist allies to declare the brotherhood as terrorists and by doing so denouncing their socio-political status and beating their influence of relatively moderate views.

In fact the British courts declared that this organisation was not terrorist. This is a mere political power play to strengthen the Saudi ideology.

In truth, none of these values are good for Malaysia, its people nor life in general in this part of the world. Fighting the Muslim Brotherhood with Saudi help is like fighting fire with a bomb. Only misery will come of it. I am not an expert nor am I a seasoned commentator on middle eastern affairs, but my basic understanding is that we need to distance ourselves from both sides of the conflict.

The threat of radicalisation is very clear in Malaysian society. Organisations with ulterior motives will easily hijack and sway public opinion by citing domestic problems and providing revolutionary methods of relief. This is dangerous and harmful. We must protect ourselves against this, by having an honest platform of discussion between the government and public.

If the Arabs wanted to fund us, it should be public as it is in our interests. Parliament should then debate and decide on it.

I think, judging by the comments and feedback received, we have all formed an opinion on the quality of the author’s reasoning and what his motives are. I would encourage the author to print his views on every single newspaper in the country as well. There is ignorance, which is fixable, and then there is selective ignorance which cannot be fixed. There are less clever people, then there are people who pretend to be less clever for their own gains.

I do agree with the author on one thing. We do need an expose on the Saudi royal family. We need to show Malaysia that these people are not our true allies. The only reason why we maintain good ties with them is because of the importance of Makkah and Madinah to our Muslim friends.

Any leader must acknowledge this, but at the same time, we must be prepared to call a spade a spade. We don’t need their culture or ideas, we don’t need their money or influence. The only reason why we exist as a nation so far is because of our strength as a people and our ability to collective call ourselves Malaysia.

The identity of being ‘Malaysian’ and strengthening our bonds with each other will repel any harm that would come to us. It is a positive message. This is a small reminder of the greater background picture that very few of us actually see. By focussing on building our nation, based on our merits and values, we will beat any Arab who seeks to extend a poisoned olive branch.