Clare Rewcastle-Brown should keep herself away from Malaysian affairs, should she really cares about Malaysian economy. Her interview via skype with Free Malaysia Today on March 26 reflects as though she is really cares about Malaysia’s well-being.

Despite the government’s ban on Sarawak’ Report , she still voices out her grievances about the state of affairs in Malaysia, through other media. Yes, it is good for her to tell it straight about the misgovernance going on in Malaysia but not to the extent of scaring off the foreign investors and local business people. It’s amounting to pouring soil on people’s rice bowl.

Her investigative reports against Abdul Taib Mahmud, the former Sarawak chief minister, were done in good faith of course, probably to protect the people from further deforestation.

However, now the situation is totally different and Taib is no more in full control of the Sarawak’s administration.

Adenan Satem took over the leadership and all is well now with Sarawak.

Since she had lost her fine target which is Taib, she turned her attacks toward the federal government and blaming it for its corrupt practices. She turned more aggressive since the ban on Sarawak Report , her own news portal which was reporting mainly on the malpractices of the Sarawak state government.

Leave aside Sarawak, why doesn't she speak all the achievements of the country as whole, instead of making Najib as her bull's eye now? She should have talked about the Pan-Borneo Highway project which was launched last year. And why did she turn a blind eye on the poverty reduction succeeded by Malaysia up to 0.28 percent, as reported by the World Bank? What about the Standard & Poor rating agency’s ‘A-' rating on the long-term foreign currency sovereign credit ratings? Again she is nowhere to be seen to give any positive remarks on that achievement.

As an investigative journalist, Rewcastle-Brown should be aware that the Brooke dynasty ruled Sarawak for more than a century and thereafter handed over the then kingdom to the British Crown Colony in 1946. The Brookes and the British, during their occupation, enriched themselves by robbing the natural resources of the state. To avoid dissidents, they preserved the natives’ lifestyle and that kept the natives away from modernisation and subsequently education.

The Sarawakians who were purportedly chased out from their lands by the state government, actually were not left stranded. They were given sufficient compensations and places to stay. Harsh measures were taken only against those who turned hostile towards the authority during the process of taking over the land from the locals, but not to the extent of causing serious consequences.

So, I would suggest that Rewcastle-Brown should write about her forefathers’ mistake over the people of Sarawak instead of writing about the so-called unfettered deforestation - which is done to uplift the natives’ lifestyle and to generate economic growth for the Land of the Hornbills.

She also should look into the mind-boggling issue of uncivilised Sarawakians left by the Whites, despite ruling the state for more than 100 years.