In the final part of his interview with malaysiakini , Musa Hitam speaks on the success of the NEP in creating a Malay middle-class. But in the same reflective tone, he also recounts the circumstances which led to the failure in garnering greater political freedom for Malaysians.

Malaysiakini: How will globalisation affect the special position of the Malays?

Musa Hitam

: I think it has already been eroded. It is a revolution (for there to be) talk of meritocracy. In the old days, once you talk about meritocracy, you are finished, you are in trouble. Now they debate it.

When I was the secretary of Umno, I used to take part in great economic debates (in universities). I said even then, shame on you Malays to be here because you are Malays. I want to see the day that you are here because you are good. I think it is emerging to be more and more like that.

You were one of the main architects of the National Economic Policy (NEP).

Yes, it suited that time. We needed it. I will argue the same way. I went to South Africa and I told them that they needed (something like) the NEP. Why? The principle is the same. You want to go for a 100m race, and someone is hobbling, so you wait for him and wait for his foot to be cured.

Those days, the Malays were really in the kampung and not interested in development. We had to push them. That's what the NEP is all about.

Are they ready for globalisation?

They have to be whether they are ready for it or not.

Do you think the NEP has achieved all that it set out to achieve?

Yes definitely. I think it has. There are thousands of Malays who are successful without government patronage.

The Malays need the exposure. They need to be exposed to competition and this is what it is all about. We needed subsidies to help when the going was not good. Now that the going is good, they have to survive.

Do you agree for the special position to go?

It is already eroded as never before. Racism is a reality. If you were to interpret (the divisions), it could be because the Malays happen to be mostly in government so they might be favoured more for this reason than anything else.

I am trying to be positive here. I may be wrong. In the old days, if you go to the railway station, (mostly) Indians were employed there. You can call it racist or racial, but it was a natural (development) rather than anything else.

How would these changes affect the Malays? There would definitely be those who would not be able to face the competition.

Which racial group will be100 percent happy? The Chinese have been unhappy for ever so long. People would try to exploit that. But as I said earlier, provided the economy moves along, we will have problems.

Can Umno leaders convince the Malays it is time to keep up with globalisation?

They are doing it. The prime minister has been saying it again and again. My problem is this: it has all been too PM-centric. Everyone has so much confidence for Mahathir to do it single-handedly. The ministers, the leaders - they all leave it to him to do the job, to say the things that need to be said.

I would like to see a wider spread of division of labour. That is going to be the challenge that (Abdullah (Ahmad) Badawi will have to face.

Can they persuade Malays to face globalisation? I say yes. There are many Malay contractors all over the world competing and winning contracts. They have international link-ups like any other business venture.

Go to the Middle East. The Malays are clever enough to exploit the Islam link and to fill up the vacuum. I have seen myself a project and I was surprised and proud. They delivered. These are the things that must be considered to be positive.

As the former Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) chairperson, it has been said that Suhakam is not as active as it used to be when you were at the helm.

I feel that it is unfortunate for circumstances to have made them what they are now. After Sept 11, human rights was forced to the backseat.

Human rights within the context of political rights was forced to take a backseat. I have been quoted and misquoted several times on this, but I did not say that I was putting it there but that it was forced there.

After Sept 11, it all sounded hollow. Look at (what) the Americans who were propagating (a human rights commission) did. I said to the Western governments, who are you to talk now? So it has weakened.

Secondly, (we were going through) the reformasi period and there were lots of things that needed to be addressed.

(For instance) the Internal Security Act (ISA). I was once responsible for administering it when I was a minister so I know more about it. When I was the home minister, I presided over the end of the communist threat. I won't go into details but the ISA was needed and even used.

I said publicly (then) that the communists were trying to use Islam as an instrument to promote themselves among the Malays. I noted that there were a lot of clandestine broadcasts, starting with the recitation of the Quran. The Malays (communists) were also celebrating Hari Raya in the jungle.

I said, be careful, Islam is going to emerge as another instrument they are going to use. We needed (the ISA) at the time. There were extremists movements but then the communist threat passed. Islam as a threat went together with it. So what is the need for the law then? The threat of overthrowing the government by force is gone.

(In contrast), the Anwar reformasi (crowd) were just demonstrating and expressing their views purely on ideological grounds. On the question of justice - why not? We should not use the ISA. That was my contention. The ISA needed to be looked afresh and that is how Suhakam came up with the proposal for (the people) to be allowed to demonstrate. They should be allowed to expressed themselves.

So we suggested a procedure for having demonstrations. An orderly sort of approach which should be acceptable. The government nearly did. There were some signs saying, yes, we are looking into it.

There were (also) lots of contradictory signs because it was a new thing and coming from me, I think it made them think a little deeper. We were talking about maybe one year. We had provoked thinking and expressions by some ministers.

But then Sept 11 came. It killed everything. If they (the government) said there was justification (to retain the ISA), who was I to say no when I was no longer privy to information? The Americans are now doing much worse things. So this is how I would explain the lower key approach.

You came up with the idea of forming Suhakam. Are you disappointed with how it has turned out so far?

Insofar as political rights are concerned, I cannot be disappointed. I am disappointed not so much with them but the events that have happened.

But as far as other issues are concerned, I do not know. They have not been as forthcoming but it is improper for me to comment or say that I was better than them. I do not think it is right.

Are you going to write a book about your experiences?

I have a script ready. I am checking, double-checking (the facts). I have got three things to do. This is one of it. (The book) would be more on how, why and when things happened. Nothing antagonistic.

I am trying to make it readable now. It is just out of my own knowledge. That's all. More anecdotal than anything else. I am not in a hurry at all.

I have also rediscovered my master's degree thesis. It is very interesting. It is called 'Singapore in Malaysia: Case study in regional integration' on how it failed and what were the difficulties. As I read it I was very excited. How relevant even for now. I have just given it to some friends and academics to, as the (British prime minister's director of communications) Alistair Campbell did, 'sex it up'.

The third (project) is that I wanted to look at a huge volume of speeches that I made. The problem is that people may not be interested in (reading) the speeches.