Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
I remember reading a research done in Indonesia some years back that science students are more readily radicalised to commit violence and extremism compared with their non-science counterparts.
One of the reasons cited was because science is a more rigid — black or white — discipline with few grey areas in between. As a result, science students are more inclined to decide on one or the other.
Whereas the humanities students are more used to choosing the “in-betweens” and feel comfortable with it. Although they may later gravitate towards violence but there is also a chance they may do otherwise.
In other words, religion may not be the main cause for violence per se.
That said, many were relieved to learn from the International Seminar on Religious Values in Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism held last week at International Islamic University Malaysia that religions are indeed innocent bystanders being (mis)assigned the malicious blame.
There are many factors that drive someone towards extremism. According to an expert on religion-state-society studies, geopolitical or economic influences are more likely to be the cause, although religious labelling are more often used which then makes the issues more complex. At times politicians are the culprits by using religions for their vested interest.
Professor Mark Woodward said religious leaders instead have a crucial role and responsibility to play in stopping violent extremism. Together with politicians, religious leaders should refrain from using religious hatred as political tools to advance their own interests.
Policy makers are, therefore, ill-advised to use theological orientation as a factor in assessing the violent potential of Muslim movements and organisations, he writes. Instead more attention should be paid to variables that measure political attitudes and behaviour.
In line with this, the United Nations Security Council resolution 2250 (2015) urged states “to consider ways to have a more inclusive representation of youth in decision-making at all levels in local, national, regional and international institutions and mechanisms for the prevention and resolution of conflict, including institutions and mechanisms to counter violent extremism”.
The seminar thus recommends the formation of a coordinating body, i.e. a secretariat, to facilitate the National Action Plan for Preventing and Countering Violent Extremism (PCVE) under the purview of the Home Ministry.
This is to consolidate government resources towards actionable response on PCVE issues and to also involve other stakeholders and acquire expertise from educational, civil society organisations and the private sector.
As it is, a survey of existing PCVE programmes across various ministries and agencies, such as the Department of National Unity and Integration under the Prime Minister’s Department, indicates that there are significant efforts at engagement and capacity building for PCVE.
However, there are also overlapping and duplication of efforts and responsibilities of these different government agencies which may prevent effective and cost-efficient enforcement of policies. By having a national secretariat, better optimisation of resources and best practices can be achieved. In addition, it also recommends the development of a PCVE programme package for Malaysian youths for national implementation.
This will be ascertained through a pilot study and identification of existing best practices across government ministries and agencies.
The principles of public health provide a useful framework for PCVE using capacity building especially in terms of research, collaboration, advocacy and engagement as part of more general nation-building efforts and also target segmentation of those considered to be at risk of radicalisation and violence.
By rigorously understanding the causes and consequences of violent extremism and terrorism via research and instrumentation, a more general but relevant primary prevention programme, policy interventions, advocacy; and a more focused countering of violent extremism programmes can be created.
Before all those, it also recommends that outmoded aspects of PCVE be reformed and expanded in the so-called post-ISIS period, by giving focus on the threat of far-right extremism and other religious and ideological radicalism, and the dynamics of their exchanges intra and between communities that threaten local and global peace.
It is our fervent Merdeka wish that through better understanding of PCVE, the level of violence and aggression could be better handled and reduced.
The writer, an NST columnist for more than 20 years, is International Islamic University Malaysia rector.
Published in: The New Straits Times, 31 August 2019
Last week Malaysian universities had a field day when the university rankings were released. There were many “jumps” that took place, giving the impression that they were “soaring upwards” in unprecedented ways.
One is now among the top 100 worldwide (based on a given set of criteria), while a handful made it to the top 50 in Asia. This is good news to some, while others are not so sure. Especially when realising that this particular exercise is still on an old trajectory as to what constitutes education. It is no longer adequate, in fact, it is too narrow to give a holistic meaning.
Last week, two groups of educators-cum-practitioners met at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco) headquarters in Paris and at the International Islamic University Malaysia, Gombak. The former were mainly from Europe while the latter were from Asia.
Both interacted in a two-day session to elucidate how higher education can better embrace Education 2030, also known as Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in meeting the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs, 2016-2030).
This is indeed the “new” trajectory that emphasises on the future of education using a totally different language, worldview and terminology.
Foremost, it is rooted in “collaboration” and not “competition”. It also emphasises on “inclusiveness” and “shared prosperity” and not a “winner-takes-all” approach. It further celebrates “diversity” and “balance”, and not the “one-size-fits-all” mode. There are many more, but suffice to say, it is focused on the “complete (holistic) person” in humanising education, and not the reverse that promotes only human capital as it is today.
Simply put, we need to create the next (revolutionary) paradigm for future education and launch a fresh narrative for the 21st century and beyond. Ultimately, it has to provide the most appropriate “responses” for the emerging Anthropocene era, the Post-Materialist framework, and overarching targets of ESD for a sustainable future.
It is the call of the future that education must commit to. Short of this it will bring more doom and gloom as education gets dehumanised through the factory-like entities called “universities” which came out of the industrial revolution when we are now in the post-industrial era.
Putting all of these in the scheme of things, the existing ranking exercise is totally out of sync and out of context as to the future that we deserve. In other words, it has finally outlived its usefulness and to go on subscribing to it is mindless. And it continues to promote “unsustainability” (read, money and time wasting) as our options are fast running out. Now that Malaysia has already proven itself in making it to the top by pulling the “right” strings, and pushing the “correct” buttons, it is time to pause and contemplate on what is next.
This calls for bold academic decisions in the quest for the higher purpose of education in the post-industrial/material age. It must be deeply meaningful and relevant so as to bring out higher intellectual returns for the betterment of the future. It must also be “shared” in all manner and form, and all silos must be brought down so that knowledge can converge into wisdom. Failure to do so would mean the price to pay would be tragic despite being avoidable.
The most recent reminder is what is unfolding in Pasir Gudang, Johor, where schools are experiencing another agonising ordeal directly due to an “unsustainable” approach to development. More than a hundred schoolchildren were “suffocated” by toxic air that caused them to be hospitalised, and virtually all nearby schools have been ordered closed after the situation further deteriorated.
It was not too long ago that a similar tragedy occurred in the same vicinity due to chemicals being irresponsibly dumped in Sungai Kim Kim. These occurrences send a clear signal that ESD has been compromised for far too long.
Now that we are at the threshold of initiating the 12th Malaysia Plan (12MP —2021-2025), it is time to initiate a “new” trajectory and move out of the old one.
We must search, (re)define and introduce “new” thinking and values that humanise what the 2015 World Education Forum envisaged as the future of education for all. It is imperative to keep this at the forefront of our thoughts as 2020 has always been regarded as an inflexion point to rise above the “errors” of the past.
To ignore this is to forsake the invaluable opportunities in translating into reality the noble and futuristic National Education Philosophy (NEP) that has been laid to waste (irresponsibly) for more that 30 years today.
The 12MP must, therefore, breathe life into the NEP in (re)constructing the “new” trajectory for education forward. A chance that must not be squandered again.
The writer, an NST columnist for more than 20 years, is International Islamic University Malaysia rector.
Published in: The New Straits Times, 29 June 2019
Within weeks before the new government took over the administration of the country, I wrote to express my concern about what could be a lifelong threat to our youth community, bearing in mind this generation would be instrumental in swinging the votes in favour of change.
They took the bull by the horns as it were by organising themselves worldwide against all odds. And to everyone’s pleasant surprise, it worked a miracle!
On the anniversary of the feat, it is useful to drop a reminder of the top three concerns, namely, mental health like depression, vulnerability to screen devices, and last but not least, drug addiction which has been plaguing us for more than 50 years.
The drug war is yet to be won at the expense of innocent lives wasted in the millions, especially of our youth. To me this includes the use of tobacco, often dubbed as the “gateway” drug that allows users to experiment and eventually get hooked on hard and fatal drugs.
Going by the frequency and size of the drug busts reported in the media, they point to a mere tip of the iceberg. In other words, drugs are easily obtained once one knows who or how to seek them out. With the more recent daring actions and policies to curb smoking and vaping, it gives some new hope that the gateway to hard drugs can gradually be dismantled, as demonstrated in countries with more stringent tobacco control programmes.
But it is not going to be easy now because the “decriminalisation” of ganja is knocking on our doors. Substance-related addictive disorders, involving alcohol, tobacco, stimulants, marijuana (ganja) and opioids have been enlisted in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5).
The issue is, if we cannot do a good job to control tobacco use openly, how can we do better to control any of the other hard drugs that are clandestinely supplied, unless we go the Philippines way! Otherwise, the drug addiction scene will worsen with ganja now “readily” available, if not accessible.
Linked to this is the second life- threatening issue — screen devices which is the “new” tobacco as it is also a “gateway” to other “addictive” behaviours. Gaming is obviously one of them. In fact, it is the only behavioural addiction (as opposed to substance use) in the DSM-5 as identified by the experts. Implying that with indiscriminate use one can get hooked to it as evident in several countries that are fully wired up.
The analogy to unregulated tobacco use cannot be mistaken. The more the usage, the more vulnerable one gets to becoming addicted with symptoms like preoccupation with gaming, the need to spend more time to satisfy the urge, and the inability to reduce playing (texting), or unsuccessful attempts to quit gaming. Of late, the World Health Organisation (WHO), as though an endorsement, announced something similar in its International Classification of Diseases (ICD, 11th edition).
There are also evidences that some of the algorithms used in gaming are similar to those for gambling in casinos — meant to gradually hook the unsuspecting players based on frequency of use!
Hence, it is not surprising to see advertisements everywhere encouraging more usage by cutting down rates or other gimmicks to stay talking (read “smoking” for tobacco). So much so, as we see an increase in traffic, the content or quality remains poor, if not harmful. Still many just cannot do without it as portrayed by the world of social media, especially among the youth community.
Let it be known that the tobacco companies knew of the “addictive” properties of tobacco decades before, but chose not to share it with the users. Instead, they used it to gain “loyalty” to the product through addiction. But as mentioned no one cares.
Not until something tragic happens like the recent “Instagram-suicide” of a 16-year-old Sarawakian. Mental health is the greatest toll in a world of loneliness that surrounds most of those who tend to live “helplessly” via the e-devices. Devoid of any mechanism to cope, that is, the ability to appropriately participate or understand what the techno-centric world is all about — one would suffer slavishly at the altar of technology in harm’s way.
The Instagram suicide is just one of many cases that caught our attention. There are thousands of others who are trapped by similar dilemmas that we know nothing about. It is therefore time to stop procrastinating, and dig in deeper by deconstructing the “myths” that have been deliberately created to hold technology as the “new” tobacco in our lives.
History will repeat itself, unless we had better (re)learn as to what could be done to avoid the same consequences before the so-called “technology takeover” become widespread. By then it might matter not any more because it would be too late. The game is already over. It is one avoidable death too many if only we stop procrastinating!
The writer, an NST columnist for more than 20 years, is International Islamic University Malaysia rector.
Published in: The New Straits Times, 20 May 2019
Some magical event took place in Sarajevo last week. It was the 10th anniversary of the Sarajevo Business Forum (SBF) that started in 2009, less than a decade after an asymmetrical war was forced onto Bosnia and its people.
Indeed it could be argued that SBF is “inspired” by the tragic incidences that spurred a number of lessons, setting many Bosnians to thinking very hard about their future, if not survival.
One of them is the architect of SBF, Amer Bukvic — an International Islamic University Malaysia alumni and now CEO of Bosna Bank International, who described the forum as an “emotional project” because it took many years to realise the event.
Last week as he spoke at the welcoming session of the 10th SBF at the National Parliament of Bosnia Herzegovina, one could clearly sense the proud moment that SBF bestowed on the nation and region.
It was the largest thus far, commanding the participation of more than 300 projects with over 1,000 participants attending. In addition, 50 countries were represented and spanned beyond Southeast Europe.
Not to be forgotten were the number of dignitaries who were actively involved. One of them was Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, a founding patron of SBF, then and now as the prime minister of Malaysia.
Dr Mahathir in his address was clearly excited to be with SBF again in his present capacity. He urged SBF to seek common purpose and to work together as one region and one economy. This is so as to hedge the current situation and the crossroads ahead.
Another person who appeared outstanding in the evolution of SBF was former prime minister of Turkey, Dr Ahmet Davutoglu. Being a professor to Amer, his influence could not be underestimated as he recounted what could be done to counter the potential challenges ahead.
Like Dr Mahathir, regional reintegration with common policy and shared values covering multiculturalism, multireligious and ethnicity seems to be his strategy to move forward.
In all, SBF for the 10th year exhibited a high level of maturity and readiness which was clearly evident through the panel discussions held. Apart from the usual subjects of leadership roles and issues of brain drain/gain, sustainable development (SD) featured well as the “new” agenda that straddles between the two.
This means that the leaders of tomorrow must be conversant about SD which could also be a factor in reducing brain drain, if not to improve brain gain. What is apparent is that “unsustainable” (counterpoint to SD) development could encourage brain drain because of the natural tendencies to seek “greener” (pun intended) pastures when all seems to be beyond reach (unequitable prosperity).
Thus, it has direct implications to the goals of SD in creating an ecosystem that is fair, just and balanced. This is what escapes many businesses today, that look at SD as another “incremental” tool rather than a “transformational” model that changes everything before it has any meaningful impact on sustainability.
For example, the language used is no longer about a linear growth economy but that of a circular one; “eco” in the conventional economy is all things “ecological” as a counterweight to economic imbalances of the past in safeguarding the one and only planet and all of its inhabitants to co-exist in a harmonious balance.
This means that the leadership role in an heirachical pyramidal structure is not sustainable due to its rigidity and top-down tendencies. Instead it has to be organisationally flatter and networked like that of nature where it is more connected at the roots and thus truly borderless and sustainable. Are businesses moving in this direction as a global trend in adopting or adapting to SD?
In other words, SBF 10 has opened up new vistas to thinking afresh, instead of merely tinkering with the same old ways to jump start. To quote Amer in his opening remarks: “History will be judging us” — is indeed apt as a reminder that the SBF has clearly raised the stakes for all those present at the forum with clear signals that the days ahead are extremely bright.
Also, not to lose focus over is the “brightened” common path to the collective future, and not to be gullible over the many distractions that take away the higher sense of purpose, blinded by the same bright lights that veil the vision ahead.
Issues like the fourth industrial revolution could be just one if artificial intelligence is allowed to overshadow and reign over human primodial intelligence (the fitrah) beyond the technological “singularity” as it stands today.
In summary, the next SBFs will face even more difficult tasks ahead in “humanising” technology through business unusual, if history is indeed to judge us favourably. Therein lies the vital lesson of magic of the recent SBF.
Published in: The New Straits Times, 20 April 2019
Little did I expect, soon after my last column on March 9 questioning the “intellectual dishonesty” of the ranking system, there is an ongoing elaborate report of something similar, but far more toxic than what one ever suspected.
It relates to university admission scandals implicating some of the well-ranked so-called ‘world-class’ universities in the US, no less.
Names that were often bandied about as the places to aim for are now caught with their pants down publicly in a very compromising situation unbecoming of their ‘famed’ status as education institutions where lying and cheating have no place, yet these are done almost unsuspectingly.
This has been rumoured for many years now, but hard evidence is difficult to come by, not until this fiasco emerged that is, dubbed the nation’s worst.
We had our fair share of ‘fake degree’ scandals, but they are no where near this one.
When I mentioned this recently in a meeting that deliberated on quality issues, it was quickly brushed off as unlikely as though such tendencies cannot happen in other places outside Malaysia!
How prejudiced can one be, just because they have some foreign degrees somewhere?
So here are some of the bare facts:
(a) Yale, Stanford, USC and Georgetown are among the top names reported to be involved. Meanwhile, five Harvard alumni were arrested and charged with conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud in a nationwide scheme to secure admission for their children to top universities through millions of dollars in bribes and falsified standardised test answers.
(b) Those involved are allegedly very wealthy, famous and ‘white’. Previously, though, Asians and blacks were the ones who bore the brunt of such allegations. There is an ongoing “lawsuit against Harvard alleging it discriminates against Asian Americans in its admissions process.
“It was revealed that the college’s admissions office maintains a secretive ‘Dean’s List’ and ‘Director’s List’ which comprised donors’ relatives and others with special connections to the university.”
(c) To date, fifty people (seven of whom are Harvard affiliates), including 33 parents and athletics coaches, have been charged.
(d) Almost immediately, one Hollywood celebrity was dropped by a TV network, accused of paying US$500,000 in a scheme that involved cheating in college entrance exams and bribing athletic coaches to help her daughter and her sister get into a university in Southern California, according to court documents.
(e) This is said to be the largest known college admissions scandal in US history. US federal prosecutors claimed one company made about US$25 million by charging parents to secure spots for their children in elite schools, by cheating in the admissions’ process.
The situation is so dire that reportedly students and parents are suing the prestigious universities over the massive scandals and bribery, and for deceiving them about what actually took place. Consequently, there is a growing sense that degrees from such institutions are now grossly ‘devalued’.
So, what do we say of the rankings game that we are so engrossed in? Is it not ‘devalued’ too? After all, doesn’t it rank some of the trusted top players that are now embroiled in scandals?
Are they not privy to such ‘underhanded’ techniques, or otherwise choose to ignore them in the hope that they would remain undisclosed?
Could the rankers, too, have used similar ‘underhanded’ techniques when they aggressively solicited participation from unsuspecting institutions?
Evidence to this effect has long been suspected but nothing much has been done about it. So it is time to dive in and clean up the act once and for all.
It is certainly timely, taking a cue from the US scandals, for the relevant authorities and ministries to truly evaluate the worth of the ‘ranking game’ which has remained largely opaque and ‘shady’. Especially when education is viewed as ‘private’ goods which can be bought and sold to the highest bidder. Even to the extent of buying seats in university boards on the pretext of giving lucrative donations and sponsorships.
Meaning, there can be a greater tendency to collude, and deceive students and parents. Maybe it is time they sought clarification from the universities about how much money is spent (or wasted)?
To quote one of those who allegedly paid tens of thousands of dollars to secure a place for her son: “I know this is craziness, I know it is.” It must stop now before it gets worse!
The writer is a Fellow of the Centre for Policy Research and International Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, and rector of the International Islamic University Malaysia
Published in: New Straits Times, Tuesday 26 March 2019
THE Transformasi Nasional 50 (TN50) road show started well when it chose University Malaya to launch the discussion about the future of the nation in the next 30 years. Unlike Wawasan 2020 that was announced in a meeting with business leaders, TN50 aims to engage the younger generation as potential leaders taking into account their own aspirations. This is in tandem with the United Nations document, The World We Want, where a global conversation helps to guide in shaping the future.............................Download the full article in pdf attachment (below)
MAQASID al-Syariah has recently made a resurgence after falling into oblivion and neglect for several reasons, chiefly due to the so-called “closing of the door of ijtihad”, as alluded to by Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. He commented on this at the recent launch of the International Conference of Maqasid al-Syariah in Public Policy and Governance hosted by the International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies (IIAIS) in Kuala Lumpur..................Download the full article in pdf attachment (below)
The much anticipated Malaysia Education Blueprint (Higher Education) is expected to further encourage a change in values in the current national education environment. Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM) Chair of Islamic Leadership Professor Tan Sri Dzulkifli Abdul Razak said it was vital for the nation to.................Download the full article in pdf attachment (below)
I STUMBLED upon three surprises as a speaker at the recent International Conference on Higher Education hosted by the University of Guadalajara in Mexico. The first was the concurrent renowned Guadalajara International Book Fair, regarded as the most important publishing gathering in Ibero-America that also doubles as a cultural festival. The second was the fact that the event — initiated 28 years ago by the university — draws authors of various languages and cultures from all continents to take part in stimulating academic forums and dissect key concerns. Argentina is guest of honour this year.................Download the full article in pdf attachment (below)
THE lifting of the quota for Malaysians to enrol in international schools has brought much rejoicing to some quarters, especially those who want English as the medium of instruction. It is clear that those who can afford an international school education will benefit most from the latest move, despite the high cost incurred to enrol in such schools.......... Download the full article in pdf attachment (below)