馬來(lái)西亞應(yīng)向新加坡學(xué)習(xí).

　　馬來(lái)西亞應(yīng)向新加坡學(xué)習(xí)，這到底是怎樣的一種情況呢?編者為什么要這樣說(shuō)呢?

　　Fifty years ago, Malaysia expelled Singapore from the federation and the two entities went theirseparate ways. So distraught was Lee Kuan Yew, then Singapore’s chi minister, that heshed tears in public for the first and last time in his long and extraordinary career. Half acentury later, it should be Malaysians who are crying.

　　50年前，馬來(lái)西亞將新加坡驅(qū)逐出馬來(lái)西亞聯(lián)邦，兩個(gè)實(shí)體從此分道揚(yáng)鑣。時(shí)任新加坡首席部長(zhǎng)的李光耀(LeeKuan Yew)當(dāng)時(shí)如此悲痛，以至于他首次——也是漫長(zhǎng)而非凡的政治生涯中最后一次——在公開場(chǎng)合落淚。半個(gè)世紀(jì)后，流淚的應(yīng)該是馬來(lái)西亞人。

　　Undoubtedly, Singapore has its problems. Its brand of authoritarian guided development hasdelivered prosperity and produced the world’s slickest city state. But many Singaporeans feelsomething is missing in their controlled society, a hole that cannot be filled by economicgrowth. Yet whatever difficulties Singapore faces, these pale in comparison with those ofMalaysia. Not only is Malaysia going through its worst political crisis in years after hundreds ofmillions of dollars found their way into the bank account of Najib Razak, the prime minister.More critically, Malaysia has been undergoing a long-term meltdown in which the political,religious and ethnic compact that has underpinned the country since independence groansunder its own rotten contradictions.

　　新加坡無(wú)疑有它的問(wèn)題。其特有的威權(quán)指引發(fā)展模式帶來(lái)了繁榮，締造了世界上最高效的城市國(guó)家。但許多新加坡人覺(jué)得，他們身處的受控社會(huì)是有缺失的，而這種缺失是經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)填補(bǔ)不了的。然而，無(wú)論新加坡面對(duì)什么困難，這些困難與馬來(lái)西亞相比實(shí)在算不了什么。馬來(lái)西亞正在經(jīng)歷多年來(lái)最嚴(yán)峻的政治危機(jī)，起因是該國(guó)總理納吉布拉扎克(Najib Razak)的銀行賬戶不知怎么多出了數(shù)億美元。更嚴(yán)重的是，馬來(lái)西亞正走在長(zhǎng)期的下坡路上，自獨(dú)立以來(lái)支撐著該國(guó)的政治、宗教和民族“契約”在自己造成的嚴(yán)重矛盾下岌岌可危。

　　For all the doubts that nag at Singapore, from democracy to demography, the city has beenan incredible success. Its per capita gross domestic product, $56,000 in nominal terms, ismore than five times that of Malaysia’s $11,000.

　　盡管有各種疑慮困擾著新加坡(從民主體制到人口結(jié)構(gòu))，這個(gè)城市國(guó)家仍是一個(gè)令人難以置信的成功故事。其5.6萬(wàn)美元的名義人均國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值(GDP)，是馬來(lái)西亞1.1萬(wàn)美元的五倍多。

　　True, in the post-Lee era, Singapore’s People’s Action party, which has held power sinceindependence, has lost its aura of infallibility. Nearly 40 per cent of Singaporeans votedagainst it in the last elections. Yet, the PAP is still widely regarded as honest and competent.The same cannot be said for the United Malays National Organisation, which has clung on topower for nearly six decades. Its leader is now embroiled in a scandal linked to stateinvestment fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad, which has racked up $11bn in debt. Thecountry’s anti-corruption agency has denied media allegations that $675m in Mr Razak’saccount came from 1MDB — it says the money came from an unnamed Middle East donor. MrRazak denies any wrongdoing. But whatever the truth in that case, UMNO has long fronted athoroughly corrupt political system. Malaysia’s public senses this. In the 2013 election, UMNOlost the popular vote but scraped into power thanks to an electoral system stacked in itsfavour. Since then, the state, too often synonymous with UMNO, has turned its guns on theopposition, jailing its leader Anwar Ibrahim, on charges of sodomy.

　　沒(méi)錯(cuò)，在后李光耀時(shí)代，自新加坡獨(dú)立以來(lái)一直執(zhí)政的人民行動(dòng)黨(PAP)失去了絕對(duì)正確的光環(huán)。在近期的選舉中，近40%的新加坡人投票反對(duì)該黨。然而，人民行動(dòng)黨仍被普遍認(rèn)為是誠(chéng)實(shí)和能干的。這樣的評(píng)價(jià)不適用于在馬來(lái)西亞抱住權(quán)位近60年不放的馬來(lái)民族統(tǒng)一機(jī)構(gòu)(UMNO，中文簡(jiǎn)稱：巫統(tǒng))。其領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人現(xiàn)在卷入了涉及政府投資基金——背負(fù)110億美元債務(wù)的“1MDB”(1Malaysia Development Berhad)的丑聞。該國(guó)反腐敗機(jī)構(gòu)否認(rèn)了有關(guān)納吉布賬戶上的6.75億美元來(lái)自1MDB的媒體指控;該機(jī)構(gòu)稱這筆錢來(lái)自一中東捐贈(zèng)者，但未披露姓名。納吉布否認(rèn)自己有任何不當(dāng)行為。但是，無(wú)論該案的是非曲直如何，巫統(tǒng)都長(zhǎng)期領(lǐng)導(dǎo)著一個(gè)徹底腐敗的政治體制。馬來(lái)西亞公眾意識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)。在2013年的選舉中，巫統(tǒng)在票數(shù)上失利，但借助一套對(duì)其有利的選舉制度勉強(qiáng)繼續(xù)掌權(quán)。自那以來(lái)，往往已成為巫統(tǒng)同義詞的馬來(lái)西亞政府對(duì)反對(duì)黨開刀，以雞奸罪名監(jiān)禁反對(duì)黨領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人安瓦爾易卜拉欣(Anwar Ibrahim)。

　　In one sense comparing the two countries is unfair. Singapore, with a population of only 5m, isa city. Malaysia, with 450 times the land area and a population of 30m, is harder to govern.Lee, Singapore’s founding father who died in March, held Singapore tightly in his mostlybenevolent grip. It is hard to see how such micromanagement could have worked in a muchbigger country.

　　在某種意義上，對(duì)比這兩個(gè)國(guó)家是不公平的。人口僅500萬(wàn)的新加坡是一個(gè)城市。陸地面積是新加坡450倍、人口3000萬(wàn)的馬來(lái)西亞顯然更難治理。3月去世的新加坡開國(guó)總理李光耀以總體上仁慈的手腕牢牢掌管著國(guó)家。很難看出這樣的微觀管理能在一個(gè)大得多的國(guó)家奏效。

　　Still, both countries have potentially combustible ethnic mixes. Singapore has done better atforging a sense of fairness and national unity, through language, meritocracy andincorruptibility. Malaysia, in the name of protecting Malays through positive discrimination, hasby contrast created a crony capitalist state. It should learn from Singapore. It should showzero tolerance for corruption, starting with Mr Najib, who must clear his name or step down.Prerential treatment for Malays should be phased out and the government should forgepolicies of national unity, not ones of division based on religion or Malay ethnicity. Singapore hascreated a strong foundation from which it can move forward. Malaysia must stop the rot, orslip disastrously backwards.

　　話雖如此，這兩個(gè)國(guó)家都存在容易產(chǎn)生沖突的多民族問(wèn)題。新加坡借助語(yǔ)言、任人唯賢和廉潔制度，在營(yíng)造公平和民族團(tuán)結(jié)意識(shí)方面做得更好。馬來(lái)西亞則以保護(hù)馬來(lái)人為名明確實(shí)行歧視政策，搞成了一個(gè)裙帶資本主義國(guó)家。馬來(lái)西亞應(yīng)該學(xué)習(xí)新加坡的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。它應(yīng)該表現(xiàn)出對(duì)腐敗的零容忍，從納吉布開始，他必須要么證明自己清白，要么下臺(tái)。優(yōu)待馬來(lái)人的政策應(yīng)該被取消，政府應(yīng)該出臺(tái)民族團(tuán)結(jié)政策，而不是基于宗教或馬來(lái)族裔的分裂政策。新加坡夯實(shí)了一個(gè)讓國(guó)家能夠向前邁進(jìn)的堅(jiān)實(shí)基礎(chǔ)。馬來(lái)西亞必須刮骨療毒，否則就可能災(zāi)難性地向后倒退。