Singapore’s madrassas: another ‘exception’ to the secular state?

Singaporean Muslims ought to be alarmed with reports that students from the Madrasah Wak Tanjong Al-Islamiah did not meet the Ministry of Education's (MOE) minimum Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) standards. (For Singaporean Muslims read Malays, non-Malay speaking Muslims will have a hard time gaining admission into religious schools with a curriculum administered primarily in Malay.)

As a result of the madrassa's poor non-religious educational standards, it has been disallowed from admitting new Primary One students for the academic years 2012 – 2014. A second madrassa, Madrassa Al-Arabiah ceased its Primary One intake in 2009 for similar reasons.

Falling short of the PSLE benchmark is surprising given the lax standards applied by the MOE to the Republic's six madrassas. The religious schools are required to meet a minimum benchmark at least twice during every three year assessment period. The minimum benchmark "is pegged at the average PSLE aggregate score of Malay pupils who took four standard-level subjects in the six lowest performing national schools, ranked according to the performance of the Malay pupils ... of the same year." (Ministry of Education Information Sheet, November 2010. Emphasis added by author.)

Clearly, the MOE's flaccid yardstick does not push Singapore's madrassas far enough in raising educational standards to national levels.

Critics may counter that a madrassa's role in society is distinct from that of a 'normal' school. Certainly, Madrasah Wak Tanjong Al-Islamiah stated objectives point in that direction.  

"Mastering of the Arabic language is a pre-requisite for the understanding of the Al-Quran and Hadiths (Prophetic Traditions), the two fundamental sources of Islamic jurisprudence, less in importance, is the acquisition of knowledge in the secular sciences." (Madrasah Wak Tanjong Al-Islamiah website. Emphasis added by author.)

What exactly is the role of Islamic schools in contemporary Singaporean society - to provide Islamic education to Malay-Muslims who wish to pursue specialized religious knowledge? To teach Arabic so Malay-Muslims may interpret the Koran 'correctly' by comprehending the holy book in its original form? Or, as stated by the Madrasah Wak Tanjong Al-Islamiah website, simply "moulding students to become Islamic scholars who excel religiously as well as academically."

Surely, religious education can form an important part of character building for children. But is it necessary to impart such training on a full time basis, especially through schools with an overtly religious character?

Religious training is better left as a private 'extra-curricular' activity.

Undoubtedly, there are examples of madrassa graduates who have excelled in mainstream society. Yet, there are many legitimate reasons to question the role of a religiously inspired educational establishment within a secular state.

For starters, Singapore's English educated labour force is arguably one of the country's core competitive strengths. Singapore continues to move up the economic value chain based largely on the quality of its human capital.

Is it just for society to deny one segment of Singaporean students' access to the country's conventional educational system from a young age, perhaps because the child's parents believe they are fulfilling a religious obligation? I think not.

Certainly, a fine balance between individual liberties and state responsibility must be struck. However, validating religious education, Islamic or otherwise, within a secular, multi-ethnic society is not the best solution. The MOE must continue to tighten its grip on Singapore's religious educational establishments in the coming years.

Other than in higher education, it is hard to justify the existence of full time religious schools in contemporary, theoretically secular, Singapore.

Chairman Mao’s new and improved People’s Republic of China

China's emergence as a global actor on the world's stage has become conventional wisdom. The evidence supporting the notion is overwhelming.

The People's Bank of China, China's central bank, moves global financial markets with interest rate moves. Chinese finance ministry officials roil foreign currency markets with statements on China's foreign exchange reserve management policies. US and Japanese defense officials fret about the Chinese military threat to disputed Pacific islands. India worries about China's 'string of pearls' naval strategy. 

Chairman Mao proclaims the People's Republic of China on October 1, 1949

Like any successful nation state, China is not satisfied stagnating at the lower end of the production spectrum. Making textiles or footwear is not enough to move up in the world. Vietnam and Bangladesh can make such crude products too.

Pick up almost any manufactured item today and it's a good bet that somewhere there will be a sticker proclaiming, 'Made in China.' Consumers owe the Chinese a debt of gratitude for transforming luxury items, e.g. electronics, into affordable basics of everyday life.

China may be the factory of the world, a deflationary force in global economics, but there is more to China's than merely economics. In fact, it is the less noticeable aspects of the country's advance which has the established powers, especially the US, deeply concerned.

Take the supercomputer, that seminal symbol of modern technology.

As of October 2010, China operates the fastest supercomputer in the world. Located at the National Supercomputing Center in Tianjin, the 'Milky Way Number One' supercomputer is a supercomputer capable of an Rmax of 2.566 petaFLOPS or over 2½ quadrillion floating point operations per second (whatever that means!).

American spooks at the National Security Agency and the Central Intelligence Agency must be scrambling to evaluate the implications of the Milky Way within the global intelligence galaxy.

The Chinese are not stopping at supercomputers. The apogee of contemporary military technology, the unmanned aerial vehicle or drone, is part of China's military arsenal.

"The 'Dark Sword' [drone] is an unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV) concept which was displayed as a model at the 2006 Zhuhai air show. It is obviously designed for high manoeuvrability at supersonic speeds ... a staff member called the aircraft the "future of Chinese unmanned combat aviation", emphasizing its projected ability to evade enemy radar and to engage in air-to-air combat." (Source: Real Military Network website.

Surely, China still operates like the Japan of yesteryear. The country copies foreign technologies until it has reached a sustainable technological base of its own. That day is not far away.

The first quantitative sign of China's indigenous collective brainpower came in 2007. 2007 was the year China overtook Germany in the number of new patent applications. A year later in 2008, the number of doctorates (PhDs) produced by Chinese universities exceeded that of the US. Undoubtedly, the quality of many Chinese PhDs may not yet be globally competitive but that too is changing.

One can only expect both numbers to rise in the coming years.

In the late 1960s, Pakistan's late President Ayub Khan wrote a political autobiography describing Pakistan's (client state) relationship with the United States titled 'Friends not Masters.' In 2010, with China being the largest owner of US government debt, it might be time for US treasury secretary Geithner to consider writing a sequel focusing on the Sino-US relationship, i.e. Friends not Masters (Part II).

Late Pakistani President Ayub Khan with First Lady Jackie Kennedy and Sardar (the Pakistan President's horse) in 1961

Eid al Mubarik and the Festival of the Egg

Cultural ethnocentricity takes many forms. We all have it embedded within us.

Readers of my blog realize that much of my writing about Pakistan glosses over the country's very real problems. Instead my 'Pakistan Centric' writings focus on the country's under reported positives.

At times, cultural ethnocentricity borders on arrogance and even intolerance. Maybe I am just too sensitive about some things – including my name.

Undoubtedly, Imran is a Muslim name which is found extensively in the Koran. The Koran's third sura (chapter) is called titled, "The Family of Imran." According to the Koran, Imran was the name of the Virgin Mary's father – a woodcutter by profession.

A Chinese translation of a portion of the Koran

Imran's origins aside, a recent incident in the Gulf still disappointed me.

I arrived for a meeting and gave my particulars to the Arab receptionist. "Ah, Omran," she said. I smiled and repeated, "No, Imran." "We say Omran," and called my contact and pointedly said, "I have an Omran here for you." All the while looking at me with eyes suggesting 'Imran's an Arab name and learn how to write and pronounce it properly.'

As I have said before, if there is one thing I have a firm copyright on it is my name. I write, pronounce and use it the way I like. I do not need to justify its spelling or pronunciation to anyone.

No particular group holds a monopoly on my name, or indeed any name.  

Tell a Jacob his name is Yacoob, or a Moses he is Musa; tell a Turk that Sultan Ahmet mosque (the Blue Mosque) ought to be renamed Sultan Ahmed mosque. The list is endless.

There are many tell tale signs of individuals not paying attention to small details.

Receiving Arabic language newspapers at a hotel each morning because hotel staff assumes I am proficient in Arabic because I have an Arab name. Similarly, obtaining notifications in Malay from MUIS or other Malay organizations because a Singaporean Muslim is assumed to be proficient in Malay also resonates of a mono-cultural view of the world.

Not surprisingly, journalists make similar mistakes. A few days ago a CNBC newscaster reporting from Dubai repeatedly referred to the Muslim festival of 'Eid al Mubarik.'

Yes, as Muslims we describe Easter as the Festival of the Egg! Am I asking too much for reporters to do some homework before reporting to a global audience?

In the real world, it's the little things that give us away. Everyone can get the really big stuff right – the tiny stuff requires serious effort.

Dubai: the tale of the Ferrari and the Metro

Having spent the last few days circulating in Dubai, I am more convinced than ever the city continues on its path towards becoming a global metropolis. Surely, the fat from the boom days has been sliced, almost to the bone.

Today, Dubai's skeleton is visible and the skeleton looks pretty solid. That is good news not just for Dubai's debt holders but for the entire region.

For good or bad, Dubai had come to symbolize the Gulf region. When Dubai's name became synonymous with excess, the city's development model came into question.

Dubai's trappings as a global city are in place. The sight of overhead metro trains running parallel to the city's main thoroughfares adds to the public transport piece of the puzzle.

After many years of persistence, even the Dubai International Financial Center (DIFC) is showing signs of life. The DIFC is no Canary Wharf or even Raffles Place but undoubtedly a financial cluster has emerged.

Size, unfortunately, remains a systemic weakness for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Hence, the DIFC's modest buzz around cafes and bars is symptomatic of the region's size.

Dubai's role as a regional hub has only been underscored by the recent air cargo security scare. That the packages flowed through Dubai towards their final destination seems as natural a combination as wine and cheese.

Yes, many who sneered at some of the city's more outrageous grandiose schemes have been proven right. There is little talk of having the biggest and best of everything. The talk now centers on the federation and closer cooperation especially with their partners on the other side of Sheikh Zayed Road: Abu Dhabi.

So, while I do not believe the Dubai has any plans to extend its new metro system to Abu Dhabi. Abu Dhabi is not too worried. Abu Dhabi is doing just fine focusing on Ferrari theme parks.  

Singapore and Australian exchanges: learning to play the SAX?

Price and protectionism aside, the acquisition proposal between the Australian and Singapore exchanges is a potential winning stroke for both countries.

While Australian nationalism (read protectionism) may force politicians to veto the deal, the Singapore exchange (SGX) had to try something to force its way back onto the international stage. Granted the price being paid by Singapore might be a tad too much but it might just be a price worth paying.

The Singapore exchange had all but lost the regional race to Hong Kong some years ago. Hong Kong basks in the sunshine of being a political territory of the fastest growing economy in the world – the People's Republic of China!*

Recently, the financial race has added a new dimension, a shift from the capital markets to the currency markets. Offshore Yuan trading will be the next big thing. Once a freely tradable / convertible Yuan becomes established, then Yuan based tradable securities are merely a hop, skip and jump away.

Yuan denominated transactions, fixed income, equities and derivatives, will happen first and foremost in Hong Kong. Singapore may get some crumbs but Hong Kong will win the prize ... again.  

Hong Kong's natural advantage, geographically and politically will practically ensure the city the right of first refusal for most major future transactions (which will be liberally sprinkled with Chinese government owned entities).

Australia faces other issues. The country's geographic isolation is its best friend and enemy.

Australia is the first major capital market traders can access. It's a natural stop for businesses from Oceania. The capital markets benefit from a steady supply of resource linked companies. The Australian institutional investment community familiarity with resource based companies is an added advantage.

Yet, for companies beyond a certain size Australia loses much of its relevance. Also, after a certain time trading shifts to Europe and the US. In a sense, Australia is an important market by default – its importance diminishes as the rest of the world wakes up.

Put two 'losers' together and one may just get a bigger loser. But the stakes for the SGX and the Australian exchange (ASX) are high. A merger gamble is better than sitting around waiting for the situation to improve.

There are ways in which a 'joint' exchange can synergize a winner. Imagine if stocks were dual listed on both the ASX and the SGX, meaning investors had two time zones to trade the same security. The resultant liquidity boost may just galvanize more listings on a merged SAX, exactly the medicine required to revive the SGX.

Operational constraints are real, including managing pricing in two floating currencies. Related settlement matters will also need to be addressed. However, over time such teething issues can be overcome with adequate investment.

Many observers question the wisdom of the SGX bid for the ASX. The strategy does raise legitimate questions about the SGX's future strategic direction. Nevertheless, without a radical departure from the past the SGX would only continue its slow march into the sunset.

Sometimes, shaking things up is a prudent strategy – even if the end result is unknown. It stirs corporate entities from a complacent slumber.

* I wrote a post titled 'Has Singapore lost the race to Hong Kong' in October 2009.

Of mothers, spouses and Singapore’s sharia

Last week, I attended an Association of Muslim Professionals seminar on the subject of Islamic Estate Planning. Sitting in a room filled with Muslims theoretically at the 'cutting edge' of Islamic thought has somewhat of a nineteenth century feel – it was as if I was an anti-imperialist activist at a session addressed by the likes of Indian Muslim Modernists like Sir Syed Ahmed Khan or Dr. Allama Mohammad Iqbal.

Sir Syed Ahmed Khan's study about the causes of the 1857 uprising against colonial rule

Modern Singapore is a far cry from British India. But some positive vestiges remain – the English language and Common Law.

The seminar was interesting in many ways. Without exception, each individual speaker, including a scholar associated with the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS), extolled the virtues of individual financial planning. Each stated it is perfectly Islamic to make post-death arrangements to secure the future of loved ones, even if the plan contravenes the binding inheritance principles of Singapore's Application of Muslim Law Act (AMLA).

The audience was told about the flexibility that Islam provides believers. Listeners received an introduction to various Sharia compliant financial instruments available to Muslims to dispose of an estate.   

In other words, I learnt how best to circumvent the inheritance restrictions laid down by AMLA.

The entire event has me confused. If it is perfectly Islamic for an individual to wish to deliver his estate to his spouse, parents or others who he financially supports then what is the purpose of making the law of Faraid legally binding? Why not make things easier for ordinary Muslims by empowering them to write a Will under normal civil law?

In the current set-up, any Muslim wishing to bequeath his estate based on his freewill must enter into all sorts of extraneous paperwork associated with gifts (hibah), trusts or other sharia compliant instruments recognized by Singapore's sharia law.

I am a believer in Islamic scholarship.

Surely, there is a place in the world for Sharia compliant financial products. During my professional career I have worked to develop Islamic products. However, for sharia compliant products to be successful they must be simple, cost efficient and true to the spirit of Islam. Not merely intelligent ways to dodge usury recognized by prevalent legal codes.

Islamic finance has come a long way during the last few decades. Plain vanilla banking products like loans, credit cards and mortgages are available in Sharia compliant form in standardized form, thus making them competitive with their interest based counterparts.

Unfortunately, that is not yet the case with Islamic estate planning.* Ordinary Singaporean Muslims cannot order their personal financial affairs to their own liking due to legal restrictions enforced by AMLA.

It is all well and good to outline options available to academically inclined or wealthy Muslims. Nevertheless, for ordinary Muslims with a modest financial asset base, these choices are complicated and costly.

Pakistan's Founder, Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah's left his entire estate to three educational institutions - an action not permissible under certain interpretations of Islamic law - via a simple Will

Muslims have been granted free will to make personal decisions on worldly matters, including matters of inheritance. In contemporary Singapore, individuals have even been granted the freedom to commit certain 'innocent' sins; sins which do not harm other members of society or the public good.

It is almost impossible to argue that securing the future of one's parents, spouse and family is a sin, under Islamic or secular law.

Undoubtedly, the decolonization of Singapore was a liberating experience. Yet, for some Singaporeans the enactment of AMLA in 1968 took away a few important financial freedoms previously available under colonial rule.

*I became aware of one Sharia specific legal provision pertaining to Muslim beneficiaries of insurance policies under Singapore's Insurance Act which is unusual and somewhat alarming. I hesitate to comment on the subject until I am certain of the correctness of my understanding. 

Taunting China Norwegian style – the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize

By awarding the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to a hitherto unknown Chinese human rights activist the Nobel Committee has achieved at least one objective: focusing global attention towards the state of human rights in China. However, inadvertently or not, the Committee has also divided the world into pro and anti-China camps.

I don't blame either side, but place myself squarely in the 'back to basics' Peace Prize camp. Back to basics means honouring the Will of Alfred Nobel, the founder of the award.

The Will reads, "[The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded annually] to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

The peace prize is not meant as an overtly political statement.

Jean Henri Dunant: Swiss businessman and founder of the International Committee of the Red Cross was the first recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1901

One may stretch the meaning of 'peace congresses' so as to permit granting of the prize to human rights activists such as Shireen Ebadi, Liu Xiaobo or Aung San Suu Kyi. Undoubtedly, all three activists struggle for a noble cause at great personal risk. No one can argue with their passionate idealism for achieving social justice.

However, at another level, awarding prizes to such personalities seem very much an attempt to irritate the domestic regimes of countries 'out of favour' with Western nations; not surprising given that the Nobel Committee's five members are appointed by the Norwegian parliament and broadly represent national parliament's political make up.

The Kingdom of Norway is a founding member of the US-led security alliance, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). While the country is not a formal member of the European Union, it maintains strong European ties through various treaties. Norway is a member of the European Economic Area.

Surely, the Norwegians have played an admirable role in engendering peace in the Middle East (the Oslo Accords) as well as other war ravaged areas. Yet, is it not possible for the Nobel Committee to find less politicized recipients for the Peace Prize? There are several billion people in the world.

Governance and international representative systems are not divorced from a nation's ground realities. For example, pursuing democratic ideals in Somalia, China, Denmark or the United States requires modifications to suit local political cultures. Somalia's parliament meets in Kenya, when it can. In the United States and Denmark, burning the Koran or caricaturizing Islam's final Prophet is a legitimate democratic pursuit.

To an outsider, the fine legal niceties legitimizing water boarding, acts of rendition, assassinations using unmanned drones and Guantanamo are not so different from China's policies designed to ensure social stability within its own borders. Arguably, China pursues vigorous economic development as a way of granting greater freedoms to its people – freedom from hunger versus freedom to protest.

Awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to less divisive personalities such as Nelson Mandela, Mother Teresa, Medicins Sans Frontieres and Mohammad Yunus seems a better way to achieve Alfred Nobel's goal of 'building fraternity between nations.'