kuala lumpur- The Malaysian government appears determined to move forward with the privatization of the Malaysian Airports Management and Operations Company (MAHAP), despite popular and partisan criticism of the privatization plan, which calls for 30% of the airports company to be owned by Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP), a subsidiary of US giant GlobalRock.
Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has on several occasions defended his plan to sell the airports company, which operates 39 of the 40 airports across western and eastern Malaysia, and stressed in a parliamentary session that it would adhere to the standards set by the Malaysian sovereign funds involved: Khazanah and the Employees Provident Fund.
The most prominent of these criteria is that the company’s chairman and the majority of the board of directors be Malaysian, which was rejected by the other companies that submitted the application, and approved by GIB and its Emirati partner, the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority.
The Prime Minister has been accusing the opposition of criticizing the upcoming deal for populist reasons and stressing that it does not conflict with Malaysia’s firm position in supporting the Palestinian cause, while the opposition parties insist that the deal is a threat to Malaysian national security and complicity in the crimes of genocide committed by the Israeli occupation forces in Palestine by contracting with the “BlackRock” company, which is classified as the largest supplier of weapons and money to the occupation forces.
Al Jazeera Net met with Mr. Wan Ahmad Faisal, the representative of the opposition National Contract bloc in the Malaysian parliament, whose participation in parliament activities was suspended for 6 months due to his raising the issue in parliament:
-
Mr. Wan Faisal, how much impact does the war waged by Israel on the Palestinian people have on the Malaysian political scene?
What happened at the Tabeen School, for example, where more than 125 worshippers were killed during dawn prayers by a 200-pound bomb, had a major impact on Malaysia, even though the crime occurred far from Malaysia. The closest example of this is the current debate over the privatization of the Malaysian Airports Operating Company (MAHAP).
-
What is the relationship between what is happening in Palestine and the airports company deal?
The privatization of the airport operating company requires that GIP, which is owned by BlackRock, acquire a good share of the company. The issue here is that BlackRock is known for supplying weapons to the occupation army and has huge investments in Israel. Human rights experts at the United Nations considered it the most prominent supplier of weapons to the Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people. It owns large shares in arms manufacturing companies in the United States, such as Lockheed Martin, Northern Glacier, and many others. The question currently being raised in Malaysia is: Is it permissible for our airports to collude with BlackRock?
-
But BlackRock is a transnational company with investments everywhere, and boycotting it means economic isolation for Malaysia?
All over the world, including Western governments, they have stopped dealing with companies that supply weapons to the occupation forces. For example, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, KLP, has stopped its investments in Caterpillar, one of the world’s leading producers of heavy equipment used by the occupation forces to destroy homes in Gaza and the West Bank. The Norwegian government has ordered the sovereign wealth fund to withdraw its investments.
If we hold a referendum, the majority of the Malaysian people will oppose this deal, because it may cause a geopolitical crisis that will negatively affect Malaysia, not only morally in terms of its connection to the crimes taking place in Palestine, but also economically, politically and security-wise.
-
Don’t you see a need to develop Malaysian airports, and this will be in partnership with international companies?
The question on the tongues of all Malaysians is why do we want to sell a profitable company, and why take it off the stock exchange? If the Malaysian Airports Management Company is running Sabiha International Airport in Istanbul, what will be the reaction of the Turkish government when it learns that the Malaysian company that runs its airport is a partner with GIB and BlackRock? This affects the position of the Turkish government in defending the Palestinian cause.
-
You raised the issue in Parliament earlier this year, what was the outcome?
When the issue was raised in Parliament last March, Transport Minister Anthony Locke dismissed it as mere rumour, despite knowing that talks had been going on for a year or two.
Malaysia Airports is a profitable company, and has been operating 39 airports in Malaysia for 45 years, in addition to an airport in Turkey. It is a very good company, except for the Corona pandemic period, and it is important for our sovereignty.
There are many international companies that can be cooperated with, such as the Indian, French, Spanish and German companies that have applied for investment, similar to “GIP”. Will this deal enhance or weaken the security of our airports? Especially since Zionist elements will be partners in the management of the Malaysian Airports Company.
-
The government says it has chosen the best offers and according to the conditions it has set to ensure the security and safety of the country.
The logic of the Prime Minister, the Treasury and the Provident Fund is that the goal is to develop airports in a way that enhances competition, and that is the main goal, but is there a need to give up 30% of the shares of the airports company to GIP, a subsidiary of BlackRock?
According to reports, GIB is not the best operating company, and the Sydney Airport it operates has suffered huge losses, and it does not operate any of the distinguished airports in the world, and its level is much lower than Kuala Lumpur Airport, and there is no economic or technical advantage to having GIB as a strategic partner, and we currently run our airports and trains well and efficiently, so why is the government so keen and insistent on selling this stake to GIB?
-
You may not gain much economic or technically from this partnership, but there may be political gains behind it.
I raised this question in Parliament. This year, the US government announced what it called the Asia-Pacific Economic Framework Initiative, under which a group of companies will provide loans for infrastructure projects in Southeast Asian countries. GIP is the leading implementer of these projects in the region, because it specializes in infrastructure such as airports, trains and ports.
In my view, the initiative as announced by the US is aimed at enhancing balance with China in the region as Beijing has invested heavily in Southeast Asia, especially Malaysia. We have the East Coast Railway, we have Forest City, Kuantan Port, Malacca Gateway, and many more, and the next investment will be the high-speed train.
The United States seeks to compete with China, or at least achieve balance with it in these projects, especially since Malaysia is the guardian of the Strait of Malacca, which is the most congested in the world after the Strait of Hormuz, and China depends on it to obtain gas, oil and other natural resources.
-
Apart from the economic feasibility of these airports, what benefit or harm can be achieved from privatizing them?
Not all of the 39 airports operated by Malaysia Airports are profitable, and some, especially in Sarawak and Sabah, have short runways and serve local needs in remote areas, but are of strategic importance because they are located on the South China Sea.
We are concerned that these airports could be used for military purposes if the Malaysian Airports Company is privatized, and they could be seized and used as alternative airports for foreign parties, in the event of a war, God forbid. Therefore, we believe that all Malaysian airports should be under the full control of the government, and no foreign party should be allowed to interfere in their management, and the government has not responded to this.
-
What if you were in power could you say no to the Americans?
Yes, this is what our governments have done in the past, such as the Mahathir government, and no previous government has sold shares in a sovereign institution to a foreign party, and there is no need for that.
Let’s say we want to raise capital to expand our airports; only Malaysia Airports can do it, they have a strong track record, enough liquidity and the government is able to support them to expand the airports without resorting to external companies like GIB. I don’t see GIB as qualified to help our airports, if we need specific expertise we can hire consulting companies and there is no need for us to sell our shares to these companies.
I think GIB doesn’t need the money here, they have a lot of money from other places, but they are looking at Malaysia’s strategic location in the region to confront China, and to keep an eye on India, which is what Malaysians have been doing for hundreds of years, since colonial times, and I think it is a restoration of that role, and gradually GIB will take control of the Malaysian airports company and the region.
-
But in the end, it is an elected, coalition government that represents most of the Malaysian people, and it is the decision-maker.
Some policies do not depend on a specific government, but extend beyond it to several upcoming election cycles, and therefore require national consensus.
When you sell a large stake in a sovereign company, we fear for our security future even if the government changes in the future, and we see that they have made concessions in national security, so we must look at the issue not as a small investment in a company, but rather it will leave major repercussions at the national level and the entire region, and even at the global level, because Malaysia is at the forefront of countries that stand by the rights of the Palestinian people.
I believe that Anwar Ibrahim’s government should reconsider its ethics and principles, act like Norway, and distance itself from entities that support crimes and genocide.
We are now giving the government a chance, declaring our opposition to GIB, and seeing if there are alternatives to make the privatization process successful; one of them is that the two sovereign funds, Khazanah and the Employees Provident Fund, own more than 90% of the shares, and they alone are capable of doing that.
