Foreign investment to perpetuate neo-colonialism

The arguments put forward by Shahril, Rafidah, Hawkins and others are basically the same. They argued that foreign investment is essential for national development in developing countries because the latter are short of capital and lack expertise which is supposed to be provided by foreign investors. They further argued that foreign investment also helps provide employment, thus helping to solve the acute unemployment problem in these countries. However, because of the tremendous opposition against foreign investment in the country, and not to appear in total support of such a policy, Shahril and Rafidah had to make certain criticisms of foreign investment. But both of them still maintained that foreign investment has an important role to play in national development. What is needed, they claimed, is some form of control so that the cost or the disadvantages of foreign investment to this country could be minimised!

To refute this unscientific analysis, Sdr. Rahman took a brief look at history. He pointed out that after the Second World War, the tide of anti-imperialism and anti-colonialism was surging forward on the continent of Asia, Africa and Latin America threatening the very existence of the imperialists and the colonialists. Their fear was well expressed by the arch imperialist, the US Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles in his book "War and Peace" in 1950, when he recommended a change from direct colonialism to neo-colonialism if the West wanted to avoid recolution and defeat. A similar fear was echoed ten years later in 1960 by another arch imperialist, Harold MacMillan. Hence to avoid complete defeat at that time, the imperialist powers, weakened by the Second World War and the people's struggle were forced to change their form of rule from direct to indirect colonial rule, i.e. from colonialism to neo-colonialism, so as to deceive the people that they have obtained their independence! In reality, the imperialists still control the politicis and economics of the country through their local agents. As an aspect of the Cold War that was officially declared by the imperialists in 1947 in order to maintain their interests, a new branch of social science, i.e. economic development and the sociology of development, was developed in the imperialist and neo-colonial universities. The most important component of this field of social science is the theory of development based on foreign investment, foreign 'aid' and foreign expertise. Such a theory argues that in order to develop, the developing countries must attract foreign investment, 'aid' and expertise! Such a theory therefore, is meant to perpetuate the Third World Countries as neo-colonies of imperialism, the kind of foreign idea which is harmful to these countries!

Sdr. Rahman then pointed out that Malaya is still a neo-colony of Anglo-US imperialism. The slavish reliance on foreign investment over these years has only perpetuated the neo-colonial set-up in the country. For example, over 60—70% of the traditional sector of the economy (i.e. rubber, tin, oil palm, etc.) are in the hands of British imperialism. At the same time the British imperialists own a vast tract of fertile land here. For example, Kumpulan Guthrie Sdn. Bhd. alone owns about 175,000 acres of the most fertile land in this country, which is equivalent to about 2½ times the size of Penang! In Negeri Sembilan, it controls one-third of the total cultivated land! A similar situation, if not worse, prevails in "new industries". Even the government has admitted that 62.1% of the share capital of limited companies in 1969 is in the hands of the imperialists. It is an undeniable fact that the principal aim of the foreign monopoly capitalists is to make' maximum profits by exploiting our rich natural resources, cheap labour and the "incentives" such as pioneer status provided by the government. Therefore, how can there be any development for the masses when our resources and people are exploited to the maximum?