Zhen Ming Yan (translated name)
Kwong Wah Yit Poh, 16-02-2015

Two days before the Valentine’s Day, the Agriculture Minister has made a statement to expressed regrets regarding the remark he previously made about boycotting the Chinese traders. He, however, emphasised that this is not an apology.

“Regret” and “apology” are the two most commonly used terms in a boy-girl relationship. The Agriculture Minister tried to distinguish his regret from apology in his surprising political remark, just what is his intention? Is the Agriculture Minister admitting fault? Is he sincerely and willingly apologising to the diverse society and taking responsibility?

According to the Chinese dictionary, the word “regret” is used when one fails to fulfil one’s wish and feel sorry about it, which leads to regret that arises from uncontrollable or unsavable situations. On the other hand, the word “apology” means that one is admitting fault for one’s inappropriate or harmful actions and words, and to admit the fault of wronging or being rude to others.

If the Agriculture Minister’s statement of “regret” is not an “apology”, then he is telling the diverse society and especially the Chinese society, that there is nothing wrong in his remark about boycotting the Chinese traders. He is saying that his remark was not unreasonable and it did not harm the diverse society, and that his words and actions did not wrong the Chinese society. He is only expressing regret that his remark has caused uncontrollable and unsavable situations that did not please him. If so, what was his intention or wish in making such a remark? Furthermore, what does the “regret” that the Agriculture Minister express have on the emotions of the Chinese society, the diverse society and the fair treatment for the diversified Rakyat?

By what standard should the diverse society and especially the Chinese society adopt to receive the stand of “it is a regret but not an apology” taken by the Agriculture Minister? And by what principles are the Chinese-based political parties living by for them to urge the people in order to avoid more frictions in the diverse society, they should accept the Agriculture Minister’s “regret” statement that does not seem to reflect that he is admitting fault to the remark he made that has caused tension or that he sees anything wrong in making it?

The Minister is one of the nation’s leaders. The Agriculture Minister did not think about the consequences thoroughly before making a remark. He just wanted to be a hero and so he has caused tension in the diverse society. However, when the consequences of the remark confront him, he does not want to admit fault or change just to save face when he might just know that it is wrong. Perhaps, this is because he thinks that there is nothing wrong in making a remark that would cause tension in the diverse society? If it is so, would this type of Minister be fit for a leader of the country? Should other leaders of the country, especially the leaders of the Chinese-based political parties pardon the sinners and turn a blind eye? And how should they guarantee that the same incident will not happen again in the future?

A fault confessed is half redressed. Nonetheless, if one knows that one is wrong but would not admit fault, and resort to wordplay to avoid responsibility, then the diversified Rakyat should either urge the Agriculture Minister to resign and take responsibility, or ask the Cabinet to remove his post in the light of prioritising the diverse society. This is so the effect of “executing one to warm a hundred” can be reached.

The stand of the Chinese society is very clear. Their basic dignity has to be respected. As for unfairness and double standard treatment, they are adamant in saying – enough is enough!

Original Source: 遗憾，不是道歉