[Ada beberapa fakta yang tidak tepat dalam rencana dari laman baru ini. Daim pergi bersembunyi di luar negara bila Datuk Harun dibicarakan. Dia mendapat tanah daripada Datuk Harun kerana dia menyogok imbuhan (rasuah).

Ekonomi Malaysia tidak pulih semula kerana polisi kawalan modal dan matawang Daim atau Mahathir. Malaysia selamat kerana harga minyak naik mendadak dan ekspot elektronik meningkat kerana permintaaan IT teramat tinggi akibat kebimbangan Y2K dan IT bubble burst.

AWSJ tidakpun disaman dalam kes UMBC itu. Menurut Marina Yusof, chek urusniaga tersebut telah dibelakangkan tarikhnya (backdated). Sampai kini AWSJ tidak menarik balik lapurannya itu. Apa yang menarik Mahathir asyik membela Daim dari dulu sampai sekarang. Daim kini diundurkan dalam diam dan tidak dibawapun kemuka pengadilan kerana dia masih disayang dan diperlukan oleh Mahathir. Jika tidak kerusi Merbuk sudah lama melayang.
- Editor]

http://www.analysismalaysia.com/
sam_publication_issue1.php?link=ami1/ami1-3.htm

Analysis Malaysia
Issue No.1
25th June - 1th July

Daim Zainuddin
The man and his times

Together they have much to tell us about why Malaysia has been so successful a model for the Islamic world. But at some point, even the closest of friends will not get along with each other and that time has clearly come for Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Daim Zainuddin. Their personal relationship was so close that on many occasions they acted as one.

They were born in same village in Kedah, but unlike Mahathir, Daim studied law in London, joined the government legal service, and then worked for a private law firm. In the early 1970s he specialised in property development, and built his own fortune on the basis of a gift of land in Selangor from the then Menteri Besar, Harun Idris.

After studying urban planning at Berkeley, he entered politics, and in 1984 accepted Mahathir's invitation to become finance minister. His power has been based on his competence in finance, and on his close relationship with the prime minister. He lacks a secure base inside Umno and is not a credible successor to Mahathir.

Daim and Mahathir have been so close that they exchanged telephone calls every day. They have worked well together, not only because of their long association, but also because Mahathir is convinced that, unlike any of his other colleagues, Daim could never be his political rival. Daim, apparently, was less tolerant of inefficient management. For instance, it is also said that he, rather than Mahathir, was mainly responsible for firing some unsuccessful senior executives in government heavy industry projects.

Journalists, in search of words to characterise Daim, have used terms such as "quiet", "shy", "reluctant" and the like.

BMF Scandal

But we suspect that even Malaysians were a bit taken aback when the latest news about the alleged strain in relations between Mahathir and Daim after the latter resigned on June 2 this year as finance minister. Stories of rifts or imagined rifts between Daim and Mahathir became common towards the end of the 1990s. For those who read between the lines, the polite exchanges showed that Mahathir and Daim were no longer united in sanguine optimism about the country's economic future.

The recent 'turbulent' political climate has shaken up the business community; many of them said they now have less confidence in the country's future. But commerce is still booming in Malaysia. Business people can find reasons to cheer in the surging number of property transactions, the rekindled stock market and the swelling inflow of expatriates.

At the same time, however, some business leaders fear that Daim's resignation will be accompanied by rough weather. The political uncertainties have compounded fears that the situation will be far from smooth. The most worrying prospects are of financial instability.

While in government, Daim has been linked to several financial disasters which involved politicians or government officials in the main during Mahathir's tenure. The outstanding Malaysian financial disaster of the 1980s occurred when the Bumiputera Malaysia Finance (BMF), a subsidiary of Bank Bumiputera, which operated in Hong Kong, collapsed with losses of about US$1 billion in 1983.

The majority of Malay politicians were not just defending themselves. They wished to preserve the reputations of the New Economic Policy and those, including employees of BMF, who were occupied in helping to implement it. They did not want further enquiries into the matter. That was the position of Finance Minister Daim in 1984. The unpleasant episode of the BMF scandal is now a thing of the past.

UMBC Shares

Other controversies during the period involved the use of government funds in the stock market, which is said to involved Daim. A minor, and not very widely publicised, alleged breach of propriety concerned the government's handling of funds in the EPF (Employees Provident Fund). It was alleged it used some of the EPF money to make investments designed to stimulate the economy. However, the government did not explain the issue clearly enough to prevent DAP charges of "share speculation" seem plausible.

The other two incidents were more serious. The first concerned a risky and unsuccessful government policy. The second had to do with Daim's private fortunes. As regards to the former, the government decided to try to establish a tin cartel through a company, Maminco. However, despite the government's support for tin, prices collapsed and the Treasury suffered a loss of about US$200 million. It is hard to say who was responsible for the failed policy - Mahathir, the Prime Minister, or Daim, the finance minister.

Daim, was also the leading figure in another major scandal, which was unraveled by professional journalism at its most persistent. In September 1986, the Asian Wall Street Journal suggested that Daim had benefitted from the sale of shares in the United Malayan Banking Corporation (UMBC) to Pernas, the state trading organisation, and he allegedly had acquired the shares shortly before becoming finance minister.

The key issue concerning Daim's transactions was whether he transferred his shares before or after he joined the cabinet. Mahathir declared that the transfer came first, but the Asian Wall Street Journal maintained the contrary. The conflict of views provoked fierce reactions from the government, leading to temporary bans on the Journal.

In spite of his association with some of the scandals and 'incidents' referred to above, his performance as finance minister was favourably judged. He was well suited to be in the post at the time of the mid-1980s recession, and was adept at implementing the downsizing that it entailed.

When Mahathir was outside Malaysia for two months in 1997, Daim's opinions on economic issues were widely quoted, though not as much as Anwar's. In the economic crisis of 1997, he helped to moderate Mahathir's inappropriate initial reaction. During the recent economic slowdown, instead of opting for International Monetary Fund (IMF) help, Daim was also responsible for the introduction of the Malaysian currency controls which no doubt help the recovery of the country's economy.

The real scandal

Stories of rifts between Anwar and Daim gained prominence toward the end of the 1990s. Daim was no longer a minister seeking to win a seat in Parliament. But he exercised power by being closed to Mahathir, being his financial adviser, and Umno treasurer. He had numerous business connections, some of which cooperated with Anwar's corporate links. At other times, a competitive relationship existed.

Clashes were reported concerning the Bakun Dam project, where Daim's associates were included, while Anwar's were not and a competition over some privatisation projects. By extension, the Anwar-Daim rift could be construed as part of the Anwar-Mahathir rift.

Daim retained his economic power, and, through Mahathir, much of his political clout. And his latest resignation from the government has been linked to the bailing out of Malaysia Airlines (MAS) and Time dotCom, both owned by his 'boys' - Tajudin Ramli and Halim Saad respectively.

A closed friend of his, when asked on his opinion on Daim, says: "If we had saints looking over our markets, we might not have these problems. But as long as regulation is done by fallible men and women, the best hope for reducing corruption is to reduce the all-too-human temptations. The sin may be of the individual. But the real scandal is the system."