That angry voice in the wilderness is Mahathir Mohamad, the man who dominated Malaysia as prime minister for two decades and now, to his evident amazement, cannot seem to get the attention of the press he once controlled.
Ignored or pushed deep into the back pages like an inconvenient critic, he has turned to the alternative Internet sites that are the refuge of the powerless in Malaysia, sites he says he still despises.
"Where is the press freedom?" he exclaimed recently, although he must know that it remains pretty much where he left it when he retired three years ago.
"Broadcast what I have to say," he told a forum in remarks that were carried on the Internet. "What I say is not even accurately published in the press."
His surprise comes as a surprise. For this master politician, retirement seems to have been a refresher course in elementary principles of government -- that the man and the office are not the same, that self-interest is the politician's compass and that yes men do not always mean it when they say yes.
For more than a year, Mahathir, 80, has been grumbling about his handpicked successor, Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, who has been reversing some of his policies and canceling some of the gigantic projects that were his legacy.
In the past few weeks, the familiar aggressive, sharp-tongued Mahathir has returned noisily to the scene. Although the man may sound the same, his words have an entirely different ring, coming not as edicts but simply, for the government, as a nuisance.
It is not a benign nuisance, and some analysts worry that if Mahathir persists he could cause political rifts and shake the stability that is a hallmark of the government he left behind. So far, Abdullah's position seems secure, and leaders of the ruling party, the United Malays National Organization, are seeking to mediate between the men.
But many analysts here see Mahathir's attacks as an expression more of personal angst than of differences in policy.
One of his past allies, Musa Hitam, a former deputy prime minister, suggested dismissively that Mahathir was suffering from "post-prime-ministerial syndrome."
There is poignancy in Mahathir's realization that the country has been moving on without him. Although his announced plan was to become "the man in the library" writing his memoirs, it is clear that he did not expect to become so quickly irrelevant.
"I get stabbed in the back, I don't know which direction it comes," he complained to the political Web site www.malaysiakini.com.
His chief reference was to Abdullah, who he said had broken a promise to continue his policies and complete his projects.
Among the issues Mahathir has raised are Abdullah's decision to scrap expensive plans for work on a new bridge to Singapore; his downgrading of the special status of the national car, the Proton; and the firing of the carmaker's chief executive, a friend of the former prime minister.
"I'm in the habit of choosing the wrong people," Mahathir said.
Another of his chosen people, Anwar Ibrahim, who was Abdullah's predecessor as heir apparent, was fired in 1998 when he appeared to be mounting a challenge to the prime minister. He was then convicted and jailed on what almost everyone here believes were politically motivated charges of corruption and sodomy.
Once Mahathir was out of power, those convictions were overturned, and Anwar has filed defamation charges that are likely to prolong the pain for the former prime minister.
Abdullah has offered a contrast in styles, with a low-key response to Mahathir that is making some of his supporters impatient but is being characterized as "elegant" by the newspapers that are now his to command.
"I have more important things to do, like repaying the trust given to me by the people," he said in one of his few responses.
This evidently infuriated Mahathir, who seemed to be trying to goad Abdullah when he told a conference: "Now I don't know who is in power. If you ask a question, he does not answer. Others will answer."
Some of those others were members of his own Cabinet, endorsing his projects and agreeing with his ideas, and the shift in their allegiance has clearly wounded him.
"Before, I also got such support," he said. "Many kissed my hands. But now I know this support has no quality."
With the fury of a former prime minister scorned, he added: "They are like a chorus line. They are all dancing. When one kicks, all will kick. They are like the Rockettes."
As if to underscore his indifference, Abdullah headed to Australia for a vacation last week after his Cabinet ministers pledged to continue speaking out for him.
"All the ministers must defend their position," said Nazri Aziz, the minister in charge of law. "These are Cabinet positions, and now they are being disputed."
It was Nazri who suggested a week ago that Mahathir resign from the governing party, adding, "Most of us don't understand him anymore."
Steven Gan, the editor in chief of Malaysiakini, said Mahathir had not changed so very much, telling him during their interview that he had never liked the upstart Web site and still did not like it.
He said the former prime minister should not have been surprised at the turn the country has taken.
"I think his ego overshadowed his critical analysis," Gan said. "I would have thought that if he had read Malaysiakini over the past years, he would have been able to realize that things were not what they seemed."
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US