HOW EARLY UMNO LEADERS UNDERSTOOD THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RACIAL AND RACIST

"Our future depends on how well many different kinds of people can live and work together." — Tunku Abdul Rahman, Bapa Malaysia.

In Malaysia, the question is often framed as: Are you first a Malay, Chinese, Indian, or Malaysian? Some insist that ethnicity must come first. Others argue that citizenship should be above all else.

But perhaps we are asking the wrong question. Ethnicity and nationality are not in competition. One describes our heritage, the other our belonging. To be proud of being Malay, Chinese, Indian, Dayak, Kadazan, or Iban does not contradict being Malaysian. In truth, we can and must be both.

Unfortunately, politics thrives on false choices. The same voices that ask whether we are “Malay or Malaysian first” may soon demand to know if we are “Malaysian or Muslim, Christian, Hindu, or Buddhist first.” The aim is not clarity, but division.

Like a wicked man who asks a child, “Do you love your mother or father more?”, they plant seeds of doubt and pain where none should exist. The child, confused and torn, does not realise that he is being manipulated into betraying what should be natural: equal love for both parents.

When translated into our politics, “mother” and “father” become “ethnicity” and “citizenship.” The outcome is a divided society. And the wicked man—political opportunism—walks away with satisfaction.

Realpolitik and Malaysian Stability

If we are honest with ourselves, Malaysia will remain bound to race-based politics for some time. This is the reality we must deal with, not deny. Instead of pretending otherwise, we should work to ensure that it evolves in ways that strengthen rather than fracture our nation.

For that reason, it is dangerous when the majority community—the Malays—find themselves split into two, three, four, or more competing parties. No country thrives when its political centre is broken into fragments. Stability requires a strong and credible Malay-led party. But such a party must not merely exist to secure Malay votes.

It must return to the spirit of early UMNO leadership—men and women who, while firmly rooted in their community, were accepted as leaders by all Malaysians: Chinese, Indians, Sabahans, Sarawakians alike. They understood the line between being racial and being racist. They drew strength from their base but applied power as Malaysians.

They were measured, inclusive, and pragmatic. They sought realpolitik not for narrow gain, but for national balance. In their leadership, the Malays saw protectors, and the non-Malays saw partners. That equilibrium is what made Malaysia possible.

The pressing question is: Which Malay party today will rediscover this formula? UMNO? Bersatu? Pejuang? PAS? Whichever it is, the first to take this step will not only gain my vote—but, I believe, the trust of many others who long for leaders capable of being both racial in base and Malaysian in spirit.

Beyond the Wicked Question

We Malaysians must learn to recognise the traps being set for us. When asked, “Are you Malay or Malaysian first?” we must answer as the child should have answered the wicked man: I love them both, equally and fully.

Our future depends on refusing false choices. It depends on leaders who know that ethnicity and nationality can coexist. It depends on us being smart enough not to fall into the wicked man’s game.

Because if we allow that seed of division to grow, the harvest will not be unity, but brokenness. And Malaysia is capable of better than that.

As Tunku reminded us, our future depends on how well many different kinds of people can live and work together.

In short, it Is OK to Be Racial, But Not Racist.

Peace,

Anas Zubedy

Penang.

 

STOP A BULLY TODAY, PREVENT A CORRUPT LEADER TOMORROW

 

Bullying is a sad social problem that scars individuals, families, and communities. It can cause long-term psychological trauma, physical harm, and in extreme cases, even death. The tragedy of bullying is that it not only destroys lives in the present but also plants seeds of dysfunction that can corrupt the future of society.

Bullying is not a uniquely Malaysian issue. It is a global concern, taking place in schools, workplaces, and public life across the world. But Malaysia has had its own heartbreaking cases that highlight how serious the problem can be.

One recent example is Zara Qairina Mahathir, a 13-year-old in Sabah who died in July 2025 after alleged bullying in her school dormitory—a case that sparked nationwide outrage, suspicions of a cover-up, and allegations of protection for perpetrators from influential families.

Another is Naval Cadet Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain, who in 2017 was brutally tortured with a steam iron by fellow students at the National Defence University and later died, with six attackers eventually sentenced to death in 2024. Both cases reveal the devastating consequences of unchecked bullying and the urgent need for accountability and stronger safeguards.

These are only the high-profile cases that made national headlines. The sad reality is that there are countless other bullying incidents in Malaysia that go unnoticed. Many victims suffer in silence, bearing psychological scars, dropping out of school, or carrying trauma into adulthood. When we look at these patterns, we begin to see why bullying can be described as the “training ground” for corruption.

What is the link between bullying and corruption?

At its core, both bullying and corruption share the same DNA: the abuse of power when accountability is absent. In bullying, the stronger—physically, socially, or institutionally—prey on the weaker. In corruption, those entrusted with authority misuse public trust for private gain. Both thrive where power is unchecked.

They also share a culture of silence. Bullying victims often stay quiet out of fear, shame, or the belief that nothing will change. In corruption, whistleblowers face retaliation, job loss, or even physical danger. This silence allows abuse to spread and become normalized.

Another parallel lies in the networks of protection. Bullies are sometimes part of popular groups or influential families who shield them from consequences. Similarly, corrupt politicians or business leaders often rely on connections and patronage to escape justice. In both settings, accountability is bent or broken by social and institutional shields.

Finally, both bullying and corruption erode trust. In schools, students stop trusting teachers, parents, or systems that fail to protect them. In society, citizens lose faith in government when corruption is covered up. This breakdown of trust weakens institutions at every level, making it harder to build a just and functioning society.

For this reason, bullying is more than just a “childhood problem.” It is, in many ways, the training ground for corruption. A bully learns early that abuse of power works—especially if one has protection. If society fails to correct this behavior in schools, the bully grows into adulthood carrying the same mindset into politics, business, and public service. Unchecked school bullying, therefore, is not just a social issue; it is a pipeline to systemic corruption.

What is to be done?

Bullying will never be eradicated completely, but it can be minimized when families, schools, communities, and government work together. The aim is to create a culture where bullying is neither tolerated nor normalized. This requires consistent action at every level, but most importantly, it begins with leadership that embodies responsibility and integrity.

As Caliph ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb once said, “If a mule were to stumble on the road, I fear that Allah would ask me, ‘Why did you not pave the way for it, O ʿUmar?’” This standard of leadership—where even the suffering of the smallest is a leader’s responsibility—is the very opposite of the culture of impunity that fuels bullying and corruption.

The key takeaway is clear: bullying and corruption are two sides of the same coin, both representing the misuse of power when accountability is absent. Tackling bullying in schools is not only about protecting children—it is about building a society free of corruption in the future. The question remains: Are our leaders prepared to embrace such deep accountability as ʿUmar did—or are we raising a future of corrupt leaders?

STOP A BULLY TODAY, PREVENT A CORRUPT LEADER TOMORROW.

Peace,

Anas Zubedy

Core Team Member

#RasuahBusters Malaysia

JALUR GEMILANG MISTAKES: A QUR’ANIC GUIDE

Ironically, the Jalur Gemilang’s role is to unite the nation. The dark blue square in the upper left corner represents the unity of the Malaysian people.

Yet, of late, something troubling has been happening. Instead of uniting us, the flag has sometimes become a source of division—especially in how we react to mistakes involving it. Whether it is being hung upside down, printed with the wrong number of points, or misrepresented in other ways, such errors are often met with anger, suspicion, and accusations.

This is not to say we should ignore mistakes involving our national flag. We must protect its dignity. But how we respond matters. The Jalur Gemilang itself bears the crescent and star—symbols of Islam as the religion of the Federation.

Because of this, I choose to base my approach on the Qur’an—drawing from its call for justice, fairness, and peace-building.

Here is a Qur’anic guide to dealing with mistakes involving the Jalur Gemilang.

1. Avoid Unfounded Suspicion (Qur’an 49:12)

Before we assume ill intent, we must first ascertain the facts. The Qur’an warns:

"O ye who believe! AVOID SUSPICION AS MUCH (AS POSSIBLE): FOR SUSPICION IN SOME CASES IS A SIN: and spy not on each other, nor speak ill of each other behind their backs..." (Qur’an 49:12)

A wrongly displayed flag may be due to ignorance, carelessness, or oversight—not necessarily malice. Let us not jump to conclusions.

Be careful—negative suspicion not only leads to sin but can also be one of Shayṭān’s tools to divide and create mistrust among people. (Refer Qur’an 58:10)

2. Do Not Practise Double Standards (Qur’an 83:1–3)

Justice in Islam requires that we apply the same standard regardless of who is involved.

“Woe to those who give less [than due], who, when they take a measure from people, take in full. But if they give them by measure or by weight, they cause loss.” (Qur’an 83:1–3)

We cannot practise double standards—demanding that one group be punished when a mistake is made, but turning a blind eye or offering leniency when the same mistake is made by those we consider “one of us.”

3. Judge with Justice Even if You Dislike the Other (Qur’an 5:8)

The Qur’an reminds us that justice is not dependent on personal feelings:

“O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah, witnesses in justice, and DO NOT LET THE HATRED OF A PEOPLE PREVENT YOU FROM BEING JUST. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do.” (Qur’an 5:8)

Even if the person who made the mistake is someone we oppose, we are still bound to be fair—and vice versa. Failing to do so means failing in our Taqwa.

4. Exchange Bad with What Is Better (Qur’an 41:34)

The Qur’an guides us to respond in a way that promotes reconciliation rather than hostility:

“And not equal are the good deed and the bad. REPEL [EVIL] BY THAT [DEED] WHICH IS BETTER; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [WILL BECOME] AS THOUGH HE WERE A DEVOTED FRIEND.” (Qur’an 41:34)

When we correct the mistake respectfully, we may win hearts instead of creating further division. This behaviour draws us closer—to unity.

Conclusion: Living the Test
Malaysia and Malaysians have a deep responsibility to live up to God’s test. Here, Islam is lived—together with other living religions. Our diversity reflects a Qur’anic truth:

“And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. HAD ALLAH WILLED, HE WOULD HAVE MADE YOU ONE NATION [UNITED IN RELIGION], BUT [HE INTENDED] TO TEST YOU IN WHAT HE HAS GIVEN YOU; SO RACE TO [ALL THAT IS] GOOD. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ.” (Qur’an 5:48)

In many ways, Malaysia is a living chromosome—a model of how faiths can coexist, each preserving its own colours, yet woven together in the same tapestry of peace.

In other words’ we are given the responsibility to showcase the Quran.

When we guard the dignity of our flag, let us also guard the dignity of our unity. For the Jalur Gemilang does not just represent our sovereignty—it represents our shared responsibility to one another as Malaysians.

We must live up to this test!

"And We did not reveal to you the Book except for you to make clear to them that wherein they have differed and as guidance and mercy for a people who believe." (Qur’an 16:64)

Peace.
Anas Zubedy
Kuala Lumpur

WHY NEGOTIATION IS ABOUT MANAGING BOTH TODAY AND TOMORROW

 

Negotiation Skills Series – Entry 1 -By Anas Zubedy

In recent years, we’ve seen a surge of interest in negotiation—particularly after Donald Trump’s second term and his hard-hitting, no-holds-barred approach to international trade and tariff negotiations. Whether one agrees with his style or not, his actions sparked global discussions and reawakened the corporate world to the critical role negotiation plays—not just in politics and global trade, but in everyday business decisions.

At Zubedy, we believe that negotiation is not a one-time transaction. It is a long-term strategy, not a quick win. Our workshop—Negotiation Skills: How to Negotiate and Manage a Change in Your Price or Deal?—is built on this very philosophy.

The final words we leave our participants with are:

“The most effective negotiations are those where both sides win—always aim for a solution where everyone walks away better off.”

This is not just a feel-good statement. It’s a strategic imperative.

Of course, we must aim to secure the best possible deal for ourselves. We would be naïve not to. However, we must also recognize the importance of managing both today’s deal and tomorrow’s relationship. A negotiation is not just about the price tag—it’s about trust, reputation, and future opportunities.

We must be careful not to win the battle but lose the war. At the same time, we cannot afford to keep losing battles and expect to win the war someday. In both business-to-business (B2B) dealings and nation-to-nation diplomacy, relationships are rarely one-off. People and organizations have memory. How we negotiate today will influence how we are treated tomorrow.

In other words, even in negotiation, justice must prevail. When we are fair, principled, and long-sighted, we create deals that last and partnerships that grow.

This series will explore the mindsets, skills, and strategies that help you become a Principled Negotiator—one who negotiates firmly yet fairly, with a clear eye on both today's value and tomorrow's relationship.

Does Trump negotiate with this approach?

In contrast to Zubedy’s negotiation philosophy—which prioritizes fairness, relationship-building, and long-term mutual gain—Donald Trump’s win-lose negotiation style often leans heavily on short-term wins and aggressive leverage, such as the imposition of tariffs. His approach is typically transactional and pressure-driven, aiming to force concessions quickly, even if it risks damaging future trust and cooperation.

While this style may yield immediate results, it often comes at the expense of stability and goodwill. Trump’s unpredictability and readiness to escalate can alienate long-term partners, creating a “win the battle, lose the war” scenario—exactly what our approach cautions against.

Our model, on the other hand, emphasizes negotiating firmly but fairly, ensuring both sides walk away with dignity and a foundation for future engagement. It values justice not just in outcomes, but in the process—recognizing that people and institutions have memory, and that sustainable success is built over time, not forced in a moment.

How about Xi’s and China’s approach?

China’s negotiation approach under President Xi Jinping shares notable similarities with the philosophy I advocate. Like my view that negotiation is a long-term strategy—not a quick win—China often plays the long game. Through “dual circulation” and “major-country diplomacy,” China emphasizes resilience, mutual benefit, and strategic partnerships, especially within the region. This aligns with the idea that we must manage both today’s deal and tomorrow’s relationship.

China frequently uses the term “win-win cooperation,” echoing the belief that success lies in finding common ground rather than dominating the other side. In that sense, their formal posture mirrors the principle that justice must prevail—not just in outcomes, but in the way we negotiate.

That said, China’s occasional use of “wolf warrior diplomacy”—marked by assertive, nationalistic rhetoric—can contradict the trust-based, fair-minded approach I promote. While strategic, such tactics risk undermining long-term relationships.

In short, China’s broader strategy aligns with wise negotiation in its emphasis on long-term thinking and partnerships. But its aggressive tactics remind us: without fairness and mutual respect, even strategic wins may cost us what matters most—trust and enduring relationships.

“Gain earned without righteousness will later cause sorrow, even if it appears sweet in the moment.”

– Tirukkural 467 – On True Gain

“Woe to those who give less [than due], who, when they take a measure from people, take in full. But if they give by measure or by weight to them, they cause loss.”

– Quran 83:1–3

Peace, anas

Note: This series is part of Zubedy’s intellectual property (IP). You are welcome to share the articles, but they may not be used for commercial purposes without permission.

JALUR GEMILANG: Let’s Always Bersangka Baik, Not Bersangka Buruk

 

Sometimes, in the rush of Merdeka preparations, mistakes happen. A flag may be hung upside down. A symbol may be displayed incorrectly. These are not always acts of disrespect—but often, human error.

When such incidents occur, especially involving our beloved Jalur Gemilang, our response matters.

Do we react with anger and suspicion (bersangka buruk)? Or do we pause, reflect, and choose to respond with understanding and wisdom (bersangka baik)?

This is where we must return to the very spirit of the four colours of our flag.

Let blue guide us to unity and calm. Let white remind us to be sincere and honest in our assessment. Let red give us the courage to correct with dignity, not to shame. And let yellow inspire us to act with grace and respect, as our royal traditions teach.

We must quickly nip mistakes in the bud—but with compassion.

Not every error demands a ministerial response or a police investigation. In cases like a school hanging the flag upside down by accident, a gentle correction from a district officer or community leader is more than enough. Let us not inflate errors into controversies. Let us not trade harmony for headlines.

In fact, even when the Jalur Gemilang is mistakenly flown upside down, it can still become a catalyst for unity—if we choose mercy and kindness.

It is in our rahmah, not our rage, that we build a better Malaysia. In this way, we win either way—whether it was truly a mistake or otherwise—because we responded with dignity, compassion, and wisdom.

Enough of always bersangka buruk. Let’s start anew this Merdeka.

Let this be the year we fly the Jalur Gemilang not only with our hands—but with our hearts.

Peace,

Anas Zubedy

Kuala Lumpur

ILLEGAL DOUBLE COMMISSION IN PENANG: A BLOW TO CONSUMER RIGHTS AND THE STATE’S REPUTATION

I write with deep concern about an ongoing practice in Penang’s rental market—one that quietly burdens tenants, undermines investor confidence, and may be in breach of Malaysia’s laws protecting consumers.

It has become increasingly common for both tenants and landlords to be charged one month’s rent each as agent commission.

This appears to go against the spirit and letter of the Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers Act 1981 (Act 242), which permits only one party—typically the landlord—to bear this cost. The law, enforced by the Board of Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers (LPPEH) under the Ministry of Finance, is clear—but its enforcement in this context seems lacking.

This is not a small matter. Renters—including students, young families, and digital professionals—are often faced with paying 4 to 5 months’ rent upfront, making housing less accessible and significantly more expensive.

Many are unaware that such practices may be illegal. It is a consumer rights issue, and one that deserves thoughtful and immediate attention.

There are broader implications too:

It may deter foreign talent and remote workers under MM2H and DE Rantau from choosing Penang, especially when housing feels opaque or overly costly.

It risks dampening Malaysia’s vision of becoming a digital and semiconductor hub, where talent mobility is essential.

It contributes to regional inequality, as renters in Penang and the northern region are effectively paying more than those in other parts of the country for the same right to secure a home.

Perhaps most importantly, it erodes public trust, especially if such practices continue unchecked.

I respectfully urge the Ministry of Finance, LPPEH, and the Penang State Government to look into this matter with urgency. It is my hope that the relevant authorities will step in to enforce the law, ensure transparency, and protect the rights of both renters and landlords.

This is not just about property—it is about fairness, trust, and doing what is right for Penang, its people, and the country. With proactive leadership, I believe this issue can be resolved in a way that strengthens confidence in our systems and supports Malaysia’s global ambitions.

Sincerely,
Anas Zubedy
Penang

A QURANIC DEFINITION OF A HOLOCAUST?

In a recent interview, Piers Morgan challenged Candace Owens’ characterization of the situation in Gaza as a “holocaust.” He argued that the comparison was inappropriate, stressing that the Holocaust refers specifically to the genocide of six million Jews orchestrated by Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime. While acknowledging that the loss of life in Gaza is deeply tragic, Morgan noted that the current death toll—under 50,000—is vastly different in both scale and historical context.

In this article, I aim to explore the concept of a holocaust as a general descriptive term—not limited to the Nazi genocide. I will examine what constitutes a holocaust from a broader historical and moral perspective. Finally, I will reflect on how the Qur’an, as a moral benchmark, might frame what constitutes a holocaust.

What Is a Holocaust in general terms?

A holocaust is among the gravest expressions of human cruelty—a large-scale, deliberate, and systematic destruction of human life. It is not the result of natural disasters or accidents, but of calculated human actions rooted in ideology, prejudice, and the abuse of power. At its heart, a holocaust represents a complete moral collapse, where the tools of governance or influence are turned against a group with the intent to destroy.

Central to any holocaust is massive loss of life, often in the hundreds of thousands or millions. These atrocities are not spontaneous—they are meticulously planned and executed over time with chilling precision. Victims are targeted not randomly, but for who they are: their race, religion, ethnicity, politics, or social identity. An ideology often drives this targeting, portraying the victims as threats or obstacles.

What distinguishes a holocaust from other forms of violence is the intent to annihilate—not just to conquer or punish, but to erase an entire people or culture. This may include not only physical extermination but also cultural erasure through the destruction of language, religion, and heritage.

Such acts are frequently state-sponsored or institutionally supported, using the machinery of bureaucracy—IDs, propaganda, detention, transportation—to systematize terror. The methods are extreme: mass executions, forced labor, starvation, and torture, all intended to dehumanize and dominate.

The aftermath is devastating. Generations may be lost. Survivors carry deep, lasting trauma. Societies are left grappling with the hatred and silence that allowed such horrors to unfold.

To understand a holocaust is not just to recognize mass killing—but to see it as a total breakdown of moral order, where prejudice becomes policy and power is used to destroy rather than protect. The term “holocaust” is both a description and a warning—of what happens when humanity turns against itself.

A Broader Lens: Historical Events That Reflect the True Meaning of a Holocaust

While the Nazi genocide is well known and widely documented, here are 15 other examples of what may also be described as holocausts, based on scale, intent, and systematic targeting:

One, the Transatlantic Slave Trade (16th–19th century), where over 12 million Africans were kidnapped, sold, and transported under brutal, inhumane conditions. Millions died during the Middle Passage or while enslaved. This atrocity was driven by European colonial powers such as Britain, Portugal, France, and the Netherlands.

Two, the genocide of Native Americans across the Americas (15th–20th century), which included forced removals like the Trail of Tears, massacres, and cultural destruction. Perpetrated by European settlers and later the U.S. and Canadian governments, it resulted in the loss of millions of Indigenous lives and ways of life.

Three, the Belgian atrocities in the Congo (1885–1908), where King Leopold II’s regime caused the deaths of an estimated 10 million Congolese through forced labor, mutilation, starvation, and executions—all in pursuit of rubber and ivory profits.

Four, the Aboriginal genocide in Australia (1788–1900s), marked by massacres, land dispossession, and forced assimilation. British colonial policies included the removal of Aboriginal children from their families, known as the Stolen Generations, aimed at erasing Indigenous identity.

Five, the Herero and Nama genocide (1904–1908) in present-day Namibia, where German colonial forces exterminated up to 80% of the Herero and 50% of the Nama through desertification, executions, and concentration camps.

Six, the Bengal Famine of 1943, which killed up to 3 million Indians. The famine was exacerbated by British colonial policies under Winston Churchill, including grain diversion and denial of relief. Churchill is reported to have blamed Indians for their own deaths.

Seven, the Great Irish Famine (1845–1852), during which over 1 million Irish died and another million emigrated. While the potato blight was natural, British policies of continued food exports, high taxation, and mass evictions magnified the suffering.

Eight, the Rwandan genocide (1994), in which nearly 1 million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were slaughtered within 100 days. While executed locally, international powers including France and Belgium have been criticized for their roles and failure to intervene.

Nine, the Armenian genocide (1915–1923), where the Ottoman Empire systematically killed or deported 1.5 million Armenians through mass executions, starvation, and forced marches. Despite strong historical evidence, this genocide is still officially denied by Turkey.

Ten, the Indonesian anti-communist purge (1965–66), where an estimated 500,000 to 1 million people were killed, including communists, ethnic Chinese, and left-leaning Muslims. The mass killings occurred with support and encouragement from the United States and the United Kingdom.

Eleven, the Khmer Rouge genocide in Cambodia (1975–1979), where nearly 2 million people died under Pol Pot’s regime due to mass executions, forced labor, starvation, and systematic targeting of intellectuals and ethnic minorities.

Twelve, the Japanese atrocities in Nanjing and East Asia during World War II (1937–1945), especially the Nanjing Massacre, where over 300,000 civilians and prisoners of war were brutally killed, and thousands of women raped, as part of Imperial Japan’s expansionist campaign.

Thirteen, the Iraq War and Sanctions (1990–2011), where over 500,000 Iraqi children are estimated to have died due to U.N. sanctions, according to UNICEF. The 2003 U.S.-led invasion further caused massive civilian deaths, torture scandals (e.g., Abu Ghraib), and widespread displacement.

Fourteen, the Cultural Revolution in China (1966–1976), where Mao Zedong’s political purge led to the deaths of an estimated 1.5 to 2 million people. Intellectuals, minorities, and dissidents were targeted through public humiliation, torture, and executions under the banner of ideological purity.

Fifteen, the Rohingya crisis (2016–present), where Myanmar’s military has been accused of genocide against the Rohingya Muslim minority. Villages were razed, civilians massacred, and over 700,000 people were forced to flee to Bangladesh amid allegations of mass rapes and ethnic cleansing.

Piers Morgan or Candace Owens?

Based on the general description of a holocaust—large-scale, systematic, and targeted destruction of human life—what is happening in Gaza today may also be understood through this lens. While the death toll may differ in scale from other historical cases, the sustained bombardment, mass displacement, and collective punishment of a specific population raise urgent moral, legal, and humanitarian concerns.

I agree with Candace Owens: we must act now. Just as the world should have intervened in the early stages of the Nazi genocide, we cannot wait until the death toll reaches a million to acknowledge the gravity of what is unfolding. A holocaust is not defined solely by numbers—it is defined by intent, system, and silence. It is also important to remember that the list above is not exhaustive. Many other atrocities, past and ongoing, reflect the same tragic pattern. Each one calls for remembrance, justice, and the courage to act before it is too late.

How Does the Qur’an Frame a Holocaust?

A holocaust, by its very nature, involves the large-scale and systematic destruction of human life. It is not the death of one, or one hundred, or even one hundred thousand—but often the calculated erasure of entire communities. It shocks the conscience by the scale of its brutality.

Yet the Qur’an offers a framing that is simple, clear, deep, and spiritual. It does not measure the value of life in numbers but in principle. The Quran decrees,

“Whoever kills a soul—unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land—IT IS AS IF HE HAD SLAIN MANKIND ENTIRELY. And whoever saves one—it is as if he had saved mankind entirely.” -Quran 5:32

This verse elevates the worth of a single life to that of all humanity. In the Qur’an’s moral vision, the intentional killing of one innocent soul is not a small crime—it is a universal tragedy.

From this divine lens: ONE INNOCENT DEATH EQUALS A HOLOCAUST.

Peace,

Anas Zubedy

Kuala Lumpur

HOW BLAIR AND OBAMA CAN HEAL THEMSELVES – LESSONS FROM HINDUISM, BUDDHISM, CHRISTIANITY AND ISLAM.

An Open Letter to Tony Blair and Barack Obama

Both Barack Obama and Tony Blair have, in their own ways, expressed regret over pivotal decisions that contributed to chaos in the Middle East. Their reflections, while different in tone and approach, mark an important and commendable step in the direction of personal accountability.

Tony Blair, in a deeply emotional statement following the 2016 Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War, accepted “full responsibility without exception or excuse.” He openly apologised for flawed intelligence and inadequate post-war planning, expressing profound sorrow. At the same time, he stood by the decision to remove Saddam Hussein, reflecting a complex mix of remorse and justification.

Barack Obama, though not offering a formal apology for U.S. involvement—or inaction—in Syria, has spoken candidly about his regrets. He described the Syrian crisis as one of the most painful aspects of his presidency. In his 2016 farewell press conference, he shared how deeply affected he felt by the suffering in Aleppo, and earlier identified the failure to plan post-intervention in Libya as his “worst mistake.” His reflections show a leader grappling sincerely with the consequences of difficult decisions.

Both men have taken meaningful steps by publicly acknowledging their regrets. This in itself is a sign of growth and integrity. In this letter, we do not seek to criticise, but to offer a pathway forward—one that may help them find deeper peace with themselves, with the world, and ultimately, with their Maker. For leaders who have shaped history, the journey toward redemption and healing is not only possible, but powerful.

________________________________________

What Blair and Obama Are Regretting About

At the heart of the regrets expressed by Blair and Obama lies a painful and sobering reality: the loss of innocent lives—especially those of children. While policy decisions are made in cabinet rooms, their consequences are lived out in bombed schools, refugee camps, and silent graves across the Middle East.

In Iraq, the war that followed Blair’s decision to join the 2003 U.S.-led invasion caused widespread destruction. Conservative estimates suggest over 200,000 civilians have died, with thousands of children among the dead.

However, when combined with the years of crippling international sanctions before the war, some humanitarian studies have estimated that up to half a million Iraqi children may have died due to conflict-related causes, including malnutrition and lack of medical care. A generation of Iraqi children grew up under the shadow of war, trauma, displacement, and poverty. Today, according to UNICEF, at least one in five Iraqi children still requires humanitarian assistance, and millions lack access to clean water, healthcare, and quality education—the basic building blocks of a safe and meaningful life.

In Syria, the consequences of inaction and hesitation—regretted by Obama—have been equally devastating. Since the conflict began in 2011, more than 29,000 children have been killed, according to the Syrian Network for Human Rights.

Millions more have been wounded, orphaned, or displaced. Cities like Aleppo became haunting symbols of shattered childhoods. Many Syrian children now live as refugees, robbed of stability, education, and peace. Their trauma is not fleeting—it will shape who they become, and what kind of future they can hope for.

And the suffering continues. Today, children in both Iraq and Syria face ongoing threats—of violence, hunger, exploitation, and extremism. Tomorrow, they will carry the emotional and psychological scars of these wars into adulthood, shaping future generations and the fragile peace that may one day emerge.

This is what Blair and Obama are regretting—not merely flawed strategies or missed opportunities, but the irreversible cost borne by the most vulnerable: the children who had no say, no shelter, and no safe place to run. Their expressions of regret are steps in the right direction. The next step is to ask: what now?

How can these two influential figures—who once shaped history—now help heal it?

________________________________________

From Harm to Healing: Lessons from Four Great Transformations

Across time and tradition, we find stories of men who caused great harm—men of violence, arrogance, and destruction. And yet, something changed. In a moment of clarity, of awakening, of truth—they turned. They repented. They transformed. They spent the rest of their lives healing the very world they once helped break.

If Tony Blair and Barack Obama are looking for a path forward, they need not look far. History and religion offer profound examples of how one can turn regret into redemption, and power into peace.

Ratnakar the Bandit who Became Valmiki (Hinduism)

Once, there was a highway robber named Ratnakar, feared by all who crossed his path.

He attacked and killed travellers without remorse, justifying his actions as a means to feed his family. To him, there was no wrong—only survival.

But everything changed when he met Narada, the wandering sage. Narada asked a piercing question: “Will your family share in the sin of your actions?”

Ratnakar was stunned. He went home and realised they would not. The truth broke his heart.

He gave up violence, meditated in remorse for years, and emerged as Valmiki, the sage who composed the Ramayana. From bandit to poet-saint, he became a teacher of dharma, compassion, and righteousness.

Angulimala, the Serial Killer who Became a Monk (Buddhism)

Deceived by a cruel teacher, Angulimala believed that killing was the path to enlightenment. He collected the fingers of his victims and wore them as a garland—his name means “finger necklace.”

When he met the Buddha, he prepared to strike again. But the Buddha, calm and unmoving, said: “I have stopped, Angulimala. Have you?”

In that moment, Angulimala’s heart cracked open. He dropped his sword, asked for forgiveness, and became a monk. Villagers hated him, but he bore their hatred silently. Through patience and humility, he attained arahantship—true enlightenment.

Saul of Tarsus who Became Paul the Apostle (Christianity)

Saul was once a hunter of Christians, a man who approved of persecution and violence in the name of religious purity.

But on the road to Damascus, he was struck by a blinding light. He heard the voice of Jesus say, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”

He was blinded for three days. When his sight returned, so did a new understanding.

Saul became Paul, Christianity’s most influential missionary, preaching love, grace, and forgiveness. His letters became scripture. His transformation became legend.

Umar ibn al-Khattab, the Oppressor Turned Just Caliph (Islam)

In the early days of Islam, Umar was a fierce enemy of the Prophet ﷺ. He once marched out intending to kill him.

But first, he learned that his own sister had accepted Islam. When he burst into her home and heard her reciting the Qur’an, he was struck by its beauty. He broke down, asked to see the Prophet, and embraced Islam.

Umar became the second Caliph, known for his justice, simplicity, and accountability. He once said, “If a dog were to go hungry on the banks of the Euphrates, I fear Allah would hold me responsible.” From persecutor to protector, Umar’s legacy is one of reform and mercy.

________________________________________

Sacred Reminders from Four Traditions

Hinduism (Bhagavad Gita 9:30)

"Even if the most sinful person worships Me with unwavering devotion, he must be regarded as righteous, for he has rightly resolved."

Buddhism (Dhammapada 173)

"Though formerly he committed evil deeds, if he covers them with good and becomes pure, he lights up the world like the moon freed from clouds."

Christianity (Luke 15:7)

"There will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance."

Islam (Qur’an 39:53)

“Say, O My servants who have transgressed against themselves: do not despair of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins.”

________________________________________

A Final Reflection

To regret is noble. To admit one’s mistake is courageous. But regret becomes real only when followed by change. Saying sorry while continuing life in luxury, power, and comfort—disconnected from those who suffered—rings hollow.

True redemption calls for more.

Dear Mr. Blair and Mr. Obama, if your regret is sincere—and we believe it is—then let the remainder of your lives be lived in service to the children of Iraq and Syria, to the widows and the wounded, to the healing of broken homes and broken hopes.

Go to them. Listen. Help rebuild what was lost. Speak truth even if the world forgets. Live simply. Give generously. Let your legacies be transformed, not by speeches or memoirs, but by humble action.

It is not too late. You can still turn your regret into a calling—and find peace not only with the world but with your own souls.

Peace.

Anas Zubedy

Kuala Lumpur