More cracks in Abdullah's crumbling facade

Asia Times (26/6/08): These are trying times for Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, who after a sub-par showing in the March general elections now faces opposition both from inside and outside his Barisan Nasional (BN) ruling coalition.

Many political analysts speculate his administration will not last the year as the opposition Pakatan Rakyat alliance ramps up its efforts to either poach parliamentarians from the BN into its camp or secure a no-confidence vote in parliament.

The latest blow to coalition unity came on June 18, when two parliamentarians from the Sabah Progressive Party (SPP), a small coalition member from the north Borneo state of Sabah, said they would support a planned no-confidence motion on June 23 against the prime minister. Such a no-confidence motion would have required advance notice and in the end, no vote was put to the house.

But another opportunity arose the same day when a politically sensitive vote on a recent government-ordered reduction in fuel price subsidies, which resulted in a 41% hike in pump prices, was put to parliament. Ruling coalition officials had been on tenterhooks in the run-up to the vote and heaved a sigh of relief when it was passed with a 129-78 majority.

Nonetheless, 11 BN parliamentarians failed to show up for the crucial vote, among them the two disaffected SPP parliamentarians. A report on the SPP's website on the same day said that, since June 18, its leaders had been advised by "friendly parties" not to underestimate "the risky consequences and likely threats" to the party and its leaders.

The legislative endorsement for Abdullah's fuel price hikes has not dampened speculation that his government could yet face a vote of no confidence if, in the coming months, enough members of parliament defect to the opposition Pakatan Rakyat, or People's Alliance. At the same time, opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim has indicated that there are enough parliamentarians who would be willing to defect to his side by September 16, the date commemorating the formation of the Malaysian federation in 1963.

The ruling coalition currently has a 140-82 majority over the opposition alliance in terms of numbers of parliamentarians, while the opposition alliance is looking for at least 30 coalition members to defect in its bid to seize power. It is believed that Anwar is in particular targeting parliamentarians from the states of Sabah and Sarawak, which are rich in natural resources, including oil and timber. The ruling coalition includes 24 parliamentarians from Sabah and 30 from Sarawak.

Opposition leaders are also believed to be courting disgruntled members of Abdullah's United Malays National Organization (UMNO), which currently has 79 seats in parliament and Anwar was formerly a member.

Many in Sabah and neighboring Sarawak feel aggrieved by what they see as the marginalization of their states in the Malaysian federation. The two entities, along with Singapore and Malaya, merged to form Malaysia in 1963, though Singapore left the federation two years later. Now, Sabah and Sarawak are widely viewed as just two among the federation's 13 states, even though they were previously granted special administrative concessions in recognition of their distinct character.

Apart from the disgruntled Sabah and Sarawak parliamentarians, Abdullah also has to contend with a rival within UMNO, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, who is bidding to challenge him for the party presidency in December. He also has to deal with the scathing pot-shots lobbed at him by his prime ministerial predecessor, Mahathir Mohamad, whose critical blog postings have received widespread attention.

Moreover, Abdullah has to lug the political baggage that his deputy, Najib Razak, brings along. On Tuesday, the parliamentary speaker rejected a motion by veteran opposition parliamentarian Lim Kit Siang to discuss the latest allegations surrounding the murder of a Mongolian woman, whose body was blown up with explosives in a remote area in 2006.

Popular blogger Raja Petra filed a written declaration in the high court last week alleging that Najib's wife and two others - an acting colonel and his wife - were at the scene on the night of the murder. A close associate of Najib's, Abdul Razak Baginda, and two police special operatives already stand accused in court in the ongoing murder trial. But Raja Petra's sensational allegations point to higher-ups who have not yet been brought to court.

Abdullah said he doesn't believe that either Najib or his wife were involved and has denied Raja Petra's allegation that he had received a written report from military intelligence over the murder. Najib, for his part, has denied that he and his wife were involved in the murder. "Everything that is written is a total lie and fabrication," he said on Wednesday. "It's total garbage."

Anwar in the wings

Meanwhile, various civil society groups and the youth wings of opposition parties are planning a massive protest against the oil price hike on July 5, when organizers hope - somewhat ambitiously - to gather a million aggrieved Malaysians in the heart of the capital Kuala Lumpur. Government crackdowns on street protests staged by aggrieved Hindu groups last year were one factor in UMNO's disappointing electoral performance in March, analysts have said.

All the while, Anwar Ibrahim lies in wait for the opportune moment to make one final push to seize power for the opposition alliance. In that connection, all eyes are focused on what happens next in Sabah. Through its actions last week and its defiance of the ruling coalition, SAPP has tapped into a current of discontent after having toed the party line for years.

The party sees the current moment as a window of opportunity to achieve greater autonomy for Sabah, which despite its considerable oil resources only receives 5% in royalties from the national government. It is a perennial source of political discontent in the state, which has large pockets of poverty in its interior areas, and the small party now seems keen to renegotiate those terms for its future political support. Anwar has already promised the oil-producing states that he would raise their royalty to 20%.

A recent report on the SAPP's official website said, "The momentum for us to recover our autonomy, get 20% oil royalties and return of Labuan [an island off Sabah now regarded as a federal territory] would be lost. Unfair federal laws, excessive taxes and structural imbalances in the economy will remain entrenched. Sabah will remain the poorest state subservient to the central leadership. Labuan bridge, poverty eradication and rural development will remain elusive. Racial politics and wasteful monopolies will continue as usual."

Abdullah has tried to cajole the Sabahans by scrapping the Federal Development Department - an intermediary for federal funds allocated to the state - and with the appointment of a local Sabahan as the vice chancellor of the University Malaysia Sabah. His government has also set up a cabinet committee to look into the large number of illegal immigrants - a major source of discontentment among Sabahans. Najib has said that the government will soon launch a major operation against illegal immigrants.

But those moves are likely to be too little too late for many Sabahans to maintain their political support to the BN. As the political temperature rises, Abdullah has also bid to soften the blow caused by the removal of oil subsidies.

For instance, the government has started to pay out cash rebates amounting to 625 ringgit (US$192) to each car owner across the country. And in an apparent nod to the call for more political openness, his administration has allowed the opposition Harakah newspaper, run by the Islamic Party, PAS, to publish twice a week - its original frequency - instead of once a fortnight as was the case until now.

But that was quickly forgotten this week as new administrative rules restricting reporters' access to the lobby of parliament provoked an angry reaction among mainstream media journalists, prompting them to boycott several press conferences held by politicians in parliament. And with higher oil prices hitting the livelihoods of all Malaysians, it seems unlikely the pressure on Abdullah - and the ruling coalition - will ease any time soon (Anil Netto).

More parties weighing in for the Malay votes

The recent emergence of Parti Kegemilangan Bangsa Malaysia in Johor is not an issue that Umno hasn't handled before — it has even dealt with its own founder's splinter party. But Shannon Teoh senses that the situation today is unlike those that it has faced before.

NST (25/5/08): When a group of ex-Umno veterans formed Parti Kegemilangan Bangsa Malaysia (KBM) as a "back-up" to Umno last week, it was probably not the sort of safety net Umno was looking for. The situation was compounded on Monday when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad exited Umno and called for others to follow suit.

In an unprecedented situation, Umno is now having to deal with four splinter groups - Dr Mahathir's, KBM, Parti Keadilan Rakyat and Pas.

In the battle for the Malay electorate, Umno is now facing a multi-pronged attack, being accused of not championing Malay rights by Dr Mahathir and KBM while simultaneously fending off opinions that it has built up an ethnocracy founded on Malay dominance.

Considered Australia's foremost observer of Malaysian sociopolitics, sociology professor Clive Kessler believes that these recent developments are exerting an altogether new kind of pressure on Umno.

"These are ginger groups, so-called because they are spicy and are meant to lobby on particular issues. Whereas some splinter parties or even internal factions like Pemuda or Puteri might pressure from a position of youthful idealism, KBM and Dr Mahathir reprimand with the wisdom of the old patron," he said.

It's been more straightforward for Umno in the past. When founder Datuk Onn Jaafar formed the Independence of Malaya Party and then Parti Negara to push for multi-ethnicity, he was easily disposed of by Umno via its cohorts in the Alliance who had already positioned themselves as representatives of the different races.

The Team A-Team B schism in Umno resulted in Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah establishing Semangat 46 in 1989 to try and wrest power from Umno.

However, Semangat 46 found itself squeezed out by Pas loyalists in their shared home of Kelantan despite the loose coalition they had formed.

After just two elections, Umno was only too happy to negotiate the first voluntary dissolution of a political party through the process of law and allowed Semangat members back into the fold.

In between these two incidences, there were other splinters such as the National Association of Perak, Perak Malay League and former cabinet member Aziz Ishak's National Convention Party that never came to much.

Wong Chin Huat, a journalism lecturer who is pursuing a PhD on Malaysia's electoral system and party politics, explains that it is difficult for any Malay party, let alone an Umno splinter, to survive because of the constant desire for Malay unity.

"Because of the perceived threat to their dominance by other races, Malays tend to suppress the number of parties. Pas succeeded in the Malay heartland of Kelantan and Terengganu because there weren't many non-Malays and the people felt secure enough to allow a second party to operate."

Pas itself splintered from Umno and was the first mover after establishing itself where Parti Negara failed. Its "captive market" of Islamic support in the east coast was in contrast to Parti Negara's scattered support which saw the latter fall victim to the first-past-the-post electoral system.

Today, Pas is joined by PKR as the only Umno splinters and indeed, Malay-dominant parties that have survived in the long-term. After March 8, PKR can claim to have surpassed the psychological three-election watershed and has come out of it as the largest opposition party in Parliament.

Kessler believes that these splinters have survived where others have not because they were not just based on personalities but because they cleaved out a constituency.

"Pas brought out latent Islamic concerns and made it overt. Same with (Datuk Seri) Anwar (Ibrahim), it's not just personal to him, his agenda connected with the generation who grew up under the NEP (New Economic Policy). The parties were not just grabbing a power bloc from Umno; they were new groups being conscious of themselves."

However, if Wong's historical observation is to be taken into consideration, then more changes are afoot. Putting Pas aside and allocating it the timeless Islamic east coast support, if Malays are to back just one party to represent them, then either Umno or PKR must fall.

Johan Saravanamuttu Abdullah, visiting research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore, noted that Umno's capability to see off challenges by splinters has been weakened by blows to its hitherto rock-solid institutional strength.

"At this particular political moment, factionalism has become endemic and it seems to be a party in its 'September' years ever since the reformasi movement took a chunk out of Umno. Over the years, Pas has also slowly chipped away and eroded its structural strength."

And while this is a question of which Malay party will survive, Wong believes that the answer lies with the non-Malays.

"If in competing to be the prime Malay party Umno plays along the Malay nationalist line, non-Malays will be alienated and throw in their lot with PKR."

Should the tide swing towards Pakatan Rakyat, Malays who stand by Umno might find themselves at the losing end. While PKR is not highly institutionalised, its leadership has shown that it will not abandon Malay values.

Johan points out that PKR de facto leader Anwar and his wife, Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, are regarded as deeply religious.

Kessler, however, thinks that it would be grossly premature to be writing obituaries for Umno.

While it cannot assume an automatic first claim to Malay votes, it can still make strategic moves to ride on the wave of new concerns by the electorate.

“A party has to choose and it can’t be all things to all people. Umno can’t be in favour and against Ketuanan Melayu at the same time.

“So, if Umno were to give up its diehard Malay vote and go after the progressive Muslims, it could win back votes that went to PKR and also supply its BN (Barisan Nasional) allies with the non-Malay vote.”

He added: “Umno has to be prepared to let someone else represent the hardcore Malay vote and instead build a coalition that aligns with social forces and politics of the future, not backward trends.”

Johan feels Umno needs to address certain clear and present issues quickly: “Checking Dr Mahathir is important. Go to Kedah and maintain your structures.

“The people have also been expecting you to deliver on the promise of reform so the cleaning up of the judiciary et al is necessary to show that you are a party capable of providing the change required.”

No doubt though, that these recommendations imply efforts at making PKR unnecessary.

However, 57 years ago, when Onn first mooted a consociationist multi-ethnic party led by Malays, it was shot down emphatically by Umno.

“It’s been a very long learning curve,” Wong concluded.

“The problem then was that leftism wasn’t in the mainstream perhaps because the communists didn’t disarm and contest democratically. Maybe society has become settled today and nobody wants to be an all-out liberal or have a pure Malay ethnocracy.

“So it’s come to some sort of consensus, and you can’t challenge the people’s decision on this and, in a sense, you have to congratulate Umno for achieving this.”

Opposition woos Mahathir, but son defies his call

Malaysia Sun (21/5/08): The initial response to the rebellion by Malaysia's former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad who quit the United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) has been poor. Most lawmakers, including his son, have ignored his call that they follow suit.

While UMNO lawmakers reposed their faith in Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's leadership, only 156 members in Kedah state, to which Mahathir belongs, have followed him out of the party, reported The Sun newspaper.

Mahathir's son Mukhriz Mahathir, 44, a first-term lawmaker, said after a meeting with Badawi that his father had quit UMNO 'out of love' but that he would not do so.

However, on Tuesday, Mahathir received an invite from the Pan Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) and the Party Keadalan Rakyat (PKR) of former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, whom he had sacked and jailed a decade ago. The two opposition parties have gained strength in this March's general election and are threatening to pull down the Badawi government.

Mahathir has thus to choose between his hand picked successor Badawi and his old foe Ibrahim. Political analysts have said a Mahathir rebellion has the potential of boosting Ibrahim's political prospects.

Ibrahim's PKR has the support of 82 lawmakers and needs just 30 more to cross over from the Badawi-led ruling coalition Barisan Nasional (BN) to form a government, media reports have said.

While Ibrahim has gloated over the UMNO crisis, his wife Wan Azizah Wan Ismail who leads the parliamentary opposition said the whole issue was 'just about UMNO's internal politics' and it showed that the party had 'no direction'.

'We, however, welcome it if it makes our party stronger and they (UMNO members) are also welcome to join us,' she was quoted by The Star as saying (IANS).

Opinion: What crossovers? Has it been just a bluff?

Independent Pasir Mas MP Datuk Ibrahim Ali (left) says he has asked the BN MPs who are said to be crossing over from BN to Pakatan Rakyat, and they denied they would leave BN, while Che Johan Che Pa, the Pasir Mas Umno vice-chief, likened the 'threats' by Sabah and Sarawak politicians to 'Umno's future being decided in the longhouses'.

From the lively debates in the chamber to political wheeling and dealing outside, Parliament has it all and is the place to be, writes Zubaidah Abu Bakar.

NST (16/5/08): Parliament is a hive of activity these days, turning at times into a stage for political gambits and power-brokering intrigues.

Statements made by several members of parliament, especially from Sabah, who have repeatedly said they are unhappy with the "raw deal" they got after playing a crucial role in Barisan Nasional's victory and insinuations that they might abandon the ruling coalition if things are not fixed fast have caused anxiety - not only to BN but also Malaysians at large, who have been following the proceedings through the various media.

While the widely publicised claims of crossovers during the debate on the royal address have taken centre stage during the sittings and coffee breaks, there are equally interesting but less noticeable events taking place.

The rumours of crossovers ended in an anti-climax for "observers" who travelled hundreds of kilometres just to "witness the historic event" on Wednesday. Some had arrived as early as 9am but gave up hope when nothing happened after 3.30pm.

"It looks like the failure to announce the crossovers confirmed a theory that it was all Anwar's bluff, at least for now," says one of the observers, the secretary of a party division from Kedah, referring to Parti Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's claim that many BN MPs were ready to defect.

But an aide of a top opposition leader of another northern state has this to say: "It will take place, but not so soon as widely speculated. Wait till after August when Umno is too absorbed with its divisional elections; at that time, Umno leaders' concern will be to ensure they are nominated for posts they want to contest."

Independent Pasir Mas MP Datuk Ibrahim Ali does not believe crossovers will happen.

"I have asked the BN MPs who are said to be crossing over from BN to Pakatan Rakyat, and they all denied they will leave BN," he says.

Concurs a blogger who has stationed himself in Parliament since the session started: "Anwar is playing mind-games. He does not have the numbers. It is all about PKR's agenda to rule the country and make Anwar prime minister, that is why only PKR MPs are talking about crossovers, not those from Pas and DAP."

BN should take the threats from Sabah Umno seriously, however, as history has proven that political loyalty is not paramount in Sabah.

Furthermore, Sabah politicians don't have a deep sentimental attachment to Umno, which could end up a dead party in Sabah like Usno and Berjaya.

Che Johan Che Pa, the Pasir Mas Umno vice-chief, likened the "threats" by Sabah and Sarawak politicians to "Umno's future being decided in the longhouses".

"They have basis for their demands for recognition as they contributed a lot of BN's seats in Parliament. After all, 10 of BN's 14 component parties are from these two states," he says.

Another interesting character is PKR vice-president and Gombak MP Azmin Ali, who's been spotted almost daily in serious discussions with certain personalities, including those from Sabah and Sarawak, over coffee at the MPs' lounge.

"It's done on purpose to create anxiety over claims of crossovers," laments one minister's aide.

Azmin had echoed claims by Anwar that the defections would happen. In fact, he told Parliament that Pakatan Rakyat, comprising PKR, Parti Islam SeMalaysia (Pas) and DAP, with 82 of the 222 seats in the Dewan Rakyat, has the support of "friends" in the ruling BN to enable Pakatan Rakyat to form the federal government.

His assertion came amid concerns expressed by former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad on May 7 of just such a possibility.

The prospect was, however, rejected by former finance minister and Gua Musang MP Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, arguing that BN is not unstable as perceived.

Several defeated BN MPs and assemblymen, now "unemployed", were seen in Parliament the other day dressed in their best suits, perhaps looking for favours from those in power.

One of them waited outside the hall for hours to see a minister from Johor.

It was noted that they were lobbying to get back into the mainstream by being appointed chairmen or directors of government agencies and government-linked companies.

Defeated candidates from Kedah are courting those in authority as they are unhappy over talk that Umno deputy permanent chairman Datuk Badruddin Amiruldin is to be made chairman of the Federal Agricultural Marketing Authority, for the second time.

Badruddin, who lost the Jerai parliamentary seat in the polls, served as Fama chairman from March 1994 to October 2000.

A first-term MP is also working hard to make personal contacts with MPs from both the ruling and opposition fronts over a cup of coffee and friendly chats to rebuild his tattered image.

All this aside, ministers are being distracted from their real jobs during the current 16-day Dewan Rakyat meeting.

They will again be in Parliament for two weeks from June 23, and then again for 41 days from Aug 18.

Their focus is more on preparing to answer questions from the opposition.

The new face of Pas

Malay Mail (14/5/08): Khalid Abdul Samad (Pas-Shah Alam) demonstrated to an agitated House yesterday that an intelligent, humane and cosmopolitan renaissance is now bearing fruit in the once hardline pro-Islamist party.

In his maiden speech deba t ing the mot ion of thanks on the Royal Address, the urbane opposition member launched an eloquent and devastating attack on the Barisan Nasional. He demolished in a few sentences what many on the government benches had worked hard to establish.

The other side seethed, and their discontent soon spilled over into outraged jeering. Datuk Tajuddin Abdul Rahman (BN-Pasir Salak), fast developing a disagreeable reputation for rudeness, attempted several times to interrupt with his usual method of growling closely into the microphone.

This came to nothing, however, for the Umno stalwart failed to remember being hobbled by Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia, who after lunch forbade interruptions in order to save time.

Tajuddin’s final defeat came in an example of supr eme bad t iming: Just as he ended his last growl above the Speaker’s objections, Khalid (who had carried on with his speech) reached his line: “Sayonara, Umno,” and delivered it with an impish wave that reduced Tajuddin to a sputtering mess.

Worse, however, was to come. Members went wild (or apoplectic, in the government’s case) when Khalid held up his frontbench colleague Lim Guan Eng (DAP-Bagan, and also chief minister of Penang), as a fine example of Islamic leadership.

“The chief mini s ter has repeatedly stated his intention to imitate the pattern of government of (the eighth-century Umayyad Cal iph) Umar Abdul Aziz, and I wish to say ‘shame on you’ to Umno for having failed, despite your Islam Hadhari rhetoric, to manifest the requisite leadership required of you by the Muslim community.

“I can only pray that this awareness shown by the chief minister will be emulated by all those within Umno.” The government had no answer to that, and the opposition was in an uproar of cheers. Indeed, if the BN does not act swiftly to check this new onslaught, Pas will swiftly render communal politics irrelevant in this country — putting an effective end to claims of championing sectarian interests that have fuelled our politics for the past half-century.

It was a fitting remembrance of the May 13 tragedy.

Khalid is, of course, the brother of Domestic Trade and Consumer Af fairs Minister Datuk Shahrir Samad. Yesterday, he was preceded on the floor by another member of an illustrious political family.

T he maiden speech of Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir (BN-Jerlun) was, however, on par with boiled cabbage. Why he chose this moment to entertain members with a seemingly interminable ramble about foreign direct investment in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos is anyone's guess, and MPs soon lost interest.

PKR frontbenchers were intent on their laptops.

Salahuddin Ayub (Pas- Kubang Kerian) used the lul l in proceedings to show off a new book to his friends along the row, and then scooted off to the back where a lonely Ibrahim Ali (Ind-Pasir Mas) seemed to want company. Even opposition frontbencher Chong Eng (DAP-Bukit Mertajam) fell asleep.

Mukhriz’s speech, and its delivery, will inevitably be compared with that of his arch-rival Khairy Jamaluddin (BN-Rembau) who was savaged by the opposition on Monday.

While Khairy may have lost some points, he could in no way have been said to have reduced the House to a state of blank-eyed catatonia. (U En Ng)

Membership drive grips political parties

Umno will continue pursuing its target of 3,000 new members registered
in every state by year-end.

Malaysian political parties would prefer to be broad-based, but remain troubled by the risk of infiltration by opportunists, writes Zubaidah Abu Bakar.

NST (9/5/08): Size does not matter. This was proved by some political parties which, despite having relatively few card-carrying members, had their representation in Parliament markedly increased in the March general election.

Parti Keadilan Rakyat now has 31 seats, an increase of 30, although membership was holding up to a constant 300,000 up to the polls. The DAP, with a registered membership of fewer than 100,000, has 28 representatives, an increase of 16 from the previous term.

But in the context of Malaysian politics, political parties on both sides of the divide generally prefer the numbers. Large membership equals strength, they say.

So they are not rejecting new membership applications, which are coming in steadily for some parties despite huge setbacks in the polls. Many parties are on membership drives.
Gerakan, for instance, has set up 100 new branches and registered at least 5,000 new members in the past two months, according to party secretary-general Datuk Seri Chia Kwang Chye.

PKR is also experiencing an influx of new members, a trend its secretary-general Datuk Salehuddin Hashim describes as "encouraging". The party expects its membership to triple by year-end.

"People who want to engage in our struggle are politically experienced and they share the agenda for change. We will definitely take them," he says, adding that membership in Ampang alone has risen by more than 2,000 since March.

For Parti Islam SeMalaysia (Pas), a wide network is important. Secretary-general Datuk Kamaruddin Jaafar says the party wants to boost its membership, now around 900,000. "The numbers reflect our strength," he says.

"We need committed members to mobilise our election machinery."

Pas is also experiencing a surge in membership applications after the March 8 polls, and a sizeable number of new branches are being set up. The party is still updating its database, and expects the new members to expand the party's rosters to more than a million.

Umno is also continuing to woo new members despite its dismal performance, which was partly attributed to its own members voting for opponents.

The country's largest political party, which boasts of having 3.2 million registered members, was snubbed when only 2.4 million voters voted for its candidates, reducing its MP strength by 30 to 79.

Umno will continue pursuing its target of 3,000 new members registered in every state by year-end.

Its Anakku Ahli Umno ("My children are Umno members") campaign, launched in 2005, is still very much alive.

"We are grassroots-based and want to get more people to support us through becoming registered members and helping fight for the party's cause," says Tan Sri Muhammad Muhammad Taib, Umno's information chief.

Like Pas, Umno needs election campaign workers to woo voters on the ground come every election. Its time-tested "Kumpulan 10" campaign strategy, where each member or group is to take charge of 10 families during an election campaign, will not work if the party does not have members to touch base.

The Chinese-based MCA, with 1.1 million members, is trying to reach out to young people. It amended its constitution last year to enable youths, aged between 18 and 35, to set up their own branches and run activities independently, as part of efforts to "reinvent" the party.

Only 16.07 per cent of MCA's membership comprises those below 35. It aims to raise this to 20 per cent in the next two years, party secretary-general Datuk Seri Ong Ka Chuan said early this year.

While the DAP is not limiting its membership, it is treading with caution in admitting new members, whose applications are vetted at the branch level.

"We are not limiting membership but we want only members who are loyal to our cause," says party chairman Karpal Singh.

"We have to be careful who we take as we do not want opportunists in the party."

DAP is known to prefer quality to quantity. The party had never relied on membership for support and won support from non-members because of its deeds and the performance of its MPs.

DAP leaders believe their party is self-sustaining, given that 50 per cent of members of its central executive committee comprise graduates; one-fifth of them lawyers.

The last general election result speaks for itself - the DAP does not have to have a big, broadbased membership to win support at the ballot box.

Professor James Chin's observation that "people always want to be associated with those in power" may explain the sudden surge in membership among political parties that performed well in the last general election.

The head of Monash University's School of Arts says this human peculiarity explains why more people are becoming interested in joining PKR, DAP and Pas of late.

"These three parties are now in control of five states, so it is natural for people to want to be part of them," he said, adding: "It is also a well-accepted view that the fastest way to gain power and wealth is to join a political party.

"There are also those who become a member in the hope that one day they will get a chance to move up the party hierarchy and hold important posts in the government."

Chin also points out that it is a trend in many political parties to see an increase in membership during internal-election years - especially parties whose delegations to annual assemblies are based on membership strength at the division level.

This might explain the sudden interest of "apolitical" individuals in Penang to join Gerakan despite the party having lost power in the state it ruled for 39 years.

Gerakan is holding its party elections in October. The MCA, Umno and DAP will also hold party elections this year.

While too many members can be a liability to a political party, given the difficulty of pleasing everyone, Muhammad says Umno has its own ways to tackle the issue.

"There are pros and cons of having a large membership, but being a big party is what Umno wants," he says, though admitting it is difficult to screen supporters for sincerity.

Kamaruddin strongly believes that Pas members will not resort to actions that would undermine the party, as those who join Pas are committed to the party's struggle.

Karpal admits that it is easier to control members of a small organisation, but says limiting party membership is not a rule.

Big or small is a matter of choice. Fact: Political parties get the people's support if their cause is in tandem with the needs and aspirations of voters at the time the general election is held.

Ku Li: Umno is here to stay

The Star (11/5/08): Umno veteran Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, who has been busy rallying the party’s grassroots for change, shares his views on a range of issues, including Malay supremacy, the NEP and the future of Umno and Barisan Nasional.

Q: Umno will mark its 62nd anniversary today. As a party veteran, one who challenged and narrowly lost the presidency, set up a rival party but later returned to the fold, how would you describe the crisis facing Umno now?

A: If you call it a crisis, this is one of monumental significance not just to Umno members and to the Malays but to the country. I cannot foresee the country without Umno. The Malays, for what they are worth, good or bad, only know Umno and its allies – the other component parties, whether in the Alliance old or Barisan Nasional. I cannot imagine how the Malays will behave or react without Umno on the scene.

I know people in some circles greeted the results of the March 8 election results with euphoria, saying the victory of the Opposition showed maturity in the thinking of the people. Maybe so, but I like to take a different interpretation.

I think the losses incurred by the coalition, and Umno in particular, were because people were disgusted with their leaders and what had been happening in the Government under the rule of Barisan Nasional and Umno.

It would have been different if Umno didn’t behave like that. Even if people had opted to go the multi-racial make-up of the PKR, for instance, probably they might have won some seats. But not to the extent of what they are enjoying now. That’s my view.

I want to correct the bit in your question about Umno celebrating its 62nd anniversary. Actually we are not. We are only celebrating the 20th anniversary of Umno Baru. The Umno that was founded in 1946 by Datuk Onn Jaafar and the freedom fighters in 1946 was declared unlawful by the High Court in 1988. That gave birth to Umno Baru, which is there today and will celebrate its 20th anniversary.

Q: With all the disgust against it, is there hope for Umno? Can the party reinvent to meet demands for equality, accountability and transparency, given its patronage and gravy train culture?

A: As I said earlier, I cannot imagine people continuing without Umno. The party has been on the scene for a long time. The LDP of Japan went through that. The Congress Party of India too went through the process when the people rejected it.

But I think it is a different thing here, in this country. Like most people say, here it’s the politics of race. It is not completely ideological-based parties that you live with. As such, I don’t know where the Malays are going to scuttle or run to, if Umno is defeated wholly in the next general election. I think people will still support Umno, maybe not to the degree that they used to support but they will return when Umno changes its ways.

But I am not talking about the need for a complete re-engineering of Umno or of the party re-inventing itself. Umno has to behave, that’s all. If it behaves and runs this country fairly and justly, it will get back the support it used to get.

What was wrong with Umno-led rule from 1955 to 1959, before we gained independence? And what do you think of the rule from 1957 to 1969, and from 1971 or 1972 until now? Was it all bad? I don’t think so. Except, of late, you see excesses; you see abuses by Umno leaders who were also getting very arrogant. This is the perception that people have.

And that is why they decided to debunk Umno and Barisan. After all, why should they vote for people whom they don’t even know? Who is PKR? It is a party that is relatively new and came into the fray in a big way in this election. Previously, they only fielded two or three candidates, in Kelantan and Penang, with no showing. But they did so because people were so disgusted and angry with Umno leaders. That’s why they opted for anything.

Some people said I should not have disbanded my old party Semangat 46 under Gagasan Rakyat, which I think would have done much better than PKR or whatever. So you see, if Umno wants to come back, I don’t think it needs to re-invent itself.

Q: You have been rallying the grassroots for change but only a few have held EGMs. Are you still optimistic about a groundswell and getting the nominations needed to contest the presidency?

A: There is a groundswell against the leadership because of the bad election results for the party in power. But there is no groundswell for whoever wants to challenge or change the leadership. I don’t feel it yet. But there are people who are anxious to see a change in the leadership of the party and possibly the Government.

I am going around not purely to canvass for posts and change in the Government but I want to get people at the grassroots level to discuss the effects or the outcome of the election results.

If they could hold extraordinary general meetings, then they could effect changes to the constitution. We have to give back power to members to elect office bearers at branch, division and supreme council levels and also to select candidates for general elections.

Q: Do you expect more divisions to hold EGMs’?

A: I don’t know. If conducted in a fair and free atmosphere, with no threats from any quarters or harassment from any one, possibly there will be more. But even those who have come to me saying they want to hold one have decided to back off, maybe because they were threatened, or bought over. Only a few have held it in spite of the big numbers who came to see me. Maybe they will do it later, I don’t know.

Q:What’s the biggest motivation for you to do this now?

A: Firstly, we have suffered huge losses. I mean, we have lost four states and we have lost the two-thirds majority over no big issues, really, except that people were disgusted with the way the leadership had performed. We need to have a change, if not in the persons or personalities, but in the way they do things.

People look at Umno as being “very racial” now, whereas it has never been racial from day one. It has always been caring, considerate, looking after the interests of others. Umno has also always been accused by PAS and other opponent parties of being too soft and compromising on lots of issues. But Umno wanted peace and stability. That is the actual hallmark of Umno’s brand of struggle and because of that, we have achieved progress. What’s important is to ensure that everybody can come together.

Q: On the question of ketuanan Melayu that is premised upon the social contract agreed to by the nation’s founding fathers, Malays agreed to citizenship for non-Malays in exchange for recognition of their special rights. Should non-Malays born after Merdeka still be bound by this? Do they not have equal standing with Malays by virtue of being citizens?

A: Actually, it is a fallacious way of looking at the term because the concept of ketuanan Melayu is more historical than anything else. As Tunku Abdul Rahman used to tell all of us then, this is Malay land. The Malays are from this country, not from any other, unlike the Chinese or the Indians who are from elsewhere.

But since then they have become loyal citizens of the country and those who are born here are automatically citizens having equal rights as the Malays. But because the Malays were the original people of the land, they have these special rights and special privileges. These were not negotiated; they were already there in the 1948 Federation of Malaya agreement before independence.

When the British negotiated with the Malay Rulers and Umno to do away with the Malayan Union proposal, form the Federation of Malaya and introduce a new constitution, these special rights were entrenched in it. Similarly, the position of Islam, the position of the Rulers and all the other things were carried forward into the constitution.

It was never intended to impose the views of the Malays over the rest. The Malays are not dominant. Even though we won 53 seats in Parliament in 1953 with the majority of 38 Malay MPs, we never exercised that. And after that, even when we had two-thirds in a series of elections, we never imposed our will on others. But the problem is that the term is being bandied about loosely.

Secondly, it is being seen that the Malays are arrogantly abusing their positions in government. Generally, not all leaders but some leaders and this gives rise to the impression that Malays want to dominate. But I have not seen the leaders of Umno, all the prime ministers from the time of Tunku right down to (Datuk Seri) Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, trying to show that they are dominant or domineering over the rest. Have you seen it?

Q. But after the elections, haven’t there been more groups clamouring for reinstatement of ketuanan Melayu?

A: Yes lah, because the Opposition has won big and whoever wins will talk big. But Abdullah, after winning big in 2004, he talked of the big mandate but then did not flex his muscles and penalise anybody.

As for MCA vice-president Datuk Ong Tee Keat who came out with a statement that ketuanan Melayu should be dropped, he is fighting for MCA leadership. It happens lah. But you will hear more from the Umno side when we come closer to the date of the Umno election in December.

Q: There is a lot of debate on the issue in the alternative media, on websites and blogs. Based on what is being expressed about ketuanan rakyat, has the concept of ketuanan Melayu become outdated?

A: I think so. But in effect, it isn’t true. People are comparing it to a slave and master situation. Is there such a thing? If there are servants and slaves at all, it’s between the lowly paid and their masters. But who is lowly paid? The Malays, Indians and to a certain extent, some Chinese, isn’t it? It’s not like what was in America’s South in the old days of slavery. It’s just gross exaggeration and it’s not healthy, you know.

Ketuanan rakyat is a new phrase coined by (Datuk Seri) Anwar Ibrahim, taking advantage of the feelings against ketuanan Melayu. He is very quick at that.

Q: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has warned of conflict if there’s a change in the Government with the crossing over of Barisan. He says Malays are making demands in response to demands made by others and some are talking about going back to feudalism. What are your views on this?

A: Like I said, just now, Ong came out with a statement that ketuanan Melayu should be dropped. Fair enough. But there are also lots of demands from the Malays, as Dr M has expressed. Take the recent congress in Johor Baru. They refused to invite politicians but got together about 200 Malays associations and NGOs. They have demanded that the Malay rulership be restored with its traditional powers. In other words, depriving the elected representatives of some of their powers and to go back to the Rulers. I think that’s not on, because we have democracy now.

Except for matters like restoration of immunity for the Rulers, we have to look at that. Not the Rulers per se, but the institution. After all, our diplomats and officials who work in foreign lands are given immunity. This immunity originates from the immunity of the sovereignty. It’s an age-old custom and practice but that’s just a small area to be re-examined. Overall, I think the preoccupation with ketuanan Melayu is just a reaction to the election results.

Q. Are the Rulers exercising their powers more noticeably or being more vocal now?

A: I don’t think so. Raja Nazrin (Perak Regent Raja Dr Nazrin Shah) has been speaking out but all the things he has been saying echo the words of the Bar Council, like independence of the judiciary, and other groups. He rightly re-emphasised and re-stated things that are in the Constitution. Of course, it also reflects the feelings of the people who are not happy with the Government and the way the judiciary was behaving. So, this gets into the press and catches the eye of those people who are not happy with the Government. That’s about all.

About the appointment of Mentris Besar of Terengganu and Perlis, it was the inaction of the leadership or slowness that prompted the Rulers to appoint MBs who were not candidates of the party. The actions were seen as Rulers taking the initiative before the political leaders. But I think the Rulers were pressured to act within their constitutional powers. I don’t think it is seen as Rulers taking powers into their hands. It’s just coincidental that we had these bad election results and all these things relating to the Rulers and therefore it is seen as you have described it.

As for the case of Tengku Faris’ (Kelantan’s Tengku Mahkota Tengku Mohammad Faris Petra Sultan Ismail Petra) speech, the statement was taken out of context. I have seen the whole speech and it was a repeat of what is in the Constitution.

Q: How is your current relationship with Dr M? Based on what he has been saying, it seems both of you share the same sentiments.

A: Good. As for sharing the same sentiments, maybe we are, but not absolutely.

Q: In one interview before the elections, you were asked whether Malaysia was ready to move away from the New Economic Policy. You said it was going to be there for another 50 years or more. Have you changed your views?

A: No. I still feel the NEP is a good policy but it should not have been implemented the way it was and caused a lot of problems and created misunderstanding among the various races. It was not intended to be like that nor was it formulated that way. It ended up favouring a select group of people in a particular community.

The NEP was devised during the Second Malaysia Plan to bring everybody together, to give opportunities to those who never had opportunities and to lift up everybody, irrespective of Malays, Indians or Chinese or others, out of poverty. It was a good programme, I thought. Unfortunately, some people took advantage and abused their positions. And these excesses have given rise to a lot of grievances and doubts about the policy itself.

Q: If you do get the nominations, win the presidency and get to become Prime Minister, what would be your priority?

A: The first and most important is unity: To bring about unity in all aspects of government policy, programmes and even to the NGOs and the political institutions. That is the priority concern and should be the primary concern of everybody. The education system must be re-looked into exhaustively, in that it is geared towards this end. This is because the future depends on the unity of the nation. Without it you cannot have stability, peace and progress. Underpinning that is, of course, education. It is also important that the knowledge acquired is kept abreast with changes, so that we can rise to the occasion and compete with likeminded people elsewhere in the world. We should not be left behind.

Secondly, you have to kill corruption, which is cancerous. You have to go to town with it. I am impressed with the model in Hong Kong. I don’t know what the Government has in mind but the agency in Hong Kong works. It should also work here with some modifications. Whatever it is, wiping out corruption is of prime consideration because unless and until we can kill it, you cannot progress.

You cannot expect costs to come down – cost of living, cost of doing business and everything. We really have to fight this tooth and nail. Similarly, within Umno, we have to stop all this nonsense about giving of contracts, permits and “pocket money”. All these must be brought down without exception.

Q: There are still many repressive laws and people are demanding that these be done away with. What is your view on laws like the Printing Presses and Publications Act, Universities and University Colleges Act, Official Secrets Act and the Internal Security Act?

A: All ought to be reviewed. Some ought to be repealed. UCCA should be repealed. The OSA must be reviewed. Some features are important but not the draconian measures. The Printing Presses and Publications Act has no place. It has to go. The Police Act should also be re-looked. As for the ISA, it must be re-looked. I don’t think we can do away with that, I must say honestly, because even democratic countries like the US have laws with the same features that we have in the ISA. Even Britain has new laws to fight terrorism. I think we can remove all the features that appear to be rather draconian and make sure that individual rights are protected sufficiently. Ensure that it is palatable for the Government to use but never to use it for political purposes.

Q: The perception out there is the ISA is always used for political persecution.

A: That’s what they say. Even Umno chaps have been arrested. (Datuk) Zahid Hamidi was detained, along with many other people, including Anwar. So anyway, we have to re-look that.

Q: For much of the latter part of your political career, your supporters say you have been a victim of media blackouts, unfair coverage and spin. Do you think political parties should own newspapers?

A: I’m glad you realise it. I think (the ownership of newspapers by political parties) this is a historical development. Utusan Melayu was formed by people from Singapore. When we were gaining independence, Umno needed a voice in the papers to project its image and to appeal to the people to support its movement against the Malayan Union.

That is how Utusan Melayu slowly came under the influence of Umno. Later, Tunku with the help of some friends bought into Utusan Melayu as a vehicle to influence the thinking of the people. When I was asked to buy the Straits Times, we couldn’t do so because some of the operations were in Singapore, which was not under our jurisdiction at that time. I had to negotiate with the OCBC group and eventually bought the interest in Malaysia.

The paper split into the Straits Times in Singapore and the New Straits Times in Malaysia. We took over and paid cash for it. We did not want to own it completely so we listed the shares. But because of these historical developments, Umno had to own some of the shares. Eventually, when Umno was declared unlawful, the shares went to the Public Trustee and then sold to a public company. Umno has a very small percentage in the newspaper now.

Even Utusan Malaysia has gone public. Control is through the Government, not through the ownership of equity. MCA used to own Tong Bao, Nanyang Siang Pau and The Star. Now they still own The Star. But slowly all these things will go. What I would like to see is for anybody who wants to own a newspaper to be able to do so. Whether they survive or not, it is up to them. But before we can allow that, we must ensure that the laws of defamation and libel are strengthened and penalties must be very serious, so that people don’t go to town with their newspapers.

Q: How would you rate Pakatan Rakyat’s chances of taking over the government through crossovers? Do you share Dr Mahathir’s view of taking the threat seriously?

A: I do. We should not take it lightly because unlike Umno members in the peninsula, those in Sabah have only been members since 1990 or just before that. Umno is relatively new there. And also people in Sabah have been jumping parties – from Usno to Berjaya to Umno and so many other parties. The whole lot of them have been jumping here, there and everywhere. I’m not saying that they don’t have principles or they have a stand on certain given ideals. But I think their heart is not in the party struggle. Because of the racial politics here, we are closer to the party struggle than those in Sabah.

They were brought in to help in order to help Dr Mahathir then to make sure they could thwart me and Semangat 46 in the number of seats in Parliament. Anyway, we shouldn’t take the threat lightly for it is serious. And I do hope the leadership will really look into this and confide in the MPs and state assemblymen and those from the component parties and look into their problems. Otherwise you may find that there is no Barisan Nasional except for Umno. You should look after them.

I think they are very unhappy. The election results have shocked and disgraced them. Apart from that, they are losing confidence in the future. If they think that the future is not so bright for them why should they remain? I think the leadership today cannot give them sufficient comfort to ensure that the future is all right. But I think that the future will be all right, if we can bolster their confidence. I think it all depends on the leadership. But the leadership today is embroiled in so many things, it is not helping (M Veera Pandiyan).

No hard and fast rule on supremacy

In battling for Malay supremacy, are its champions defending a concept whose origins are blurred in the annals of history? As for those pushing for a Malaysian identity, did the country only begin post-Merdeka?

The Star (11/5/08): Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) is a delicate subject, bringing with it connotations of supremacy of one race over another.

Historically, the more confident the Malays are, the more generous they will be. But after the March 8 election they feel threatened, and so are not in a giving mood to their Chinese and Indian fellow countrymen.

We cannot build this nation overnight. What we are asking for is a willingness to contribute, a willingness to sacrifice.... Razali Ibrahim

Thus talk of Malay unity and nationalism has cropped up with increasing frequency over the past two months, the latest being the three-day Congress on Malay Solidarity in Johor Baru last weekend.

There, 2,000 representatives from 180 Malay non-governmental organisations got together to discuss the need to form a lobby group to protect Malay interests, due to the failure of Malay political parties to champion the Malay agenda.

Congress co-organiser Federation of Malaysian Writers Associations (Gapena) president Tan Sri Ismail Hussein noted the increasing prominence of such ideologies as a Malaysian Malaysia, multi-lingualism, multiculturism and religious pluralism.

“We are against these as our stand is that Malaysia’s existence is founded on the principle of Kedaulatan Melayu (Malay sovereignty),” he said.

At the same time, he noted that the Congress and its resolutions were not meant to be against non-Malays.

For non-Malays, as well as some Malays who espouse a Malaysian Malaysia, this line of argument goes against the grain. Their argument is: how can you advocate supremacy, which by definition places one above another entity, and then claim that you are not against non-Malays?

There seems to be no conciliatory ground of understanding between the two. Each group wants concessions that the other is not ready, or willing, to give.

Nationalist Malays want Malaysian Chinese and Indians to absorb and demonstrate more Malay traits. The latter do not want to be Malays; they want to be Malaysians.

Bukit Bintang MP Fong Kui Lun criticised the Congress “50 years after Merdeka” as a regressive step. “Today we are living in a globalised world, with an open policy.

“If you want to hold a convention for uniting Malaysians, then that would be suitable. But if you go for racialism, it’s a step back.”

The debate shifted up a gear on May 8 when MCA vice-president Datuk Ong Tee Keat objected to the term ketuanan Melayu as it implied the relationship between tuan, or master, and slave.

Inter-linked: The debate over Malay supremacy is ironic in that as a people, the Malays are very much linked to the Chinese and Indian civilisations of old.

Without missing a beat, Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek responded that the ketuanan referred to the raja raja Melayu of whom all races were subjects.

When Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) spilt into the streets last Nov 25, many indignant Malays threatened only half in jest that they should be sent back to India. Ethnic relations had receded to its lowest ebb. Two or three generations along, there were still Malays who thought that they had more rights to this country than anyone else. It is a question that harkens back to 1957 and that non-negotiable trade-off of Malay special privileges for citizenship rights for non-Malays.

The die-hard Malay nationalists insist that the non-Malays must first understand the country’s history.

“The younger generation Chinese and Indians have to stand tall and appreciate that the country called Malaysia was founded on the Malacca sultanate,” said Muar MP Razali Ibrahim.

“All who are Malaysians must accept this as the country that we have built together.

“Is it enough to sing the Negara Ku and be able to recite the Rukun Negara by heart to call yourself a citizen?”

“We cannot build this nation overnight. What we are asking for (from the non-Malays) is a willingness to contribute, a willingness to sacrifice.”

This includes a willingness to wear the songkok, not fighting for mother-tongue classes, and thinking of oneself as Malaysian (first and only) without any reference to China or India, explained the Johor Umno Youth chief.

“Without this, it’s too much for the Malays to sacrifice that (element of) language,” he said, adding that he was not trying to promote racial tension but nation building.

But the current debate does have race as its political genesis. Umno, by its failure to protect Malay supremacy in politics, has disappointed, even frightened, the Malays.

Malay polity is now trying hard to separate religion from culture from their envisioned ideals of “bangsa Melayu” and, of course, from politics.

Umno is caught in the middle. It has to placate the intellectuals and cultural activists who still form the opinion leaders among its grassroots. At the same time, it has to evolve into a Malaysian party because that is its only option in the face of Pakatan Rakyat’s multi-racial appeal.

Meanwhile, MCA has won admiration even among a segment of Malays, for having been pragmatic enough to evolve into a party that looked beyond the narrow confines of Chinese interests. Its president Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting said: “We are still a Chinese-based political party but our ways, direction and approach are for all races.”

Conversely, the MIC is still looking inward, to protecting Indian interests, especially after makkal sakti (people’s power) swept the nation, leaving its president and a few leaders without a seat.

On May 7, Razali took on DAP chairman Karpal Singh for asking who had prepared the text of the King’s speech to Parliament. In the near free-for-all that ensued, Razali challenged Karpal Singh, saying that he was on the verge of being derhaka (an act of treason against a sultan or King). It was telling that all those who later congratulated Razali on a well-delivered speech were Malays from Umno.

Malays would probably feel more comfortable if Malaysia comprised ethnic Chinese of say 12% of the population, and Indians another 6%. So far, their brethren from Sabah and Sarawak are no threat to peninsula Malays because of their small numbers.

At a relatively youthful 38, Razali would like to inherit a united country. To him, integration was a misnomer for this country’s socio-political evolution.

“We have adaptation, accommodation. We respect your culture and needs.”

A language belongs to the race as denoted by the people, not the country as defined by a land mass, reasoned Razali.

“It does not have to be so taboo to say it belongs to the Melayu because the language belongs to the bangsa of the country – in this case, the Malays.

He pointed to Indonesians and Thais as examples, whose Chinese were not ethnically identifiable by their names and who spoke Bahasa Indonesia or Thai as their language of first choice.

But before we can reach that point, the Chinese and Indians already fear they have to compromise their roots, he said. “There is no sense of pride in being Malaysian.”

“Nation building will not work if only the Malays work towards it. Our future is intertwined.”

Razali’s views were typical of a Johorean Malay “cocooned in his Malay milieu,” said the former Speaker of the Kelantan Legislative Assembly Datuk Wan Rahim Wan Abdullah, now the PAS MP for Kota Baru.

“The first 50 years are over. Umno must have the courage to admit that the playing field has changed,” he said.

“People are educated. In another 10 years, the pre-Merdeka generation will all be over 60 years old.”

They will not be showing respect to Umno en masse, he pointed out.

It was in that light that at the Congress, Prof Datuk Dr Zainal Kling of the Sultan Idris Teachers’ Training University warned Malays not to be complacent about ketuanan Melayu just because the Prime Minister and most mentris besar were Malay.

“Our culture is to surrender leadership to one person, and if he turns out to be weak, all would fall with him.”

What in fact constitutes a Melayu?

Genetically, it would be almost impossible to define one as the Malays are such a mixed lot.

The late National Laureate Datuk Usman Awang described the origins of Malays as covering the swathe of Indonesian islands from Sulawesi to Aceh, on the peninsula from Jakun to Sakai, and eastwards to Pakistan and Arab.

The Constitution distils the definition to one who is born to a Malaysian citizen who professes to be a Muslim, habitually speaks the Malay language, adheres to Malay customs and is domiciled in Malaysia or Singapore.

All of Malaysia’s first four prime ministers were not of 100% Malay stock: Tunku Abdul Rahman’s mother was a Thai princess; Tun Abdul Razak traced his lineage to Bugis seafarers of Sulawesi; Tun Hussein Onn was of Turkish descent; and Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad admitted to “having Indian blood flowing through my veins”.

Yet they were all Malay and as leaders of the country’s largest Malay political party, Umno, also represented the Malay polity. As Mahathir added: “No Malay is pure.”

In fact, in social studies classes, children are taught that the Malays who settled in the coastal areas, pushing the orang asli inland and uphill, descended from Yunnan, in south China.

The values Malays hold most dear are, in no particular order: Islam, sultans, land, customs and language.

But it is a language that has borrowed heavily from Sanskrit and Arabic, with a smattering of everyday words from the rest of the South-East Asian archipelago.

This debate over Malay supremacy is then ironic in that as a people, the Malays are very much linked to the Chinese and Indian civilisations of old, as former deputy prime minister Tun Musa Hitam himself once observed.

So in battling for Malay supremacy, are its champions defending a concept whose origins are blurred in the annals of history? And are those pushing for a Malaysian identity also mired in the same misconception that the country only began post-Merdeka? Perhaps there is no big deal to the debate after all – as long as one is comfortable in one’s own skin (Suhaini Aznam).

Malays in state of worry, says Ku Li

Bernama (4/5/08): The Malays are in a state of worry over their own and their children's future following the March 8 general election, which saw the Barisan Nasional (BN) lose five states to the opposition.

Gua Musang Member of Parliament Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah said the Malays who met him had expressed their worries and fears over their future and the community's following the change in the country's political landscape.

He disclosed this at a talk and dialogue themed, "Restoring Umno's Relevance in the Hearts of the Malays", organised by the Wanita and Youth wings of the Umno Bandar branch in the Batu Pahat division, here Sunday.

Tengku Razaleigh, also known as Ku Li, said after wresting Selangor, Perak, Penang and Kedah and retaining Kelantan, the opposition would intensify its "attacks" to win more states in the next general election.

He also warned that the opposition would go all out to wrest Johor, the Umno and BN stronghold, after it managed to win one parliamentary and six state seats in Johor in the recent elections.

"Please take care of Johor as the opposition will mount an all-out attack in the next general election. As it is, PAS has managed to infiltrate this Malay stronghold by winning two state seats (Sungai Abong and Maharani)," he said.

The Gua Musang Umno division chief said BN's defeat, especially in the three "rich" states (Penang, Perak and Selangor) would have an impact on the federal government's administration.

This was because, explained the former Finance Minister and former International Trade and Industry Minister, the three states contributed 75 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), while the BN government controlled states which contributed only 25 percent of the GDP.

"So what is there for our leaders to be proud of?" he said, adding that efforts to improve the lot of the Malays in the opposition-controlled states would also be affected.

The Umno stalwart also said that the opposition parties would continue to embarrass Umno and BN by digging into and exposing the wrongdoings or mistakes committed by the previous BN state governments.

However, he added, Umno had its own way of dealing with the actions of the opposition parties.