MGG Pillai Commentary View

<< Previous || Next >>

Two political sparks meet – and set alight UMNO and PAS

THE PRIME MINISTER'S SON-IN-LAW, Mr Khairy Jamaluddin, and the Kelantan executive councillor, Mr Husam Musa, one in UMNO the other in PAS, are two peas in a pod, out of line with the ground in their respective parties though they hold centre stage. To unsettle the ground in each, neither party could find better men. One represents the cronyistic self-centred approach to power, the other a modernist politician whose success in the party raises the shackles of those in power.

Both want to change the mindset of the parties they are in, and therefore resented by the status quo. There the similarities end. One is a novice there by virtue of his links with the prime minister, the other a consummate new breed PAS politician who believes that one need not be a religious scholar to be in an Islamic party. One wants to extend the cronyistic and nepotic privilege he represents, the other wants modernity amidst a recrudescent fundamentalist Islam.

When both met by chance, so we are told, at the Mutiara Hotel in Kuala Lumpur last month (June), the shock-waves in PAS and UMNO went beyond its narrow confines to set alight the two parties. Both insist it was to touch base, each knew of the other, and decided they ought to meet.

Both deny, in separate interviews with the Internet newspaper, malaysiakini (www.malaysiakini.com), that they had anything significant or serious to discuss, that they represented no one but themselves, that no deals on the impending election petitions were struck, although they did touch on them.

But UMNO and PAS sources insist there is more than either reveals, that the meeting followed an earlier unscheduled and private meeting in Kota Bharu, the Kelantan state capital, between the prime minister, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, and the state mentri besar, Tok Guru Dato' Nik Aziz Nik Mat. It is no coincidence then that one is the son-in-law of the former and the other a trusted aide of the latter.

It was important to both UMNO and PAS to find a solution of the raft of election petitons each had filed, all of which, in the present climate, UMNO could win, landing PAS with large bills, possibly losing control of Kelantan. But the UMNO victory would come at a heavy cost. In the end, the two parties would lose badly, the changing of the guard adding to the woes of both.

This invitation for tea followed shortly after. It does not matter who called whom. Or what was discussed. It was, for all I care, a meeting to find out who each was. Whatever it is, it had the desired effect of both UMNO and PAS: the election petitons were struck out in Kelantan and Trengganu.

If we accept Mr Khairy and Mr Husam met to exchange pleasantries, it must follow that PAS must have had poor counsel to make mistakes in the election petitions to strike them out. That is unlikely. It is part of a large settlement. Otherwise, when the rumours spread, and articles written about the deal, no official comment was forthcoming. Mr Khairy and Mr Husam responded only when doubts appeared in their respective political parties.

Each gained from it, but not as the rumours and gossip put out. It was believed then that it was a roundabout charade to ensure Pak Lah would not be out on a limb at the election petition in his Kepala Batas constituency, where his PAS opponent had challenged his candidature because he did file his election expenses after the 1999 general election. This turns out to be wrong: he did file it, and there is the government gazette to prove it.

So, why was the deal struck? It appears that the UMNO point-man in Kelantan, Dato' Mustapa Mohamed, had left a visible trail of receipts, invoices, statements so he could be barred from standing for elections for five years. It that had happened, it would redound on Pak Lah, since Dato' Mustapa is his secret weapon to unseat his deputy prime minister. This seems to be the UMNO rationale for withdrawing the petitions.

For PAS, the party leaders did not want to lose control of the only state government it was in power. In the internal party discussions, it felt that the PAS president and Trengganu mentri besar when polls were called, had unnecessarily raised the ante so the divide between modernity and recrudescent Islam would widen to the point where the non-Malay would be frightened of PAS. He had to be put in his place.

It reflected an infighting within the ulamaks and the fundamentalist Islam supporters on the course of a future Malaysian Islamic state. Once PAS kept its fundamentalist image in check with a worldview that emanated confidence, with a party president always from the secularly educated Islamicists from the more cosmopolitan west coast of peninsular Malaysia; but when Dato' Fadhil Noor died, the deputy president, Tok Guru Dato' Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, took over.

The Islamic agenda took centre stage, and became the more strident as PAS' policy of attracting the professionals succeeded beyond its wildest dreams. The realists in PAS accepted it must change to attract the modernist, professional constituency or be no more than a regional party. It was the success of this policy that led UMNO to turn itself into an Islamic party.

The 2004 general elections was the first after this dramatic change. Neither could be seen to give way. Nor did each want to test the grounds of their new policy. Which of course it would if the election petitions had gone one. The realists in UMNO and PAS saw this more starkly than the others, but they also knew they could bring their ground with them.

Besides, the threat of a mid-term elections in Kelantan if the election petitions went against PAS was enough to sober UMNO. A divided UMNO cannot fight an election in Kelantan and hope to do better than it did in the March 21 general elections.

So if Mr Khairy and Mr Husam did meet, as they claim, by coincidence and oblivious of the larger issues UMNO and PAS wanted resolved, they strain our credulity. They had to come out with a spin of their meeting because of growing problems within the political ground they spoke for. Which is why they had to come public.

When politicians subborn the media to carry their spin, and exclude it when they do what they do not want the people to know, dissidents in either group would happily spill the details. That is what happened in the Khairy-Husam tete a tete. To tell us it is, is to assert that, yes, pigs do fly!

M.G.G. Pillai
pillai@streamyx.com