The Wars To Come Nurul Izzah Pkr And Bersatu

---

Nathaniel Tan, Malaysiakini
Firstly, deepest condolences to the family of Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim. He died a true Malaysian hero.
Beside such nobility and sacrifice, our political squabbles seem somewhat petty and childish.
Nurul Izzah Anwar’s resignations are obviously the hot topic of the day.
It feels like there isn’t enough information out yet about this to write a full and balanced commentary that wouldn’t be pure speculation.
In imagining how Nurul Izzah sees her own decision, perhaps we might end up recalling Alfred’s words to Bruce Wayne: “Leaving is all I have, to make you understand.”
Beyond that, permit me only a slight observation that might have some tiny bearing on the real focus of this article.
Two gentlemen, among so many others, wrote what was upon close reading two very similar tweets (content wise) concerning Nurul Izzah.
Her reply to Rais Hussin’s tweet:
“Kindly refrain from ever commenting on my behalf.”
Her reply to Khairy Jamaluddin’s tweet:
“Thank you, YB @Khairykj . You have been an inspiration from across the bench, since 2008. Can’t imagine Malaysia without your towering political footprint. Rooting for you, albeit as a mere MP now 😆 – but rooting nonetheless.”
The latter suggested something of a mutual admiration society, to which the joke “Get a room!” would be particularly inappropriate.
Bad jokes aside, perhaps we should hope that these two glaringly different exchanges are not a representation of current party dynamics between PKR, Bersatu and Umno.
The wars to come
Peppered throughout the show Game of Thrones is the enticingly cryptic quote: “I wish you good fortune in the wars to come.”
In Malaysia, those of us looking to the future find ourselves asking the question: what exactly will the wars to come look like?
Believing that wars are coming has less to do with cynicism about politics (which I never prescribe), and perhaps more to do with the physics postulate horror vacui, commonly stated in the expression “nature abhors a vacuum”.
Political competition is a staple of life.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing. A lack of political competition would indicate dictatorship and hegemony, which never ends up well in the long run for the person in the street.
In the absence of such a Hobbesian leviathan in the arena of political competition, there will surely be individuals and factions competing fiercely.
The question any political analyst should be asking though, especially in Malaysia, is: who will be fighting whom?
Lessons from the era of Mahathir 1.0
We can gain some insight from our own history.
As coincidence would have it, the period of history that is relevant was one where we had the same prime minister as we do today.
During Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s first tenure, BN was so strong, that the opposition was generally considered irrelevant.
Back then, primary political competition was not between the government and the opposition, but within the governing coalition itself.
Obviously, there was some competition between Umno and the other BN component parties.
Back then, though, the most important wars were most often fought within Umno itself.
Mahathir survived multiple challenges from his would-be successors, the last of which – between himself and Anwar Ibrahim – led to a war which has shaped Malaysian politics to this very day.
A weak opposition intensifies intra-coalition infighting
The lessons from this period are insightful.
First among these is the fact that there almost never exists widespread satisfaction with the status quo.
Dissatisfaction with one’s lot is often described as a defining feature of the human condition, and this seems amplified in the arena of politics. We always seem to want more.
Secondly, when the opposition is weak – as it undoubtedly is in today’s Malaysia – the focus of political competition will shift from inter-coalition competition to intra-coalition competition.
Given the current trajectory of Malaysia’s opposition parties today, it is hard to imagine any of them putting up any kind of decent fight in GE 15 – barring any major changes.
To begin with, they do not currently have any serviceable ideological common ground that could serve as a basis to form a viable alliance that might function as a government-in-waiting.
In addition to, or perhaps more accurately as a result of, this state of affairs, the internal politics of the former
BN is in complete disarray – a ship adrift, with no rudder.
Uncertainty engenders instability and jostling
Politicians, being full-time professionals, are well aware of this. Thus, they know that the struggle for power will not be one against the opposition, but one against their allies – their allies on paper, that is.
In September, I wrote extensively about the inherent uncertainty with the Harapan formula, regarding where the party from which the prime minister will come from.
In BN, the prime minister and deputy prime minister both come from Umno – a fact that was never once disputed.
How will it be for Harapan? Let’s say Anwar becomes the next prime minister. Who will succeed him?
Someone from Bersatu? Someone from PKR?
Will there be a rotation between parties, or will only one party monopolise the top post? If there is a rotation, will it include DAP and Amanah? If not, why not?
These are already the difficult questions that arise even if Anwar succeeds Mahathir as prime minister. When some float the possibility that he might not, that opens yet another massive can of worms.
Some may argue that these questions to be too ‘inconvenient’ perhaps to be addressed now, citing the fledgling nature of the coalition, and the need to focus on good governance in the here and now.
This argument is not without some merit. It may, however, vastly underestimate the instability produced by not addressing these questions openly early on.
As long as these questions remain unanswered, there will be endless jostling – in the open and behind the scenes – as various factions scheme and plot to engineer the end result that they prefer.
Is the coming war Bersatu vs PKR?
In my humble view, the ongoing drama we see unfolding at breakneck speeds – starting most recently in Sabah and manifest in Nurul Izzah’s resignation – are symptoms of this root cause.
On one hand, we have top leaders endlessly repeating their commitment to promises made.
On the other, the public reads about individuals like Nazri Aziz going around telling Umno people that Anwar told him that with all of Umno’s MPs, he wouldn’t need the rest of Harapan.
The public also reads about what some could interpret as Bersatu’s aggressive recruiting of Umno MPs – what some would argue is Mahathir’s countermove to Anwar.
With all this writing on the wall, surely some can be forgiven for thinking that the war to come will not be between Harapan and whatever tatters remain of the opposition, but between PKR and Bersatu.
Answering the hard questions
All that said, this could just as easily merely be consumers of political drama (not unlike columnists like myself) who thrive on speculation, seeing what they want to see.
I, for one, am not of the view that things between PKR and Bersatu are as some make them out to be.
I would say, though, that managing perception is very important, and that short-term gains should not be made at the expense of the rather fragile bigger picture.
Ultimately, I, for one, certainly don’t profess to really know what is going on in the hearts of these political players, and what is really happening behind what we can read in the news.
What I might perhaps be able to safely say is that, in the long run, there are a few things that we can be fairly sure will be helpful.
Firstly, let’s try to stay level-headed.
It would be overly presumptuous of myself, not being even remotely possessed of all the facts, to say that this or that act was overly emotional, but in general, long-term political goals are often better served by a measured approach in the context of well thought out strategies and endgames.
Secondly, while everyone has his or her own political interests, the interests of Malaysia, in the long run, may well best be served by starting to work on the hard, uncomfortable questions of the present government’s long-term succession plans.
Surely there are fears that this may scuttle short-term efforts, but I humbly submit that that isn’t a guaranteed outcome. Indeed, doing so might achieve the exact opposite: providing stability, and a clearer sense of direction – resulting in a reduction of infighting and facilitating a focus on good governance.
 

---