DAP and PKR are as guilty as PAS’ Hadi Awang

Khoo Kay Peng, The Ant Daily

DAP claims that the recently concluded PAS elections, where the ulamas made a clean sweep of all elected positions, had rendered the opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat, defunct.

DAP’s Lim Kit Siang said the coalition would have disintegrated sooner if the coalition had won the 2013 general election. He accused PAS’ president Abdul Hadi Awang as the main culprit of the breakup.

It is rather unusual for Lim to point the finger at PAS now. Ironically, Lim was trying his level best during the last general election to capitalize his party election campaign on PAS’ by suggesting that his party candidates might contest under PAS’ banner if the Registrar of Society outlaws the DAP due to the party’s election irregularities.

Lim made the suggestion to strengthen his electoral chances in Gelang Patah, a Malay-majority seat, when he was pitted against the ex-menteri besar of Johor Abdul Ghani Othman.

Lim’s allegation is only partially accurate. Both PKR and DAP were part of the reason why the coalition could not sustain beyond a general election. The fault line lies in the coalition’s Common Policy Framework.

The Common Policy Framework misses something more specific. It focuses on something as common as national unity, justice, good governance and prosperity of Malaysians where most political parties regardless of their ideology would be able to agree and accept. The main issue that breaks the coalition apart is not the framework but on a few very specific ideological differences the leaders had opted to ignore.

It is not wrong to say that both PKR and DAP knew that there were some serious policy and ideological issues and differences between them and PAS right from the start. They knew that PAS would not be willing to drop its Islamic state agenda. They were aware that the tussle between secularism and Islamic state would be one of the key ideological conflicts between PAS and DAP.

There were also key disagreements over the governance model to be adopted and distribution of key portfolios in the government. Kit Siang had disclosed that Hadi had refused to accept PKR’s Anwar Ibrahim as the prime minister candidate for Pakatan.

But yet they preferred to sweep these key differences under the carpet and focus on electoral competition with the UMNO-led Barisan Nasional. Hence, both PKR and DAP must share the blame for the breakup too and not conveniently put the blame solely on the PAS president.

For the next opposition coalition to work, the parties must address any key ideological differences right at the start. They must learn the lessons of being overly fixated with dethroning the BN but did not offer the electorates a viable alternative government.

There are also lessons to be derived from each of the three political parties. If the DAP can’t curb its selfish pursuit for electoral victories and its sole intention of keeping and preserving their power bases in Penang, Selangor and Perak they would not have an incentive for the party to sacrifice to strengthen the opposition coalition.

They made a mistake for trying to protect the dominance of Pakatan by not supporting the applications of smaller parties such as Parti Sosialis Malaysia to join the coalition.

If the DAP’s leadership is visionary and unselfish, they should seek some common grounds with the natural competitors such as Gerakan and MCA on issues such as Islamisation, corruption and growing racial extremism in the administration. Both Gerakan and MCA can be persuaded to rethink their future in BN.

To be a government different from the BN, Paktan must become more inclusive, expansive and democratic than the former. It must avoid the divisive ethno-religious silos that BN has been using to divide and rule. It must strive to create an equitable, fair and just Malaysian society where every member is not being judged by the colour of the skin or creed.

The next viable opposition coalition should avoid a component party that adopts an exclusive and restrictive form of political ideology. PAS’ Islamic agenda is more suitable for a homogeneous Islamic state than a plural society like Malaysia.

Hence, it would be interesting to see how the G18 (made up of defeated ‘progressive’ leaders of PAS) can succeed in forming a party that has broad appeal to both Muslims and non-Muslims. Is the G18 willing to drop their support for PAS’ hudud law in Kelantan and fully support the country’s civil law?

A new opposition coalition needs a strong leadership spine and direction. Can the PKR, with its unending internal power struggle, provide the necessary leadership and direction to the new opposition coalition? Does the party have a future post Anwar Ibrahim or the internal power struggle for control would disintegrate the party before the next leader can be identified?

Building the next credible and viable opposition coalition is not as easy as forming another political party to replace PAS. It has to start from putting the right foundation, forging real common interests and solving key differences.

Khoo Kay Peng is a political analyst and management consultant.