The DAP poser
For there has never been any problem of Chinese-based multi-ethnic party, like DAP, joining a Malay-based multi-ethnic party, like Keadilan, or vice versa in the interest of posing as an alternative counterweight to Umno-led Barisan Nasional. So why does the writer think that this has ever been an issue?
If DAP's leaders have cared only for their personal interest and not national agenda, why did they take the DAP out of BA over PAS' Islamic state issue when they were the ones who took DAP into the BA coalition in the first place?
What personal agenda could DAP's leaders possibly have in taking the party out of the BA; what chances of winning positions are there for DAP leaders when the DAP is struggling out in the political wilderness alone?
To reconcile its reason for leaving the BA coalition dominated by PAS and yet maintain a consistent course in opposing the BN coalition, the DAP has to reject as "false choices" of Malaysia being an Islamic state whether a la PAS' or a la Umno, and uphold instead its consistent agenda of Malaysia being a democratic, secular and multireligious state with Islam as the religion of the Federation.
As shown at the time immediately preceding DAP's departure from the BA when there was a war of words subsisting between DAP and PAS leaders over the issue of the Islamic state it was common knowledge then, as is now, that Keadilan prevaricated and never took a definitive stand on it, whether in opposition or in support.
This only means Keadilan was/is either in support of PAS' Islamic state agenda or plain opportunistic by way of "sitting on the fence". Either way an absence of strong and expressed repudiation by Keadilan of PAS' Islamic state agenda would tantamount to acquiescence.
If Keadilan acquiesces and is not prepared to reject outright PAS' agenda of an Islamic state, what are the chances that it will ever support the DAP's vision of the secular state when its chances of supporting even Umno's more moderate version of Islamic state are, to say the least, remote?
I would say the chances of Keadilan's agreeing with DAP's agenda of secularity are practically nil which means that for DAP to collaborate with Keadilan in the interest of the larger national agenda, the DAP has to, like Keadilan, acquiesce too with PAS' agenda, its dominance of BA and use of this alternative coalition to come to power for the implementation of the Islamic state.
Is the writer then saying that PAS' agenda is advancing the larger national agenda deserving of DAP's indirect support through collaboration with Keadilan?
By remaining alone on the grounds of the "secular" principle, the DAP has nothing to gain.
Being a predominantly Chinese-based multi-ethnic party, it will not get the support of other Malaysian communities and hence has no hope to be elected to power.
Meanwhile, some of its Chinese members would in the interest of positions and political advancement, leave and join Keadilan which, although Malay-based, is multi-ethnic in membership. The reverse (i.e. Keadilan's members joining the DAP) does not happen. If Keadilan's members become disillusioned that the party or they themselves will not make headway politically, they will only join Umno.
So for the above reasons, I cannot figure out just how by being alone and not joining Keadilan, can it be insinuated by the writer that DAP's leaders were putting personal agenda above the larger national agenda of defeating BN's "unhealthy politics" when the alternative to BN's politics might be even more "unhealthy"!
Whilst Keadilan has been unequivocal in its condemnation of BN for abuse of power (by use of the Internal Security Act, for example), money politics, unfair campaigning, cronyism, Keadilan has never on public record unequivocally opposed the alleged "racist" policies of the BN or the vigorously religious agenda of PAS.
In the light of Keadilan's prevarication on racial and religious issues, and in spite of its avoidance of these key issues under the banner of social justice and proper governance (slogans acceptable to all), does the writer still think that Keadilan and DAP's collaboration with it, and by extension, PAS, will "usher in the inception of multi-ethnic politics", "remove fanaticism" bring about a "more mature political scenario" and "contribute to the coming of age of Malaysian politics"?
I am not convinced. Taking a leaf from what that great patron of Keadilan, ex-deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim, had written in the Asian Renaissance "in politics, consistency of principles is just as important as political support". Well said, but actions count more than words.
