When former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim was released by the Federal Court in a surprising 2-1 decision, the vigor and vitality so characteristic of Anwar were clearly missing. Gone was the clenched fist raised in the air as a sign of defiance.

Impaired by his chronic back injury, which was aggravated by the abuse he had received at the hands of the former police chief, the charismatic leader could only emphasise the urgency of his immediate surgery overseas.

Anwar's physical frailty, paralleled by the secular decline of his populist support, where his wife's Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) merely has one parliamentary seat, even that from a razor-thin majority in the March 2004 election, collectively does not deter Anwar from the thought of staging a comeback.

To be sure, the bravado of Anwar could well boil down to the indomitable belief of a 'conviction politician' - one who is animated more by ideals rather than the reality and limitations at hand.

In other words, even if Anwar were handicapped by the obvious physiological and physical deficits, the path of maximum, rather than least, defiance, would still be adopted. Such is Anwar's steely style.

That Anwar has the necessary force of character is beyond the question. Six years of imprisonment on a litany of corruption and sodomy charges, the latter of which quashed by the Federal Court, have clearly shown Anwar to be made of sterner stuff.

Yet, while Anwar may grit his teeth and bear the proverbial cross, as he put it with "no malice to Dr Mahathir Mohamad", the man who literally destroyed him, the key issue from this point onwards revolves on Anwar's relevance and sustainability.

How can Anwar transform his six years of invisibility from Malaysian politics in the past to an otherwise invincible profile as a kingmaker in the future?

Despite the jubilation of his supporters, some of Anwar's alleged advantage with the Malaysians, especially Muslim electorate, may not be that definitive.

Anwar's preferred platform, that of using Islam Madani (civil Islam) as a front to project his vision of a free and democratic Malaysia, for instance, is matched just as adeptly by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's concept of Islam Hadhari (progressive and moderate Islam).

Unveiled in the most recent general election, Islam Hadhari has already gained nationwide acceptance. Indeed, given the indistinct nature of both forms of 'Islam' in Malaysia, their parallel existence just about cancel each other out. Put differently, Anwar cannot use moderate Islam to carry his message when one already exists.

Need to state party affiliations

Like all politicians, seasoned or reborn, Anwar has to state his party affiliations very firmly too; without which his supporters will not know whether all those years of pining for Anwar's return were worth it.

To further establish his party identity, Anwar must take the necessary step to outline his doctrinal beliefs too, both within the context of his chosen party, and Malaysia's multicultural set up. That is, having been chastened by the rough and tumble of Umno politics, how is the new Anwar different from the old Anwar who was previously with the government?

To this question, Anwar must move away very categorically, from the ideology of negation. It is not enough for Anwar to say he is against the Internal Security Act, economic excesses and corruption but how he plans to tackle the problems too, either singly or collectively with other parties.

To this day, the true party and doctrinal position of Anwar remain ambiguous. There is no certainty whether Anwar sees himself as a opposition figure, or a former Umno leader who envisions a return to the fold of government.

Naturally, Anwar may as a matter of political necessity would cast his lot with PKR now, if anything to enhance his visibility first. But it is just as inevitable that to win over more Malaysian voters in future, he would have to cast his net ever wider to gain greater national support, and beyond that international goodwill, to revive his stalled political career.

Domestically, Anwar would not have to try very hard to solicit the backing of others. Having gained from the sympathy votes of Anwar in the 1999 general election, the opposition parties are likely to come knocking at his door.

PAS, the Islamic opposition, for one, will court him earnestly by inviting him to their rallies, even to be a key executive member; as they once did in 1982 when there was a tug of war between Umno and PAS for the service of Anwar, who was by then already a promising leader.

While Anwar would not embrace PAS ideologically - especially the concept of Islamic state that most Malaysians are aversed - he has always felt most at ease in using Islamic ideas and symbolism to re-articulate his values.

What Anwar would do, as he did prior to his arrest, is to link the tortuous struggle that he went through, with the equally arduous treatment that Prophet Muhammad had received at the hands of his detractors. With such a strategy, Anwar would find himself tugging at the heart strings of the Muslim voters.

Yet, Anwar would not have it easy all the way, as Abdullah is an Islamic scholar of equal, if not better standing.

Indeed, the release of Anwar has actually helped rather than hindered Abdullah's position in Umno as its titular 'spiritual leader'. This is because no one in Umno can categorically challenge Anwar on Islamic issues, except Abdullah.

But should Anwar adopt a religiously loaded platform, this would not work well with Malaysians of other faiths, nor gel with the position of secular political parties to which he has to build his bridges.

Therefore, to close the chasm, Anwar will shore up his plight as a former ISA detainee, and the need for all parties and individuals to work towards its abolition.

Therein lies the irony of Anwar's comeback: While ISA had twice victimised him and a host of other opposition figures, the common cause which this draconian legislation engenders, now and in future, would considerably help Anwar to unite different parties together. Even if there is no common vision, there is common revulsion of ISA.

This default option would allow Anwar enough time to decide his party affiliation, clarify its doctrinal positions, and the extent to which all opposition parties must work together to challenge the electoral supremacy of the ruling Barisan National.

Tread gently in courting international support

To regain certain measure of respectability to buttress his position in Malaysia, Anwar would invariably have to court the support of the international community too, especially the US.

It is here that Anwar will tread carefully, as he does not want to be seen as too close to US, which could lead to accusations of him being a US or International Monetary Fund (IMF) crony all over again.

Much has since changed in US too. Gone are leaders like Al Gore, Madeline Albright and William Cohen, all friends of Anwar, whom at different points had championed his unconditional release. To a large extent, US support of Anwar would also depend on the war on terror.

If President George W Bush is re-elected in November 2004, Anwar would not get much mileage in the administration, as Bush, who puts a high premium on cultivating personal rapport with world leaders, has already developed a comfortable working relationship with Abdullah.

Furthermore, Abdullah is a known Muslim moderate, who currently holds the chair of the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) and the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) too.

Within the context of Asean, some of Anwar's friends, such as former Indonesian president BJ Habibie and disgraced Philippines leader Joseph Estrada are out of office already. Not much support can be expected from them.

Nor would Amien Rais, at one stage Anwar's close ally in reformasi, who is now an elected parliamentary leader in Indonesia, is capable of doing more, as his political clout has been waning too.

But in due course, Anwar would through his speeches delivered in the regional universities and conferences help re-shape his image to the international community, especially his vision of an Asian renaissance based on democracy, justice and freedom.

These ideas are likely to echo in Washington DC , especially in think tanks like The Heritage Foundation that has worked closely with Anwar before, and is agreeable to his rhetoric and politics of reforms.

Nevertheless, Anwar's true test of support would be in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia; contacts which he had cultivated since the 1970s as a student leader.

But once again, Abdullah, no less Islamically inclined than Anwar, is strong in those parts of the world too. So the regime in Saudi Arabia would express token support for Anwar, but would not do too much beyond this.

Instead, the role to support Anwar would fall on Islamic scholars in Saudi Arabia, whom Anwar had known well since his days as the president of the International Islamic University.

Invariably, there is another angle to see Anwar's prospective attempt to garner support before his return to politics proper. One good way is to see if he will position himself as the Nelson Mandela of Malaysia - a leader jailed for his beliefs.

Given the charisma of Anwar, and his ability to fire up a crowd in both Malay and English, it is certain that he will indeed adopt the posture of someone who was unjustly wronged.

The one person in Malaysia who will vehemently challenge that is of course Mahathir, indeed the leader who now has to come out of his retirement to parry some of the accusations that Anwar would throw at him.

The result is the resumption of a Malaysian saga that will significantly increase the political awareness of Malaysians over the inner workings of Umno and the government, to which both played their key parts.

The only difference is that Anwar wish to do more, either with or without an alliance with other opposition parties, while Mahathir seeks to defend his legacy from claims of excesses.

PHAR KIM BENG is author of Eye Eye You column in malaysiakini. He graduates from the International Islamic University in 1994 as a Muslim revert, having previously been a Buddhist. He has travelled around the world studying at the University of Notre Dame, where he understood the beauty of Catholic scholarship, the University of Cambridge, where he learned the importance of British education, and later the University of Tokyo, where he learned his survival Japanese.