Founded in 1968 as a multi-ethnic reformist opposition party, Gerakan captured Penang in the 1969 general election and joined the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) in 1974. The party has also undergone several rounds of power struggles and leadership changes.

However, several structural constraints in the race-based political system in Malaysia have ensured that Gerakan remains a Chinese-predominated mini-MCA and one of Umno's strategic leverages to check and balance its second largest Chinese ally.

Can Gerakan transcend the structural limitations the Umno-MCA-MIC alliance had inherited from the British?

What probably were the secret thoughts of party president Dr Lim Keng Yaik when he broke his promise to retire by 2002 and hand power to his deputy Kerk Choo Ting?

How would the intra-party balance of forces affect the party's future within the BN in the face of a hegemonic Umno and ambitious MCA?

Above all, how would Lim's decision to quit or not to quit affect this balance in the puny Gerakan?

To explore these questions, malaysiakini spoke to Phoon Weng Keong, a researcher at the New Era College and a political columnist of the Chinese-language Oriental Daily News . He holds a MA from the Centre of East Asian Studies at Cheng Chi University in Taiwan. He was formerly a feature writer at Sin Chew Jit Poh .

Malaysiakini: At the Perak Gerakan convention recently, Kerk Choo Ting publicly proposed that the term of party president and state committee chiefs be limited to three terms or nine years but this was rejected byDr Lim Keng Yaik. What is behind the public debate between Gerakan's Number One and Two?

Phoon: Besides the term-limit proposal, Kerk's supporters also put up a draft resolution barring contests for five top posts in the party election this year. But, the proposal and the draft resolution were rejected by Lim and the convention respectively. That is certainly perceived by outsiders as indirect crossfire between Lim and Kerk.

Obviously, Kerk was disadvantaged. The candidate backed by Kerk to become the party chairperson in Perak was also badly defeated by another candidate supported by Lim.

Because Kerk wants to replace Lim, discord has surfaced. Very evidently, Lim does not want Kerk to succeed him and Lim therefore still refuses to retire from politics. In the recent Perak convention, Kerk attempted to mount pressure on Lim by proposing that Gerakan emulates MCA and DAP to limit the terms of office of the party chief. However, Kerk's grassroots support is clearly insufficient. His personal and public relations as well as his image within the party are not that good. His future looks bleak.

Dr Lim Keng Yaik has been in his present positions within the party and government since 1980. Why has he stayed so long? Why has there been no serious or credible challenge to Lim in the past 25 years?

Before Keng Yaik took over Gerakan in 1980 from Dr Lim Chong Eu, the latter's choice was actually not Keng Yaik but Paul Leong. However, Keng Yaik finally prevailed because of his political skills and popular charisma which the technocratic Paul Leong seriously lacked. Keng Yaik's wisdom was shown when, even after taking over as the new president, he decided not to immediately replace Leong as a cabinet minister and to only concentrate on party affairs. That decision helped to preserve intra-party harmony because Gerakan's resources were relatively limited. Keng Yaik only became a cabinet minister in 1986 after Leong left.

Keng Yaik did face two rounds of challenge to his presidency. One was from the forces associated with Dr Goh Cheng Teik and Michael Chen and another from entrepreneur Joseph Chong. Cheng Teik was never supported by Chong Eu and the Gerakan's original hardcore group was also wary of former MCA leader Michael Chen's rise within Gerakan. So, Keng Yaik prevailed in that round with the solid backing from the Gerakan grassroots.

Chong's challenge had actually never threatened Keng Yaik. After Chong's loss, he took the case to court. That has since made Gerakan even more concerned about the background of its leaders.

That Keng Yaik's position within Gerakan has been secure for a long period of time can be attributed to several reasons.

One, Gerakan's resources are limited and its membership is not as complex and disorderly as that of MCA. Two, because Gerakan has always placed its centre of gravity in Penang, there are few national leaders outside Penang who could claim parity with Keng Yaik.

Three, Gerakan leaders in Penang have always been lacking contact with leaders at the national level and they have also find it difficult to project themselves outside of Penang.

Finally, Keng Yaik's political judgement, administrative skills and management of party affairs can be said to be quite remarkable and also to have received Umno's support. For example, after Abdullah Ahmad Badawi assumed power as prime minister, Keng Yaik was promoted from a minor ministry of declining importance (primary commodities) to a more important and resources-rich one, namely the Ministry of Energy, Water and Communication. Keng Yaik's power has thus increased considerably.

It is widely believed that the reason Keng Yaik still refuses to step down in favour of Kerk is because the former favours Penang Chief Minister Dr Koh Tsu Khoon as his successor. What is your observation on this?

As a matter of public record, Keng Yaik once announced in 2000 that he would retire after his term expired in 2002 and that Kerk would be the most appropriate successor. At that time, Keng Yaik's calculation seemed to be vacating his ministerial position for Kerk to take over first, and he himself was to concentrate on party management. However, in 2002, Keng Yaik not only did not retire, he also indicated that he would contest in the next general election. His explanation was that party members would not let him go.

The change of Keng Yaik's retirement plan could be due to changes inside and outside the party. One reason seems to be that when former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad ( photo ) announced he would step down by the end of October 2003, Keng Yaik reasoned that he needed to stay on to protect his party's interests as the political environment then was quite fluid.

Keng Yaik's decision not to hand power to Kerk was possibly because he found that Kerk lacks popular support at the grassroots and, more critically, Kerk's public and personal relations within the party are not good. This was evidenced in the 2002 party elections when Kerk was challenged by a grassroots leader.

Indeed, the fact that Kerk has risen to the position of deputy president has a lot to do with Keng Yaik's backing or patronage.

Also, as the chairperson of Perak Gerakan, Kerk's decision to contest in a safer parliamentary seat in Johor in the 2004 general election has since been causing critical evaluation of his political judgement within the party.

Keng Yaik may have also taken into consideration the question of whether it is time for the party's presidency to be returned to its base in Penang. Gerakan's centre of gravity has traditionally been based in Penang, but in the past 25 years there has not been a Gerakan president from Penang. Keng Yaik is from Perak while Kerk is from Johor.

Both Kerk and Koh were formerly leaders of the Chinese educational movement who were also close associates before they joined Gerakan in 1982. But, it seems that, after 23 years in Gerakan and the government, they have developed personal as well as factional differences. Why?

Both Kerk and Koh joined politics in 1982. But, before that, Kerk was ahead of Koh in terms of public image, standing and social connections. Kerk joined the Chinese educational movement and the Renaissance Movement of Independent Chinese Secondary School Movement in the 1970s. Kerk was also a lawyer fighting the government for the right to establish a Chinese-language university, namely the Merdeka University. He was skillful in public speaking and writing and also popular among the Chinese intellectuals. At that time, Koh was only a lecturer with USM. Koh, although highly educated, was socially inexperienced.

With the backing of DJZ, both Kerk and Koh contested in the 1982 general election under the BN ticket. Kerk lost in Kepong but Koh won in Penang. In the 1986 general election, their fates were reversed. Kerk won and Koh lost to DAP's Lim Kit Siang. After that, Koh became the political secretary to former Penang Chief Minister Dr Lim Chong Eu and Kerk rose from being the party's secretary-general to deputy president.

In the 1990 general election, Chong Eu was defeated by DAP's Kit Siang and lost his chief ministerial position. Dr Goh Cheng Teik was, by qualification, supposed to be the most suitable replacement for Chong Eu but he was opposed by the Penang factions of Gerakan who preferred Tsu Khoon to take over as chief minister.

Koh did actually started as a weak chief minister but in the 1995 general election, he led a campaign to beat off DAP's attempt to capture Penang state power ending Kit Siang's ambition once and for all. Since then, Koh's standing has been high. No doubt, Koh is an amicable character and a man of integrity. As Penang's chief minister, he is also in command of huge resources.

Koh has been in contact with academics and intellectuals. His father was the ex-president of Penang Chinese Chamber of Commerce. He also maintains good personal relations with both Abdullah and former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim. Kerk lacks all these.

Although Kerk is a federal deputy minister, he does not command huge resources as Koh does. His personality has been described as arrogant and aloof. Also, with the label of being a 'Chinese educationist', he does not enjoys the trust of Umno. Kerk's power base is also far away from Penang and this has served to distance him from Gerakan's centre of gravity.

Although Kerk comes from the Chinese educationist background, he seems to be now intensely disliked by many Chinese educationists and Chinese-educated civil society activists, both old and young. Why? What are the characteristics of Kerk that have caused him to lose his charisma and popularity among the Chinese educationists and Chinese-educated civil society?

At that time (1982), Chinese educationists in DJZ adopted the constructive engagement strategy of 'joining the BN Front to reform the BN'. They had high hope, or even unrealistic illusion, for people like Kerk and Koh. However, under Umno's one-party preponderance, the BN cannot be easily reformed.

Initially, Kerk still maintained some contacts with DJZ leaders but, thereafter, their views on government's policies began to diverge. Their political reasoning have also began to differ. Finally, former DJZ chairperson the late Lim Fong Seng publicly announced that the strategy had failed. Kerk, Koh and their group has not reformed the BN. On the contrary, they have since been 'reformed' by the BN.

However, not all in the Kerk's group have been questioned by the Chinese educationist movement. Former MP for Teluk Intan, the late Ong Tin Kin, for example, was highly regarded up to the time of his death a few years ago.

A school of thought opines that, while Koh may be personally more amiable and intelligent in term of public image, his technocratic tendency and wishy-washy character have rendered him vulnerable to criticism for the lack of leadership quality. What is your opinion?

This is certainly Koh's weakness. He was an academic. Probably, he was not really that interested in politics. So, the fact he has reached the present position is beyond previous expectation. As compared to many MCA leaders who like to swagger around, Koh gives the impression that he is cool-headed and capable of managing normal business as well as playing the role of balancer or arbitrator.

However, his excessively cautious approach may stifle political imaginativeness and creativeness. In time of pressure and crisis, Koh may be perceived as lacking decisiveness and firm leadership. That Koh also lacks Keng Yaik's political passion or fire in the belly may cause him to face more challenges and pressures from Umno in the future

Another school of thought also opines that while Lim combines technocratic skills and mass mobilisation ability, both Kerk and Koh are purely elitist in image and attitude without Lim's natural gift of public speaking and mixing around at the grassroots. So, whether it is Kerk or Koh who finally succeed Lim, Gerakan would be enfeebled now that the MCA is helmed by media-backed populists like Ong Ka Ting. What is your opinion?

Keng Yaik's contribution to Gerakan is indisputable because he has extended Gerakan's power and influence beyond Penang and also ensured that the general quality of Gerakan's membership to be higher than that of MCA. However, Gerakan's influence outside Penang is still relatively limited.

Gerakan, however, still has two limitations. One, despite its claim to be multi-ethnic, it is still Chinese-predominated and this has caused the party to be exploited by Umno as an strategic check-and-balance against MCA. Two, too many technocrats and professions in Gerakan may cause it to lack political leadership, charisma and passion. This may be the reason why Keng Yaik is still felt to be indispensable to the party.

That MCA owns and controls the media, Chinese guilds and associations and a huge party organisation and that MCA still harbours the ambition of taking over the Penang chief minister's position certainly has caused Gerakan to be wary of its ally. It can be seen in Gerakan's effort to build a private university to counter MCA's Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman. Gerakan's academics, intellectuals, bureaucrats, technocrats and professionals are no match for MCA's leaders in terms of grassroots building and political mobilisation.