Thursday, March 12, 2009


There are a lot of opinions regarding the meeting between Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi (popularly known as Pak Lah) with Opposition Leader Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Some says it is merely coincidence. Some says it is a planned meeting between both of them. Even one of the political analyst feels that the meeting might have relevance with the transition plan in UMNO and national leadership. According to the political analyst, Pak Lah has promised to step down as the President of UMNO in the next UMNO election. So, there is no way for Pak Lah to reclaim the Presidency anymore since the nomination period had already closed. However, Pak Lah still can become the Prime Minister if he commands the majority of Dewan Rakyat. It is merely a tradition that the President of UMNO will become the Prime Minister of Malaysia. Therefore, the political analyst believes that if Pak Lah is able to bring 30 MPs from Barisan Nasional (BN) together with all MPs from Pakatan Rakyat (PR) to support him as the Prime Minister, he still can be the legitimate Prime Minister of Malaysia. It is because politics is “The Art of Possible”. The political analyst feels that this kind of situation might happen.

Personally, I do agree that politics is “The Art of Possible”. Anything can happen in politics. For example the result of 2008 General Election, no Minister post for the Deputy President of a strong party, 5 by-elections in less than 15 months since the General Election, change of government in Perak for less than 1 year of ruling, hop to other political parties twice in just a few days and so on. However, I feel that certain possibilities are more similar to miracles. Just as the case of Pak Lah, if what the political analyst has said comes true, I’ll consider that as a miracle rather than “The Art of Possible” because the percentage for that situation to happen is extremely low. I do agree that there is no absolute answer in politics. But if we look at Pak Lah’s personalities, backgrounds and influences, I’ll give it a no to the situation above.

Anyway, I prefer to be optimistic about the meeting. For me, a meeting is a meeting. A gathering is a gathering. Ruling politicians and opposition politicians meet together does not necessarily mean that there must be political agendas behind that. Even if I’m given a chance to become a politician, I’ll uphold the motto of “We might have different ideologies in politics, but we still can become friends beyond politics”. Anyhow, I feel that the motto is hardly going to be adapted in Malaysia politics. There are too many fallacies in Malaysia politics. The most obvious will be the fallacy of hominem. The fallacy of hominem refers to the rejection of one’s idea not because of the idea is poor, but because of the identity of the person who bring it up. That is why I feel that Malaysia politicians should debate and argue about a policy or issue rationally. Don’t brush off others ideas just because they are from other political parties. According to Duncan Watts in his book “Understanding US/UK Government and Politics” published in 2003, he acknowledges that the politicians in US and UK will represent the voices of people, not their respective political parties. For them, they have more obligations to serve the nation rather than their political parties. Their Chief Whip would not punish them simply because Congressmen/women support an opponent’s motion which is good to the nation or is the voice of their constituents. That is what we considered as First-World politics.

Malaysia politicians, whether they are from the ruling side or the opposition side keep on championing about First World Parliament and First World mentality. How are they going to achieve all the targets if they still keep on to the Old Politics? They should focus more on New Politics which comprises of justice, transparency, integration, universality, regional issues, good debates/arguments, welfare and others. I hope that Malaysia politicians can cooperate with each other. Don’t try to make a non-issue to be an issue.

No comments:

Post a Comment