Since my arrival in Malaysia for a short summer assignment, I read
many political articles and had many interesting political conversations
with voters about Hindraf and P Waythamoorthy.
A fair share of
them scorned at Hindraf's collaboration with the BN. Others disagreed
with Waythamoorthy's acceptance of his appointment as a deputy minister
in the Prime Minister's Department.
Some depicted him as a
traitor or even worse, as someone who deserted his original ideals for
position. Such disagreements and criticisms are understandable.
I
have great respect for freedom of speech. Such bold opinions are
definitely welcome especially with Pakatan Rakyat and Bersih in recent
days seeking the right to free speech.
While I admire these
individuals for their courage and am sure they speak out of care for the
country, I must disagree with sophism.
The failure to understand
Waythamoorthy's and the Hindraf's struggle resulted in specious
arguments and nothing more than a series of allegations thrown at a
noble individual.
Waythamoorthy's ideas are original, far ahead
of our time. He is a sort of a maverick, with unconventional and
nonconforming ideas.
Therefore it is difficult for some to
understand the steps he took and the decisions he made. Some of the
accusations against him were strongly influenced by ideology while
others were loyalty-based.
Yes, Hindraf was at one time fiercely
against the BN. That is the reason the organisation held numerous
meetings with Pakatan with one goal, among others, to oust the BN.
The crucial question to answer here is why did Hindraf plot with Pakatan to oust the BN?
Hindraf
had a single goal - to install a government that will instantly
implement the Hindraf blueprint because BN had failed to do its share
for the Indian community for more than 55 years.
Waythamoorthy
had that one goal in mind - the improvement of the socio-economic status
of ethnic Indians through implementation of the blueprint.
After numerous meetings however, Pakatan refused to sign the blueprint dumping Hindraf into a completely unexpected dilemma.
From the onset of it, Hindraf never promised that it would remain loyal to Pakatan under all circumstances.
Hindraf had always maintained that loyalty is issue-based, one that will be determined by mutual agreement and respect.
As a result of Pakatan's ditching
of Hindraf, Hindraf was left with no other choice but to collaborate with those that Hindraf had previously condemned.
Again this is issue-based, the original goal of improving the shattered lives of ethnic Indians.
The
BN, unlike Pakatan, was willing to sign the blueprint. Hindraf agreed,
and reluctantly threw its support behind the BN. Why didn't Hindraf push
for seats with the BN?
Again it is because the organisation
adopted a wait-and-see attitude before forging a long-term alliance with
the BN. If the issues stipulated in the blueprint are not fulfilled, I
believe Hindraf will leave the BN.
I mentioned earlier that many allegations made against Hindraf and Waythamoorthy were influenced by ideology and loyalty.
For these accusers, bond and devotion to a party is sacred. They loved Hindraf when Hindraf was with
Pakatan.
As soon as Hindraf made a 180-degree turn, they began to show disdain for Hindraf.
Others
failed to appreciate Hindraf's unique ideology-free stand. Both
ideology and loyalty are important but there things that are equally
significant, such as issues.
Some political issues deal with life and death matters including the survival of a community.
In
fact loyalty itself should be to the people we represent not the party.
Pakatan promised to implement the blueprint but refused to sign it in
writing.
What do you expect Hindraf to tell the hundreds of
thousands of struggling ethnic Indians if Pakatan comes to power and not
implement a verbal promise?
These people waited patiently since 2008 for PR's help with little delivered in states run by Pakatan.
Don't
you see that it will be the greatest disservice to the community if
Hindraf relied on a verbal promise for the next five years? Hindraf
cannot take that chance.
Sleeping with the enemy therefore
naturally became the better option. Try telling a starving person to
wait another five years because a strategic error occurred.
Should any responsible organisation end up in such a predicament?
Waythamoorthy
devoted the last seven years of his life for the Indian cause.
Therefore the cause is supreme, not loyalty to a party or ideology. This
man sacrificed his livelihood.
Additionally, he was prepared to sacrifice his life too as evidenced by his hunger strike that lasted three weeks.
The
cause took precedence. He is the best available choice for heading the
unit within the PM's department to solve ethnic Indian problems in
Malaysia.
I cannot think of a more suitable candidate.
Waythamoorthy's perseverance, resilience, and altruism earned him the
right to spearhead and steer the government's renewed efforts to improve
the Indian lot in this country.
For those who hold on to the
false dogma that Waythamoorthy accepted the deputy minister post for
selfish reasons, I can say one thing - he could have secured that a long
time back if he wished.
If you are still unconvinced about the person, at least support what he stands for.
Let us leave bitter feelings behind and move on. There is so much he can do for you as minister rather than as Hindraf chair.
SUGUMAN NARAYANAN PhD is a political science professor at a university near Dallas, Texas, US.
"This
will reinforce their commitment to the fight against corruption. By
doing so, doubts about their assets during their term as elected
representatives can be overcome," said committee chairperson Johan
Jaafar (left) in a statement today.
