Bersih has been hijacked by the opposition and now appears like it is the fourth coalition member of Pakatan Rakyat, says RPK.
INTERVIEW
PETALING
JAYA: Popular blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin has said that election
reforms movement Bersih has failed in its main aim of bringing about
electoral reforms in Malaysia.
He said that Bersih had made the mistake of aligning itself with
Pakatan Rakyat, and had shown more interest in making Opposition Leader
Anwar Ibrahim the prime minister of the nation.
“The window of opportunity for change has closed. If we want to see
political reforms (and hence electoral reforms as well) it will have to
be on another platform.
“Bersih is too tainted, and in particular because it is now seen as
an Anwar Ibrahim movement. Anwar has destroyed Bersih,” he told FMT in
an interview today.
The editor of Malaysia-Today blog said Bersih should have remained
non-partisan although it was political, adding that support from both
sides of the political divide were essential to see electoral reforms in
Malaysia.
“If the fight for electoral reforms is merely an opposition effort,
and with no support from those in government, then we will never see
electoral reforms in Malaysia,” he said from the UK.
He also had harsh words for Anwar, saying that the PKR de facto
leader was talking about unfair elections now when he himself was part
of a political party which had enjoyed the fruits of the system for 16
years from 1982 to 1998.
“Without this unfair election system Umno would have been out of power as early as 1990.
“But Anwar never raised this back in the 1980s when he was in Umno
and when he needed Umno to remain in power so that one day he could
become the Prime Minister.
“Anwar exploited this unfair system to fulfil his personal political
agenda and ambition. Anwar was part of the problem back in the late
1980s and early 1990s.
“Today, Anwar is offering himself as the solution when he is the problem rather than the solution.
“If Anwar had succeeded in his effort to topple Mahathir in 1997-1998
and had become the Prime Minister instead of getting kicked out of
Umno, do you think he would be talking about the unfair elections
today?” asked Raja Petra.
When asked on what was needed to bring about a change in Malaysia,
Raja Petra said the only way was for Malaysians from both sides of the
political divide unite to fight for change.
“This is not happening yet. It is still Barisan Nasional versus Pakatan Rakyat. And that is not the recipe for change.
“There are extremists from both sides — Barisan Nasional as well as
Pakatan Rakyat. We need to build a centrist movement that includes
supporters from both Barisan Nasional as well as Pakatan Rakyat. Until
that happens you can forget about ever hoping for change,” he said.
Below is an excerpt of the Q&A with Raja Petra Kamarudin:
Could you tell about your involvement with Bersih?
In the beginning, Bersih was an ad hoc and informal movement. I
really don’t know how the whole thing came about but some of us from the
civil society movements, bloggers, etc., — basically activists — got
together to plan a movement to fight for electoral reforms (as a first
step to political reforms).
Some of us, of course, were ‘professional’ politicians who had
earlier been involved with the reformasi movement and participated, or
were behind, the various demonstrations that were organised back in
1998, 1999, 2000, and so on.
That was back in 2007 at the height of the Tun Dr Mahathir
Mohamad-Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi tussle. In fact, Mahathir had already
resigned from Umno and was leading an anti-Pak Lah campaign that
criss-crossed Malaysia. If you can remember, Mahathir was attacked with
mace at the Kota Bharu airport and I was also there and suffered the
‘spill-over’ of the mace.
You may not be aware of this, but what we can probably now call
‘Bersih 1.0’ (since we now have Bersih 2.0, Bersih 3.0 and probably soon
Bersih 4.0) was also supported by some within Umno.
In fact, we had a few meetings with the Umno people and I even
brought DAP leaders such as Ronnie Liu to these meetings — plus I also
brought the Umno people to meetings with a few DAP people. Some of these
Umno people have even now joined DAP, Aspan Alias as one example. The
Umno people also helped sponsor the BERSIH caps and T-shirts costing
thousands of ringgit.
Hence Bersih 1.0 was not entirely an opposition effort, although some opposition politicians may have been involved.
It was, as far as I was concerned, a civil society effort that
included activists, bloggers, politicians, and so on, from both side of
the political divide. And for about two years from 2006-2007 we had many
meetings that included supporters of both the government and the
opposition (Pakatan Rakyat did not exist yet at that time).
We even launched a movement (not party) called Barisan Rakyat in
early 2008 even before Pakatan Rakyat was formed — which was a coalition
of six non-Barisan Nasional political parties from West Malaysia and
East Malaysia — to take on Barisan Nasional (we realised that to win the
general election we needed people from Sabah and Sarawak as well).
Sadly, though, Lim Kit Siang made a press statement denying that
Barisan Rakyat was an opposition effort and soon after that Pakatan
Rakyat was launched that involved only three parties and excluded the
parties from East Malaysia plus PSM.
You have put up some “fiery” writings about Bersih. What is
your general view about Bersih and what is your evaluation on its
performance in electoral reform for the country? To what extend can the
Bersih movement have an impact on the Malaysian political and electoral
system?
To ensure the success of Bersih 1.0, we spoke to some people in
government to obtain the consent of Istana Negara for us to hand a
memorandum regarding electoral reforms to His Majesty the Agong — then
His Highness the Sultan of Terengganu. It took many months of lobbying
and behind the scenes negotiations and finally we managed to obtain the
consent.
The police had initially classified the planned Bersih 1.0 march as
an illegal assembly. However, after we managed to obtain the consent of
Istana Negara, the police ‘loosened up’ and allowed the march (which
attracted tens of thousands of people). However, only 10 people would be
allowed into Istana Negara to hand the Memorandum to His Majesty the
Agong.
On the day of the Bersih 1.0 event, thousands marched to the palace.
When we reached the palace gates we received instructions to wait
outside. We were told that ‘the leaders’ were coming and that we had to
wait for the arrival of these leaders.
I don’t know whose decision this was but we waited anyway. An hour
later, Anwar Ibrahim and various PKR, DAP and PAS leaders arrived and 10
of them went in to Istana Negara. Suddenly the whole thing was hijacked
and was turned into an opposition event.
From then on the opposition took over and began organising the Bersih 2.0, Bersih 3.0, etc. events.
From that day on Bersih was no longer a civil society effort. It
became an opposition movement with no longer any involvement by people
from Barisan Nasional or Umno.
Some see the Bersih movement as an effort to topple the
Barisan Nasional regime, what is your view? In related to that, how do
you evaluate the relationship between the Bersih and opposition
political parties, Pakatan Rakyat?
I believe that Bersih should have remained non-partisan although it
is certainly political. We need support from both sides of the political
divide if we want to see electoral reforms in Malaysia.
If the fight for electoral reforms is merely an opposition effort,
and with no support from those in government, then we will never see
electoral reforms in Malaysia.
Hence I resent the fact that Bersih has been hijacked by the
opposition and now appears like it is the fourth coalition member of
Pakatan Rakyat. Even the chairperson of Bersih was handpicked by Anwar
Ibrahim — which is a shame really because then Bersih now ‘belongs’ to
Anwar Ibrahim, which was never the original intention back in 2006 and
2007.
If you can remember, in the 2010 general election in the UK, Liberal Democrat fought for political reforms.
That was why I joined the party back in 2009. Conservative agreed to
political reforms while Labour only agreed to electoral reforms. Hence
LibDem joined Conservative to form the new government although they had
earlier said in the event of a hung parliament they would join Labour to
form the government.
So we need political reforms. And within political reforms would
include electoral reforms. That was what we are fighting for in the UK.
That is what Malaysians must fight for in Malaysia as well.
And political reforms would include an end to racial and religious politics, something that ails Malaysia today.
Bersih suffers from an image problem. It now appears as a movement to
make Anwar Ibrahim the Prime Minister. Anwar talks about the unfair
elections (which is the same problem we are facing in the UK — such as
gerrymandering, etc.).
But that was what kept Umno in power when Anwar was in Umno for 16
years from 1982 to 1998. Without this unfair election system Umno would
have been out of power as early as 1990.
But Anwar never raised this back in the 1980s when he was in Umno and
when he needed Umno to remain in power so that one day he could become
the Prime Minister.
Anwar exploited this unfair system to fulfil his personal political
agenda and ambition. Anwar was part of the problem back in the late
1980s and early 1990s.
Today, Anwar is offering himself as the solution when he is the problem rather than the solution.
If Anwar had succeeded in his effort to topple Mahathir in 1997-1998
and had become the Prime Minister instead of getting kicked out of Umno,
do you think he would be talking about the unfair elections today?
My opinion is that Bersih has failed. The window of opportunity for
change has closed. If we want to see political reforms (and hence
electoral reforms as well) it will have to be on another platform.
Bersih is too tainted, and in particular because it is now seen as an Anwar Ibrahim movement. Anwar has destroyed Bersih.
You are one of the co-founders for the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM). What happen to the MLCM now?
Just like Bersih, the same has happened to the many other civil
society movements as well. They are either aligned to Barisan Nasional
or Pakatan Rakyat. There are no longer any independent movements.
Independent movements are not allowed. You are expected to align
yourself to either the government or the opposition.
And this was why the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM)
failed. Malaysians could not accept a movement that does not show
loyalty to either Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat.
Until Malaysians can clamour for an independent movement that is not
subservient to the political masters, on whichever side of the political
divide, then we will never see change in Malaysia because politics is
about power, never mind whether it is opposition or government.
And to gain power the ends justify the means — which is why politics is so corrupt.
What is your view on the current political landscape of
Malaysia? How do you evaluate the role of civil society and social
movements?
2008 was the peak for the opposition. 2013 saw a slight improvement
for the opposition over 2008. Many say 2018 (when the next general
election is expected) will be the end of Barisan Nasional and Umno and
will see Pakatan Rakyat in power.
I do not believe that. I believe Umno will become even stronger
although Barisan Nasional may get weaker because of the non-Umno
parties. There is too much at stake for Umno to allow the country to
fall into the hands of Pakatan Rakyat. By hook or by crook, Umno will do
anything required to stay in power. That is the reality.
The only way we will see change will be when Malaysians from both
sides of the political divide unite to fight for change. This is not
happening yet. It is still Barisan Nasional versus Pakatan Rakyat. And
that is not the recipe for change.
There are extremists from both sides — Barisan Nasional as well as
Pakatan Rakyat. We need to build a centrist movement that includes
supporters from both Barisan Nasional as well as Pakatan Rakyat. Until
that happens you can forget about ever hoping for change.
A centrist movement means we need liberalism. Even the opposition is
not yet ready for liberalism. But we put the blame entirely on Umno or
Barisan Nasional whereas the opposition is equally guilty of the same
thing.
How many times do we hear opposition leaders and supporters make
statements opposing this, that or the other? Liberalism is a big word.
And when you talk about democracy that too is a very wide concept.
To Malaysians, democracy just means voting in an election. General
elections may be part of the democratic process but that is not
democracy.
Some say democracy means freedom of speech. If democracy means
freedom of speech then Malaysia is a democracy because we do have
freedom of speech in Malaysia. It is freedom after speech that we do not
have.
Then we blame the government for denying Malaysians freedom of speech
(or freedom after speech). Are you saying that the opposition allows
freedom of speech (or freedom of thought, freedom of choice, etc. — the
fundamentals of democracy)?
Can a Muslim girl/woman marry a Hindu boy/man without the Hindu
converting to Islam? Can a Muslim leave Islam to become a Christian? Can
a man marry a man (or a woman marry a woman)?
Can I dispute the belief that the Quran (or the Bible) is the word of
God and publicly say so? Can a Muslim drink beer? Can I make a
statement saying that the Monarchy is outdated and a waste of money and
that Malaysia should be turned into a Republic?
Can I set up the Malaysian Communist Party (MCP) without getting
arrested and getting sent to jail? Can I publicly declare that all
religions are nonsense and we should all become atheists?
Now, don’t ask Umno. Umno will certainly say no. Ask the opposition.
Will the opposition say yes or will they also say no? The opposition has
already said no even before you ask them — if you had been following
what they have been saying all this while.
Hence what democracy are we talking about? There is no democracy in
Malaysia whether Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat rules. They are both
opposite sides of the same coin. That is the long and short of it all.
And that is why we need a non-partisan civil society movement because
both sides of the political divide are the same in denying us our civil
liberties and hence are equally not democratic.
Many scholars have reached the conclusion that Malaysia is a
semi-democracy regime, are you optimistic that Malaysia will in the near
future be able to call itself a democracy country?
We cannot say that Malaysia is a semi-democracy. It is like saying
someone is semi-pregnant. Either you are pregnant or you are not. How
would you define a semi-democracy? Are you saying I can drink one bottle
of beer but not six bottles? Or I can drink as long as I do not get
drunk? Or I can marry a man as long as I do not indulge in anal sex?
What is a semi-democracy? Either I can or I cannot. Period! Either we
are a democracy or we are not. Period!
Bersih (and I mean Bersih 1.0 back in 2007) was about electoral
reforms. But that was only the beginning and very small part of
political reforms in Malaysia. It was how we would we start.
Once we achieve electoral reforms (which has still not been achieved)
we will then need to take it to the next level — which is political
reforms.
Political reforms will not only involve a strong two-party system in
Malaysia but also a strong civil society movement not aligned to any
political party, basically a strong third force. But Malaysians do not
understand the meaning of a third force.
To most people, a third force means three-corner contests in the
general elections — because Malaysians are only capable of thinking in
terms of general elections and can’t think beyond that.
General elections are not the endgame. General elections are part of
the game plan but not the endgame. General elections are just a means to
an end. This, Malaysians cannot seem to understand.
Okay, let’s say in the 2018 general election Pakatan Rakyat manages
to oust Barisan Nasional. What then? Will we see more civil liberties?
Will all those ‘forbidden fruits’ I mentioned above now be allowed? What
is forbidden under Barisan Nasional will still be forbidden under
Pakatan Rakyat. There will be no change in matters involving race,
religion, language, the monarchy, and so on.
In short, it will still be old wine in a new bottle. Malaysia will
never become a Republic. Article 153 will still be in the Constitution.
Islam will still be the religion of the Federation and ‘insulting Islam’
will still be a crime (whatever ‘insulting Islam’ really means).
I still cannot say that Allah does not exist without being sent to
jail (unless some religious fanatic kills me first). Sex with another
man will still be a crime. Elton John and Shakira will still not be
welcome in Malaysia because one is gay and the other is too sexy.
And the list goes on. So what change will Pakatan Rakyat bring that Barisan Nasional will not allow?
Malaysian activists and civil society movements have to think beyond
general elections and the two main political coalitions called Barisan
Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat. Only then can we talk about change.
Until then we will still just be talking about changing the
government, not about changing society. And that is not what I mean by
change. And Bersih or Pakatan Rakyat cannot bring the type of change I
am talking about.
Bersih is just about toppling Barisan Nasional. In fact, it is now
even worse than that. Bersih is now about making Anwar Ibrahim the Prime
Minister. That was not why we formed Bersih in 2007.
Since then, however, Bersih has been hijacked and has been turned
into an ‘Anwar Ibrahim for Prime Minister’ movement. And that was what
made me so angry back in 2010 and the reason why I have been so
outspoken since 2010.
Maybe one day, after 2020, Malaysians will wake up and understand
where I am coming from and where I am trying to go. I will be past 70
then in the event I am still alive. But we shall have to place our hope
in the next generation, my grandchildren’s generation, to see this new
awakening.
Until then it is going to get worse before it gets better. Hence
prepare yourself for a crash landing before we touch dry land again.
My suspicion is that the fight for real change will not come from the
opposition. Umno and Barisan Nasional are desperate to remain in power
and they know that they are on the verge of losing power. Hence change
will have to come from within Umno and Barisan Nasional if they do not
want to lose power.
Umno may become more centrist, as will the other non-Umno parties in
Barisan Nasional. They will become more centrist out of need and
desperation.
And to me it does not matter whether change comes from Barisan
Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat as long as Malaysia sees change. As
politicians will say: the ends justify the means.
Hence as long as we see change it does not matter whether we work
with the angel or the devil especially when the devil propagates change
while the angel resists change — and even Elton John become an issue for
the opposition.
I do not owe loyalty to Pakatan Rakyat. My loyalty is to the fight
for change. Hence I will support anyone who supports change, even the
Communists if need be. After all, is not Che Guevara my idol (which is
why I wear a beret plus I have a collection of his T-shirts)?
I have written-off the present generation Malaysians and even the
next generation (my children’s generation). I am hoping for the third
generation, my grandchildren’s generation, to bring about this change.
And with the Internet, Globalisation, and so on, this is going to
happen ten years down the road, maybe after 2020. Then I can breath my
last breathe and go to my grave with a smile of my face because my
mission and vision will be complete and my life on earth would not have
been wasted.
"Stop manipulating the emotions of the army and police veterans. Just put up or shut up!" Abdul Aziz (right), a professor from the International Islamic University of Malaysia said in a press statement.
But
Sothinathan is said to be in a dilemma, whether to make a second
attempt for the post as he did in 2009 or to position himself as one of
the three vice-presidents this year and to move up later in 2016, when
the leadership transition in MIC takes place.
Palanivel has already announced that he wants Dr Subramaniam (right) to be elected unopposed as deputy president. 
But
Sothinathan is also facing another dilemma in the form of Saravanan,
the current vice president, who is working very closely with Dr
Subramaniam and has stood by the deputy president in the recent tussle
for presidency with Palanivel.
The Malaysian Insider by V. ANBALAGAN
