The feelings of Umno members is not surprising.

One newspaper analyst correctly said that “many of them probably are looking
too much into this decision and thinking about what Umno will look like in the
future.''

But Umno has, in fact, accepted many non-Muslim bumiputras into the party since
it decided to expand to Sabah.

When the United Sabah National Organisation disbanded in 1991, its members,
including Chinese, joined Umno.

It is only natural for Umno members to take time to adjust themselves to
changes.

The decision by Dr Mahathir is highly commendable. It speaks volumes of Umno's
openness and far-sightedness.

The ordinary members may not realise it but Umno has taken another positive
step towards nation-building.

The MCA and MIC have, in fact, quietly taken similar steps to de-communalise
their memberships.

Last week, a Chinese delegate was featured attending the MIC general assembly
in Johor Baru. He heads the Kupang MIC branch chairman in Kedah and is a
delegate from the Baling division.

In the case of MCA, there are already Indian and Thai members, mostly from
Penang, Kedah and Kelantan.

They may be token members in their respective parties at this point in time,
but an evolution is slowly taking place.

The Malay-dominated Parti Keadilan Nasional has several non-Malays in its
leadership line-up and are accepted by the Malay members.

The membership of PAS is restricted to only Muslims but it has toyed with the
idea of letting non-Muslims become associate members.

The idea has, however, not taken off because of purported unacceptance at
grassroots level.

The other two opposition parties, the DAP and Parti Rakyat Malaysia, is
multi-racial in set-up but dominated by Chinese and Malays respectively.

The de-communalising of Malaysian politics is a natural process. Communal
politics will lose its appeal in years to come.

Communal-based parties like Umno, MCA and MIC may adopt a non-communal approach
in their politics but the racial identification is something these parties will
have to relook at in future.

At this juncture, the leaders and members of the big three would certainly want
to maintain the status quo. For operational purposes, these ethnic structures
enable the parties to mobilise their strength more effectively.

To project a more multi-racial image, Barisan Nasional should be
emphasised.

The Barisan supreme council now meets only once or twice a year, as required
under its constitution, or when the need arises.

Although most of the Barisan component party leaders are represented in the
Cabinet, which meets every Wednesday, it would be good for the Barisan
leadership to meet every month.

The Barisan supreme council could meet after or before Umno supreme council
meetings.

More press statements could be jointly issued by the Barisan leaders to project
unity in the coalition.

At grassroots level, Barisan committees could carry out more projects and activities.

The unprecedented move by the Seputih Umno division to invite MCA
vice-president Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting to open its Youth and Wanita meetings
should be emulated by others.

Last week, the Sabak Bernam MCA division broke a 50-year-old tradition when its
meeting was opened by the constituency MP, Datuk Zainal Dahlan.

The Barisan Youth executive committee has also shown its ability to handle the
controversial university quota issue sensibly.

Instead of playing to the gallery to score points, Umno Youth emphasised the
need to maintain the quota system and, at the same time, called for the high
achievers to be admitted into university.

Barisan Youth leaders visited Education Minister Tan Sri Musa Mohamad as a
collective group to resolve the issue.

These are commendable efforts for BN to evolve into a more integrated party in
image and activities.

The notion of a coalition should not be projected only during elections but
must be seen to function as a cohesive unit at all times.

By meeting more often and regularly as a party rather than a coalition, it
would serve as a reminder to Malaysians that the country is led by a moderate
multi-racial force.

That aside, the Election Commission must try to draw up more racially-mixed
constituencies when it begins its redelineation exercise of electoral
boundaries.

Politicians, regardless of their parties, should no longer bring up issues that
only interest one particular race during election campaigns. That would reduce
the use of communal and religious issues.

No Malaysian should be fearful of moves to reduce communal politics because the
old ways will not remain forever.

It is better for the parties concerned to be far-sighted and take the necessary
steps to remain relevant.

When the various sides have expressed their views, there
has to be a meeting point for the different perspectives to converge.

In Malaysia, the message is clear: no one race can have everything. Politics is
all about accommodation and compromise.

In recent years, issues that were once considered taboo are now being discussed
more openly.

But it is never easy. Last week, an opposition politician lost his cool when he
was asked by a newsman whether his statements on the university quota would
lead to racial unhappiness.

The seasoned politician, who is used to provoking government politicians,
became angry when he found himself at the receiving end.

The reporter's newspaper sadly responded in an emotional manner.

In a democracy, there will always be many perspectives. But we Malaysians,
newspapers included, need to always remind ourselves that we must be sensitive
towards the feelings of all.

Non-Malays today read Bahasa Malaysia newspapers while the views of Chinese
dailies are highlighted in Bahasa and English publications. In the case of the
English press, it has a heavier responsibility as it is read by all
races.

At the same time, we must also bear in mind that the stand of these newspapers,
Bahasa or Chinese, reflects the sentiments of the majority of their readers and
must thus be respected.

The reminder of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad and his deputy,
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, on national unity is thus timely.

Such reminders are necessary as many of us sometimes become careless or
emotional when discussing national issues.

Dr Mahathir described national unity as “an invaluable gift which cannot be
measured in material gains.''

Malaysians, especially politicians and pressure groups, often do not know where
to stop.

Rational discussion is good but a line must also be drawn, as in a game with
rules and regulations.

Some of us do not understand the difference between making appeals and making
demands. A polemic on a specific topic can degenerate into other issues and,
soon, the original topic is lost as emotions flare.

National unity, as Abdullah said, must never be taken for granted because if we
do, we open our doors to racial intolerance and even ethnic chauvinism.

Speaking at a forum on national unity, Abdullah expressed his concern that the
willingness to compromise may not be shared by the younger generation.

Without the baggage of the May 13 incident, there is always the misguided sense
of bravado.

Abdullah said: “There is now an increasing number of Malay youths who regard
the policies of the New Economic Policy as bunk and outdated.

“They say they are ready for meritocracy and yet they are, as a group, still
mediocre compared to non-Malays.

“There are non-Malays who also question the social contract as Malaysians,
born in Malaysia, educated in Malaysia and feeling every bit as Malaysian as
the Malay.

“Many non-Malay youths demand that they be given the same privileges as
Malays. On the other spectrum, there are still Malay youths caught up in the
nationalism of the 1960s and 70s who, instead of focusing on strategies to
empower the Malays, call for more assistance and more crutches to be
given.''

Abdullah has correctly felt the pulse of many Malaysians but, as he said,
national unity and nation-building are painfully slow processes.

However, Malaysians should never underestimate themselves. We have shown the ability
to accommodate each other.

Since independence, the country has accommodated, instead of assimilated, the
cultures of all ethnic groups.

The country's leadership has been tolerant, compromising and open. Although
Umno, MCA and MIC are communal-based parties, they have adopted a non-communal
approach in its politics.

There is a sense of a common purpose, common destiny and a common flag. In the
years to come, it would not be a surprise if the component parties evolve to
become a singular multi-racial party.

So long as we remain committed to the ideals of cultural diversity, it will not
be impossible to attain the goals of national unity.

Five also had their rights to vote forfeited and their
rights to contest party elections suspended for six years.

Those suspended were charged with breaking the party's code of ethics by taking
part in money politics during the election of divisional leaders. They were
accused of giving money, throwing parties or providing overseas trips as a way
to influence internal elections. One of the accused was a state executive
councillor.

The fact is that money politics is merely a polite word for corruption.

As Dr Mahathir himself admitted recently, the perception of many Malaysians is
that Umno has been riddled with money politics.

Rightly or wrongly, many people, including even Umno members, assume that
joining the party is one way of becoming rich.

Umno aspirants are prepared to fork out millions of ringgit to buy votes,
believing that they will reap profits from their investment.

These crooked politicians believe that if they are elected as division heads,
they would stand a better chance of being picked to contest a state or
parliament seat.

Some Umno members even believe that their membership is enough to win them a
contract for a project.

On Monday, Dr Mahathir said Umno must be cleansed of money politics, adding
that the people would never believe that corrupt leaders could set up a good
government to serve them effectively.

The people, he rightly pointed out, will not pick the party leaders if they
think that these candidates are corrupt. He added that Umno would lose members
if its members did not close ranks after the election process.

In the past, Umno members used to laugh at the fisticuffs and chair-throwing at
MIC meetings.

But such squabbles no longer take place in MIC meetings only but also in Umno
meetings.

Over the past weeks, there have been reports of fights and even one reported
stabbing.

In Libaran, Sabah, police had to be brought in as tension ran high over a hotly
contested division election.

Money politics is not the only problem afflicting Umno. Party discipline seems
to be badly missing from the party now. Dr Mahathir has correctly pointed out
that greed is the problem.

Umno leaders cannot hope to win the hearts and minds of the young if they
perceive that self-interest is the only preoccupation of the party leaders. The
party's history of struggle against colonialism will not be enough to convince
the young to join the party.

Umno cannot live on the glory of its past; it has to prove to the young that it
is still relevant and that it feels and believes in the sentiments of the
young.

As the backbone of the Barisan Nasional, it has been successful in producing a
new class of confident, educated and successful group of Malay middle class.
Many of these young professionals, however, do not believe that they have to be
thankful and obligated to the Government for their positions and it will be the
Government's mistake if it continues to remind them.

The young Malays are concerned with issues such as corruption, justice and
freedom of expression and, unless these concerns are addressed, the opposition
will continue to chip away at the support for Umno.

That aside, the leaders of Umno Youth deserve to play a bigger role in the
Government. In comparison with Parti Keadilan Nasional and even PAS, many Umno
leaders are already past 50 years old.

Umno Youth leaders have proven their maturity in handling controversial issues.
In the case of the failure of top non-bumiputra students to get entry into
universities, Umno Youth has demonstrated its moderation through its
statements.

They have come out better than some yesteryear heroes who have attempted to
return to mainstream Umno politics by trying to play the nationalistic card to
garner support.

The statements of these Umno Youth leaders, in calling for more non-bumiputra
students to be admitted into public universities, reflect their calibre as potential
leaders not just for the Malays but for all Malaysians.

The task of Umno has become tougher because of increasing competition from
Keadilan and PAS.

But unlike these two parties, Umno continues to receive the support of not just
Malays but other ethnic groups who are more comfortable with its brand of
politics of consensus.

As Umno celebrates its 55th anniversary, its leaders and members have to bear
in mind that only they can prove to Malaysians that the party has not reached
retirement age but is still relevant.

The fact is that Form Six has lost its appeal. An SPM
student can enrol in a private college to do what is called a “foundation
year.'' The student then proceeds to the second year of the degree
programme.

Others qualify for a diploma before entering second year. On graduation, they
hold a diploma and a degree.

Sixth formers sit for the STPM exam at the end of two years of secondary school
education. After getting their results, they begin applying for places in local
universities.

Even if they have decent results, there is no guarantee of a place in
university. For non-Malays, competition is tough because of limited places
owing to the quota system.

Some of those who are successful are offered disciplines they are not
interested in or are over-qualified for.

I know of an arts student who was accepted into then Universiti Pertanian
Malaysia. It was miserable for her during the first few weeks because she was
in a science course.

Finally, she was accepted by Tunku Abdul Rahman College where she took up
accounting. Today, she is a qualified accountant.

If there had been no option available, she could have been a drop-out.

There is much that does not make sense in our education system, particularly
when 500 top-scorers can't get into university.

The problem has been aggravated because of the unusual number of students with
good results.

This situation is partly due to many students having skipped Remove Class,
resulting in more applicants.

Even TAR College has found that it cannot cope with the large number of
applicants.

To complicate matters, it has been reported that there are 7,168 places for
bumiputras but there are not enough eligible students. There are now calls that
these vacancies be released to non-bumiputras.

The vacancies must have come about because bumiputra top-scorers would have
been offered scholarships or loans to study overseas.

In the case of non-bumiputras, matriculation courses had been exclusively for
bumiputras until a few years ago.

The controversy, which also occurred last year, could have been avoided if
there is fairness, flexibility and reasonable implementation of the quota
system.

Of the 500 last year, only about 100 gained entry into local universities after
lodging appeals.

According to the MCA, which highlighted their plight, the 500 cases included 25
students who scored 10As, 59 with 9As, 80 with 8As, 79 with 7As, 57 with 6As and
60 with 5As.

The rights and privileges of bumiputras must not be questioned. The affirmative
action and quota system are necessary to help disadvantaged Malay students,
especially those from the rural areas.

But it is injustice when bright applicants are deprived of higher education on
the grounds that there are only limited places for a particular ethnic
group.

If the Education Ministry officials have their way, they would want our
students to go through the two years of Form Six.

Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has given an assurance
that all top-scorers will get places in university.

Following complaints from many bright applicants, the ministry also announced
that those with 10As and above will get places but it was non-committal on
those with 9As and below.

The time has come for the Government to consider abolishing Form Six or
restricting it to one year of studies.

Today, many children begin pre-schooling as early as three years old. Most
children are able to read and write before they enter Year One.

If our children can begin Year One at the age of five or six, instead of the
present seven, they would be able to complete primary education by the time
they are 10.

Our youngsters can then complete their secondary education and subsequent
tertiary education earlier.

The Education Ministry needs to concentrate on the core subjects – particularly
Bahasa Melayu, English, Mathematics and Science – to give our students the
competitive edge.

Completing tertiary education earlier would help to boost our human
resource.

There is little point in burdening our students with too many subjects.

Worse still is for the education system to continue producing students with no
aptitude in mathematics or are unable to write and speak English
properly.

As nations become more competitive, it is more pertinent for our students to be
fluent in a third language with economic value.

Internet training, which is offered by many Chinese schools starting at Year
One, should be made compulsory for all.

Education today is no longer the business of the Government and educationists.
If we want to gear ourselves to face the impact of globalisation, we need to
rethink our mindset and policies.

Among the failures in national schools that he cited was
the over-emphasis on matters relating to religion. As a result, many non-Malay
students do not enrol in these schools.

This, Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad said, had defeated the purpose of national
schools which had been set up to encourage students of various races to learn
together to enhance racial unity and integration.

Dr Mahathir is correct in saying that the system in these schools has been
found wanting due to ineffective approaches towards the learning process.

Students in Chinese schools, on the other hand, excelled in their studies, he
added.

He said national schools placed less emphasis on education and disciplinary
matters.

His remarks were followed by Negri Sembilan state executive councillor Zakaria
Nordin's claim that there were racist teachers in the state.

These teachers in national schools, he said, made insensitive racial remarks
without considering the feelings of the other races.

It has been a week of bad publicity for national schools but in all fairness,
there are still plenty of teachers who take their role as educators
seriously.

Many brave the difficult living conditions in rural areas to nurture the minds
of the young because they love their work.

But national schools, we cannot deny, have lost their shine. Many parents,
including Malays, send their children to Chinese schools because they believe
the quality of education there is higher.

In addition to the emphasis on Maths, many parents feel their children must
learn to speak and write Chinese because it is regarded as a language with
economic value.

While our educationists brag about smart schools, most Chinese schools in
cities already conduct compulsory computer classes in Year One.

These facilities are made available, not from government support, but through
community help.

Such self-reliance, which can be frustrating at times, has also resulted in
more resilient students who learn at a young age that they must stand on their
own two feet and not expect hand-outs.

Besides dedicated teachers, parents with high expectations automatically push
their children to excel. The end result is that everyone gains from the
excellent academic performance.

For example, it is common to hear of parents being hauled up by teachers
because their children are average performers.

One Chinese school in Petaling Jaya has such a reputation that parents are as
nervous as their children when they turn up to collect annual report
cards.

Parents get on-the-spot lectures from teachers if there are unsatisfactory
marks on the cards.

There are instances where parents camp overnight outside the premises of
Chinese schools just to ensure their child gets placed in a "good"
class while others forge home addresses and use political connections to secure
places for their children.

Needless to say, the vernacular education system has contributed much to the
human resource of our country.

It must never be seen as an obstacle to national unity. The weaknesses of our
education system is just one contributing factor to the lack of national
integration.

National policies and laws, perceived to be unfair, also have an impact on
racial unity among Malaysians.

In the past, many of us had the privilege of attending English-medium schools
where students were of all races. Not only do we still remember fondly our
friends of various races but we remain proud of our English.

For those from Christian missionary schools, there was a sense of belonging and
mission.

The old boy togetherness was grounded in many of us and the networking proved
useful in our working life.

Many students ended up as teachers in their alma mater and were dedicated to
their work.

But all that is gone now. Every time a new Education Minister is appointed, we
see numerous changes being made, from school syllabus to school holidays.

Then there are also misguided bureaucrats who throw in their racial prejudices
at the implementation stage and sometimes ruin the noble values of
policies.

Dr Mahathir's wish to see unity in schools is to be commended but we need to
take one step at a time.

What is urgently required is to bring back quality teaching in national
schools. Teaching must be made an attractive career. Teachers deserve better
salaries and better perks.

Our children do not need more subjects and more textbooks. Malaysia must be the
only country where children get up at unearthly hours and go to school pulling
trolley bags.

In most countries, the system merely focuses on the core subjects. In our
attempt to learn more, our students have grasped less.

The Government must seriously consider bringing back English-medium schools as
there will be many parents who will want to enrol their children there. Even
Malay groups have appealed to the Government to consider re-introducing
English-medium schools.

Leave the Chinese and Tamil schools alone because their places are guaranteed
under the Federal Constitution.

Any suggestion of introducing a single medium of instruction, no matter how
subtle, will not go down well.

The teaching of Pupils Own Language (POL) can never be a substitute for the
learning of Chinese and Tamil in vernacular schools where the learning
environment is more conducive.

Our politicians, bureaucrats and educationists should just get back to the
basics of education before they talk of the larger issues.

While the DAP and PAS may have obediently applied for
permits to publish their newsletters, the reformasi movement has ignored such
bureaucratic requirements. Books and other publications have appeared without
printing permits and are being sold openly.

However, the hundreds of reformasi sites on the Internet to reach its
supporters have been the most effective communication tool. The Harakah
electronic version, for example, even has a web TV. In contrast, the
pro-government sites have been weak, dull and unimaginative.

It cannot be denied that the Information Ministry, through its television and
radio stations, has not been able to reach out to the public as effectively as
planned.

The reason is simple – viewership is declining because the credibility of these
stations is low. The authorities do not seem to understand that hard propaganda
material can no longer work.

On April 1, RTM was given a tall order: be credible and objective. No one can
blame the staff if they think it's an April Fool's joke.

As a government entity, the staff are expected to carry out certain directives
but leaders must understand that unless the station is prepared to be more
subtle in its approach, it will never win the trust of its viewers.

Government politicians must understand that they should give some leeway and
flexibility for such information tools to carry out their tasks in the wake of
competition from other avenues, including the Internet and cable TV.

Newspapers can ignore the Opposition but it is a journalistic sin when
statements are distorted and fabricated. One vernacular newspaper had to
apologise recently because of poor or over-zealous reporting of an event.

Age has also come into play. Keadilan's main leaders are much younger than
those in the upper echelon of the Barisan Nasional component parties. Many
Keadilan leaders are less than 40 years old.

One contributing factor of the Barisan defeat in the Lunas by-election was the
age difference of the candidates. The Keadilan candidate was 37 years old while
the Barisan contender was 59.

Previously, the Opposition had fought entirely on its own but now Keadilan has
help from outside the country. Proof of this was when then US Vice-President Al
Gore openly endorsed the reformasi movement in Kuala Lumpur.

These are new situations which the Government face. It requires fresh methods
and strategies if it wants to win back the minds and hearts of those it has
lost.

Barisan needs to reform itself to meet the people's aspirations and become a
more effective platform for greater libertarianism.

More importantly, the old guards must discard the use of communal appeal
because the Opposition has portrayed itself to be more multi-racial, at least
in appearance.

It does not make sense for some politicians to treat other ethnic groups as the
bogeymen in efforts to win the Malay votes. Umno's main problem is not the
Chinese or Indians but the Malay voters.

In all fairness, we must acknowledge the measures taken to restore confidence
in the judiciary. It is evident that changes are taking place.

The Barisan formula has worked so well that the opposition front has modelled
itself after the coalition, unashamedly calling itself Barisan
Alternatif.

The DAP, for example, has even insisted that the consensus method be practised
in the opposition front to ensure that component parties have equal powers.

In the case of Barisan Nasional, all 14 component parties have equal voting
rights although Umno is the dominant party. For instance, all it takes is one
vote to stop any application to join the coalition.

Discipline within the Barisan ranks is also stronger than that of the
Opposition.

The framework of Barisan has already given it an edge. What it should do now is
to rejuvenate itself and allow the young to shoulder more responsibilities in
politics.

Those in their 30s should be entrusted to run the various bodies to inject
freshness, such as the setting up of Puteri Umno to woo the young.

Capable young members, with fresh and bold ideas, should now be groomed and
given the exposure to contest against opposition figures in the next general
election in 2004.

Barisan needs a new image. Umno is now perceived as a vehicle for members to
enrich themselves; there is a need to revive commitment and conviction. Even
top Umno leaders have admitted these problems, particularly the practice of
money politics.

When noble goals are seen as cover-ups for abuses, then Barisan needs to relook
at itself seriously.

New situations require new strategies and that includes a rethink of our laws
and policies to suit present and future needs of our nation.

Rightly, the criteria taken into account would be the
ethnic composition in the area concerned. This is to ensure that the
sensitivities of every race are taken into account.

In Shah Alam, for over a decade, the Catholic community has been waiting for
approval to build a church. Until today, their prayers have yet to be
answered.

The reason for the long wait can be attributed to the fickle-mindedness of the
Selangor government.

An application to build the church was first made in 1977 when the Mentri Besar
was Datuk Hormat Rafei.

Mentri Besar Tan Sri Muhammad Muhammad Taib then withdrew the approval
following objections from some residents who felt that a church in the area was
inappropriate.

The stalemate continued until Mentri Besar Tan Sri Abu Hassan Omar approved the
application. Preliminary work was carried out last year and tenders were
called.

On Dec 20, the state government, now under Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohamed
Khir Toyo, withdrew approval for the construction of the church on a piece of
land opposite the Montfort Boys' Town and offered an alternative site, about
2km away.

The church committee said the alternative site lacked infrastructure and no
construction work could be carried out for at least three or four more
years.

The church is crying foul, saying that the state government had created
legitimate expectations among the Catholic community in Shah Alam.

With the building site reportedly twice relocated, the case has gone to court.
The church filed an application for a judicial review and the case is scheduled
for hearing on July 26.

These legal proceedings are meant to obtain leave from the High Court to
challenge the decision of the Selangor government which approved the original
site.

What the church is attempting to do is ask the court to set aside decisions
which infringe on established legal principles, including administrative
decisions.

The matter is now best left to the wisdom of the judges.

But there is a need for an acceptable framework to facilitate the planning of
places of worship for non-Muslims.

State authorities must seek the views of the Malaysian Consultative Council of
Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism and relevant bodies on such
guidelines.

State authorities cannot act unilaterally, otherwise they will infringe on the
constitutional rights of non-Muslims.

There has been some degree of unhappiness over the building of places of
worship because of alleged interference from overzealous officials and
politicians.

In some cases, the actions of some bureaucrats run contrary to the policy of
the Federal Government.

The right forum to discuss matters of land and places of worship is the
National Council of Local Government, which meets twice a year and is chaired
by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Abdullah is a fair-minded person and Malaysians believe that he will give just
consideration to the sentiments of moderate Malaysians.

It is good for proper places of worship to be built for the spiritual needs of
non-Muslims.

Currently, some churches are operating in shophouses, office complexes and even
cinemas. For some worshippers, these places are not exactly conducive in searching
for peace and calm.

Churches in Malaysia, it appears, have run into more bureaucracy than Chinese
and Indian temples.

Interestingly, 17 years ago, the Sultan of Selangor expressed regret that there
was no place of worship for non-Muslims in the state.

The Star quoted the Ruler as saying on June 17, 1984, that he feared
non-Muslims would eventually have no religious activities. He urged the state
government to remedy the situation before it worsened.

At the same time, he reassured non-Muslims that they were free to practise
their religion without hindrance although Islam was the official religion of
the state.

He said he was aware that portions of land had been identified for non-Muslims
as places of worship but further progress had been blocked.

For Malaysians, such statements from the Sultan, who is now the King and the
Head of Islam, and visits by the Prime Minister to homes of non-Muslims during
festivals speak well for the harmony of a multi-cultural society.

We should consider taking another step forward by setting up an inter-religious
council.

Regular meetings between the consultative council and Islamic bodies could be
held to promote inter-religious understanding.

Bureaucrats and politicians should not underestimate the high degree of
religious tolerance and mutual respect among ordinary Malaysians. It is thus
unjust and unthinkable for anyone to obstruct the rights of any citizen to
practise his religion.

Datuk Seri Dr Ling Liong Sik has announced his decision
to seek re-election as party president. He said he would offer himself for the
post if the members wanted him to continue leading the party.

The announcement by the Transport Minister has effectively killed speculations
of his political retirement.

By making known his stand, aspirants for his post – and other posts – would now
need to re-assess their plans.

For example, a party leader who has decided to contest the No.1 post would now
have to re-examine the odds against him and the chances of making it against
the incumbent.

He may then opt to contest the No.2 post instead, if Datuk Lim Ah Lek decides
to vacate the seat.

If partnerships are formed, then the aspirants would have to decide on their
running mates carefully.

In short, Dr Ling has told party members they should now decide where they
stand.

It would not be easy for some party members as Lim and his protege,
vice-president Datuk Chan Kong Choy, also have their loyal supporters.

Under a leadership succession formula, it had been proposed that Chan takes the
deputy presidency but negotiations between Dr Ling and Lim eventually
failed.

Supporters of Dr Ling said the talks fell through because he was asked to fix a
date for his retirement, when the focus of the negotiations was on the No.2
post.

Lim, the former Human Resources Minister, has denied asking Dr Ling to retire.
He accused his detractors of putting words in his mouth.

The failure of the talks appears to have been the catalyst for the current
animosity.

At the party's 52nd anniversary celebrations on Feb 25, Dr Ling openly admitted
his differences with Lim.

Both pledged to place party unity above all else but there are no visible signs
of any olive branch being offered at this point.

The regular press statements and comments made by party leaders are likely to
aggravate the situation.

Responding to Dr Ling's announcement to seek re-election, Lim said it was not
the time to talk about political ambitions but to rebuild the party's
image.

He said the party's immediate task was to restore the dwindling support of the
Chinese community.

Lim also called for a post-mortem to discuss several controversial issues
affecting the party.

On the same day, Johor MCA vice-chairman Dr Chua Soi Lek challenged Lim to
state his political plan since he had so often talked about retiring.

The next day, MCA publicity chief Datuk Wong See Wah issued the sharpest
criticism against Lim and Chan for what they reportedly said in a recent
interview with Yazhou Zhoukan, a Hong Kong-based magazine.

Wong said their actions were illogical and unacceptable to the party
grassroots, and had damaged the party's image.

Chan was quoted in Yazhou Zhoukan as saying the MCA was divided into two
camps.

Excerpts of the interview were picked up by only one local Chinese newspaper.
It almost went unnoticed but has since become a talking point among party
members.

Chan had privately told party members and the local media he was upset with the
report as it was an off-the-record briefing for the magazine.

Predictably, not all MCA leaders bought the argument, and some commented that
it was a hard-hitting statement against the leadership.

The Deputy Finance Minister was quoted as saying that Youth chief Datuk Ong Tee
Kiat had been sidelined while another vice-president, Datuk Chua Jui Meng, was
seen as a threat to Dr Ling.

He said Wanita chief Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen was not Dr Ling's candidate for the
party post. Dr Ng has since rebutted, saying no one should talk about camps in
the MCA.

Asked by Yazhou Zhoukan whether Lim Ah Lek and Chua would form a team to
challenge Dr Ling, Chan said that “anything can happen.''

In the same interview, MCA Youth vice-chairman Loh Seng Kok was quoted as
saying Chua might not be in Chan's side.

He described Chua as “the third force'' and said Ong “was on his own.''

He also told the magazine Dr Ling had no intention of stepping down as
president.

As political secretary to Dr Ling, Loh is no ordinary Youth leader.

The interview had appeared shortly after the MCA anniversary celebrations where
Dr Ling had delivered his analogy of a fish rotting from the head first,
meaning any problem in the party begins with the leadership and that leaders
must ensure that the “fish head'' remains fresh.

One year is a long time. We cannot rule out re-alignment among the political
aspirants.

For now, the MCA leadership problem is akin to a Chinese opera where the ending
is still a long way off. The current scene is being played to the loud beating
of drums and cymbals.

PAS, in particular, has been using these pictures to
portray itself as a non-extremist party. Since the 1999 general election, the
Opposition has been actively trying to win the hearts and minds of the
country's six million Chinese.

In that election, the bulk of the decisive Chinese votes went to Barisan
Nasional, rescuing many Umno candidates in the process.

Many Chinese voters, wary of PAS' objective to set up an Islamic state and
worried by Keadilan's street protests, solidly backed Barisan.

The MCA, helped by its strong record on community projects, put up its best
performance by winning 28 parliamentary and 70 state seats.

Aware that it cannot form the next federal government without Chinese support,
PAS has undauntingly shown a more moderate image.

The party has been issuing statements that appeal to the Chinese. It has
supported Suqiu, saying the requests had universal values, and has even said it
could accept a Chinese as prime minister of the country so long as he is a
Muslim.

Terengganu Mentri Besar Abdul Hadi Awang went a step further by lifting a ban
on pig-rearing in the state.

He has also reverted Jalan Bandar to its original name of Jalan Kampung Cina
and promised to allow the setting up of a church and Sikh temple.

The party has been organising study tours for university students and
grassroots community leaders to Kelantan. The sightseeing stops include the
town's bah kut teh shop.

The opposition efforts seems to have paid off. In the recent Lunas by-election,
the Chinese votes went to the Opposition.

The defeat was costly for Barisan. For the first time, it was denied its
two-thirds majority in the Kedah State Assembly.

Buoyed by the newfound confidence, the Opposition has gone further. Keadilan
has formed a committee to protect vernacular schools while PAS has formed teams
to give ceramahs in the Chinese language.

These actions by PAS should sound like warning sirens to Barisan, particularly
the MCA and Gerakan which are entrusted with delivering the Chinese
votes.

The task will almost certainly become more difficult in the next general
election, scheduled for 2004.

Umno, on its part, cannot just depend entirely on its Chinese partners. Umno
leaders must understand that their statements and actions, too, would have an
impact on Chinese voters.

If the Chinese voters assume, rightly or wrongly, that the statement of any
Umno leader has unfair racial tone, it would have a bearing on their political
stand.

More than ever, Barisan component parties have to rely on each other for
support.

They cannot afford to act unilaterally, like Gerakan taking a different stand
from that of the MCA on the SRK (C) Damansara controversy after agreeing on a
Cabinet decision.

Communal-based parties such as Umno, MCA and MIC would have to constantly
remind themselves that their strength lies in being moderate in their
actions.

While protecting the interest of their respective communities has been the core
of their existence, they cannot over-emphasise their struggles, lest this is
perceived as playing the ethnic card.

That aside, Barisan needs to adopt modern election strategies to counter the
Opposition which has, undeniably, refreshing tactics.

Barisan seems slow at times to react and its methods come across as archaic and
even unconvincing.

There is a need for more openness by the Government in the building of places
of worship, including the Shah Alam church application, to demonstrate its
moderation towards a multi-religious, multi-cultural and multi-ethnic
society.

Many Malaysians also want to see more transparency in dealings involving
privatisation of projects.

It is still a long time to go before the next general election. Four years will
give Barisan time to fight back.

Despite the seemingly rosy picture portrayed by the Opposition, there has been
plenty of holes.

Terengganu MCA chief Datuk Lau Im Pin questioned PAS' announcement in allowing
pig-rearing in the state.

“The rule actually says that pig-rearing is only allowed for personal
consumption. How many of us rear pigs for our own needs?'' he said, adding that
there have been no applications.

The 10 Chinese schools in Terengganu, according to Lau, have not received a
single sen promised by PAS.

PAS may have toned down its ambition in setting up an Islamic state but it
still maintains its uncompromising position on other religions.

In its criticism against the Taliban for the destruction of Buddha statues, PAS
is seen to be “half-hearted.''

Nik Aziz, in fact, has refused to comment on the issue, saying the world was
silent when Hindu extremists desecrated mosques in India some years ago.

The PAS leaders' refusal to submit to materialism may seem appealing to rural
supporters, but the Chinese voters still question whether the religious
teachers can run a modern state.

The practical Chinese voters are more concerned with the present world than the
hereafter.

But Barisan leaders had better wake up now because PAS leaders, who are
becoming more adept in using chopsticks, are fast picking up the Chinese
votes.

While we are busy attempting to set trivial world
records, they are busy making a name in scientific discoveries.

Talk to the heartland Singaporeans who live in HDB flats in Toa Payoh and they
will tell you that they will vote PAP in the elections.

Dissident writers like James Gomez, who wrote Self-Censorship: Singapore's
Shame, don't represent the Hokkien-speaking heartlanders, as the grassroots in
Singapore are called.

The Western media can criticise the PAP for being dictatorial and omnipresent
but most Singaporeans believe the PAP has done a decent job in
governance.

The problem, however, is that Singapore has grown a little insensitive over the
years.

All that success has gone to its head and it becomes cocky occasionally; and
when it does, it needs a little knock on the head.

Every time Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew decides to lecture the world, many
people in the region get offended.

Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong seems to be the latest. His comment at a seminar
that the Malays in Singapore have done better than their brethren in Malaysia
was unnecessary.

He invited trouble. The Bahasa Malaysia media, ever ready to fly the
nationalist flag, hit back, saying that Malay Singaporeans were a marginalised
lot.

Berita Harian went a step further, insisting that Goh should apologise.

The newspaper also wanted guarantees from Singapore against bringing up such
issues again.

Not everything has gone well in the island. In November, the Association of
Muslim Professionals proposed a system of “collective leadership'' comprising
“independent, non-political'' Malay leaders who would balance and complement
Malay MPs.

The association was rebuked by Goh, who said no matter how it was packaged it
was “clearly a political challenge to the Malay MPs.''

Berating the association for straying into the political arena, he noted that
it had begun to “show an ambition beyond what the government supported it to
do.''

During the seminar, a report card on the state of the Malay-Muslim community
since 1990 revealed that more Malays earned more but were lagging behind
Chinese and Indian Singaporeans.

Malays made up half of the people receiving financial assistance to pay for
their utilities and rents in 1996 and 1997.

According to statistics, one out of four Muslim marriages ended in divorce and
many Malay-Muslim women drug addicts had at least two children.

Rightly or wrongly, the impression given is that the PAP wants to prove a point
– that the government has done much for the Malay community.

But Goh's statement comes at a time when the Malays in Malaysia are searching
for answers to their unity.

Umno politicians want PAS and Parti Keadilan Nasional to sit down to talk about
Malay unity while the two opposition parties are saying only Umno is disunited
and not the Malays.

If PAP has to worry about a general election, Umno politicians have to contend
with their party division elections starting next month.

Goh's statement may have been a godsend for some Malaysian politicians who need
to lift their standing among the community.

Goh has become a bogeyman for Malaysian politicians who want to emphasise the
point that they can best serve the interests of the community.

The underlying message is that the Malays here should be thankful that Umno
exists as the present policies, including the affirmative action plans, have
served them well.

Goh can continue to claim that his government has helped the Malays but he must
admit that the political elite is still mostly Chinese.

The spat with Singapore isn't going to be the last unless Singapore accepts the
fact that it does not live in isolation.

No one can stop Singapore from having a siege mentality, what with the usual
threat of cutting water supply, but it can learn to be good neighbour.

The present leaders of Singapore, in their 40s, have little interaction with
their Malay counterparts in Malaysia.

Except for the occasional round of golf and the yearly durian party in Johor,
the PAP leaders have never made any serious effort to understand Malay hearts
and minds.

More importantly, domestic politics should not be allowed to get in the way of
bilateral relations.