Speaking at the Dewan Negara, Jamilah was quoted by
Bernama as saying that by working at night, women would not be able to
discharge their conjugal responsibilities.

If this happened, she said, husbands would find an outlet for their urge
through incest, cases of which are increasingly reported these days. Jamilah's
statement has created an uproar among women groups.

It is an illogical proposal because it will never happen. She should not expect
all women to stay at home at night merely because of conjugal rights. For that
matter, why should such meaningful relationships be confined only to the
night?

Surely Jamilah must realise that even if the wives are at home and their
husbands are working, such intimacy can never take place. Is PAS also
suggesting that men should not work at night?

It is incredulous for PAS to link incest to women on night shift. The same
argument has been put up by other PAS leaders who link rape to so-called
provocatively-dressed women.

They appear to forget that in several highly-publicised rape and murder cases,
the victims were decently dressed, some even wearing telekung. Some of the
victims were minors; surely they cannot be indecently dressed as suggested by
the PAS leaders.

Jamilah's statement is certainly offensive to women. She seems to have reduced
women to sex objects, whose primary function is to satisfy their
husbands.

No one can question the responsibilities of a wife in discharging her family
and marital duties but Jamilah's suggestion is unacceptable.

PAS has always kept women out of the mainstream. Its women's wing, for example,
plays a relegated role in the party.

It remains to be seen whether the party will actually field women candidates in
the next general election and even if they win, the question is whether the
party is ready to appoint them as state government leaders.

Women reporters, for example, have complained for years how they are segregated
from men when covering the annual PAS general assembly.

PAS should not fault non-Muslims for having a negative perception of the
Islamist party. Neither should its party leaders blame the press for bad
publicity.

It is the party's own doing.

Although PAS is confident of doing well in the next general election, it is
unlikely to inspire confidence among the majority of non-Muslims, especially
Chinese voters, with its brand of politics.

PAS is mistaken if it assumes that Chinese voters would be convinced of its
purported tolerance by bringing them to visit Buddhist temples and the few pork-selling
restaurants in Kelantan.

The existence of these temples and restaurants are mere tokens because there
are no restrictions in other states under Barisan Nasional.

Liberal Malaysians and non-government organisations, who are unhappy with the
government, must not assume that PAS would be a better alternative because it
will never change its brand of politics.

PAS leaders have consistently maintained that it wants to set up an Islamic
state and no one, including those in the opposition front, should kid
themselves that the religious line is merely for political expediency.

No one should fault Singapore Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew for feeling uneasy
over the growing influence of PAS and its impact to the region. As a
far-sighted statesman, Lee obviously sees how a theocratic Malaysia, under the
spectre of PAS, would bring disastrous political effect to Singapore.

The majority of Malay voters – and certainly most Chinese voters – will not
allow PAS to win the next elections.

In assessing the political scenario in Malaysia, many often fail to take into
account the sentiments of Sabah and Sarawak voters, who deliver almost a third
of the seats in Parliament.

PAS is almost non-existent in these two states and its candidates can expect to
lose their deposits in the coming Sarawak elections.

Women, who make up almost half the electorate, will be another group of crucial
voters in the next general election. Efforts have already been made to win the
women's votes, including appointing women to top government posts, the creation
of a Women and Family Development Ministry and Puteri Umno.

It is left to be seen how PAS will woo the women voters.

To the majority of non-Muslims, their perception of an
Islamic state, which PAS wants to set up, is about policies of
punishment.

PAS cannot say that non-Muslims have misunderstood what PAS has been trying to
advocate because such negative perception is basically the party's own
doing.

The state governments of Kelantan and Terengganu have kept introducing laws
which have further reinforced that image.

In Kelantan, the state has introduced laws to separate women and men in payment
queues in supermarkets and discouraging the civil service from hiring
attractive women.

In Terengganu, the state has demolished the replica of a turtle at a roundabout
and has planned to implement syariah and hudud laws.

Even the non-Muslims have not been spared as gaming and alcohol have been
banned in both states.

PAS deputy president Datuk Hadi Awang recently announced that PAS would close
down the casino in Genting Highlands if it captures Pahang in the next general
election.

But the fears of non-Muslims, which are very real, are not confined to PAS
wanting to ban the sale of liquor or shutting gaming outlets but, more
important, it is the exclusion of non-Muslims from government under an Islamic
state.

Non-Muslims may still keep their places of worship under an Islamic state but
they may no longer have the political rights that they now enjoy.

In fact, no one can tell for sure what kind of Islamic state model PAS wants to
pursue, particularly when many West Asian countries have poor records of human
rights.

Pro-opposition supporters may think that PAS is the only viable party to take
on Umno, the backbone of Barisan Nasional, but they are basically gambling away
their rights, particularly the non-Muslims.

If the DAP, after three years of association, is now struggling to save the
marriage, it does not make sense for non-Muslim groups and parties to support
the Islamist party.

DAP has found out the hard way that PAS will never change their objective and
struggles. It will never compromise its plans to implement Islamic laws in
Malaysia.

Moderate Western-suited politicians now in PAS like Tumpat MP Datuk Kamaruddin
Jaafar will have to fight it out with the orthodox ulamaks, who will keep their
tight grip on the party.

The DAP has found itself in a dilemma because it understands the sentiments of
the majority of non-Muslims, particularly those in the cities and new
villages.

The DAP realises that it will never be able to regain the lost ground if it
continues to hold PAS' hands.

DAP chairman Lim Kit Siang must surely realise that it is to the advantage of
Chinese-based parties like the MCA and Gerakan for the DAP-PAS pact to
continue.

If the link stays, the two Chinese parties will surely continue to harp on the
pact, as it did in the 1999 general election.

PAS has consistently maintained that it will strive to set up an Islamic state.
There is no way that PAS will drop that objective because that is the basis of
its struggle.

PAS now believes it is strong enough to win the next elections with or without
the DAP. In fact, in the Lunas by-election last November, PAS helped Parti
Keadilan Nasional win the seat without the support of the DAP.

The DAP, which had earlier stayed away, only came at the eleventh hour when it
was almost certain that Keadilan would win.

In the case of Keadilan, its deputy president Dr Chandra Muzaffar has kept his
views very clear about the Islamic state envisaged by PAS but there is
uncertainty whether other Keadilan leaders are as broad-minded as he is.

It is clear that the opposition front is on shaky ground when it comes to the
Islamic state issue.

Some non-Muslims have criticised the DAP, particularly on an Internet news
website, about its uneasiness with PAS.

But DAP leaders like Kit Siang and his deputy Karpal Singh are feeling the
pulse of the Chinese and Indian voters better than these critics.

It is understood that some young DAP leaders, particularly those with
non-governmental organisation background, are against the DAP ending its ties
with PAS. But realistic and experienced DAP leaders like Kit Siang and Karpal
Singh understand that it is no good for a political party to talk about
idealism if it cannot win enough seats.

The alleged involvement of PAS members with the Kumpulan Mujahideen Malaysia
(KMM) will not help PAS win more non-Muslim votes.

There may be some who will refuse to believe the allegations by the police but
the majority of non-Muslims accept that PAS will always attract such
militants.

PAS leaders may not even know the identities of these members, being a
broad-based party. In fact, its leaders have openly condemned the use of
violence and have distanced itself from KMM.

Still, the stigma of PAS being perceived as an Iranian-style party which
advocates a conservative theocratic state has been etched on the minds of
non-Muslim voters, who will be the decisive voters in the next elections.

In the 1999 polls, his party detractors said he had eyed
the PJ Utara parliamentary seat but it was given to another young upstart,
Ronnie Liu, who failed to win the seat.

The critics said Teng had felt he was being sidelined and that Liu was being
favoured at his expense.

Teng's outburst in criticising the leadership surprised many but for party
insiders, especially those in Selangor, it reflected a situation that had been
simmering for a while.

Fingers have been pointed by supporters of Teng. One target is central
executive committee member Lim Guan Eng. Last week, Teng alleged that a CEC
member from Malacca had pressured party members to issue statements against him
but did not name Guan Eng.

The ruckus has worsened with Johor DAP Youth chief Dr Boo Cheng Hau joining in
the fray by expressing the same sentiments. He, too, has asked Kit Siang to
retire from politics.

In the case of Dr Boo, he openly defied the CEC warning that there should be no
more statements from party members on the issue.

It isn't clear how much support Teng can garner. The last attempt, called the
Knock Out Kit Siang (KOKS) plan, failed miserably when those behind the move
were booted out of the CEC.

History seems to be repeating itself in the DAP. Teng is not the first DAP
leader to call for reforms. Others have tried and paid heavily for challenging
the party elders.

The list includes founding secretary-general Goh Hock Guan, who drew the Rocket
symbol, Yeap Ghim Guan, Lee Lam Thye, Hu Sepang, Dr Eng Seng Chai, Chan Teik
Chan, Gooi Hock Seng, Teoh Teik Huat, Sim Kwang Yang, Dr Kua Kia Soong, Chin
Nyok Soon and Seow Hun Khim.

Others like Wee Choo Keong, Liew Ah Kim and Fung Ket Wing have set up the
Malaysian Democratic Party, which seems to be heading towards oblivion like the
now defunct Socialist Democratic Party (SDP) formed by DAP dissidents.

There have been promises of reforms by Kit Siang previously but nothing much
has been done. No one can argue that Kit Siang is a political icon. He has done
more than others in the party. But his contributions have also led to the party
being identified as a one-man show. So strong is his aura and presence that
despite having given up the secretary-general's post to Kerk Kim Hock, he
continues to eclipse Kerk.

The chairman's post, previously held by Dr Chen Man Hin, used to be advisory,
but under Kit Siang, he is regarded, rightly or wrongly, as more powerful than
Kerk.

But Kit Siang cannot be faulted entirely. His absence from Parliament should
have been used by the young MPs to bring up high-profile issues, as he had done
in the past, but none have followed in his footsteps.

After so many years, there are plenty of grievances in the DAP, including its
poor organisational structure. No one is sure of the membership size; the party
has branches but no divisions, unlike other parties.

There are also no direct elections in the DAP. Under its constitution, the
party elects 20 CEC members, who then decide among themselves who should hold
what positions. Ten others are appointed. At grassroots level, members
virtually have no say on who they want to lead the party.

The main grouse is that Kit Siang has been around too long. Although he
regularly tells Barisan Nasional leaders to quit, the former Opposition Leader
has held on to his post longer than his political nemesis.

His defenders, however, said that besides Karpal Singh or Dr Chen, there are no
DAP leaders charismatic enough to fire the imagination of voters. One possible
successor was Guan Eng but he is now almost inactive politically after being
jailed for breaching the Printing Presses and Publications Act.

For Teng, his priority is to get elected to the CEC because a place will mean
he has the sympathy of the delegates.

If he fails to get in, it means the beginning of the end of his political
future in the DAP.

It would possibly mean not being picked by the DAP to defend his seat in the
next general election. His options would be to quit the DAP and be an
independent, join Parti Keadilan Nasional as many DAP leaders have done or
defect to a component party of Barisan. His brother, Chang Yeow, is a Gerakan
assemblyman in Penang.

The DAP, without doubt, is at its lowest ebb. Its fortunes seem to have taken a
heavy beating after the 1999 polls when Chinese voters punished the party for
working with PAS.

When the congress meets, it has a chance to put things right. It can pull out
from the opposition front and regain its credibility in the eyes of its core
supporters. If it stays put, then it should never bring up the Islamic state
issue again. Any attempt, however feeble, would only invite flak from others.

It should forget about asking PAS, the dominant party in the opposition front,
to leave. The suggestion by Karpal Singh is ludicrous.

The DAP needs to show that it can win enough seats in the next polls if it
wants to attract talents into its ranks.

The reality of the game is that no one respects a loser. At this point, the
Rocket is fast running out of steam.

One possible explanation for the preference of these white
men could be their bulging wallets or our Malaysian women's misconception that
these foreigners are more romantic, having watched too many Hollywood movies.

But it is the preference for a foreigner, somewhat a novelty, in their arms
that is the more likely reason for the increasing number of “sarong party
girls.''

Like satan-worshipping, it is a sign against local convention and Asian
traditional customs and religious rules.

Local political satire Politik Kedai Kopi naughtily claims the preference for a
Caucasian male partner is particularly prevalent among Malay women.

It describes foreigner-worshipping as among the sins of the Malays, besides
being involved in poison-pen literature and getrich-quick schemes.

But Malaysian men ought to share the blame too. After all, they are unlikely to
take these often well-endowed “sarong party girls'' home to introduce to their
mothers as prospective brides.

My Malay colleagues also wonder why the more religious Malays prefer to dress
up like Arabs with serbans and long flowing robes.

Besides Caucasians and Arabs, young Malaysians, particularly the Chinese, seem
to imitate anything Japanese these days.

I thought Malaysian youths only have black hair but these days, they come in
red, brown, orange, red and even blond.

It is terribly confusing for someone like me, who still thinks he is
liberal-minded at 40 and having grown up with Saturday Night Fever. I am
finding it hard to comprehend this fondness for multi-coloured hair.

Hong Kong used to be the benchmark of youngsters from Cheras and Kepong. No
longer.

When the Prime Minister initiated the Look East policy, where we were told to
emulate the industriousness of the Japanese, he certainly did not have in mind
Frankenstein-like platform shoes.

My Indian colleagues are still trying to understand why their younger brethren
within the community prefer to dress and talk like they have just stepped out
from a Bronx ghetto in New York although they are from Brickfields and Sentul.

With their clean-shaven heads and poor attempts to sound like a soul brother,
one can sense the underlining admiration and adoration these youngsters have
for American blacks and their desire to hide their Indian roots.

It's a crying shame because the Tamil culture is rich and is recognised for its
intellectual history.

But that has been sacrificed for some mindless rap talk which is a pale shadow
of the Indian heritage.

Tune into our radio stations and there is no shortage of disc jockeys who think
and believe that speaking correct English means sounding like a white man or a
black man.

We laugh at our Malaysian-accent English but strangely, and without thinking,
we embrace the French and the Spaniards for their heavily accented, even flawed
English, with the misguided belief that they sound romantic.

And many of us think they really sound good simply because that has been
grounded into our minds by the media.

Paris is perceived as a romantic city simply because that's what the media,
especially the movies, say.

Never mind the fact that Parisians are snooty, rude and refuse to acknowledge
English-speaking Malaysians struggling to buy a croissant, which is tasteless
compared to the local roti tissue.

There's no end to foreigner-worshipping, really. Many of our hotel
receptionists and restaurant waitresses are guilty of giving preference to
foreigners, especially whites.

I am sure many of us, at some point, have experienced the contempt of some
hotel workers for locals.

But thank God, our Culture, Arts and Tourism Ministry officials have more sense
than our hospitality services workers.

Malaysia is being aggressively promoted in India, China and West Asia because
tourists from these areas have a passion for shopping, which is good for our
economy.

The older white tourists prefer to sit by the pool with a book, the middle-aged
prefer the sex industry in Phuket and Bangkok while the young are backpackers
with tight budgets.

Having said that, Malaysians should be mindful of not encouraging racism or
xenophobia, the hatred for foreigners.

It will be myopic for us to be inward looking. History is filled with leaders
who bring disasters to their country because of their narrow nationalistic
views.

Malaysia needs to be wary of politicians who refuse to accept the importance of
English or orthodox religious types who preach against liberalism. Worse still
are those who think circus acts are immoral.

Let's take the best of foreign values and assimilate them into our local
context. Not everything foreign is wrong and not everything Malaysian is right
either.

Devil-worshipping or foreigner-worshipping aside, nothing will stop many of us
from watching the Red Devils at work tonight.

Although the college is owned by the MCA, there is no
place for politics within the campus.

The students are aware their priority is to study, get their diplomas or
degrees, and gain employment.

They can join any political party, if they are keen, after getting their
scrolls.

After three decades, with TAR college's proven track record of producing over
60,000 graduates, it is a natural progression for the MCA to set up a
university.

Though there are already 14 public universities, six private universities and
three foreign branch campuses in the country, the setting up of Universiti
Tunku Abdul Rahman would help ease the continuing demand for places in local
institutions of higher learning.

Each year, we read of bright young Malaysians who are unable to enter local
universities because of limited space.

The quota system has further added pressure on our universities and the
Education Ministry in coping with the demands for places in faculties such as
medicine, dentistry, engineering and computer science.

With the setting up of Utar, it is hoped Malaysia will not lose these talents
overseas.

Malaysia needs the contribution of intelligent Malaysians and every effort must
be made to stop this brain drain.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad must be commended for his
openness in approving the setting up of Utar.

It is thus most regrettable that critics, particularly PAS and Parti Rakyat
Malaysia, are finding fault with Utar.

It is the height of hypocrisy for PAS to object to the setting up of Utar on
the grounds that it is initiated by MCA.

PAS is a known sponsor of kindergartens, religious schools and colleges, where
its politics are propagated to the students.

In universities, PAS leaders continue the indoctrination of students with its
brand of extremism.

PRM also has a steady following among non-Malay students and it is well-known
that some university lecturers openly advocate the party's politics in
campus.

There are other critics who have attacked Utar on the grounds that it is
initiated by the MCA, and nothing else. Flimsy arguments are put up to hide
their political prejudices.

Then there are also MCA members themselves, because of their quarrel with party
president Datuk Seri Dr Ling Liong Sik, who are prepared to run down Utar for
political expediency.

And there is the journalist who wrote in an Internet news website that the MCA
“thinks it does the community proud. It does not.''

The DAP, at least, feels the pulse of the Chinese community better now after
its defeat in the 1999 general election.

Misreading the mood of the community, the party partnered PAS in the fight
against the Barisan Nasional and paid a heavy political price. This time, it
has openly come out to support Utar even as PAS and PRM have stated their
objections.

Grassroots members of Chinese-based political parties, including the DAP, are
aware the community has given its endorsement to the university.

The MCA leaders must now explain that, unlike many private colleges, including
TAR, Utar would be able to grant university degrees.

It also has the potential of becoming an internationally renowned university in
the region if it has a good academic staff and the right person to head it, in
line with the Government effort to make Malaysia an education centre of
excellence.

The community should not be unduly concerned about talk that colleges such as
the private New Era College would be affected if fund-raising campaigns are
carried out for Utar.

Utar should not be seen as a competitor but as a complement in the field of
education. Even if it was not mooted by MCA, other private universities would
be set up.

At present only Universiti Malaya offers courses in Chinese Studies, but with
the setting up of Utar, a similar faculty can be set up too.

As a full-fledged private university, Utar will also be able to attract many
foreign students.

Malaysians, especially the Chinese community, has high expectations of Utar and
they want the university to take off.

Malaysian leaders, particularly those claiming to represent the Chinese
community, should provide ideas on how Utar can become a reality instead of
finding fault with the proposal.

MCA leaders will come and go but Utar will remain as a hallmark of the
community's uncompromising pursuit of education.

Malaysians will certainly benefit from the programmes offered by Utar when it
is fully realised.

For the sake of our children, can we just keep politics out of Universiti Tunku
Abdul Rahman?

Their worry is that sharks will disappear, just like the
dinosaurs, although I am not sure whether any caveman tried eating dinosaur
soup.

The campaign targets school children who have been handed pledge cards to say
“no'' to shark's fin soup.

At fashionable cafes where teenagers spend more money on coffee than shark's
fin soup, a music video called Nobody Loves You has been screened to dispel the
myth that sharks are fearsome man-eaters.

Hong Kong actor Tong Leung has become the colony's campaign spokesman.

The lobbyists received another boost when Taiwanese President Chen Shui Bian's
daughter, Chen Hsing Yu, wanted the soup off the menu at her engagement
dinner.

Central to the emotionally-charged campaign are video shots of the finning and
dumping of hapless finless sharks back into the sea.

The cruelty angle is being used to mobilise public opinion against the killing
of sharks. There are endless statistics to back their case.

The United Nations Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
(CITES) has also joined in the fray.

At the recent meeting of CITES in Kenya, Asean and many developing nations
argued that sharks were not endangered but Britain, the United States and
Australia decided three of the over-400 shark species were endangered.

The developing nations argued that sharks were by-catch, which meant most of
the shark fins sold in shops were from small fishermen.

But the debate over the Chinese delicacy has become more complicated as
cultural values surface.

Shark's fin soup has been a gourmet's delight in China since the Han dynasty,
over 2,200 years ago. The West considers the consumption of shark fins a
wasteful delight of the Chinese.

To add salt to injury, these Western groups are telling us to replace shark
fins with ginseng chicken in fatt tiau cheong (Buddha Jumps Over the Wall).

Others have even suggested leaving out abalone as well, saying it is going to
become endangered too.

Those who think the campaign is no more than just cultural imperialism against
the Chinese have questioned why these groups are not making the same efforts to
campaign against bull-fighting and fox-hunting.

The supporters of shark's fin soup point out that man-eating sharks were
unintentional by-catch of commercial fleets using long lines of hooks to catch
tuna and salmon, which are mostly for the Western market.

Sharks, they said, do not travel in shoals and thus cannot be depleted in the
short to medium term.

By-catch sharks were also dead when hauled up, thus the emotions attached to
finning were unjustified.

Few people in the West, they said, made a fuss when 1,000 porpoises drowned in
British nets each year in the North Sea and 7,000 more in Danish nets. Or when 90,000
seals and pups were shot or clubbed to death for their fur in the North
Atlantic.

With over 13 water species becoming extinct in North America since 1900, the
traditionalists are asking why these Western groups are making so much fuss
over a soup for a Chinese wedding.

Describing it as “selective amnesia,'' these Chinese traditionalists want the
environmentalists to put their house in order first.

Call it xenophobia or whatever, but there is this nagging suspicion, even if
unjustified, that the campaign is part of the agenda against growing Chinese
strength.

First, Britain blames a piece of meat in London's Chinatown for the Mad Cow
disease. Then the attacks against soya sauce makers – supported by the western
corn oil manufacturers – and then the alleged discovery of mercury substance in
shark fins from Thailand.

All these may be coincidences but China-bashing has become a Western
preoccupation these days.

The West has made no pretence that it is worried about China's growing economic
and political strength and anything remotely Chinese.

Issues such as the Dalai Lama, Falun Gong and China's bid to host the Olympics
do not affect me directly. But, like many other Malaysians, I cannot stomach
the fight against shark's fin soup.

The whole debate has been over-blown by idealistic gwei lo groups.

We have suffered enough having to eat starchy “shark's fin soup'' in which not
a single shred of fin can be found.

The debate will definitely continue over whether a living shark is more
dangerous than a dead shark whose fins make delicious soup.

It may be environmentally incorrect to enjoy shark's fin soup but the campaign
isn't likely to change local tastebuds.

MCA officials said the delegates may have their
differences over the controversial purchase of Chinese dailies Nanyang Siang
Pau and China Press but party unity was still in their hearts.

Said secretary-general Datuk Seri Dr Ting Chew Peh: “Whenever the speakers
mentioned party unity, the delegates would applause.''

The two vice-presidents are seen as the best bet to take over the helm but they
are also perceived as arch rivals.

Ong is aligned to party president Datuk Seri Dr Ling Liong Sik while Chan has
been groomed by deputy president Datuk Lim Ah Lek.

At the EGM, a total of 1,176 delegates (53.3%) of the 2,216 delegates present
voted in favour of the deal while 1,019 (46.2%) opposed. There were 12 spoilt
votes and nine abstentions.

As the party leaders analysed the implications of the bruising EGM, some
suggested that moves must be made for both sides to get to the negotiation
table.

Supporters of Dr Ling said the win was a clear endorsement of the deal but
admitted that they were uncomfortable with the narrow margin.

“But we should be clear that those who support Dr Ling may have disagreement
only on this issue," one Selangor leader stressed. "They still back
him."

There were also mixed feelings in Ah Lek's camp.

While some like deputy Wanita chief Datin Paduka Dr Tan Yew Kew have openly
expressed disappointment, believing the acquisition will be rejected, many are
jubilant at the slim margin, saying it was a peek at the outcome of next year's
party elections.

Others quietly conceded that they felt dejected at the defeat because of
mobilised support from many groups.

Both sides are, however, concerned at the possible scenarios for the MCA if
efforts are not made to patch up the differences.

Besides members, party leaders from both sides have been getting phone calls
from Chinese community leaders urging them to work on a formula to unite the
opposing camps.

“These are people who have no interest or political agenda except to see a
united MCA,'' one businessman said.

It isn't clear how Dr Ling and Ah Lek will react to such peace efforts and
whether the timing is right. A good move taken at a wrong time will not be
successful.

Any reservation is understandable, given the failure of earlier succession
talks.

Many among the grassroots members also hope for a return to the negotiation
table.

Fresh input, fresh formulae and even fresh mediators may be necessary to get
the talks going.

For that to take place, everyone must keep an open mind and there must be
sincerity on both sides.

A moratorium could be initiated to create a conducive atmosphere for such
discussions to begin.

It will not be easy but if the leaders are serious about forging unity in the
interest of the party, community and Barisan Nasional, then they must put on
their thinking caps.

The statements from various leaders over the past few days have been
encouraging.

First, Lim said he supported calls to consolidate the party while Dr Ling said
he was open to suggestions to forge unity and strengthen the party.

Then Chan said the Nanyang issue was over and that moves should be made to
unite the party.

On Thursday, MCA Youth chief Datuk Ong Tee Keat said the Youth wing accepted
the decision of the EGM.

There were initial fears that the Youth central committee meeting on Thursday
would be stormy.

Supporters of Dr Ling had questioned the legality of the Youth EGM on June 24,
where the delegates had voted against the acquisition of Nanyang.

A vote of no-confidence was also passed against Youth secretary-general Yew
Teong Look.

A compromise was apparently struck before the meeting, where Dr Ling's
supporters dropped moves to vote on its legality.

It was alleged that the Youth EGM was illegal because the 101/2 day notice was
not met and non-delegates were purportedly present.

Another issue was whether the resolution against Yew was proper when the EGM
was convened to discuss only one matter.

Questioned at a press conference held around midnight, Tee Keat told the press
“not to split hair'' over Yew's position.

Not everyone will be happy with Tee Keat's moves but it is commendable when
taking into account the larger picture.

There is little point in squabbling over what has happened. It is more
important for the party to bury the past and move ahead.

The spirit of consolidation must continue in the interest of the party and the
Chinese community.

Although politicians must be prepared for such robust
campaigning, they must remember that this is neither a party election nor a
general election. It is an internal matter; the “enemy'' is not the
Opposition. It is merely two sides in the party with sharp differences over how
the controversy should be resolved.

Dissenting views are part of democracy and should be tolerated. Similarly, no
one should forget the question of party discipline. In any organisation, once a
decision is taken, it must be respected even if we don't like it. Equally
important is the need to protect party dignity and integrity without allowing
the party's image to be tarnished.

The enemies of the MCA must not be allowed to exploit the differences within
the party. Once the decision is announced today, every effort must be made by
all levels of the party to unite. Without doubt, there will be lingering
mistrust and unhappiness but time heals all wounds.

There are no victors and losers in this matter. The delegates have been asked to
decide only on one issue – whether to support or reject the takeover of Nanyang
Siang Pau and China Press.

As such, party leaders must not think of a witchhunt once the EGM is over. They
should not be talking of sacking or isolating anyone. Such talk will only play
into the hands of the party's political enemies.

Party leaders may have opposing views on the Nanyang issue but no one can argue
about preserving party unity.

The struggle to achieve the aspirations of the Chinese community is the agenda
of MCA members. Irrespective of whether the acquisition will be accepted or
rejected, they must now work together if they are sincere about serving the
community.

There are urgent tasks ahead for the MCA, including forging closer ties with
the Chinese guilds and associations. These institutions are an integral part of
the community and have an important link with the party.

These Chinese groups must realise that the MCA is a part of the ruling
coalition and that it is the second strongest party in Barisan Nasional.

Chinese groups, with links to Suqiu (the Malaysian Elections Appeals
Committee), cannot be served by joining hands with the reformasi group or the
Opposition.

The Chinese community has always been practical and realistic. The guilds, if
they believe that they represent the community, must be equally realistic. MCA
leaders have proven their mettle by standing for elections in Chinese-majority
constituencies.

Multi-racial parties like Gerakan and the DAP are now claiming they represent
the Chinese community because it suits them. Non-government organisations are
also saying they speak for the community.

A Chinese social science lecturer, who campaign for PAS, has been introduced by
the Islamist party as “a Chinese community leader.''

But the bottom line is that the MCA has never made any apologies for its role
in safeguarding the community's interest.

The party has been criticised numerous times in the nation's history but its
track record speaks for itself.
From securing citizenship for the community to setting up Tunku Abdul
Rahman College to the Langkawi Project, the focus of the MCA has been
consistent.

The community understands that when they have a problem, they turn to the
Public Complaints and Services Department at the MCA headquarters for help
because they know that help is available.

There will always be critics but few doers. Those who work will make mistakes
and be faulted by others. Those who don't work will never make mistakes.

Except for the MCA, no other parties or groups have the capability to mobilise
the community for any project.

Today, the party is under siege because of one issue.

Despite the bitter differences, the MCA has proven that it practices democracy
and the EGM is evidence of this.

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.