The book's sub-heading, Shit @  P***mak @
PM, is a little crude.  The asterisks
have been used by  newspapers to replace
three letters to make it printable.

But I have to agree with the National Laureate on certain points.  Those who have not read the book  should not criticise it.

Deputy Home Minister Datuk  Ong Ka Ting should be commended for
maintaining that the book  need not be
banned. It should just  be ignored.

We shouldn't just ban books or 
publications that we do not agree 
with, so long as national security is 
not threatened or they are not libellous.

The whole point of democracy is  that we
should defend the rights of  writers to
express themselves,  even if we do not
share their  views.

The last thing we should do is to  punish
Shahnon such as stripping  him of his National
Laureate  Award and the benefits that
come  with it.

It will be sad if the authorities  only
reward writers for having establishment views.

The fact that Shahnon has said  he is a
long-time PAS member and  that he has
spoken at a PAS ceramah, I think, is sufficient for Malaysians to make their
conclusions.

Most of us would also question  the
sincerity of PAS leaders who  reject
populist culture such as dikir barat but are quick to defend  Shahnon's work because it fits into  their political agenda.

It is the same with those who  back
violent reformasi street demonstrations but wash their hands  when the majority of Malaysians  expressed their disgust at the  damage done.

But we know and the rest of the  world
know, from the pictures  published in newspapers,
which  politician has tried to be
heroic.

There is really no point in pushing the book controversy further.  Let nature run its course as the  majority of Malaysians are moderate and
sober.

Shahnon's work, irrespective of  whether
it has aesthetic value or  otherwise, has
sent us a reminder.  It is supposed to be
a political satire.

And like all satires, it is supposed to be humorous. Never mind  if the choice of characters and  words used are not even near Tan  Sri Samad Ismail's regular political parody
in Gila Gila.

Politics in Malaysia has become  too
emotive and personal of late.

Malaysians must learn to agree  or
disagree on political issues and  what
democracy is all about.

If it is a political satire, then we 
must not lose the ability to laugh at 
ourselves.

We should not be too overreactive and sensitive, which seem to  be a problem with some of our
politicians.

Granted that national reconciliation has become more difficult  over the past one year, that should  not stop us from talking to each  other.

On that note, it is, perhaps, refreshing that Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri
Abdullah Ahmad  Badawi was gracious
enough to  open an art exhibition by
Datuk  Syed Ahmad Jamal.

Syed Ahmad is actively involved  in the
opposition Parti Keadilan  Nasional and
had designed the  “white ribbon'' logo
for Adil, the  movement linked to the
party.

That is what maturity is about.  Whether
it is art or otherwise,  there are things
which go beyond  politics. Things like
friendship.

Our politicians, whether in the  Barisan
Nasional or opposition,  must be able to
compete on a more  mature and reasonable
level.

The abuse of the Internet and involvement of foreign journalists in  local politics is something that we  should be concerned about.

The Prime Minister and Cabinet  Ministers
have been accused of  stashing away
millions in an Israeli bank.

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was  named by
the Philippine Inquirer  as being
involved in a gaming outlet in the country, ahead of his  wife, Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah  Wan Ismail's visit to Manila.

Many of us would dismiss these 
allegations as absurd but the sad 
part is that some of us have become selective in choosing what  we want to believe.

Politicians who accuse mainstream newspapers of being irresponsible by not
giving them sufficient coverage have, ironically,  been behaving irresponsibly themselves.

If twisting facts is not enough,  they
have propagated rumours to  serve their
political cause, all in  the name of
justice.

The publications and websites  run by
these groups, for example,  have hardly
been objective, fair  and
responsible.

But that seems to be all right,  somehow,
because it serves their  cause. Some of
us have become so  partisan that we can
no longer differentiate between right and 
wrong.

On that score, it was a nice  change to
hear Barisan MPs calling for changes to the Internal Security Act and the
codifying of  laws on contempt.

Debates must be allowed to  cross party
lines if they are properly argued without the thunder and-lightning approach
adopted by  the opposition.

We sometimes forget archaic  laws can be
amended without necessarily having to repeal them  completely. For example, we can  improve laws pertaining to the  condition of ISA detainees.

No one in his right mind would  argue
against the call to improve  the police
image and to stop corruption.

For that matter, any sane Malaysian who has seen the photographs  of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim with  a black eye in prison uniform  would also have sympathy for him.

Reform is not a totally ugly  word. Being
in the opposition is not  a crime
either.

It is patriotic to make suggestions to improve things in this  country. There is always room for  the expansion of democratic space.

In calling for reforms, we must  also
realise the consequences and  risks that
we have to take. Will it  be a change for
the better?

Moderate Malaysians must ask  whether
they want to dismantle  the existing
system, with its flaws,  for another
system which can be  repressive and more
stringent.

Those who talk about cronyism  and
corruption have sometimes refused to admit that many aligned  to them have been cronies themselves and have
indulged in money  politics.

Some talk of the abuse of institutions and the media for political  gains but ignore the fact that they  had also been guilty of that themselves when
they had the political  clout.

As in all books, Malaysians  would have
to decide whether they  want to live in a
world of make-believe or in the real world.

Out of the 192 seats in Parliament, 144 seats are in the
peninsula. Of the seats in the peninsula, 
more than 70% are Malay-majority 
and over 20% non-Malay majority. 
The rest are considered racially mixed.

As the fractious opposition parties attempt to put up an opposition  front, it has been reported that the  DAP would contest in non-Malay  constituencies.

PAS, which has declared it wants  to
capture Perlis, Terengganu,  Kedah and
Pahang, will focus on  the Malay seats
while Keadilan will  contest in racially
mixed seats.

In the tussle for the Malay votes,  the
issues are simply narrowed  down to
justice for Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, the right to dissent  and the principle of accountability.

The voters will choose the Barisan for continued economic development and
political stability for  the
country.

In the predominantly Chinese areas, the DAP is banking on issues  relating to the jailing of former  Kota Melaka MP Lim Guan Eng.

It is uncertain to what degree the  Anwar
issue will be translated into  votes
among the Chinese voters but  they are
certainly less passionate  than their
Malay brethren.

Another factor is how  the opposition
front will take shape and  what their
manifesto and programmes will be.

It will not hurt the DAP to work  with
Keadilan which is a lot more  appealing
to Chinese voters than  PAS.

Keadilan president Datin Seri Dr  Wan
Azizah Wan Ismail has been a  crowd
puller at DAP ceramahs and  certainly
issues like justice transcend race and religion.

Dr Chandra Muzaffar, the Keadilan deputy president, also enjoys a  following among the middle-class  in urban areas.

The only obstacle for Keadilan  and DAP
will be to convince the  Chinese voters
that reformasi is not  about violent
street demonstrations.

Not many are likely to be convinced that Keadilan is not involved in the
demonstrations.

Keadilan's greatest mistake  would be to
encourage its supporters to take to the streets with its  continuous emphasis that peaceful  assembly is fine.

Even the best organised gatherings with the best intentions can  turn ugly if mob behaviour takes  over.

And in multi-racial Malaysia, the 
situation is more explosive. It is not 
simply a question of the right to 
demonstrate.

Opposition leaders cannot just 
dissociate themselves from their 
supporters when such demonstrations turn ugly.

To win over the Chinese votes,  Keadilan
needs to go further.  How  different is it from Umno with a  similar affirmative action programme  a point which the DAP  had consistently challenged in its  Malaysian Malaysia programme?

If Keadilan can provide convincing answers to the community, it  would have scored substantial  gains even before the first vote is  cast.

Still, it would be politically suicidal if Chinese-based Barisan  component parties like the MCA  and Gerakan were to dismiss the  Keadilan-DAP tie-up.

There are many unknown probables in Malaysian politics these  days. Many of the MPs from the  two parties are also incumbents in  the mixed constituencies where the  combination of Malay, Chinese and  Indian votes are almost equal.

No one is sure how the Malays,  outside
the federal capital, will cast  their
votes. After all, the scenario  in the
coming general election is  entirely
different.

In the quest for the Chinese  votes, the
biggest hurdle for Keadilan is its cooperation with PAS,  which has openly stated its objective of
setting up an Islamic state.

Dr Wan Azizah has so far not  stated her
stand on the Islamic  state but it will
be a question which  she will eventually
have to answer.

The DAP has repeatedly said it  does not
want an Islamic state but  by appearing
at PAS ceramahs, it  has taken a
gamble.

But the biggest obstacle for the  DAP to
win Chinese votes is the  stature of
Prime Minister Datuk  Seri Dr Mahathir
Mohamad among  the Chinese voters.

To the community, Dr Mahathir  represents
stability. His announcement on Thursday that Malaysia is  expected to record a stronger gross  domestic product (GDP) growth of  5% next year, barring any major  economic catastrophe, pushed the  KLSE index up the next day.

And if the community hears a  People's
Budget in October, it will  make the job
of the opposition  much harder.

Dr Mahathir's liberal stance in  business
and education has been  well appreciated
by the community.

For the MCA and Gerakan, their  job would
be to remind the community of the reality of the numbers  game.

They are almost sure to tell the 
community that they should not do 
what the Kadazandusuns had done 
in the recent Sabah state election.

In the state polls, the community  voted
their leaders out of the state 
government.

The result was the community  lost their
chief minister Tan Sri  Bernard Dompok
and representation in government.

With most of the 48 parliamentary seats in Sabah and Sarawak likely to be
retained by the Barisan, the  fight will
be in the peninsula for  the remaining
seats.

PAS is not only convinced it can  deny
the Barisan its two-thirds majority but believes it is capable of  forming the next federal government by
winning more than 96  seats.

To do that, PAS will have to convince all communities that it is a  relevant party in multi-ethnic and  multi-religious Malaysia.

PAS, he believed, would accept  the practical side of modern life  once they form the next government.

On a trip to the east coast recently to promote mak yong and  wayang kulit, he faced the harsh  realities.

PAS supporters roughed him out,  telling
him that these cultural  practices were
unIslamic.

He is said to have had second  thoughts
about PAS since then, although he still believes that reforms are
necessary.

Like some English-educated  middle-class
voters who have never established any contacts with  PAS, he was attracted to the calls  for justice and human rights by  PAS.

PAS, convinced that it will form  the
next federal government with  the backing
of Parti Keadilan Nasional, DAP and PRM, has now  openly talked about its plans to  govern the country.

In its attempts to set up an Islamic state, PAS leaders are talking about
banning the sale of liqour  and gaming
outlets.

On Wednesday, PAS deputy  president Abdul
Hadi Awang went  a step further  he said the Kuala  Lumpur Stock Exchange would be  banned.

Before this, PAS spiritual adviser and Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Nik
Aziz Nik Mat proposed that women should not work.

He also justified the party's  stand to
bar women from contesting in elections, saying it was to  protect and uphold their dignity.

Party president Datuk Fadzil  Noor also
ruffled feathers with his  remarks
linking pigs with the family name of Datuk Abdullah Ahmad  Badawi.

It is normal for politicians to  claim
they have been misquoted by  the press.
This was what Fadzil did  about his
remarks.

But even before that,  the party  had already shown how insensitive  it could be.

In a recent edition of Harakah, a  PAS
youth leader criticised Umno  for making
too many compromises  with other Barisan
Nasional component parties over the viral encephalitis issue.

In the April 1 issue of Detik,  which
carries the tagline Suara  Reformasi
Rakyat, the magazine  published a full
page write-up under the heading Mahathir Pelindung Cina, questioning the
ethnic  loyalty of Prime Minister Datuk  Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

The newly launched magazine is  run by
writers who are known to  be openly
supportive of PAS in  their
writings.

While what they write may not 
necessarily reflect the party's official line, it provides an insight
into  the difficulties for parties
like  DAP and Keadilan to work with  PAS.

PAS leaders seem to have persistently ignored the realities and  complexities of multi-racial and  multi-religious Malaysia, preferring to make
judgments from their  narrow political interpretations.

Ideological differences would be  the
biggest obstacle to an opposition coalition and, even if such a  front is formed, it will be PAS that  will call the shots.

At this point, the opposition parties have announced that PAS will  contest in predominantly Malay  areas, the DAP in non-Malay areas  and Keadilan in mixed constituencies.

There are only so many mixed  areas to go
in the 192 seats in the  Dewan
Rakyat.

If the opposition challenge to the 
Barisan Nasional is of any consequence, it will be Keadilan, DAP  and PRM that will deliver the votes  to PAS to form the federal government.

If former Parti Melayu Semangat 46 president Tengku Razaleigh  Hamzah had problems grappling  with PAS, it is doubtful whether  Keadilan president Datin Seri Dr  Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and her  deputy Dr Chandra Muzaffar are  capable of reaching an understanding with its
leaders.

It will be even more difficult for  DAP
secretary-general Lim Kit  Siang to do
so, considering the  emerging unhappiness
among his  members over the party's
unofficial ties with PAS.

Surely, the DAP is aware of the 
sentiments of moderate Malaysians over some of the unorthodox  pronouncements of PAS.

Perhaps for this reason, DAP  deputy
secretary-general Chong  Eng decided to
put on record the  party's unhappiness
over Fadzil's  remark.

In a nutshell, PAS wants to set up  an
Islamic state, Keadilan wants  Anwar
installed as prime minister,  the DAP
wants to win non-Malay  seats and the PRM
hopes to make  its debut in
Parliament.

Keadilan has, without spelling  out the
details, told its non-Muslim  listeners
that it wants a fairer distribution of wealth among Malaysians.

But it still wants the New Economic Policy and the special privileges of Malays
to remain as it realises the importance of securing  Malay votes.

That is the bottom line of the entire affair. 
Any political party, including the communist party will  tell its people that it is fighting for  justice.

We should not be so naive as to  draw a
distinction between the  good and bad
guys in Malaysian  politics.

PAS politicians, with their dressing, may look pious but at the end  of the day, they are still politicians.

We must admit that there are  flaws in
our system but it is a  workable system.
Call it reform,  renewal and change,
whatever, but  we all understand that we
must  take bold steps to improve
ourselves.

The world is opening up and so  must we.
A whole new generation  has grown up
demanding changes  and we must be
sensitive to its  calls to stay relevant
in the next  millenium.

Status quo is not a dirty word.  Neither
is reform. But we must  never dismantle a
parliamentary  system that has worked
well.

We can have a European-styled 
proportional voting system or the 
British-inherited “first past the 
post'' voting system but the ballot 
box remains the answer to political 
changes.

Those who advocate political  change must
ask whether they  want to instal a PAS
government  which has no blueprint of
what the  party wants to do to administer
a  modern and complex Malaysia.

Wine, working mothers, gaming  and beauty
contests may seem superficial and trivial when compared to more lofty ideals
like human rights and justice but they 
are, nevertheless, issues close to 
the people's hearts.

After all, the daily cultural practices of Malaysians are more relevant at the
end of the day.

Anwar has yet to join PAS or  Keadilan
until now, setting off  speculation that
he, perhaps, still  harbours hopes of
rejoining Umno;  a party that will make a
difference.

More importantly, it succeeded in  ending vicious rumours on the Internet by his
political opponents.

This is not the first time rumours of 
his health had been circulated, particularly on the stock market.

We often forget that Dr Mahathir is  an
ordinary human being. He gets his  bouts
of flu, like all of us. He gets  tired
when he overworks, as do the  rest of
us.

He was admitted to the National  Heart
Institute even though he had a  lung
infection because the doctors  who
performed the heart bypass operation on him in 1989 and those who  subsequently treated him are all  based at the institute.

The saddest part is that some Malaysians seem to have forgotten human values
such as compassion and  being
caring.

On this score, it is commendable  that
Opposition leader Lim Kit Siang  had,
during the debates in Parliament, wished Dr Mahathir well.

His kind gesture led to a thank-you  note
from Datin Seri Dr Siti Hasmah  Mohamed
Ali.

But for some of his political opponents, Dr Mahathir's illness has become a
matter of making political  gains.

Websites linked to this group exaggerated his illness.  One of them even  provided an hour-by-hour account of  what would take place in Kuala Lumpur should
the worst take place.

Granted that there is resentment  among
his opponents, their attitude is 
certainly contradictory to their purported principles of justice, the
creation of a civil society and a gentler 
system of governance.

Even if we do not agree with the  prime
minister, let us not lose our  sense of
decency.

By the same token, we should all be 
outraged at the assault on Datuk Seri 
Anwar Ibrahim while in police detention even if we do not agree with
his  politics.

Malaysians must know how to separate politics and personal well-being.  There is always that invisible line we  do not cross or else we are no better than
what we describe our opponents  or
enemies to be.

Foreign news reports on Dr Mahathir have also given rise to much  speculation.

It is certainly not unusual for doctors to impose a no-visitors ruling but  one news agency chose to describe  the decision as one that “raised
eyebrows.''

It even gloated about the prime 
minister's health, raising questions 
about his stamina in facing the general election.

If the restriction was not imposed  by
the hospital, there would have  been no
end to the streams of visitors, 
defeating the purpose of letting him 
recuperate.

But he still met top leaders, including Abdullah and First Finance Minister Tun
Daim Zainuddin.

The speculation surrounding him  could
have been avoided if there were  detailed
information on the nature of  his
treatment.

Much as we accept that he is like  the
rest of us in terms of health, he is 
unlike us in that he is the prime minister.

The concern shown by Malaysians  is
understandable. Though the nation's economic and political stability  does not hinge on him alone, his well being
can help maintain confidence.

It has to be accepted that any uncertainty caused by the speculation  on his health 
will affect the nation's 
political structure.

Whatever it may be, Malaysians  should
learn from the episode that Internet news is unreliable.

Despite having experienced before  how
the Internet has been abused to  spread
lies and rumours, many Malaysians are still prepared to swallow  everything that appears on their computer
monitor.

Those behind these vicious lies  apppear
to be those who had complained loudly about the mainstream  media's lack of credibility and
objectivity.

Yet, when they spread such blatant  lies,
it is condoned by their leaders.

Granted that national reconciliation  is
more difficult now, in the wake of 
current political developments, it is 
time for moderate Malaysians to say 
no to those who cannot exercise political self-restraint.

Moderate Malaysians will not accept those who advocate street chaos,  assassination and hurl curses at our  leaders.

We are Malaysians. If you cannot  respect
the prime minister, you  should at least
respect the chair.

Malaysians have reasons to be  concerned with political developments in
Indonesia.

The strife in our neighbouring  country
is much too near for our  comfort.
Kalimantan is just at  our
doorstep.

The madness saw 12,000 Madurese refugees sweltering in Pontianak with many
attempting to  cross to neighbouring
Sarawak  recently.

Authorities had no choice but  to block a
boat carrying 411 Madurese refugees from landing to  discourage a flow of boat people.

As ethnic violence flares,  threatening
the country's already fragile fabric, the political  temperature in Jakarta, too, has  shot up.

Indonesian students who protested against the shooting of  student demonstrators last May,  clashed with the police last week.

It was the first violent clash in  almost
a month.

Many of us in this region are  watching
closely the political developments ahead of the June  elections.

As the students pressed for  President
B.J. Habibie to hand  over power to a
transitional government, the main contenders 
have gone on the last lap of the 
campaign.

The scenario is as chaotic as  the waves
of religious, ethnic and  social tensions
sweeping the  sprawling archipelago with
no  clear-cut winner until now.

Habibie is harshly dismissed  by his
opponents as the mad scientist who says the wrong things  at the wrong time.

Abdurrahman Wahid is the  blind leader
from Naddlatul Ulama, the largest Muslim organisation, who wants a secular
nation.

At the same time, he has said  he would
not back Megawati Sukarnoputri, another presidential  runner, because she is a woman.

Megawati is regarded by many  as a
housewife with no vision.  Her opponents
insist that her  backers are banking on
her name  but she doesn't run the
show.

Then, there is university lecturer Amien Rais, who has been  widely criticised for soliciting  support from the Americans and  Europeans.

Most of us in the region want to  see a
return to normalcy in Indonesia as political and economic  stability is vital to the progress  of the country.

What happens in Indonesia also  has an
impact on neighbouring  countries. If the
situation there  worsens, wrong signals
will be  sent to many countries.

To many Americans and Europeans, there is little difference  between Malaysia and Indonesia.

There are some local politicians and non-governmental organisation leaders who
are not  comfortable with the way
the  media has played up the
violence  in Indonesia.

Reminders by government  leaders on the
need to avoid chaos and uncertainties, they argued, was a form of intimidation  among the people.

It was unfair to allege that the 
violence was caused by the reformasi movement in Indonesia  when a large part of the violence  was planned and executed by  certain groups within the Indonesian
army.

These politicians said the conditions in Indonesia and Malaysia  are different.

They are right. From the start,  it was
their tactical mistake to  imitate the
reformasi movement  in Indonesia.

The Malaysian reformasi supporters chanted the same slogans, wore the same
headbands  and staged similar
demonstrations.

Many of the reformasi leaders  fled to
Indonesia as self-imposed  exiles.

They were also eager to gloat  over the
Indonesian reformasi  ability in toppling
Suharto and  wanted the local version to  achieve the same with the Malaysian
leadership.

Indonesian leaders like Amien  Rais and
their mass media openly criticised the Malaysian Government and went on to
endorse  the reformasi movement in
Malaysia.

Unlike the more passionate Indonesians, the response towards  the demonstrations among Malaysians were
different. Most  Malaysians were unhappy
with  such illegal assemblies.

Moderate Malaysians could not  accept the
torching of two motorcycles belonging to policemen  and the beating up of reporters  during the demonstrations.

Like in Indonesia, the local 
demonstration organisers were 
quick to blame it on provocateurs 
and the police whenever the so called peaceful assemblies  turned ugly.

But when US Vice-President Al  Gore came
to Kuala Lumpur to  back the reformasi
group, the silent Malaysians finally roared 
their anger.

There are further differences  between
Malaysia and Indonesia.  Unlike
Indonesia, which will be  holding its
first presidential election, we have a strong tradition  of parliamentary democracy.

The army has no place in our  Dewan
Rakyat, PAS gets to capture a state government and  openly sells its official publication meant
only for members.

Large ceramahs are held all  over the
country, in many instances, with no permits.

It appears now that groups who  are
uncomfortable with reports  of violence
in Indonesia have  realised it was a
mistake right  from the beginning to copy
the  Indonesian reform movement.

Of course, many will argue  that more
democratic values  should be injected
into our system.

Positive changes are necessary  to
strengthen the existing political system. Irrespective of  whether these changes come  from the Government or reformasi group, we
must not be  afraid of change.

Flaws, which stand in the way  of
progress, must be rectified.  Archaic
laws, which are no longer relevant, ought to be amended  or even repealed if the need  arises.

There has been too much black  and white
in gauging political  sentiments. Let's
not forget those  in the middle.

If Malaysians do not want to  see the
chaos in Indonesia take  place in
Malaysia, it is not because of press reports or perceived intimidation.

Let's not insult the intelligence  of
Malaysians. They know who  are the
backers of street demonstrations.

If anything, everyone will have  his own
perception of what and  how the nation
should go in becoming more democratic.

Preachers of democracy and  freedom must
not forget that democracy and freedom is not only  for them. It is also for those who  disagree with them.

The party, encouraged by what it  perceives to be growing sentiments  against the Government, is no longer talking
about denying Barisan  Nasional its
two-thirds majority  but about forming
the next federal  government.

The white moon, green flags are  now seen
flying in even urban areas, not just in padi fields.

Confident of securing the Muslim votes, PAS is now trying  to win 
the non-Muslims votes.

It has even introduced a column  in
Harakah, its weekly party publication, on how to conduct discussions with
non-Muslims.

PAS believes that among the  Muslims the
line between its brand  of politics and
reformasi has become blur.

At the height of the reformasi euphoria, its leaders carefully talked  about justice and human rights.

As their confidence grew, the  leaders
have gone back to their  original mould,
preferring to talk  about their policies
and what they  want to do if they form
the next  federal government.

Those who backed PAS in past  elections
are likely to remain committed to the party.

It now hopes to garner the votes  of
supporters of  the reformasi  movement, even if some do not  subscribe to their brand of politics.

It is the same with the DAP and  PRM. In
the name of fighting a  common cause
against injustice  and for democracy,
human rights  and a civil society, these
opposition  parties are prepared to put
aside  their differences and adopt  a common platform with PAS.

A coalition of opposition parties  will
ensure a straight fight with the  Barisan
in the next general election  and  can even project itself as a viable
alternative.

But it may not be that simple. It  will
be difficult for DAP, for example, to openly tell its members and  voters to support PAS.

Unorthodox pronouncements by  PAS'
spiritual adviser Datuk Nik  Aziz Nik Mat
on the position of  women, such as
discouraging them  from working and
barring women  members as candidates,
have  raised eye-brows.

Wanita DAP chief Dr Oon Hong  Geok has
gone on record to state  the party's
objection to Nik Aziz's  proposal to stop
mothers from  working.

Strangely, some non-governmental organisations and political parties which have
been the quickest  in criticising the
Government have  remained silent on the
issue.

It is clear that these critics have 
compromised their position. They 
would be the first to cry foul if it 
was a government decision but because the proposal came from PAS,  they chose to close their eyes.

It is such double standards on  justice
and human rights that have  made these
critics questionable.

Many of them have lost their  moral
standing on many issues.  They appear to
be selective in their  concerns.

Similarly, when the reformasi  movement
talks of cronyism, it  sounds hollow
simply because  many of the leaders
themselves appear to have benefited from the 
system they now condemn.

Many have become super-rich,  not because
of their business acumen, but because of their political  affiliations.

The local media, they argued,  have
blacked out the opposition. At  the same
time, they refused to acknowledge that their publications  are publicly partisan, refusing to  even give a line to the Establishment.

The foreign media is professional and objective, by the standards  of the NGOs, because they are critical of the
Government.

The local media certainly does  have its
flaws and short-comings,  we must
admit.   But local newsmen  remain the best informed journalists, even if
their assessment of the  recent Sabah
elections that the  Barisan would win was
ignored by  many people, including academicians.

That is simply because many   whether in
opposition or Government  chose to
believe in their  own propaganda.

They believe that the silent majority are as passionate about issues as them
but not every Malaysian is pro-Mahathir or pro-Anwar.

Many Malaysians are really  turned off by
the reformasi slogans  and
demonstrations.

Similarly, they dislike the arrogance of some government leaders,  who assume they know best.

Huge turn-outs at gatherings  must not be
taken as indication of  support by any
party.

The majority of Malaysian voters  are
taking the middle path. Their  main
concerns are paying the bills,  the
housing loans and looking after  the
welfare of their children. They  spend
time with the family during 
weekends.

These are the moderates who understand the need for political and  economic stability.

Allies of Anwar have entertained  the
idea of setting up a multi-racial 
party.

In the Malaysian-context, a  multi-racial
party is still dominated by one race.

For example, the Malays dominate PRM, the Chinese the DAP  and Gerakan and the Indians the  PPP.

Assuming that the new Anwar linked party decides to be Malay based like Umno,
it will be competing for the same audience with 
PAS. Inadvertently, both parties 
will become competitors.

But there will be more obstacles  along
the way. How will a more  moderate Malay
or multi-racial  party, led by Anwar and
DAP, tell  their voters to back PAS to
ensure  a direct contest between the
opposition and Barisan.

A vote for PAS will mean an endorsement for PAS' policies. It  means a yes for its fundamentalist  objectives, which moderate Malaysians in our
multi-racial and multi religious society cannot possibly  accept.

The DAP has rejected PAS' objective of setting up an Islamic  state but by working with PAS indirectly
through common issues, it is  still
helping PAS to increase its 
representation in Parliament.

The Westminster system may  have its
flaws but moderate Malaysians must do all they can to protect the system.

We should rectify the weaknesses of the system and not tear it  down entirely for another system  which we are not sure of.

There is a difference between  the forces
of democracy and the  forces of
extremism.

The villagers, predominantly of  the Foochow community, knew  each other well and many had continued with
their family business  of pig
farming.

But things have changed since  the
outbreak of the deadly viral 
disease  Japanese
Encephalitis.

Like their neighbours in Kampung Sawah and Kampung Pelanduk, Sungai Nipah
villagers depended on pig farming for their 
livelihood.

As more victims of the JE died,  the
Cabinet stepped in to find solutions.

The job will not be an easy one, 
particularly for Health Minister 
Datuk Chua Jui Meng.

After all, we are dealing with human lives and the rice bowl of the  community.

There are two important factors  here.
First, lives must be saved  and the
killer virus must be  stopped fast.

The first death caused by the JE  was in
Perak in October 1997 and  the problem
does not appear to  have ended.

The JE is not something new,  that is the
sad part. Veterinary and  health
authorities have been conducting research on the disease as  far back as 1953.

We are now told there may be a  second
virus about which we have  little
information.

The setting up of the Cabinet  task force
means a concerted action has been taken.

The strategy involves destroying the animals with the help of the  army and police; intensifying fogging to get
rid of the vector Culex  mosquito;
vaccinating the farmers  and people
living within a 2km radius of affected areas; and treating  all JE patients in one special ward  in government hospitals with specialist
attention.

The outbreak could not have  come at a
worse time as the country's economy has yet to fully recover. The industry,
which is  worth about RM2bil, has been
ravaged.

This is not the time to point fingers but to find solutions. No one  should use the JE issue for selfish  political reasons.

There is nothing more sinful  than to
politicise the issue to score  political
gains. Those who do are  merely riding on
the miseries of  the victims.

Politicians who merely issue  press
statements and make visits  to these
villages to incite anger are  not helping
the victims.

We need people who can handle  the task
and help put the farmers  back on their
feet.

It must be insane for anyone to  even
imagine that the Government  is
unconcerned about the JE problem.

There should be no racial or political considerations in handling  this problem which has, in all intents and
purposes, become a national tragedy.

It speaks well for Malaysia that  the
rearing of pigs has never been  an issue
and it should be kept that  way.

The pig farmers must understand the need to start afresh. That  means the animals suspected to be  infected have to be destroyed and  the carcasses disposed of in a hygienic
manner.

There must be proper waste disposal management as it is an important aspect of
preventing any  disease outbreak.

Every measure must now be taken to confine the disease to Negri  Sembilan. It must not be allowed to  become a nationwide epidemic.

More importantly, the industry  must be
saved. Our pig farmers  must modernise
their animal husbandry practices and go for centralised and integrated
farming.

When all this is over, the authorities should organise trips for  these farmers to Taiwan and Japan  to study the modern farming  methods there.

To help these farmers go  through this
rough patch, there is a  need to initiate
some form of self help programmes, including credit  facility to get the industry going  again.

These farmers would need to  pay off
their debts and to acquire  the necessary
capital to restart  their business.

The MCA, Federation of Chinese 
Associations Malaysia, Associated 
Chinese Chamber of Commerce  and
Industry, Selangor Chinese  Assembly Hall
and the Federation  of Livestock Farmers
Associations  must now be seen to
spearhead  help programmes for the
victims  and their families.

But we must also not forget the  consumer
end. Malaysians must  have access to
accurate information about the disease.

That means the Health Ministry  must be
open and available to the  media. The
media, on their part,  must refrain from
publishing unsubstantiated reports which may 
give rise to rumours.

There is also the educational aspect. Efforts must be made to inform Malaysians
about the correct  and effective
preventive measures  to take to check
JE.

This episode should also serve as  a
lesson, especially to the authorities, on the need to be firm and decisive in
dealing with such situations.

The Veterinary Services Department plays a key role in this area,  particularly the movement of animals. There
is obviously a need for  better
enforcement.

The nation has gone through  such episodes
before, although  probably not of such
magnitude  where human lives are at
stake.

It is better to be unpopular by  making
firm decisions in the interest of the country and the people.

Last Saturday, Klang MP and  Wanita MCA deputy chairman Dr  Tan Yee Kew led a group of community leaders
to a feast of bah  kut teh to prove there
is no reason  to fear a belly-up eating
pork.

A few days later, it was MCA 
vice-president Datuk Chua Jui 
Meng's turn to lend his stomach. 
The Health Minister ate several 
pieces of roasted pork to prove 
that the publicity over the spread 
of JE had gone overboard.

The DAP obviously found it difficult to stomach Chua's bravado.  On Tuesday, 
its leaders turned up  in full
force for their bah kut teh  feast after
party secretary-general  Lim Kit Siang
had announced a  “Save Bah Kut Teh''
campaign.

“We have seen a roasted tiger in 
Kelantan, dead pigs in Seremban 
and now a dead dugong in Johor. 
We should demand a Commission  of
Inquiry,'' one DAP supporter demanded.

With the “Save Bah Kut Teh''  campaign,
he reasoned, the DAP  would be able to
impress upon the  Chinese community the
party's seriousness in fighting for their interest.

The MCA, he grunted, had been  too slow
in responding to the needs  of the pig
farmers.

Call it pork-barrel politics or 
whatever, the MCA is not amused 
by the DAP antics either. Its supporters claim the DAP is capable  only of snorting.

“The only thing they are good at  is
sowing hatred for the government,'' one member said.

Both parties are saying they are  no
push-overs and certainly no  easy meat,
as far as the JE issue is 
concerned.

Said a bah kut teh eating academician: “It's a hot issue for both  these Chinese-based parties.

“They want to prove they are  still
lean. They are eager because  of the next
general elections.''

A veteran journalist, however,  said the
JE issue should not be politicised as it was a health problem.

“Let's keep our sanity. Lives and 
livelihood are at stake here. The 
DAP should not piggy-back on the 
issue to gain votes.

“It's simply distasteful. There is 
nothing rib-tickling at all.

“The farmers must not lose their  income
and their children should  be able to
continue putting money  into their piggy banks,''
he cautioned.

For consumers, many seem to  have
chickened out, shunning bah  kut teh for
other meats.

“We would rather eat chickens  now,
although it's less fleshy. I  know some
of us are over-reacting  but we would
rather wait and see,''  one confessed.

Pig farmers are understandably  concerned
over what has been happening and they have demanded  quick and effective help from the  Government.

“We are merely demanding justice. If the authorities don't help,  they will be meat balls come election,'' one
farmer complained.

He also warned the press, especially those from the vernacular  papers, to check their facts first.

“We are disappointed with some  members
of the media who exaggerate the issue.''

But over in the Land Below The  Wind, Sabahans
have continued to  have their bah kut teh
with little  hesitation.

Said a regular eater: “It's a semenanjung problem lah. There's  no JE problem here. We are only  interested in state issues.

“We are not concerned about  dead pigs.
We're sorry to hear  about your dugong
but we only  want to talk about kataks
(frogs).

“When the election results are  out,
we'll know how the kataks performed. That's the only thing  brewing here beside my bah kut  teh.''

Bah kut teh or whatever, politics  must
be put aside sometimes. Or  else
over-eager politicians, irrespective of their political affiliations, may find
themselves in hot  soup.

In recent years, the MCA has  been able to consolidate its  strength in the government. That in  many ways is due to the electoral  support given by the community.

The party has since carried out  numerous
projects close to the  heart of the
community, particularly on education and culture.

The Langkawi project, the setting up of TAR college branches,  and promoting information technology in
primary schools are some  of the well-received
efforts.

The MCA's performance will be  evaluated
again when the present  term of the
Barisan government  ends in April next
year.

For the Chinese community, the  issue is
simple: Whether it wants to  ensure the
MCA's effectiveness in  government.

The community is already fragmented politically through several  supposedly multi-racial parties.

Until 1995, the urban Chinese  have been
perceived to be supportive of the DAP. The result was increasing weightage
given to rural  areas in the delineation
of constituencies.

The drawing of electoral boundaries to favour the ruling party,  known as gerrymandering, is not  something unusual in the Westminster style of
democracy.

Before the 1969 general election,  the
MCA was rewarded with key  ministerial
positions such as the Finance Ministry and the Trade and  Industry Ministry.

These plums jobs were the result  of the
community's backing for the  MCA in the
1955, 1959 and 1964  general elections;
1969 was the  community's gravest mistake
and  the implications were felt.

Faced with the reality of having  to send
fewer representatives to  Parliament, the
community will  again have to decide
whether it  wants its representatives on
the  government or opposition
bench.

In urban areas like Penang and  Selangor,
some members of the  community want the
best of both  worlds  they want the MCA at  state level and DAP in Parliament.

Sensing such sentiments, particularly with the current political  scenario, the DAP has been low key,
campaigning along the lines  that the
Barisan is in no danger of  losing the
federal or state governments.

The hope is that there will be  enough
protest votes to bring along  a
windfall.

But the Chinese community has  come to a
crossroads. Like it or not,  politics in
Malaysia is a numbers  game.

A weakened Chinese representation will mean little or no voice in  the formulation or implementation  of government policies. It's simple  arithmetic 
less than 20% of the 
parliamentary seats are Chinese majority.

There is also the belief that the 
Chinese population is shrinking in 
size, with most families having 
only one or two children.

In addition to larger rural migration to towns, the future will see  more foreigners becoming permanent residents
and eventually citizens. This will change the racial  make-up of urban constituencies.

Even now, any form of Chinese  opposition
will bring minimal impact.

As the community moves into the  next
millennium, the stakes are  higher. The
question that comes to  mind is whether
they wish to throw  away a protest vote
or whether  they must remain pragmatic,
focussed and practical.

Unlike other countries with parlimentary rule, the Opposition plays  more than just the role of a watch dog.

Besides having a Shadow Cabinet, the Opposition has a proper organisational
set-up with the ability  to draw up
alternative policies and  to offer itself
as a viable alternative government.

Until Malaysians see that, there  is
really little choice. For the community, any dissipating of votes  will erode its bargaining strength  in government.

Despite the DAP's projection of  MCA
leaders as lame ducks in government, they have been able to influence many key
decisions affecting the community.

The MCA's disadvantage is that  it is
unable to claim credit for  many
decisions because it accepts  the fact of
collective decision-making.

As a team player, it must defend  all
Cabinet decisions, popular or  otherwise,
but its voice in Cabinet  is crucial for
the community.

There has been suggestions that  the DAP
and PAS work together, as  one prominent
academician pointed out in the latest issue of a regional magazine.

He argued that if the MCA and  Umno could
work out the citizenship issue then, he sees no reason  why DAP and PAS could not.

There is a flaw in the argument.  The MCA
and Umno remain committed to the system of Westminster democracy and both
parties  share a similar philosophy on
how  they can work out national
issues.

PAS has not committed itself to  this
political system should it form  the next
federal government. It  has, in fact,
said it wants hudud  laws in place.

Umno has been generous enough  to allow
MCA candidates to contest  in mixed or
even predominantly Malay constituencies. That is commitment to
power-sharing.

The same cannot be said of PAS. 
Malaysians cannot imagine DAP 
Chinese leaders contesting in Kelantan or Terengganu with support  from PAS.

PAS, which does not field women 
candidates, is certainly not expected to field non-Muslims as
candidates.

So, the likes of Tian Chua and  Irene
Fernandez can offer themselves as independent candidates  endorsed by DAP, PAS, HAK and  Adil if they find party politics too  partisan.

But why should the DAP support  these
activists if the party thinks  its own
members have a chance of  winning that
particular constituency?

At a recent forum involving DAP  and Adil
supporters in Penang, a  reformasi
supporter stated that the DAP should not make use of Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah
Wan Ismail.

Another speaker, presumably a  PAS
supporter, reminded the DAP  about its
opposition to the setting  up of an
Islamic state in 1990   which
subsequently led to DAP  deputy chairman
Karpal Singh's  apology at the same
gathering.

In all fairness to the DAP, it must  be
pointed out that it has toned  down its
chauvinistic image.

The younger DAP leaders have  defended
cases involving non-Chinese and it has also tried to project  a stronger multi-racial appeal.

Over the years, it has attempted  to work
with Malay-based parties  such as Parti
Melayu Semangat 46  and now, Adil.

That is, however, different from  forging
a real multi-racial coalition  party that
is capable of governing  the country
effectively.

For the Chinese, they realise the 
importance of a strong political and 
economic system  one that the  MCA has in no small part contributed to over
50 years in nation building.

DAP and PAS can present a powerful combination without
eating  into each other's turf. As
established parties, their leaders command a huge following.

Despite their complaints of alleged media blackouts, their prominence is
certainly due to continuous coverage by the local media  and not the occasional coverage by  the foreign media.

Their leaders are realistic  enough to
invite the local media to  all its press
conferences., even  when these opposition
leaders decide to deride their guests.

The cooperation between DAP  and PAS is a
sensitive issue to both  sides because it
can be a double edged sword.

It makes good political strategy  but at
the same time allows the  nemesis of the
two parties to attack  them.

There is no love lost between the  MCA
and DAP as both try to outdo  each other
to win the support of the  Chinese electorate.

As much as it tries to project itself as a multi-racial party, the  DAP is predominantly-Chinese in  membership.

PAS, on the other hand, is rural based and boasts strong backing in  the east coast. It now hopes to bank  on the resentment among Malay  voters over the sacking of Datuk  Seri Anwar Ibrahim to gain electoral
mileage.

Following Anwar's ouster, both  parties
have worked on the question of democracy, human rights  and justice with other parties and  NGOs.

DAP leaders have also appeared  at PAS
ceramahs at their Gombak  headquarters
and in other states.

That has been enough for Barisan Nasional leaders, especially  those from MCA, to challenge the  DAP on its stand regarding the setting up of
an Islamic state  an  ultimate objective of PAS.

The apology by DAP deputy  chairman
Karpal Singh over his  “over my dead
body'' remark in the  1990 general
election, and subsequently front-paged in Harakah,  did not help clear the confusion.

But in all fairness to DAP secretary-general Lim Kit Siang, he has  reiterated several times that the  party is against the setting up of an  Islamic state.

It must be pointed out that he has  also
said that the DAP will not have  any
electoral pact with PAS in the  next
general election.

Lim is well aware of the sentiments of party members and the  community on the issue. That, perhaps,
explains why the party leadership is agitated over the constant  demand by the MCA for an explanation on its
cooperation with PAS.

MCA leaders are now claiming  that the
DAP is evading the issue  by attacking
the performance of  party president Datuk
Seri Dr Ling  Liong Sik as Transport
Minister.

They have also questioned why  Karpal
Singh should make the apology, asking whether it was aimed  at appeasing PAS supporters.

On Friday, Lim said that he  would
convene a meeting of political parties, NGOs and prominent  Malaysians on March 16 to examine and study
the threat of a purported biased mass media to democracy.

The press, he said, had attempted  to use
the issue of Islamic state and 
misrepresent the DAP's stand on 
the Islamic issue.

The DAP leadership should not  blame the
press, which is merely  reporting
statements by Barisan  leaders
challenging the DAP to explain the status of its cooperation  with PAS.

The party cannot claim there is a  media
blackout if its rebuttals have  no direct
relevance to the original  issue.

Malaysians can judge for themselves the merits of the case by  reading the full transcript of statements
issued by the party on its 
website.

Whether the issue has been ignored by the press or not, the subject is likely
to surface during the  election
campaign.

Barisan and the DAP should cut  their
rhetoric, press intimidation  and
name-calling over the “opposition pact'' issue. Malaysians are  more interested in the substance of  the argument.

One way out for the DAP is perhaps to cut all linkages with PAS  and to concentrate only on HAK  and Adil.

The Islamic state issue aside, the  DAP
has also put to test its decision  to
support the reformasi campaign.

Chinese-based Barisan component leaders seem convinced that  Chinese voters are not as passionate as their
Malay brethren on the  Anwar issue.

Some have even said that the reformasi movement, especially with  its demonstrations in the early  stages, were equated, rightly or  wrongly, with the protests in Indonesia which
led to racial riots.

They argued that the Chinese  voters have
a phobia about luan  (chaos) and that
their concern  would be political and
economic  stability.

The DAP protest against toll  rates was
more practical as the  matter had direct
impact on people's pockets, which explained why 
the MCA and Gerakan joined in the 
protest.

Cooperation with groups supporting the reformasi issue is another  double-edged sword for the DAP.

The move may win the support of 
liberals, particularly the English educated urban middle class, but  among the Chinese grassroots, the  scenario is less clear.

Still, Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah  Wan
Ismail is convinced that the  support
from the Chinese is there,  saying the
community had given  her family “quiet
but firm moral  support in this critical
time of trial  and tribulation.''

The DAP is also sure that any  form of
injustice and the lack of  transparency
will be sufficient to  generate protest
votes at the polls.

It also hopes to get the support of  the
voters by highlighting the imprisonment of Kota Melaka MP  Lim Guan Eng.

In the spirit of Gong Xi Fa Cai, 
Malaysian Chinese politicians must 
remember that they can disagree 
on many issues but they must never be personal in their
politicking.

If Barisan leaders must tolerate 
dissent, oppositionists, who make a 
career attacking the government, 
must sportingly accept the knocks 
when their turn comes. That's democracy.