PAS: Caught between Old and New


By Farish A. Noor

Now that the cat is out of the bag and the whole of Malaysia knows that there have been secret backroom dealings between UMNO and PAS; ostensibly to bring the two parties together in the name of Malay-Muslim communal solidarity, we need to pause a while and look at the political factors at work.

I highlight the political factors at work here for frankly, I see little of Islam or Islamic ethics at work in this latest round of UMNO-PAS dialogue.

Some basic historical facts are in order: PAS has, in the past, already been part of the BN UMNO-led alliance in the mid-1970s. This was during the time when PAS was led by Asri Muda, perhaps the most ethno-nationalist among PAS’s leaders and a man who was seen by many as a Malay first and a Muslim second. PAS’s entry into the BN was not without opposition: Many PAS leaders and members abandoned the party and gave up on the Islamist struggle for good. When PAS was in the BN it had to toe the BN line and even contested on the BN ticket. PAS was discredited in the eyes of an entire younger generation of Malaysians and this opened the way for the rise of new Islamist groups like ABIM and Darul Arqam instead. PAS’s marriage of convenience led to it being effectively emasculated by UMNO and when it finally left the BN in late 1970s, its base-state Kelantan was in a shambles where a state of Emergency had been declared. PAS lost Kelantan and it took the party more than a decade before it won it back in 1990.

It is for this reason that PAS veterans like Tuan Guru Nik Aziz feel so strongly that this latest round of dialogues between UMNO and PAS should stop, as he senses hidden hands that are out to instrumentalise PAS yet again.

But who are the ones who are trying to bring PAS and UMNO together? It is widely reported that among the PAS leaders who are trying to engineer this deal there are the younger PAS leaders who were not even members of the party in the 1970s, and hence they do not have the same bitter memories of betrayal and defeat like Nik Aziz does.

Looking at the profile of some of these PAS leaders, we see that they tend to come from the more outwardly conservative faction who seem more interested in superficial aspects of Islam and Islamisation such as dress codes, making people go to mosques, promoting dakwah (missionary) activities and the like.

Yet PAS is divided between the old and the new and there are also new, progressive forces in the party that understand the need to bring PAS into the political mainstream and to make the party relevant to the Malaysian public as a whole, regardless of race and religion. These are the PAS leaders who were at the forefront of the BERSIH campaign for free and fair elections, the ones who have been calling for more transparency and accountability, the ones who have tried to re-construct PAS into a modern, relevant Islamist party with national aspirations.

Between these two factions, who were the ones who helped to give PAS its victory at the recent March elections?

It is obvious that PAS’s gains this time round were partly due to the efforts of the PAS progressives who had managed to re-invent the party’s image as a modern Islamic party that is more concerned with economic-structural issues like transparency, accountability, free elections, free press and democracy. These were the issues that captured the minds of the new electorate in Malaysia, and not questions like what length a Muslim’s beard ought to be. Furthermore, it was they who managed to secure the support of thousands of non-Malay and non-Muslims who voted for PAS as part of the Pakatan Rakyat on the basis of trust (amanah) and were willing to give PAS a chance to prove that it could reach beyond its Malay-Muslim electorate and speak for all Malaysians.

As a result of this current round of UMNO-PAS negotiations, PAS’s image as a new, modern Islamic party is being deminished by the day. So is the trust and confidence of the Malaysian electorate, in particular the non-Malays and non-Muslims, who in the end may conclude that PAS’s appeals to the Malaysian nation as a whole was just cosmetic and that in the final analysis, despite calling itself an Islamist party, it is simply a Malay party concerned about Malay issues and promoting Malay interests. How can PAS ever hope to recover the goodwill of the non-Malay and non-Muslim voters who voted for them, should PAS lose their trust?

It is also ironic that PAS is being courted by its arch-nemesis UMNO, when we consider the simple historical fact that it was UMNO that has been demonising PAS all along. Have we forgotten the clashes of the mid-1980s, like the Memali incident (leading to the killing of PAS leader Ibrahim Libya and his followers), Operation Kenari (that led to arrests of PAS members and the accusation of PAS harbouring militants), the KMM and al-Maunah incidents when PAS was again accused of having links with terrorist groups? So is this new Hadari version of UMNO now about to cut a deal with the very same PAS that they have been accusing of being militant and radical; and if so, what will this do to the image of the Malaysian government if and when it has this very same ‘militant’ PAS in its company?

Which brings us to the last point: For more than three decades now the Islamisation race between UMNO and PAS has witnessed UMNO’s sustained attack on PAS as a party that is cast as fundamentalist, reactionary, militant and dangerous. Now as a result of the poor showing of the BN at the March 2008 elections, UMNO is doing another volte-face and courting PAS in the name of Malay racial and communal solidarity. But throughout this period (1980-2008) it was UMNO that cast itself in the international arena as the ‘good’ Muslims and PAS as the ‘bad’ Muslims.

The current establishment has even gone as far as broadcasting to the world that UMNO’s brand of Hadari Islam is the correct, moderate and modern Islam to be emulated, juxtaposed to PAS’s Islam which is painted in Taliban-esque colours. To bring PAS that has been so vilified into the BN coalition would certainly raise eyebrows the world over and give cause for foreign governments and investors to think twice: Who was lying then, UMNO or PAS? Was UMNO wrong to cast PAS in a negative light? Or has UMNO now endorsed PAS’s version of Islam that it once decried as being fundamentalist and militant? Either way, the image of Malaysia and the Malaysian government is at stake at a time when the world is already watching Malaysia closely as a result of the repeat of the sodomy allegations against Anwar.

All of this points to the picture of a weak government that has lost its politcal bearings and compass. UMNO’s courting of PAS (and vice-versa) reminds us that racial considerations come before all else in Malaysia still, and that despite the attempts to turn PAS into a truly Islamic party that transcends race and communal politics, there remain pockets of ethno-nationalist sympathy in that party.

One can only hope for the sake of Malaysia, and Malaysia’s weak but slowly emerging democracy, that the modern progressive voices in PAS will prevail to scuttle this dubious round of backroom negotiations.

  1. #1 by Emily Pratt on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 1:57 pm

    Let’s take an analogy: Lets assume Pakatan is the new management team and Malaysia is a comapny.

    You first need to delegate who to do what. (Where is the shadow cabinet?)

    Who is the GM? Who is the sales manager? Who is the Finance manager etc etc. All this should be clearly designated by now, Sep 16 is very near. (Don’t come Sep 16, Pakatan leaders commences in-fighting for post)

    Then you need a business plan. Where to get the source of funds, what is the cash flow like? What are the projected sales? What are the projected revenue and expenditure?

    As of now, I have not seen Pakatan does any of these… all they go about are telling us how bad the former management were bla bla bla…

    Come on guys get real… we already know how bad the previous management were, that is why we voted you in.

    Now get on to do the job…

    EP

  2. #2 by Godfather on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 2:18 pm

    Get on with what job ? PR has been snookered every step of the way by the den of thieves. Predictably so, since the thieves can’t allow their levels of incompetence to show. What is clear is that there can’t be a proper working model between state and federal if both are run by opposing politicians. We have to decide if all levels should be run by BN – or by PR.

  3. #3 by Godfather on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 2:42 pm

    The worst model is what exists today, and we the voters have inadvertently created it.

  4. #4 by citizenwatch on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 2:56 pm

    The PAS-UMNO talk is explained in Malaysia Waves/Malaysia Today under the title “Muzakarah: Another Perspective”. Please see extract below:

    “…Suddenly, the issue of PAS-UMNO meeting was raised again and this time, UMNO took advantage and the PM confessed that there were meetings held between PAS and UMNO.

    PAS leaders responsible was caught with their pants down. Now, the option of denial is no more and option. Finally, they confessed that the meetings did take place.

    When the news broke out, Tok Guru Nik Aziz blew a gasket. He was downright mad. One can easily noticed that each time Tok Guru was interviewed on TV, he did not mince his words.

    Tok Guru Nik Aziz has many reasons for his angry response. The main reason is that he experienced UMNO treachery personally. Remember, that Dato Asri would not have been able to bring PAS into BN if Tok Guru had not consented.( He was Ketua Dewan Ulama back then). I think Tok Guru is still haunted by his decision to this day.

    So, for Tok Guru Nik Aziz, whose decision allowed the move, the pain must be excruciating. For Tok Guru blowing his top like this is expected. In fact, I think if it wasn’t for his age, he would’ve taken heavier action against the “perpetrators”.

    Thank God Almighty, a meeting was called yesterday of the “Syura” and from bits of pieces I have gathered, Tuan Guru Haji Abdul Hadi Awang apologized for his mistake. The decision taken prohibits “Muzakarah” and permits only “Muqabalah”. The word “Muqabalah” can be translated as “social meeting”, the type that is not binding and formal.

    The same meeting strengthen PAS’s commitment to Pakatan Rakyat. …”

    To read the full article: http://www.malaysiawaves.com/2008/07/muzakarah-another-perspective.html

  5. #5 by citizenwatch on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 3:07 pm

    To Godfather:

    Don’t you think that it’s odd that Puppy-Power (the one who called you ‘greenhorn’) corrected himself when he misspelled Lee Kwan Yew’s name saying the his “England is no good”? What does inadvertant error of a person’s name has anything to do with one’s ‘England’ (English)? Puppy-Power might either be self-effacing or there’s something we don’t know about.

    At times, in the RealWorld, as opposed to cyber world, things are not what they seem to be. Some of the Umnoputeras cybertroopers assume other identities or usernames to carry out their agendas.

  6. #6 by taiking on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 3:10 pm

    Dear Adam,

    As a matter of fact it did not quite strike me the way it struck you that limkamput and undergrad2 are at war.

    It appears to me as if they were both having great fun poking at each other.

    That is net culture – blog culture. You see we log on. We see whats new. We read what others have to say about issues that affect us all. We contribute to the discussion. We agree with some. We may disagree with some and express our contrary views and do it in way we do always do in our individual and personal style. Good language. Bad language. Foul language and rojak. Semua pun boleh. Good opinions and stupid opinions and funny ones – doesnt matter. Just keep them coming. The point is participation and support for the blog-site. The other equally important point is this is an avenue for uncle kit to communicate with malaysians and the world.

    I enjoy visiting and contributing to the site. Really. No bull.

  7. #7 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 3:25 pm

    pas was not obliged to meet with umno after the march 8th general election. pas have kelantan , kedah and even (perak), thanks to the generousity of dap and pkr and the law of the state.

    i shall not question perak state constitution. i cannot.

    but to have secret meetings , not once but thrice creates doubts and suspicion within PR itself. Hadi should have know better that Badawi would have it splashed front page on all national medias that would have Pas feeling ashame and guilty of incest.

    And in line with the subject matter. What is so Islamic about the secret meeting and may pas and umno transcribe what was discussed for the good of islam for all muslims to know. please make the Islamic discussion public for all muslims to know. I , as a muslim have the right to know.

  8. #8 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 3:30 pm

    dear taiking,

    thanks for your brief. maybe i am really off sync with the cyber world. if they are both having fun than let them continue. thanks again taiking.
    (devilmaster is also another great guy that killer owed him an apology).

  9. #9 by Hishamuddin on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 4:29 pm

    YB Lim,
    It is a known fact that UMNO is a racialist party. Now we see the real face of AAB and teh Great Selangor MB. What they are doing is similar to ethenic cleansing in Selagor under KT.

    After UMNO get PAS support, they will and can sideline MCA, Gerakan and MIC. After all, they are irrelevant already after the last election.

    If those fellows in MCA, Gerakan and MIC still think they are equal partners in BN, think again. If they are, then they will participate in the meetings and brief on the progess.

    Pity those guys, they only read it in the papers.

    Ha ha. Serve them right. To UMNO, they are just guard dogs for their doors. Give them some left over bones at the end of each day, they will be happy.

  10. #10 by Godfather on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 4:54 pm

    citizenwatch:

    I don’t see Puppy-Power as being a defender of the den of thieves. If anything, his/her infrequency at visiting this blog and commenting thereon suggests that he/she does not have the same agenda as RealWorld or Shamshul Anuar.

  11. #11 by Godfather on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 4:57 pm

    Adam Yong:

    Undergrad2 and Limkamput remind me of a couple who can’t live with each other, and yet can’t live without each other. So they go on airing their dirty linen in public, and follow each other dutifully from thread to thread. I can’t see the sniping ending anytime soon, irrespective of our interference and comments.

    Let them grow old together.

  12. #12 by zak_hammaad on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 5:22 pm

    undergrad2, semantics for you but a fact for the Muslims. Regards.

  13. #13 by undergrad2 on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 7:07 pm

    zak_hammaad.

    “Fact” for you – yes, but Quran, Bible, Torah are books of faith. Long before there was a Quranic Genesis, there was only the Genesis which is also the first of five books of the Torah.

  14. #14 by zak_hammaad on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 10:20 pm

    undergrad2, being selective with what you choose and ignore from my posts is a reflection of your desperation. When will you graduate? Better still, where will you graduate from?

    You know very well what I was specifically speaking of. The Qur’anic concept is clear-cut enough for Muslims to accept and not delve into the confusion you propose. Furthermore, it’s bemusing how you add words that were not said nor implied – “sons of God”? lol, maybe this would explain the reason why Trinity remains the single biggest cause of desertion from the Church :^) But that’s a different matter.

  15. #15 by undergrad2 on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 11:26 pm

    “The Qur’anic concept is clear-cut enough for Muslims to accept..” zak_hamaad

    If the concept is clear, explain why there are Shiites and Sunnis and these two groups of Muslims have been killing each other ever since? The Quoran like the Bible and the Torah are books of faith.

    Come down from your high pedestal and stop talking down to readers as if you have the monopoly of the truth. That, in case you missed, is my message to you.

  16. #16 by zak_hammaad on Friday, 25 July 2008 - 11:51 pm

    undergrad2, what you are now doing is jumping around like a kangaroo and grabbing any subject that tickles your fancy. I am not going to fall for your time-wasting tactics, but will leave this thread with a fundamental principle by which anyone can understand the differences that you speak of.

    Islam is one; and despite this we have been forewarned of the emergence of 73 sects within Islam, each calling to themselves. However, Islam is safeguarded by it’s sources and everytime another strays from the defined path, it is easy to being them back to the sources and judge according to them. This is something you will not find in any other religion because none have the original sources to go back to.

    In conclusion, the Islam that was 1430+ years ago is the same Islam now, time and location and space may change, but the fundamentals creed and actions and methodologies do not change. There are secondary and tertiary levels that are dynamic enough to fit any place and time and space, it is this that is subject to debate and concensus.

    See you in the next thread :^)

  17. #17 by ChinNA on Saturday, 26 July 2008 - 8:23 am

    Dialog vs face-to-face talk.

    What is face to face talk if it is not a dialog. Can dialog happen without face to face talk?

    Perhaps in a dialog, the parties sat with their backs facing each other but they still talk. Audible but not facing each other.

    Can a face-to-face talk happen with a dialog? Yes, it is possible when there is a disjointed topics being discussed. For example, one party talks about going to the moon while the other party talking the merits of fishing.

    To me, in a regular world, face-to-face talk and dialog is the same.

    Someone please enlighten me how the Islamic world differentiate between dialog and face-to-face talk. I need to understand Islam better before I reach any conclusion.

  18. #18 by ChinNA on Saturday, 26 July 2008 - 8:24 am

    opps typo: should have been – Can a face-to-face talk happen without a dialog?

  19. #19 by lopez on Saturday, 26 July 2008 - 8:28 am

    some people like it fried, some like it steam, some grilled, yet some dont bother at all,

    it is world of choices, you are responsible for your own actions.

    Not one values system is better than the other, it is the millenium, we all adapt , it is natural except if you chose not to do so, and it is your own reason for not doing so.

    your beliefs and values system is not better than others, keep it to yourself, dont preach to people who do not wish to accept, it can be seen that there is no use of force but only raping, let others do it their ways, please respect other people’s cultures and values system

    incidentally it appears the word Hypocrisy came into existed just after the idea of belief or religion came into being .

    Man make things to to cure himself in mind and body
    For the mind he made religion to cure his non stopping worries and concerns that his brain generates
    He create cultures and value system to guide social behavior and conduct
    But in society of human beings they are wide disparity in IQ and well being.
    So it is never surprising to have so many variants in many things , particularly in interpretation of learnings and thought brought down from ancestors, some cultures have written them down while some dont, some dont even have a written text and only based on verbally within each other family cluster.
    So what we see and read and listen are versions of certain people or groups of people. And the writings are explanation of thoughts and observations or findings of the writer.
    Those who know the language of the ancient texts interprets them for us to know, so it is an interpretation of a language base on the intepreter’s explanation.
    Depending on ones IQ and knowledge in understanding and reasoning, we can have many many versions from the same texts.
    We have been fooled….those guys could be laughing at us.

  20. #20 by yhsiew on Saturday, 26 July 2008 - 3:23 pm

    If PAS continues to have dialogs with UMNO, eventually it will lose support from non-Malays. PAS should be mindful that its good showing in the 12th general election was partly due to support from non-Malays.

  21. #21 by shamshul anuar on Saturday, 26 July 2008 - 6:49 pm

    Dear Yhsiew,
    Many thanks for your view. Perhaps you are not aware that vast majority of Malays want the talk to be started and better still , a success.

    If you ask any Malay, you will be given answers that there are excessive politicking between these 2 parties. This is damaging the interests of Malays.

    I am neither PAS or UMNO member. But certainly I never fail to notice that never ending arguments between them actually weaken the Malays. And I must tell you that PAS members whom I talk to are actually upset about mega pig farm project in Selangor. The truth is that they are very embarrased as PAS is part of Selangor Govt.

    Contrary to what you said, PAS support among the Chinese is not that substantial, although it shows some growth. PAS derives support mainly from Malay community. The same goes to UMNO. Both these parties can stand on their own.

    It is other parties such as MCA, MIC , Gerakan that will collapse without Malay support. As for DAP, its anti Malay attitude is actually known as its “hallmark”.

    Co

  22. #22 by shamshul anuar on Saturday, 26 July 2008 - 6:55 pm

    Dear Undergrad2,

    Yes. There Sunnis and there Shiites. Just like there are Catholics and there are Protestants. Bottom line is that we, mere mortals are well humans.

    I see nothing wrong in Zak _ Hamaad answer’s to you. He is just explaining about Islam to you. In Islamic tradition, Kuran is believed to be pure way back to Prophet’s day. There is no such thing as new King James Version in Islam.

    Again, I hope nobody is offended with his remark. I have high regards to religions, be they are Islam, Christianity, Hinduisn or Budhism

  23. #23 by limkamput on Saturday, 26 July 2008 - 11:51 pm

    Shamshul, you are talking bulls. I am offended already. Just remember this, your Koran is true to you and you only, ok. How true can we be if the god of Judaism has become the god of the christian and subsequently the god of Muslim. Who has more truth? I just hope you know what you are talking. But I don’t want to be as insulting as you, so I will just stop here.

  24. #24 by Godfather on Sunday, 27 July 2008 - 9:36 am

    Shamshul:

    Is stealing a sin under the Koran ? What about stealing other people’s money ?

  25. #25 by ahmadrafaei on Monday, 28 July 2008 - 10:35 am

  26. #26 by ahmadrafaei on Monday, 28 July 2008 - 10:38 am

  27. #27 by zak_hammaad on Monday, 28 July 2008 - 6:32 pm

    Looks like UMNO is happy to see the crack emerging from within Pakatan:

    http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/Frontpage/20080727181042/Article/index_html

  28. #28 by bennylohstocks on Monday, 28 July 2008 - 10:24 pm

    If the chief had not openly called for a merger and called for a meeting on this, there will be non-stop back-door nonsense from some:

    A MERGER PLAN CHANGES ALL

  29. #29 by shamshul anuar on Monday, 28 July 2008 - 10:36 pm

    DEar LImkamput,

    Sound that you are upset. Why? I reread my comment. In no way, I insulted you or your belief.

    As for Godfather, the answer is already known to you. I tell you what. Why do not you ask your mother whether stealing is OK. I bet the answer is the same as that of mine. Again, I fail to understand the rationale of your question.

  30. #30 by Charlie Chan on Wednesday, 30 July 2008 - 10:44 am

    Reading the latest comments of PAS leaders, they have no need to share infor with Pakatan parties. It appears odd but then again, what is the status of Pakatan’s setup, esp. taking into consideration the comparison with BN which is a formalise grouping. Perhaps, Pakatan needs to work on this aspect, if is harbours any hope of longer term grouping and meeting the aspirations of a two party political setup in this country. That may well be the issue at hand as this should negate need for one party to feel upset when any component party decides to take action seen as improper.

You must be logged in to post a comment.