A weak government, by characteristics, is dysfunctional, cannot unite its people and draw on the social capital embedded in their unity, cannot construct effective formal institutions and structurally reform to build consensus and wide legitimacy amongst its peoples. If TDM says the Najib’s Administration is weak, the irony is that the principal cause of that weakness is the former premier himself. First he anoints successors whom he deems weak and susceptible to do his will (after he left office); then when he tries to build consensus with 1 Malaysia, take tentative steps to deconstruct the NEP by financial liberalization, give accreditation to TARC diplomas, institute RCI on Sabah immigrants, he publicly criticizes, gives patronage to Perkasa to oppose, by statements on race and religion, divide the people more etc by raising Malay vs Non Malay concerns, who are beggars in their own country etc) and when the government relents to his pressure and seem indecisive ‘cakap tak serupa bikin’!, you turn around and say its weak, when that weakness is lot due to your castigation, instigation, criticism, words and actions past & present. Come on man if you think that all your successors are all incompetent, that you can do better show to preserve your legacy, you should not have resigned. Don’t resign on your own and then after that keep interfering how your own anointed successors do their jobs.

He laments that because Najib administration is “weak” and cannot entertain the concerns of the Malays, especially its business community, they are no longer the country’s kingmakers. It is a quaint choice of words – “Kingmakers” instead of “King”. Its not entirely logical: for if otherwise the administration were strong and concerns of Malays were addressed -so that Malays become “Kingmakers”- then who is the King? It only shows the man who says this is obsessed with word and role of “kingmaker” that he even uses the word inappropriately in this context. Yet we see this kind of people who in certain situations love being defacto king makers than the actual king. The French call him éminence grise (“gray eminence”) the equivalent to English Kingmaker or Man Behind The Throne. A man with manipulative bent of mind likes this. He exerts authority or influence without having formal status. He gets his position rewarded & goals achieved by others at the front whose strings he pulls: but whilst he reaps benefit, the risks, flak and fall out will fall on others. We see these kind of personalities in company board rooms, in private household (many wives are behind the throne) as well in political organisations. Instead of power comes with responsibility, here power is wielded, responsibility is shoved. Woe betide he who goes to office to make decisions at others behest/influence, takes the blame for others doings, and when he comes home after work faces the same dynamics with the significant other! Predictably his hair will ashen and from that to snowy white.