Two-party system not feasible to explain Malaysian politics
BANGI: The two-party system approach used by analysts in analyzing Malaysia is not feasible to be used in Malaysia as it fails to explain the fluid movement of political figures from one party to another.
“Analysts have been using many terms because the system cannot be explained using the two-party system model. We are caught in a two-party system analytics,” said Institute of Ethnic Studies (Kita) founding director Professor Shamsul Amri Baharuddin.
“Why should we be like US, UK and Australia? Analysts are confused but not Mahathir who is an expert. There have been no explanations from the experts for the past 18 months as they have focused more on feuds
“Obama became a president for two terms, and he is from Democrat. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad became Prime Minister twice, under BN and Pakatan Harapan,” said Shamsul while presenting his paper on political epistemology in Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
He was speaking at a forum entitled “Current Malaysian Political Analysis: Between Academic and Popularity.
Other speakers included Kita deputy director Kartini Aboo Talib and USM political anthropologist P Sivamurugan.
Oppositional democracy framework
Shamsul proposed that political analysts used the oppositional democracy model to understand Malaysian politics instead of the two-party system.
“It has strategic groups that can change from time to time. They are well educated and well-funded.”
He used PKR president Anwar Ibrahim’s group as an example to elaborate his point.
“When Anwar was removed from power in 1998, he had his men both in Umno and PAS. Now that PKR has come to power, (Deputy Transport Minister) Kamaruddin Jaafar returned from PAS to PKR, not Amanah.
In the second example he also included roles of individuals from the private sector.
“(Tun) Daim (Zainuddin), Mahathir and Vincent Tan is a strategic group. Where Mahathir is, you can see Daim.”
He also lamented over the lack of studies conducted on strategic groups.
Shamsul also described the patterns of oppositional politics.
“You have to study factionalism and the intra and inter-ethnic conflicts.
“Coalitions are temporal in nature,” he said.
The opposition had various short-lived coalitions such as Barisan Alternatif and Pakatan Rakyat before becoming Pakatan Harapan and the government following the successful outing in GE14.
Shamsul also explained the significance of symbolism in Malaysian politics.
“When the polls were first held, upto 63% voters were illiterate. This reduced gradually in the 1990s,” he said.
He also said that different political parties had “competing nation of interest”.
“PAS wants 355,” he said in reference to stringent Islamic laws related to the Islamist party. 355 is in reference to Shariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) 1965.
He also mentioned that NGOs and foreign funding also had significant roles in Malaysian politics since NGOs did play the role of check and balance.
“Our politics are dictated. Social media too is very vital for polarization.
Personalities and family dynasties
The academic also said the issue in understanding Malaysian politics also boiled down to individual personalities who were political actors and family dynasties.
“There are individual personalities like Dr Mahathir, (Gua Musang MP) Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, DAP’s (late) Karpal Singh and Lim Kit Siang.
“There are influences from family dynasties but we have not studied this. Freezing of money is done not to impact on parties but on dynastic families.”
There are also other features such as majority – minority, party hopping which is more prevalent in Sabah and Sarawak federal state relations which is ruled by opposing parties such as PH federal government and PAS led Kelantan.
