I refer to the Malaysiakini report Liow goes for the kill, moves for fresh polls .

MCA vice-president Liow Tiong Lai (his status as deputy president is still doubtful) declared that MCA’s ‘Greater Unity’ plan must be transparent and discussed by the central committee members. Liow said that the plan must be made very clear to gain support at all levels of the party for it to work.

Liow’s statement could be declared a truism and generally acceptable to anybody who considers only the words used. That consideration has, however, taken for granted that the so-called unity was entered into with an enemy of the party, and hence the party members have a say on the matter. But are Ong Tee Keat and Chua Soi Lek ‘enemies’ of the party?

Officially not. The fact is though the words ‘unity plan’ were used, it involves only the agreed cooperation of two party members who were at odds with one another, and the word serves more to ameliorate embarrassment for climbing down from opposite stands, or even personal rivalry.

It was meant to be an euphemism for a difficult change in position. Those who are opposed now to Ong Tee Keat staying on and Chua Soi Lek returning to the central committee see their own career advancement plan thwarted won’t be magnanimous enough to allow to save face, but insist on discussing their ‘unity plan’.

Why should cooperation or even a secret pact between party members be subject to review by other members of the party, let alone the central committee? It would make no sense to involve all members at all the levels of the part to ensure that the cooperation between these persons would work.

Liow obviously wanted now to force a central committee meeting to implement a coup d’etat having now obtained the so-called authorisation of a number of central committee members to speak on their behalf and thus to act en bloc. One cannot speculate what Liow wanted to push through the central committee, but by voicing opposition to the cooperation of Ong Tee Keat and Chua Soi Lek, he has highlighted to the world that all is not well within MCA.

Aside from his desire to involve Umno in MCA’s dispute, Liow is signaling to other fence-sitters in MCA that he has substantial support to go for the presidency should a fresh election be called. Liow calculates that Chua Soi Lek’s supporters are unlikely to vote for Ong and that those who supported Ong in the past, as seen in the central committee, would also be weakened.

Having tasted the power of the central committee to grant him the right to usurp power, Liow is now looking at the next prize.

When Ong tee Keat directed his MCA secretary-general to implement an EGM, the central committee members were against calling this EGM to decide whether a reelection should be held for the entire leadership.

Sensing that their plan to pit Chua Soi Lek against Ong Tee keat has failed, they now make an about-turn. They have mobilised sufficient signatures from the central committee members to demand an EGM. The actions of these opportunists show that they care not for principles but for personal gain only.

Umno is waiting to get involved in MCA’s internal fairs. When they do, then the Chinese community will have concrete evidence that MCA is but an Umno lapdog.