Parti Rakyat Malaysia or PRM will hold its 35th national congress in Kuala Lumpur this Sunday. This is election year for party delegates and there may be a change of guards in the top leadership.

The party is also at the crossroads for this may be the last year that the party meets as PRM. If the merger goes through with Keadilan, PRM will dissolve and its members will join Keadilan en bloc to create a new party named Parti Keadilan Rakyat Malaysia. PRM president Dr Syed Husin Ali replies to malaysiakini 's e-mailed questions on the relevance of the party and the merger with Keadilan given the current political scenario.

Malaysiakini: How do you see PRM's role in the current political scenario, especially the post-Mahathir period 16 months later?

Syed Husin: I don't foresee much change during the next 16 months. (Prime Minister) Dr Mahathir Mohamad will still be very much in command. His authoritarian rule will continue with all its inherent injustices and corruption. PRM will struggle on for social justice, people's democracy, national unity and welfare for all, and against all forms of injustices, violations of human rights, corruption, cronyism and discrimination.

Like Japan's LDP and India's Congress, I expect Umno-Barisan Nasional to come to the end of the road, after ruling the country for more than four decades. PRM's role will hopefully grow, either on its own, together with Keadilan, or in co-operation with other political parties as well as non-governmental organisations.

What do you think the post-Mahathir period will be like for the government and Umno?

At the same time, during the next 15 months, I expect there will be a lot of power struggle and position jostling at all levels of the government and Umno. They will get worse after Mahathir steps down.

Most of the present leaders are known to be weak and corrupt. None of them can measure up to Mahathir as a leader. I am not even sure if (Deputy Prime Minister) Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will finally be the successor, although he has been named for the time being. If he does succeed Mahathir, I hope he will not pursue the latter's authoritarian style. He must open up the democratic space in the country, and fight corruption more determinedly if he wants to win the hearts and minds of the people.

With the current political situation, is the merger with Keadilan still necessary? If yes, why?

I think the merger with Keadilan is a logical political development. Both parties can gain from each other's strength and together overcome their weaknesses. The new merged party will be multi-ethnic in composition and will be pro-people in its economic, social, education and health policies which will not discriminate in favour of wealth or a particular ethnic group.

In long-term politics, it is necessary to develop a strong and progressive multi-ethnic party to challenge the political hegemony of the governing Umno-BN, and also to provide an effective alternative to the ethnic or religious-oriented parties in general.

At the same time, in terms of elections, it is necessary to have a party which can mount a strong challenge against the governing coalition, especially in the mixed constituencies, where it (ruling coalition) still dominates.

Despite his firm and unequivocal denial, many people are still speculating that jailed ex-deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim is negotiating for his release and may return to Umno someday. What happens then to PRM and Keadilan?

I doubt if Anwar will return, or be accepted by Umno, as long as it continues as what it is today, without any change of leadership and policies. Of course Anwar has vehemently denied that he will abandon Keadilan to return to Umno.

Anyhow, be that as it may, I am not particularly worried if Anwar and his close followers decide to return to Umno. It would mean that all those who remain behind, and I believe they form the majority, are those who are really committed to fight against the Umno-BN with all its undemocratic, unjust and anti-people policies and for change or reformasi. I cannot imagine Keadilan being dissolved and the whole membership going to Umno, in the manner of Semangat 46. They are different from one another.

How will PAS' "radical" Islamic policies and its acting president and Terengganu Menteri Besar Abdul Hadi Awang's reputation as an "Islamic firebrand" affect PRM in its merger with Keadilan?

I don't fully agree with your characterisation of PAS or Hadi. It shows how effective the government propaganda has been. But I am not surprised. The local as well as international media, which have their own particular masters and interests to serve, have been consistently demonising Islam.

I think there are moderate and even progressive elements within PAS, although they may not have the upper hand. As for Ustaz Hadi, he is not as much a firebrand as he was 30 or 20 years ago. From personal experience, there are many issues which we can easily discuss with him.

But, to come back to your question, I see the merger as being inevitable, once all the internal obstacles are overcome. Internal factors may be more important than the external ones, including the ones that you suggest.

The party was formed as a democratic-left party at the height of the Cold War. Do you see a conceptual realignment of the party programmes to deal with the post-Cold War situation?

As you know, the party was formed in 1955, by Ahmad Boestamam, after his release from a six-year detention by the British. The aim of the party was mainly to continue the struggle of the banned Malayan Nationalist Party (Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya or PKMM) for genuine independence and social justice. It was certainly not the product of the Cold War, although regional and global politics at that time tended to influence it a little.

PRM has never stuck itself dogmatically to its original past. On several occasions, without changing basic principles, PRM has tried to adapt itself to transforming realities. Of course, if one takes a good look at the party constitution, programmes and manifestos, one will see clearly that PRM has adapted itself to many situations, and not merely the post-Cold War situation. For, instance the party now shows greater concern for issues like human rights, environment and gender discrimination.

Has dropping the word "socialism" achieved the desired effect, i.e., capturing the middle ground? If yes, why has the party remained 'small'? If no, why has it not achieved the desired effect?

Some background first. The original name of the party was "Partai Rakyat Malaya", and "Malaysia" replaced "Malaya" following the formation of the former state. The word "socialism" was included in the name of the party in 1970. When the party congress decided to drop it in 1990, it was merely returning to its original name. It also dropped the word from its constitution. But, the party programmes and manifestos, adopted later, showed that in no way PRM deviated from its historic progressive and pro-people principles. One of the reasons for this change was to project an image that could be more acceptable to a wider spectrum of people.

PRM and its members had always been tarnished by the propaganda of Umno, the government and its state machinery being "socialists" were similar to "communists" and "atheists". This stigma could not be easily removed from the minds, especially the Malays.

Further, the party has been a continuous victim of government repression. Many cadres and every one of its presidents had been detained under the Internal Security Act at one time or another.

Consequently, we also suffered from organisational, leadership and financial weaknesses. So, despite the change, we did not really succeed in achieving our objective. But after the Anwar saga especially, we have been getting a steady flow of new members, particularly among the young professionals.

Do you admit there are 'generation' problems in the party's top leadership or decision-making level as seen by certain quarters?

I admit that there may be such problems as a number of the party leaders are already quite advanced in age and belong to a rather different political tradition from the younger members. But the problem is not very serious, I believe. There are also young members who are in leadership positions. Now, the party is trying very hard rejuvenate the party and encourage younger leaders to take over the party. The process is ongoing.

How do you see the role of Malay nationalism in the process of globalisation, political Islam and Malay liberalisation?

I don't see Malay nationalism just disappearing from the Malaysian political scene as a result of the process of globalisation. On one hand, this process may promote internationalism (or more correctly Westernisation) in certain values, institutions and practices. But, on the other, it may even strengthen further the nationalistic sentiments of the people, especially those who strongly oppose the negative aspects of globalisation, and view it as a new form of imperialism.

In the same way, political Islam and Malay liberalisation can have opposite or dialectical effects on Malay nationalism. I believe, though, that nationalism that is conservative, backward looking, and manipulated mainly for the advantage of a select ruling elite, as represented by some sections in Umno, is on the way out.

I am quite certain that there will develop, on the other hand, a nationalism that is more progressive, forward looking and more pro-people. Among other things, such nationalism can be used to motivate industrial and technological advancement and also to alleviate the socio-economic conditions of the people at large.