According to acting Umno president and Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the summary sacking of the former editor-in-chief of the New Straits Times "had nothing to do with personal or internal politics".

He reportedly said that the decision taken by the management of the New Straits Times Press (NSTP) was a response to diplomatic protests received by the Malaysian Foreign Ministry from the Saudi government over an article written by Abdullah Ahmad.

In the allegedly controversial article, Freeing The Prophet's Land (Nov 12) Abdullah Ahmad, 66, argued that Saudi Arabia has long been suspected of complicity, conscious or otherwise, in the Sept 11 attacks in the US, and that there was no escaping the fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis.

From a purely professional perspectives of journalists, commentators and analysts, the former editor-in-chief did not seem to have committed any professionally unethical act.

First, he is entitled to the freedom of speech, expression and conscience.

Second, the allegedly offensive statements made by Abdullah Ahmad are, in fact, not original or unique as there have been almost similar public statements made in the United States by journalists, commentators and analysts.

That 15 of the 19 hijackers who attacked the United States in a war-like and highly lethal manner were Saudi Arabians is also a statement of pure fact.

Neither free or independent

If the New Straits Times were a free and independent media, then the summary sacking of its former editor-in-chief for stating pure facts and expressing reasonable opinions could be construed as a gross violation of press freedom and the rights to free speech of a Malaysian citizen by a foreign power (Saudi Arabia) in collaboration with the domestic government.

However, the New Straits Times has never been a free and independent media. On the contrary, it has always been the official mouthpiece of Umno and, by extension in the context of the Malaysian polity, the ruling coalition and government.

Seen in this light, Abdullah Ahmad was not a free and independent journalist or commentator or analyst, but a mouthpiece of Umno, and the Umno-dominated ruling coalition and government. His case can therefore be construed as a disciplinary action taken by the paymaster against a propagandist who had deviated from the correct line.

On this premise, whoever replaces or succeeds Abdullah Ahmad institutionally as the new editor-in-chief has to be propagandist who is willing and able to toe the party line.

In any case, that Abdullah Ahmad was summarily sacked for his allegedly offensive statements made against Saudi Arabia is only the official explanation. There are at least three other alternative accounts of why the veteran writer, politician, diplomat and party operative was dismissed in such an ignominious manner, and the diplomatic protest lodged by Saudi Arab, while it is true, is only a convenient pretext.

One, as a political appointee to the top editorial position of former prime minister and Umno president Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Abdullah Ahmad's dismissal could be reasoned as a prelude to, or part of, a process of de-Mahathirisation by the new regime and its advisers and supporters.

It is clear to many sharp-eyed readers of the New Straits Times that, in the last several months, Abdullah Ahmad had been posturing himself and the newspaper under his editorial control as the unsolicited political tutor for the new prime minister and acting Umno president and, above-all, "king-maker" or, at least, political "match-maker".

In a political culture that is still characterised by the need for individual top leaders to establish or preserve feudalistic "awesomeness", public comments or open speculations on leadership qualities and requirements, especially on psychologically sensitive subjects like "to be hard or soft" or "to be loved or feared", are considered "de-stabilising" and "insolent".

Directed by advisers?

Abdullah Ahmad seemed, therefore, to have failed in separating his roles as an adviser and political strategists on one hand, and political lobbyist or "king-maker"on the other. No top political leaders anywhere in the world would like to be publicly seen as being controlled or directed by the advisers or strategists for whose service they reward.

Two, Abdullah Ahmad was considered to be a public or "insolent" lobbyist to promote Defence Minister Najib Tun Razak to be the new deputy to Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in the party and government, and he was also regarded as having "abused" the party's mouthpiece for factional or personal agendas.

The second alternative account is by far the most popular version of the cause of the downfall of Abdullah Ahmad, and it seems that it is not an unreasonable explanation.

On the premise of this popular account, several questions are relevant and important for public discourses that seek to explore the dynamics of Umno politics in the post-Mahathir Malaysia:

One, who took the initiative to bring up Abdullah Ahmad's case for discussion and decision at the meeting of the Umno's management committee held last Thursday?

Two, did Najib, the man whom Abdullah Ahmad attempted to promote so fervently in the public, defend him at that meeting?

If yes, it means that Najib had failed, and if no, then, he could be seen as a weak leader who could not stand by an ally who promoted his cause passionately.

It is noteworthy that the meeting was chaired by Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and also attended by two other vice presidents of Umno, namely Muhyiddin Yassin and Muhammad Muhammad Taib. Muhyiddin Yassin is widely seen to be a rival of Najib now.

Three, was there a debate at that meeting at all? Was the decision unanimous?

Four, why did Abdullah, a party veteran and experienced politician as well as political operative who has witnessed, and actively participated into, many intra-party power struggles in the last 50 years, did what he did without firm and solid backing within the party and some of its top leaders?

Fifth, how does the sacking of Najib's most public and high-profile lobbyist affect the defence minister's chance and prospect of becoming the next deputy prime minister and deputy Umno president?

Part 2

JAMES WONG WING ON is chief analyst of Strategic Analysis Malaysia (SAM). Wong is a former member of Parliament (1990-1995) and a former columnist for the Sin Chew Jit Poh Chinese daily (now Sin Chew Daily ). He read political science and economics at the Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. While in Sin Chew , he and a team of journalists won the top awards of Malaysian Press Institute (MPI) for 1998 and 1999.