Gerakan's Dr Lim Keng Yaik has, as expected of all incumbents in Malaysian politics, successfully defended his presidency against challenger, ex-deputy Kerk Choo Ting last Saturday. This, however, is only one side of the story.

The other equally significant side is the fact that, despite all the odds, Kerk managed to garner a hefty 38.8 percent of the votes, against Lim's 61.2 percent. In absolute terms, Lim obtained 983 votes to Kerk's 628 with six spoilt ballots.

What does this mean? First and foremost, it means that Umno mouthpiece New Straits Times' bold front-page 'prediction' that Kerk was heading for 'a humiliating defeat' was far off the mark.

More importantly, it means that Lim's highly-publicised final presidential term has ended with tainted glory - almost four out of 10 delegates voted against him despite his 25-year grip on the party as well as the material and psychological advantages of incumbency.

From this, it can be deduced that, had the campaign period been set longer and had the challengers camp not made tactical blunders, Kerk could have secured a higher number of votes or even won the presidency by a slim margin.

Protest vote

It seems that Kerk's criticism of Lim had worked in the hearts and minds of a significant number of voting delegates.

One, Lim's caprice or perfidy in selecting and de-selecting his successor certainly impeached his political integrity as a trustworthy and credible leader and public figure. This considerably depreciated the value of Lim and Gerakan on the Barisan Nasional public relations front among the more educated segments of the Malaysian urban middle class.

For Kerk and his hardcore supporters, the blatant breach of Lim's public promise was, and still is, as intolerable a situation as when a bride-to-be discovers, on the eve of the wedding, that her husband-to-be has arranged to marry her close friend.

Two, the criticism that Lim has overstayed and remains ambivalent about his departure from both the party and government, has certainly resonated with a significant number of the party's rank and file.

Three, the allegation that Lim has been attempting to emulate MCA former president Dr Ling Liong Sik by promoting his son in Gerakan's politics also reverberated within and outside the party.

Four, the allegation that Lim's high-handed, even Machiavellian style of leadership as well as 'menu' politics and pre-election 'public declaration of support for the president' - caused many members to ponder the qualitative differences with their supposedly more democratic, enlightened and progressive party on one hand, and the neo-feudal and neo-authoritarian Umno, MCA or MIC on the other.

This translated into a significant quantum of protest or anti-establishment votes against Lim and the values and traits he epitomised.

Mao factor

Kerk's problems arose from tactical blunders committed by himself and overzealous supporters like Dr Tan Kee Kwong.

First and foremost of these was his 'intellectual vainglory' in trying to juggle sometimes opportunistically- with so many unproductive or counter-productive ideas to enhance his image as a 'philosopher-king' in a struggle against a street-fighting 'dictator'.

One of the counter-productive ideas was his negative comparison of Lim with China's Mao Zedong as reported in an English-language newspaper.

That was imprudent because, as a deputy minister, Kerk should have avoided exploiting the image of legends and leaders of other countries, especially friendly countries like China, for self-promotion in a party election. Strictly speaking, this is breach of diplomatic etiquette and convention between two friendly countries.

Moreover, this proved counter-productive for Kerk because Mao is not as notorious as some on the lunatic fringe on the right in American politics and the Japanese right-wingers make him out to be.

Mao, despite his mistakes during the 1966-1976 'Cultural Revolution', is still quietly remembered and respected by many in Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, China, and other parts of Asia, including Gerakan members, as a great figure who had re-unified a once war-torn and hungry nation and regained political independence, national sovereignty and territorial integrity for an Asian country and people whose dignity was mercilessly and wantonly rampaged by Western and Japanese imperialists and their lackeys from the late 19th century to Oct 1,1949.

Kerk seemed to have forgotten that it was the colour photograph of Chairman Mao shaking hands with former Prime Minister Abdul Razak Hussein in 1974 that helped the newly-formed Barisan Nasional to secure a landslide victory in the general elections that year.

Shocking conduct

Tan too acted in a counter-productive manner by appearing, speaking and posturing in the public domain like an emotionally charged man filled with personal hatred and venom against Lim.

The behaviour certainly shocked and dismayed many members and well-wishers of Gerakan - Tan is not a nobody, but the highly educated son of a much-respected former Parliamentary Opposition leader, the late Dr Tan Chee Khoon.

Kerk's blunder was his failure to restrain Tan's no-holds-barred approach in campaigning for him.

However, the most serious tactical blunder was Kerk's attempt to manipulate the image of being a 'Chinese educationist' fighting an English-educated incumbent.

That simply backfired as the more authoritative figures of the Chinese education movement, both inside and outside Gerakan, came out publicly to disassociate themselves from Kerk for fear of the movement becoming unnecessarily politicised for his personal ambition.

The campaign to disassociate the Chinese education movement from Kerk, in effect, critically tilted the balance of power between Kerk and Lim to the former's disadvantage in a party whose Chinese-speaking segment is estimated to be in the region of 85 percent of the membership.

The disclaimer was, of course, only intended for the nobler purpose of protecting the movement from being hijacked by those perceived as politicos.

Seen in this light, it appears that the street-fighter, whether one likes him or otherwise, still has a better sense, even in a slug-out, of what to say and what not to say in the public domain.

Lim did not assume that Malaysians are so compartmentalised that they cannot read newspapers of different languages simultaneously and detect some obvious contradictions or opportunism.

JAMES WONG WING ON is chief analyst of Strategic Analysis Malaysia. He is a former DAP member of Parliament for Kampar (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 Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.