Karpal: Bull in a china shop

It may not be the right moment to write a critical piece on Karpal Singh, a veteran opposition leader and the national chairman of DAP. Then again, when would the right timing be if not now?

Like many others, I condemn the chauvinistic language employed by Umno leaders in berating Karpal over the latter’s plan to sue Sultan Azlan Shah following the constitutional debacle in Perak. In particular, the scuffle at parliament yesterday was completely unacceptable in any democracy, and unbecoming of a political party that claims to ‘modernise’ the Malays.

However, unlike a good many opposition supporters who put the blame solely on Umno Youth, I would argue Karpal himself should learn to hold his tongue and speak wisely and statesmanly if he hopes to remain relevant in Malaysian politics.

Mindful of the need to put up a good ‘show’ ahead of Umno’s general assembly next month, Khir Toyo, Khairy Jamalluddin and Hishammuddin Hussein Onn have all come out strongly against Karpal. Eager to establish their credentials as ‘benefactors’ of the Malay race, they are naturally hungry for more.

And Karpal has, wittingly or unwittingly, given them ample supply of ammunition by tackling the Perak royal family head-on.

It has been a decade since the cry of reformasi was first heard in Malaysia. While it is still popularly perceived to be everything about Anwar Ibrahim, this shallow understanding of the popular movement fails to appreciate the subtle but deep changes in Malay politics.

Prior to it, much of the Malay community had tended to see state machineries – from the police to the judiciary – as first and foremost about affirming and entrenching Malay rule through Umno. Since that fateful day of Sept 2,1998, this (mis)belief has been thoroughly shattered.

Whenever a Malay person attempts to stand up for justice, he/she will invariably be met with violent crackdowns by the riot police. It also shakes his/her faith in the Umno-monopolised state to the core. Every time a pregnant woman is ruthlessly beaten by police for making a stand on social justice, it erodes further the image of Umno as the defender of the Malay race.

Many may consider the phenomenal rise of Parti Keadilan Rakyat to be a manifestation of support for Anwar, but they may not notice even Pas has expanded its influence and constituency over the last ten years, indicating that a large, if not larger, segment of the Malay community has turned to the Islamic party for inspiration. They are not necessarily Anwarites, but they are definitely against the corrupt and power-crazy Umno.

Take heed of changing political landscape

Some accredited the nation’s ills to the autocratic nature of the Mahathir era, and quietly hoped that Umno would reform itself by ridding the party of the strongman. Alas, they were only bitterly disappointed by Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who had promised more than he could deliver.

Corruption continued unabated, and the police was as brutal as ever. It was at this critical juncture that Anwar played the crucial role of uniting the disparate opposition parties and weakening the once ‘invincible’ Barisan Nasional.

Karpal appears to be ignorant of the vastly changed political landscape since March 2008. Used to his role as a champion of non-Muslim causes, he continues to lash out at his opponents over issues that are dear to his heart.

In doing so, Karpal only serves to widen the misunderstanding between the Muslim and non-Muslim communities. Worse, he is increasingly seen as the answer to Hadi Awang, the firebrand of Pas.

Karpal cannot care much about the sentiments of the Muslims just as Hadi adamantly adheres to Islamism and Malay nationalism. But when a non-Muslim or a secularist is irked by Hadi’s sometimes parochial remarks and criticises him accordingly, Karpal continues to be looked up to as a sacred cow despite his statements that are equally antagonistic to the Muslim masses.

Are we not behaving like those bigots who relish in provoking the other side, only to make ourselves feel good? Can there be a middle ground? Unfortunately, this is something that Karpal persistently refuses to contemplate. He is so embedded in his opposition mindset that he cannot think strategically as a politician.

Like it or not, the fact that the Malays are now at the watershed of imagining a post-Umno Malaysia is remarkable, and this cannot have happened without the relentless effort of socio-political activists of various races and the critical part played by Anwar.

Granted, Karpal is entitled to voice out his discontent with any Pakatan Rakyat leader, and I do respect his call for Anwar to step down as the supremo of the fledgling coalition. But would Karpal suggest a better alternative?

One should not criticise merely for the sake of being critical. Only constructive criticism can make a difference. As a senior opposition leader, Karpal should be wise enough to know any reckless remark can play into the hand of Umno, which is still baying for blood.

After all, DAP Perak leaders Ngeh Koo Ham and Nga Kor Ming dithered over the dissolution of the state assembly and missed the golden opportunity to pre-empt defections; the duo have to take a chunk of responsibility for the fall of the Pakatan government.

If Karpal is truly just-minded, he would do well to call for an inquiry into the incident instead of driving a wedge between his party and other coalition partners.

Should Karpal feel that he is marginalised within the Pakatan leadership and his position as DAP national chairman is no longer respected, the most honourable thing for him to do is, having exhausted all the internal channels to air his grouses and concerns, to resign from the post.

Not so principled after all?

In doing so, he would have gained much greater moral authority, just as the resignation of Zaid Ibrahim has convinced the public that the former de facto law minister is a man of conviction.

Sadly, by asking publicly for respect from other DAP leaders, Karpal simply behaved like a child throwing a tantrum, and I have no doubt all the Umno ultras could hardly believe they were having a field day!

In fact, Karpal is not that much a principled man as many make him out to be. He often reminds the BN of the freedom of assembly, yet he was so upset when Umno Youth members gathered outside his house and office to protest, even asking why the government was not taking action against these ‘illegal’ assemblies.

I am flabbergasted. Even a villain deserves to be heard. But by questioning his detractors’ right to assembly, was he not lending credence to the BN’s crackdowns on peaceful protests in the past? Little wonder one hardly sees Karpal around a public demonstration for he sees it as illegal.

I would also be least surprised if he one day called for the notorious ISA to be used against Hee Yit Fong, the DAP defector, parroting Syed Hamid Albar that the authorities could "no longer ensure her personal security"!

Make no mistake: I am not denying Karpal the right to uphold his principles, ideals and convictions. Quite the contrary, I believe his words would have much greater impact on Malaysian politics and society if he was an NGI (non-governmental individual), although I am tired of his confrontational style when it comes to religious and constitutional issues.

Unbounded by party discipline and collective responsibility, he could criticise without fear and favour either BN or Pakatan. Just like former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad has been instrumental in Abdullah’s downfall from outside Umno, perhaps Karpal could do the same to Anwar by quitting DAP and Pakatan altogether while winning rounds of applause in return?