Ever since the 1999 general elections, it is clear that for the first time in our country's history, the ruling coalition is facing the most serious challenge to its monopoly on political power.

I believe this presents a crucial test on the Malaysian system of democratic self-government, and an opportunity for evolution toward a more mature parliamentary democracy.

One important characteristic of a mature democratic system, as I see it, is having a strong and serious opposition. This opposition could be made up of more than one group of politicians, but the most important contribution such an opposition could make to the 'health' and effectiveness of such a democratic system is to function as a strong and viable check on the conduct of the ruling party, to always keep the ruling party on guard, and on the right course.

Such an opposition can provide the most meaningful vigilance when it is no longer merely a dissenting 'voice' in the parliament, but a plausible and a better replacement of the ruling party. In other words, when it becomes a serious and respected opponent to the ruling party and is able to form a government: an 'electable', and meaningful, alternative.

Without a meaningful alternative, the ruling party will have less incentive to rule in the best interest of the people, and have more opportunities to pursue the individual self interests of its members.

Do we have a meaningful alternative in Malaysia? Is our opposition electable? Could we possibly foresee, and accept, the opposition coalition we have today replacing Barisan Nasional to form an effective and just government enjoying the support and loyalty of the Malaysian people as a whole?

I believe the answer is no. True, PAS, Keadilan and DAP have so far been a serious challenge to BN - even our pragmatic neighbour south of the border is eager to strike a deal with the current government, fearing that there might soon be a new government replacing BN.

I think there are two questions we need to ask.

1) As a factual matter, is Barisan Alternatif likely to win the next one or two election and replaces BN?

2) Assuming that BA will replace BN in the next election, is it going to form a viable and effective government, enjoying the support of the Malaysian society as a whole?

I believe the answer to both of these questions are no, and they are based on one same reason: extremism.

First of all, I believe that a meaningful alternative is an alternative which is acceptable to the mainstream of our society. This is especially important for our country, because we are a racially, religiously and linguistically diverse country. For the happiness of all people, we cannot afford to have a government which appeals to the extreme ends of the spectrum of our society, yet not acceptable to the mainstream.

More importantly, as a practical matter, if the extreme ends are incompatible with each other, then a ruling coalition which wins the election based on the support of these conflicting ends would not be able to rule in a coherent manner, because it would not be able to enact harmonious policies, nor implement them consistently. Worse, they would fall apart eventually, due to their incompatible agendas.

BA, as it stands today, is not a meaningful alternative for the mainstream of our society. It might be regarded as the best choice for people on the more extreme ends of our society's ideological spectrum - those Muslims who are more religious, those who are diehard Anwar Ibrahim supporters, and also those Chinese and Indians who hate Premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad; but it is far from being a comfortable choice for the mainstream.

Of course, BA might be acceptable by some people in the mainstream as an alternative to BN, but the main reason why these mainstream people would cast a vote for BA is because they no longer want BN to return to govern. In other words, it's like voting for George W Bush even though you don't like him, because you happen to dislike Al Gore more. They want to punish BN, not to elect BA.

The bottom line is, however, the "lesser of two evils" can never be a satisfactory government. It can only be a temporary alternative in a transitory period, while people are waiting for a truly meaningful alternative to emerge, or while waiting for the original power (BN) to 'rehabilitate' itself back to being an acceptable government (less corrupt). We would forever be locked in this political cycle, where there would be a periodic resurgence of fundamentalist and extremist politics.

I am not a BN supporter, nor am I an enemy of the BA. I also have absolutely no interest in taking sides in the current mess of Malaysian politics, but as a citizen whose life is affected by whoever is in power, I would call myself a staunch supporter of a good government.

I don't know how to define a 'good government', but I do know that a good government is not a corrupt government plagued by cronyism, racism and personal ambitions. A good government is also not a government which appeals to fundamentalism, fanaticism of the masses, and divisive dogma which allows one belief system to dominate other equally worthy beliefs in a culturally diverse democracy. Sadly for Malaysian democracy, in my pessimistic view, we still do not have a good government.

I believe that getting a good government is a long evolutionary process. It seems that 44 years is still not long enough, but I am willing to wait another 44 years, if that's what it takes. Yet we need to take the first step, in the correct direction.

I suggest to BA, and any other opposition parties in the country, that the first step is toward building a meaningful alternative, not solely the narrowly focused, short-term agenda of taking over the power from BN in the next general election and putting in place another government which would only end up disappointing the Malaysian people - and force us to become disillusioned toward politics, and abandon any remaining hope for a good government for our country.

I personally do not want to see an opposition which is simply another clone of BN, 20 years outdated. My hope is to see an opposition party that truly transcends the lines which have traditionally divided our people, even before independence: race, ethnicity, religion, culture, language.

In some aspects, today's BA, however, is nothing more than the extreme version of BN; for example, it appeals not only to religious sentiments, but to the fundamental conception of it - which is no different from Umno, MCA and MIC appealing to the racial sentiments of their respective racial constituencies, only more extreme.

I have no quarrel with Muslims nor Islam, nor do I want to get involved in the debate of whether Islam is fundamentalism or militant. No matter how good a religion is, it is another thing to allow it to completely dominate non-believers, and to alienate a large proportion of the population -even though these are only minorities.

A government for the people and the country as a whole must enjoy both the political and moral support of as many of the people as possible. It should aim to be a legitimate government, a government which unites, not divide or dominate. Remember that we are not talking about an NGO like Greenpeace or Amnesty International - we are talking about a government, which is only legitimate if it represents more than some narrow constituencies or ideologies.

Continuing to appeal to fundamentalism might get BA into the central government, but in the long run this will only set back the progress (albeit limited) we have achieved so far in terms of racial harmony, tolerance and religious freedom in Malaysia.

In the long run, we need a meaningful alternative which is always ready and capable of stepping in order to replace the ruling party, if the latter is not doing a good job. This is what I mean by a healthy and balanced two- or multi-party democracy, such as the Conservative and Labour parties in Great Britain, and the Republican and Democratic parties in the US.

Such a multi-party system is only possible if they compete with each other in trying to win over the mainstream, not just the 'majority'. The agendas and government's priorities might change when a different party comes into power, but at least it is not a 'revolution' every time a new government is elected.

By contrast, in Malaysia, we have parties competing with each other by trying to convince their distinct constituencies that they are more extreme, not mainstream, than their opponents. Under these circumstances, an opposition party like BA might could come into power only if the ruling party has failed to be as extreme as the ruling party's distinct constituencies would like it to be, or when the ruling party has failed to obscure its failure to be 'extreme'.

So, when the economy turns sour, Malays and Chinese begin to demand that Umno and MCA do more to protect their respective races, even at the expense of the other races. Failure of both to do so would open the door to a more extreme opponent to take over power; alternatively, the ruling party might decide that it should sacrifice the interests of one constituency, just to keep the entire coalition in power.

Ultimately, the result is division, not unison. The government would no longer represent the entire population, but only one or two groups which are able to win more votes than others to form the government, to the exclusion of the rest. This tyranny of the majority would be a disaster for a multi-racial country like Malaysia.

We therefore need a mainstream government and a meaningful alternative which both emphasise commonality, not differences. We need a political climate in which the opposition and the ruling party compete on the turf of mainstream ideology and policy debates, not on the divisive turfs at the extreme ends of the spectrum: racial and religious politics.

What can BA do? I believe BA should demonstrate how it could be a mainstream political coalition by beginning to prove itself in the states that it controls. It should not emphasise - or should even be willing to abandon - some of its divisive agendas, such as the effort to establish an Islamic state. It should instead be working hard to compete with BN on the mainstream turf by establishing a clean, just, neutral and effective government which helps the poor and not the colour, and enjoys the moral authority of all people - not just the majority.

Only if BA (or any other opposition parties) abandon the old politics of race and religion as practised by BN, and shift to the mainstream, can we have a meaningful alternative. Without a meaningful alternative, the next 44 years would be politics as usual.

One day, your grandchildren would still be reading news on racial violence and religious imperialism every single day, wondering what their grandparents could have done to change the course of Malaysian history, at this juncture.