When Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad pushes on the issue of the Islamic state within the Barisan Nasional component members, at the back of his mind is the thought of how to win the general elections and weaken the opposition.

Mahathir displays how religion can act as a powerful political resource. He hopes that the debate on the Islamic state will benefit the ruling elite by pushing PAS to make fundamentalist explanations regarding the Islamic state, which will create fear among non-Muslim voters.

PAS insists that Malaysia is not an Islamic state until issues of sovereignty, criminal law and constitutional matters are resolved. PAS' position is not new to the Malaysian public. The reaction by former Lord President and PAS member Tun Salleh Abas and PAS president Fadzil Noor reflects this.

In order to keep their members' esprit de corps , PAS must show that the present system is unIslamic and therefore its role, responsibility and commitment to change the system. The secular nature of the state will make it more significant for PAS to continue the political struggle towards the establishment of an Islamic state.

Maintaining this stance against Mahathir's rhetoric will also result in the members of PAS remaining solidified and prepared to make more sacrifices for the cause. Furthermore if PAS accepts Mahathir's definition of the Islamic state it will lose its core challenge against Umno.

Mahathir hopes PAS' insistence on this "fundamentalist" approach of Islam will frighten the Chinese electorates away. Will PAS' insistence that the present system is unIslamic and secular and should be transformed to become Islamic be a disadvantage for the party? Will Mahathir's strategy to bait PAS into addressing the Islamic state issue in order to create fear among the Chinese and non-Muslim electorate work?

Eventually the non-Muslims' experience in Kelantan and Terengganu under PAS leadership will provide insights on the freedom they experience in these states. How are the pertinent issues relating to liquor consumption among the non-Muslims, pork rearing and trading, and gambling handled in these states?

What about the democratic space; was there opportunity for the non-Muslims to speak out and to participate at the local and municipal levels? Are the PAS-led states responsive enough to the needs of the non-Muslims in these states compared with the Umno-ruled states?

It is interesting to note the statement ( Asiaweek Nov 16) of Masamitsu Fujikawa, general manager of Nankai Worsted Spinning in Terengganu, "We thought that when the new [PAS] government came in, it might be very restrictive, but it's not. We can still drink beer."

Jeffrey ("The necessity of a 'secular Islamic state'", Nov 13) gives credence to Mahathir's Islamic state version based on "retention of secular institutions like parliamentary system" differentiated with PAS' version of conservative Wahhibism. But PAS never rejected and does not view the Westminster parliamentary democracy as unIslamic and accepts the fact that their struggle is through the political process.

Fadzil Noor has denied that PAS views democracy as "unIslamic". With the Westminster-style parliament in place, it is doubtful that Malaysia can be transformed into a theocratic Islamic state ruled by ulamas . But Mahathir's rhetoric is aimed at getting PAS to insist its puritan and fundamentalist outlook and reject a democratic government.

In fueling this debate Mahathir hopes that certain hardliners in PAS will go overboard and incriminate itself by making "seditious" statements that can cause panic among non-Muslims. Then, Mahathir can use his coercive machineries to detain more opposition leaders, including from PAS, under the Internal Security Act.

Mahathir does not care about the true character or attributes that should be embodied in the Islamic state. Mahathir's Islamic state is in a symbolic and rhetorical form to serve political ends. Even the basic principles of justice, freedom and tolerance are not there in Mahathir's present Islamic state.

In conclusion, I agree with Jeffrey that "we should not have any qualms in forging our own destiny or version of the Islamic state based on our own weaknesses and strength drawn from plurality". It is the rhetoric of the ruling elites that bothers me.