COMMENT The major takeaway points from Rafizi Ramli’s comments at a forum last Tuesday night were:

First, that PKR’s top leaders are dead set on burning all bridges with PAS, and thus abolishing Pakatan Rakyat entirely.

Second, that PKR’s top leaders truly believe that it is better for Umno to run Selangor, than Khalid Ibrahim.

With regards to the second, Rafizi bluntly stated that the attempt to remove Khalid is worth the risk of losing Selangor to Umno.

That he addressed this risk at all is an admittance of how real that possibility is. That he thinks that this somehow brings his like closer to Putrajaya is an indication that obsession and vindictiveness have overtaken common sense.

Rafizi’s ‘revelation’ that some leaders in PAS had proposed Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah as prime minister instead of Anwar Ibrahim should they win GE13 is more interesting.

What it tells us is firstly that Anwar’s chief lieutenant and confidante has no qualms whatsoever at slapping PAS in the face. He is perfectly happy to burn all bridges with them, dissolve what little trust that remains, and in doing so, decidedly tear Pakatan apart , as predicted.

Again, this can only mean that for PKR, installing Anwar’s wife as menteri besar is more important than maintaining a united front to defeat Barisan Nasional.

Rafizi’s revelation also betrays the PKR mentality that Anwar is some sort of god. His choice of attack was clearly meant to enrage the segment of society he believes is as obsessed as PKR with making Anwar prime minister.

Rafizi felt that revealing this information would drive a further wedge between liberal non-Malays (PKR and DAP’s power base) and more conservative Malays - as if there weren’t enough mischievous people in the country working tirelessly to achieve exactly that.

The inevitable conclusion is that PKR is gleefully burning all bridges with PAS and Pakatan as we know it.

Either they are stupid enough to think they can go it alone, especially in the heartland where they lost the worst, or they simply have other priorities than replacing BN.

Erdogan vs ulama dynamic

There are interesting, and to some extent unfortunate battle lines being drawn here.

Recently, a liberal/Erdogan versus conservative/ulama dynamic in PAS has defined the party.

Like many others, I have generally been supportive of the Erdogans before, because I don’t believe protesting concerts is particularly productive, among other reasons.

Somewhat sadly, it looks like when push came to shove, it is the ulamas who have demonstrated a higher intolerance towards corruption.

Thus, while I continue to disagree with many of the ulama faction’s views on social policy, I believe that many of them have taken the correct position vis a vis Khalid.

This problem highlights how the menteri besar crisis is unfortunately becoming a proxy war for all sorts of political conflicts in the country.

Perhaps I hope in vain, but I hope that we take our positions based on the facts of the matter in the crisis itself, rather than based on our political, feudalistic loyalties to any particular individual or faction.

PKR’s internal fault lines

The cracks are also showing within PKR itself, as the Azmin Ali faction openly disagree with Anwar’s faction regarding the latter’s approach to PAS.

The chaos and confusion at a recent PKR press conference had some of us joking that the party who wants to run Selangor had perhaps better first demonstrate their ability to master the art of running a press conference.

On a more serious note, the retracted circular demonstrates that Azmin and his supporters are clearly still trying to nudge their way into the menteri besar’s seat - and no wonder, given that half of PKR seems to have voted for Azmin for deputy president, a third for Khalid, and only the small remaining one sixth for Anwar’s man Saifuddin Nasution.

It is uncertain which is worse - those in PKR who have been attacking Khalid openly while having benefitted from his administration, or those who maintain a deafening silence.

Many second-tier PKR leaders have offered essentially no comment. More alarming still is the silence of most Selangor PKR exco members and state assemblypersons.

It is almost as if no one is willing to stick their necks out either way, and are just waiting to see where the chips fall.

The state exco members are part of Khalid’s administration, and with things developing at the breakneck pace that they are, it is no longer viable for them to keep silent on their beliefs with regards to whether Khalid should be replaced.

Due process

I would like to address briefly some worthwhile points made in a forum held the night preceding the one mentioned at the start, by fellow writers Wan Saiful Wan Jan and Wong Chin Huat.

I must record my thanks to Wong in particular for his kind words about me, as well as my own admiration for his intelligence and eloquence.

Wan Saiful takes the position that Khalid must resign because he has lost the confidence of his party. Wong cites the examples of Margaret Thatcher in 1991 and Kevin Rudd in 2010 as examples of chief executives stepping down in similar circumstances.

A major difference I feel is worth noting is that in Thatcher’s case , a vote was taken and lost, a vote was also about to be taken, but Rudd resigned at the last minute when it was clear he did not have the votes.

I have always maintained that Khalid’s detractors have every right to call a vote of no confidence. This is a democratic and procedurally correct way of removing a chief executive.

It must be noted however, that Khalid was elected by a coalition, not by a single party. By right then, any vote to remove Khalid must involve all three parties in that coalition.

I believe the most correct forum for a vote on Khalid is the state assembly as a whole, because it is that assembly that most fully represents the democratic will of Selangor’s citizens.

Some feel that a vote amongst Pakatan state assemblypersons alone is sufficient to remove Khalid, but seeing that that hasn’t even been attempted either, the question remains for now academic.

At this juncture, I feel that any move to remove Khalid should involve a formal vote. In Khalid’s bold reply to PKR’s-show cause letter, he pointed out the same lack of formality and due process in that letter that is plaguing this haphazard, chaotic, and damaging attempt to pressure Khalid to resign.

As the crisis burns on , I hope PKR will be able to respond to what seems to be the real heart of the anti-Khalid movement.

If they can promise firstly not to pay Splash more than RM 250 million, and not approve transfer of ownership of 308 acres of land from Tropicana to Eco World or approve any development on the total 1,172 acres of land until payment of RM 844.2 million is made to the state government, then I think we can all take a brighter view as to PKR’s motives in seeking to install a new menteri besar.

NATHANIEL TAN is trying to remember to keep his priorities straight. He tweets @NatAsasi .