What will the next federal government look like?

Murray Hunter
Jul 01, 2026


What will the next federal government look like?





Malaysia has been governed by a ‘unity government’, created out of convenience for the last three and a half years. It had an illusion of stability until the Johor State election came up and two major components of the coalition have decided to run separately from each other. This will no doubt be continued in Negeri Sembilan, and later in Melaka.

These three coming state elections will most definitely alter the current perceived centre of power within the country, leading to the possibility that the next federal government will be drastically different from what has been labelled the “Madani government” today.

No doubt, UMNO, which is expected to form a government after the Johor State election is pushing for an early federal election, hoping to use Johor, Negeri Sembilan, and Melaka as a catapult.

However, the current prime minister Anwar Ibrahim presently intends to allow the government to run its full term, where a full general election can be held as late as February 2028.

Too be sure, no one can safely predict the actual outcome of the Johor State election. There are too many factors involved. However, the nominations last Saturday provide UMNO with a great electoral advantage. After Johor is Negeri Sembilan which is currently ruled by a minority Pakatan Harapan government, after UMNO withdrew support. Negeri Sembilan will be a very fair test of voter sentiment within the southern half of the peninsula.

The crucial question that will be answered in the coming two state elections will be if PH and UMNO are better off running solo. Secondly the two state elections will show the DAP what options the party really has. Will their disaster in Sabah be repeated is the crucial test for them.

There have been many signs that major political parties will change alliances, based upon the Johor and Negeri Sembilan results. We have already seen PAS calling for voters to choose UMNO, if PAS is not running a candidate in the seat during the Johor campaign.

Johor will also test the one month old Bersama Party led by ex-PKR deputy president Rafizi Ramli. They are presently an unknown quantity. Bersama is contesting 15 seats in Johor.

The key to watch in Johor is whether UMNO can do better than the 40 seats it had in the last assembly, and whether Bersama can be taken seriously.

So, what will the next federal parliament look like?

To answer this question this far out, requires some assumptions and guess work based upon trends that can be observed.

Its most likely that PAS could win up to 50 seats, cannibalizing seats from Bersatu. Some Bersatu seats were lent to Bersatu for GE15 and PAS wants them back. Amanah could also be eaten up in the coming election, some of their seats going back to PAS.

PH is in a quandary. Many activities that have made PH unpopular actually were undertaken by rogue parts of the bureaucracy. However, PH will most likely pay for these activities electorally. This is going to leave the DAP with fewer seats, maybe with some going to the new Bersama party. PKR’s own electoral research tells the story, unless something drastic happens.

UMNO is a big question mark, which Johor, Negeri Sembilan, and Melaka will answer. If UMNO does well in the south of the Peninsula, this could mean that in a general election that UMNO could win up to 40-50 seats, particularly if Bersatu performs poorly. Hamzah’s new movement is an unknown.

Who will form the next government?

If the voting scenario above occurs, PAS will be in the best position to form a government in coalition with other parties. The most obvious is UMNO (Barisan Nasional). This could give this grouping somewhere close to 100 seats.

Zahid is waiting for his time

The remains of PKR, which could be around a dozen seats could allow PAS/PN to have a simple majority.

Its well known that Ahmad Zahid Hamidi wants to take up the mantle of being PM. However, many dismiss this for a number of reasons (proficiency in English, etc.). Anwar could with agreement of PAS and UMNO take on a second term, although its more likely he may take on a position as a mentor-minister. There are other scenarios which are best to explain later.

The ‘deep state’ elements want an UMNO controlled government. Otherwise, a government with UMNO playing a powerful role. However, there is a group of ‘professionals’ within PAS that want to rid the government of such artifacts. They want to ‘save Malaysia’ and bring back good governance. The more conservative grouping in PAS want to play a ‘backroom role’ in any future government.

Under such as scenario, the DAP and the small number of seats Bersama may win will be banished to the opposition benches in parliament and not heard from.

One can expect that most Sabah MPs in the two blocks Wawasan and GRS will support the new government in exchange for positions and conditions. GPS will decide on what is best for Sarawak.

This scenario has a high possibility looking at the political environment now. After the Johor state election this scenario could be re-evaluated as to its potential reality.

***

Depressing, more so with BERSAMA entering the fray

MSM Claims That Iran War Has Caused a Rift Between Trump and Saudi Arabia

 

MSM Claims That Iran War Has Caused a Rift Between Trump and Saudi Arabia

Reports in The New York Times and Wall Street Journal say disagreements over the Iran war have created friction between President Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

According to unnamed officials cited by the reports, Saudi Arabia opposed aspects of US military strategy because of concerns about Iranian retaliation, prompting the Trump administration to consider repositioning some US forces stationed in the kingdom.

Despite the reported tensions, both governments have continued to publicly describe the US-Saudi relationship as an important strategic partnership.

GhostofBasedPatrickHenry: Remember when Mossad Media was trying to psyop everybody into believing that Saudi Arabia was about to enter the war against Iran? And that Saudi was lobbying Washington to go to war?

But now they are saying that Saudi Arabia never wanted the war, and it has actually caused a rift between Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and President Trump?

So were they lying before? Or are they lying now? Or are they just always lying and making up things about the Middle East and expecting us to believe it?

The net effect of this “rift” is that we are now mulling pulling our troops out of Saudi Arabia and bringing them home. And the best part is that the warmongers like Lindsey Graham claim that this is a punishment for Saudi.

The incentive for Saudi Arabia to house US troops has also been that it would serve as a deterrent for attacks against The Kingdom, lest the attacker suffer the retribution of the US military. We learned from the Iran War that actually the US military presence wasn’t actually a deterrent at all—it actually was a liability, as the US bases were specifically targeted by Iran, who stated that they otherwise had no intention of attacking Saudi. So it has inverted, and there is actually an incentive now to expel foreign military bases, lest the host country suffer the consequences of that foreign military’s warmongering.

And President Trump tricked the Deep State into doing it, using their enormous ego against them. 5D chess like you read about.

China’s remarkable contribution to the clean energy movement

From the FB page of:

Nury Vittachi 

Favorites ·oonprSdset840gh41t156011hm06higfc8h43ft5l8mct3fttac2h75mu8f7 ·

China’s remarkable contribution to the clean energy movement was highlighted in a new chart by Jostein Hauge of Cambridge University in the UK, released last night.

“China now manufactures 89% of the world’s solar panels, 70% of the world’s wind turbines, 83% of the world’s batteries, and 75% of the world’s electric vehicles — all at a lower cost than the West,” he said.

After posting the chart on X, he received the usual hostile comments that China still uses coal.

The simple response to that is that every major economy still uses coal – the question is whether they are following targets to ween themselves off it and create alternative energy sources.

China, clearly, is.

Other countries? Well, some have spotty records, while others are going in reverse.

People concerned about the future of the environment will recall the works of Rachel Carson, a scientist-author credited with triggering the start of widespread awareness of these issues, with a 1961 book called Silent Spring.

The movement she inspired grew in the west in the 1960s, and is now global. Everyone has now heard of the need to move to cleaner energy.

But some do a lot of talking, while others actually make the switch.

‘Will not leave’: Is Israel killing the US-Iran MoU by staying in Lebanon?

Analysts say both sides want the MOU to succeed but Israel’s actions in Lebanon will prove a formidable obstacle.

By Nils Adler

Published On 1 Jul 20261 Jul 2026

As he visited troops in southern Lebanon on Tuesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the military “will not leave” the area as long as the Iran-backed armed group Hezbollah remains a “threat” to his nation.

A day earlier, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz also said Israel’s military will not withdraw “a millimetre” until Hezbollah is disarmed.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 items

• list 1 of 3Evolution under fire: Iran’s ‘axis of resistance’ in a post-war era
• list 2 of 3The Lebanon-Israel agreement is paving the way for the next war
• list 3 of 3US-Iran negotiations: What’s the latest?

end of list

But the Israeli stance is squarely at odds with the first clause of the US-Iran Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which provides for an immediate, permanent halt to fighting on “all fronts”, including in Lebanon where Israeli forces have occupied approximately one-fifth of the country since early March.

That provision has since been undercut by a separate US-brokered framework agreement between Israel and the Lebanese government, which doesn’t require Israeli forces to leave southern Lebanon or halt attacks – a deal Hezbollah has denounced.

The result has been an entrenchment of Israel’s military presence in Lebanon, even as strikes have eased to avoid reigniting direct conflict with Iran.

That leaves an open question: Is Israel’s position bluster for a domestic audience, or a hard line that could unravel the fragile MoU? We spoke to analysts to find out.

[Al Jazeera]

‘Lose-lose’ for Netanyahu

Behind Netanyahu’s combative language is an embattled prime minister managing a difficult balancing act, Cyrus Schayegh, professor of international history and politics at the Geneva Graduate Institute, told Al Jazeera.

On the one hand, domestic politics has made Netanyahu reluctant to be seen as backing down from the war with Hezbollah, which began firing rockets into northern Israel soon after the first US-Israeli strikes on Tehran on February 28, in which Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed. Israel responded with force and has launched near-daily strikes, as well as an expanding ground invasion, ever since.

With elections expected around October, a hasty withdrawal from Lebanon could look like capitulation – and worse, an implicit admission that he only fell into line because of pressure from US President Donald Trump.

But the other side of that “lose-lose” is Washington. Netanyahu, Schayegh says, understands exactly what Trump wants from him: to prevent the Israel-Hezbollah front from unravelling the broader US-Iran negotiations.

Defying that expectation risks a rupture with the US at a moment when Israel can least afford one.

Israeli security personnel remain on alert and scan the sky for an FPV drone in Metula, northern Israel, after Netanyahu ordered strikes on what his office described as Hezbollah targets in Beirut’s southern suburbs, according to a statement from his office [Atef Safadi/EPA]

Iran’s ‘deep commitment’

Tehran has explicitly and repeatedly stated that Israel must fully withdraw from all occupied Lebanese territories before it will entertain signing any sort of peace deal with the US.

Schayegh said this reflects Iran’s deep commitment to Hezbollah’s survival – the group has proven itself a vital strategic partner over the years, and the ties between Hezbollah’s leadership and the Iranian regime run deeper than pure strategy, reaching into socio-cultural and even family bonds.

Hezbollah is a major issue for Iran, particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and it has shown this by its willingness to strike northern Israel and block the Strait of Hormuz over the issue before, geopolitical analyst Joe Macaron told Al Jazeera.

But that doesn’t mean Iran expects, or even wants, a full return to the pre-Gaza war status quo, Schayegh says.

At least some in Tehran, he believes, understand that getting Israel out of Lebanon won’t mean restoring the arrangement that held before 2023, when the Lebanese army played little to no role in the south, and Hezbollah operated largely unchecked, a dynamic dating back to the 2006 war in which Israel also occupied southern Lebanon.

That recognition, Schayegh argues, means the form Hezbollah’s precise posture and footprint in southern Lebanon takes isn’t treated by Tehran as non-negotiable.

Instead, it functions as a bargaining chip, one Iran could potentially use incrementally, trading concessions step by step in a slow, deliberate, diplomatic process, he says, adding that although it’s “a delicate path” for Tehran to walk. Diminishing the power of Hezbollah in Lebanon, therefore, it is a path Iran may be prepared to navigate around rather than resist outright.

Still, Iran holding on to the Lebanon issue “as much as it could” was reportedly a sticking point that delayed the MoU in the first place, according to Ronnie Chatah, a political commentator, writer and host of The Beirut Banyan podcast.

He told Al Jazeera it’s conceivable Iran could still make Lebanon “a heightened problem”, slowing a permanent deal with Washington unless there’s added pressure on Israel to at least appear to be withdrawing.

Even so, Chatah doesn’t believe the current situation is enough to derail the MoU altogether.

In the days since both agreements were signed, he said, there’s been no serious push by Iran to make Lebanon a priority and, despite Israel’s clear insistence it will stay as long as it sees a threat, he does not believe it will “jeopardise” the MoU.

Hezbollah’s exclusion: ‘humiliating, shameful and a surrender’

Hezbollah was not involved in the framework agreement between Israeli and Lebanese officials. In fact, it was entirely excluded from the negotiations, which led to a deal being signed in Washington, DC.

Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem has adamantly rejected the framework agreement, calling it “humiliating, shameful and a surrender of sovereignty”.

As a party which has held seats in the Lebanese parliament since the mid-2000s, Schayegh noted, Hezbollah is not simply a “marionette” of Iran. But since Israel’s 2024 campaign in Lebanon, amid the Gaza war, which has massively weakened the armed group and killed much of its leadership, Iran has organisationally assumed a greater role.

For Chatah, the real answers, therefore, lie not in Lebanon but in Iran.

As the most important player in its “axis of resistance” across the region, Hezbollah represents Iran’s most “advanced investment” beyond its borders over the past four and a half decades, he said. The armed group also remains “a very valuable asset for security leverage” across the region, even after being hit hard, degrading its capabilities.

He said it is unlikely Tehran could be persuaded to abandon Hezbollah anytime soon, or in the long term – the group is simply too important for the Iranian regime to give up, and may ultimately be “the lifeline for the Iranian regime” itself.

Meanwhile, Israel also refuses to back down on the disarmament and removal of Hezbollah.

Chatah points to a historical precedent for this kind of impasse: a 1983 tripartite agreement between Lebanon and Israel ultimately collapsed, followed by a wave of attacks, including on international peacekeepers and the US embassy, after which Hezbollah emerged as a dominant security actor in Lebanon as Israeli forces later withdrew.

Still, without Hezbollah’s buy-in, the deal will be “difficult to implement” and could trigger further conflict, Macaron said.

A framework that sidesteps the core issues, the Lebanese army’s role and an Israeli withdrawal, isn’t built on solid ground, Macaron said, adding that it is merely the start of a process rather than a long-term resolution.

Trump’s priority: the nuclear file

For Washington, Macaron says, the priority is clear: The nuclear issue with Iran takes precedence over everything else, and the US isn’t willing to be flexible on that front.

Avoiding a return to escalation with Iran matters more than pressing hard on Lebanon – meaning the US doesn’t want Hezbollah “under complete pressure” either, he said.

If Washington and Tehran can make progress on the bilateral nuclear talks in the coming weeks, Macaron suggests, the US is likely to show more flexibility on the Lebanon issue as a result.

Schayegh also noted that the US has much riding on the outcome, and the balance of leverage between the two sides is tilted more towards Iran than before – partly because Iran can now hurt the US in ways it previously couldn’t or wouldn’t, such as by closing the Strait of Hormuz, which directly harms Americans and the wider global economy.

Secretive Gaza meetings in Cyprus as plan to isolate Hamas gathers pace

Secretive Gaza meetings in Cyprus as plan to isolate Hamas gathers pace


Board of Peace talks on Gaza’s post-war future face funding crises and warnings of a colonial occupation

Israeli soldiers occupy a military position overlooking the so-called 'Yellow Line' in the central Gaza Strip, Tuesday, May 26, 2026 [File: Ariel Schalit/AP]

By Al Jazeera Staff
Published On 1 Jul 2026

While a Hamas delegation holds talks with mediators in Cairo, discussions over Gaza’s next administrative phase are also taking place in the Cypriot coastal resort city of Ayia Napa.

Representatives of a US-led Board of Peace – headed by prominent international figures including former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former UN envoy Nickolay Mladenov – are convening to draw up a roadmap for the devastated enclave.

The primary objective is to isolate Hamas from the Palestinian population and its resources through the implementation of Article 17 of US President Donald Trump’s plan to end Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, which has now killed more than 73,000 Palestinians. However, the initiative is already buckling under the weight of financial crises, Israeli political gridlock, and legal controversies.


Article 17 and the ‘pincer movement’

Article 17 of the Trump plan paves the way for what officials describe as a “temporary reconstruction” in areas designated as free of Hamas control. Rather than pouring concrete for permanent rebuilding, the plan envisions setting up temporary structures and providing medical services for civilians settling in those areas.

According to reports from the Israeli newspaper Israel Hayom, the Board of Peace – the organisation set up by Trump in the wake of the October Gaza ceasefire – is scheduled to launch a pilot project within weeks in one such “Hamas-free” area, Tal as-Sultan area near Rafah. The plan aims to establish humanitarian shelter compounds for “unarmed” civilians, overseen by a multinational stabilisation force stationed at Camp Amitai on the border. These multinational forces will be equipped only with batons to maintain public order, while the Israeli military fortifies its presence behind the “Yellow Line”, which separates areas of Gaza under Israeli control from those outside it.

The strategy effectively allows for the Israeli military – with the support of the Board of Peace – to only allow for reconstruction to take place in areas under its control. By directing reconstruction, aid distribution, and civilian shelter to areas outside of Hamas’s control, Palestinians in Gaza may increasingly relocate to those areas, ultimately leaving Hamas with “no people, no land, and no resources”.

However, the plan faces fierce resistance from within Israel. The “Israel Envelope Forum”, representing residents of settlements bordering Gaza, has warned that implementing Article 17 constitutes a major strategic gamble.

The forum argues that any “reconstruction” – even temporary structures – before the complete military and political defeat of Hamas is a strategic error that will give the group a golden opportunity to catch its breath, rebuild its tunnel networks, and recruit fighters. It maintains that past attempts at “consciousness engineering” to separate Gaza’s population from Hamas have failed, warning that international civilian administration will only perpetuate the security threat to Israeli border communities.



Gaza's farmland shrinks as war devastates agriculture and food production


A ‘colonial occupation’ authority?

The Cypriot Board of Peace meetings have also been overshadowed by a leaked draft resolution published by The Guardian, which revealed that the body is seeking sweeping legal immunity for its members, forces, and contractors, shielding them from potential prosecution in Gaza’s courts. The document also reportedly outlines efforts to seize public facilities and properties inside Gaza without compensation.

While a Board of Peace official quickly dismissed the leak as misleading, the revelations have sparked alarm. Mohanad Mustafa, an expert in Israeli affairs, warned that if the document is authentic, it effectively transforms the Board of Peace into a “colonial occupation authority” rather than an administration meant for rescue and reconstruction.

“This means that any legal violations, criminal acts, or financial corruption committed by Board of Peace members would be completely shielded by legal immunity,” Mustafa told Al Jazeera, adding that seizing public facilities without legal backing violates both local and international law.



China’s UN envoy calls for genuine and lasting ceasefire in Gaza


Funding collapse and the Israeli veto

Little is known about what is being discussed behind closed doors in Ayia Napa.

Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Cyprus, Mohammed al-Madhoun, reported that the Board of Peace meetings are shrouded in such secrecy that even their exact location remains undisclosed.

And there are few signs of progress for the Board of Peace’s plan in Gaza, with the only visible development being the release of images showing vehicles designated for the International Stabilization Force arriving near the Karem Abu Salem (known as Kerem Shalom in Israel) crossing.

Behind the scenes, the Board of Peace is struggling to resolve two massive hurdles:

Donors have reneged on $17bn in pledges made during a February donor conference, largely due to the economic fallout from the recent regional war with Iran. Without these funds, the Palestinian technocratic committee tasked with day-to-day administration of Gaza cannot function.

The Board of Peace has also adopted the Israeli narrative regarding the plan’s execution. Israel flatly refuses to allow the technocratic committee into Gaza, open border crossings, or begin reconstruction until Hamas is completely disarmed – even down to its military uniforms.

Mustafa, the Israeli affairs expert, notes that Israel is actively obstructing the plan, expanding its occupation to cover more than the 50 percent of Gaza stipulated in the first phase of the ceasefire agreement.

For Hamas, the intentions of the Board of Peace are viewed with deep suspicion. Palestinian political analyst Ahmed al-Tanani explained to Al Jazeera that Hamas recognises Israel’s attempts to exploit the vague texts of the ceasefire agreement and is demanding that mediators provide real guarantees to prevent humanitarian projects from turning into a “cover for genocide”.

Mohammad Mansour has contributed to this report.


***

With a bloke like Tony Blair on the Board, it's a joke. Bloke was one of the three members of the Coalition of the KILLING, responsible for the unnecessary deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis (and some Pommie soldiers), if not millions, and still very much UNforgiven - S-Whole!!!

Anwar says Malaysia will stay non-aligned but never neutral on Palestine, sovereignty or Islamophobia

Anwar says Malaysia will stay non-aligned but never neutral on Palestine, sovereignty or Islamophobia



Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said Malaysia will continue to pursue an independent and non-aligned foreign policy during his keynote address at the 39th Asia-Pacific Roundtable in Kuala Lumpur July 2, 2026. — Picture by Firdaus Latif

First Published: Thursday, 02 Jul 2026 11:14 AM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, July 2 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today said Malaysia will maintain an independent and non-aligned foreign policy but will not remain neutral on the Palestinian cause, Islamophobia or matters involving national sovereignty.

Anwar said the country will not shy away from taking a principled stance, even on issues involving powerful partners such as the United States (US) and China.

“First and foremost, Malaysia’s foreign policy will remain independent, and that is fiercely independent, proactive and non-aligned.

“(However), we will not hesitate to adopt positions, cultivate relationships, and support initiatives that advance our values, beliefs and interests.


“Malaysia cannot remain neutral on matters that involve fundamental rights such as the Palestinian struggle or in countering Islamophobia, or on our core national interests including territorial sovereignty, even when it comes to powerful partners like China and the United States,” Anwar said in his keynote address at the 39th Asia-Pacific Roundtable (APR) at the Grand Hyatt Kuala Lumpur today.

Anwar said Malaysia’s principled stance includes the country’s unwavering support for the peaceful resolution of disputes in accordance with international law and its denunciation of the use of force or coercion, whether economic or military.

The prime minister also stressed that Malaysia and Asean continue to have meaningful engagements with China on the South China Sea, and said his Chinese counterparts had “responded reasonably” to his calls to expedite a Code of Conduct for the contested waters.


Asean leaders, he said, also unanimously agreed during their recent meeting in Cebu, the Philippines, to increase engagement with all sides in Myanmar.

“It cannot be overstated that the eventual political settlement must be a Myanmar-owned and Myanmar-led process, not one imposed externally,” Anwar said.

On the Cambodia-Thailand border tensions, Anwar said both Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul and his Cambodian counterpart Hun Manet remain committed to lasting peace in the region.

Anwar also welcomed the understanding between the United States and Iran towards reaching a possible resolution to the months-long hostilities in West Asia, and stressed that a comprehensive ceasefire and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz should be prioritised.

Malaysia, he said, is also expanding trade ties with newer, less leveraged markets in West Asia, Central Asia, Latin America and across Africa.

“Our goal is to strengthen existing partnerships, build new ones, and keep our economic ties broad-based, resilient, and forward-looking.

“In a more uncertain global environment, diversification is not just an economic strategy; it is a national necessity,” he said.

DPM Fadillah: Malaysia to turn retiring coal plants into renewable energy hubs under new plan

DPM Fadillah: Malaysia to turn retiring coal plants into renewable energy hubs under new plan



Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof said Malaysia plans to repurpose retiring coal-fired power plant sites into renewable energy hubs and battery energy storage facilities as part of its energy transition. — Bernama pic

First Published: Thursday, 02 Jul 2026 11:30 AM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, July 2 — Malaysia plans to repurpose sites of retiring coal-fired power plants into renewable energy (RE) hubs and battery energy storage facilities under a proposed National Coal Site Repurposing Framework, said Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof.

He said the country’s existing coal fleet represented significant national infrastructure, including transmission connections, industrial facilities and strategically located land.

“Rather than allowing these assets to become stranded, we should view them as opportunities to create new economic value.

“Selected sites possess strong potential to be transformed into renewable energy hubs, battery energy storage facilities and other clean energy developments that continue contributing to local economies while supporting our national transition objectives,” he said.

He was delivering his address at the closing ceremony of the World Economic Forum’s “Malaysia’s Energy Future: Power Sector Decarbonisation Deep Dive” here today.

Fadillah, who is also Energy Transition and Water Transformation Minister, said the proposed framework outlined in the World Economic Forum’s insight paper, Beyond Coal: Building a Flexible, Resilient and Clean Power System for Malaysia, would provide a foundation for continued engagement among the government, regulators, utilities, investors and local communities.

He said every retiring power station presented an opportunity to create new industries, attract investments and prepare the workforce for the economy of the future.


Fadillah said Malaysia remained committed to its target of not building any new coal-fired power plants, transitioning away from coal-fired electricity generation by 2044 and achieving 70 per cent RE installed capacity by 2050.

He stressed that RE deployment must progress ahead of coal retirement to avoid replacing coal dependence with greater reliance on imported liquefied natural gas (LNG).

“This is a critical consideration. Should renewable deployment fail to keep pace, there is a real risk that coal dependence may simply be replaced by greater reliance on imported LNG, exposing Malaysia to fuel price volatility and external geopolitical uncertainties.

“A successful transition must therefore reduce dependence, not merely shift it from one imported fuel to another,” he said.

To support the transition, he said the Ministry of Energy Transition and Water Transformation continues to prioritise large-scale solar deployment, the Corporate Renewable Energy Supply Scheme, battery energy storage systems, and smart grid modernisation.

On regional cooperation, Fadillah reaffirmed Malaysia’s commitment to advancing the Asean Power Grid and expanding cross-border electricity trade to strengthen regional energy security and facilitate greater RE integration.

He also said the country would continue exploring long-term low-carbon energy options, including advanced nuclear technologies and small modular reactors, while ensuring safety, robust governance, regulatory preparedness and public confidence remain paramount. — Bernama

Beating you down with words, the dangers of debates to elections

Beating you down with words, the dangers of debates to elections



Thursday, 02 Jul 2026 8:24 AM MYT

By Praba Ganesan


JULY 2 — I failed to disguise my chuckle reading about Onn Hafiz’s verdict on public debates. As much as he unequivocally failed to hide his contempt for reason.

The Barisan Nasional Johor chief remains convinced they are unnecessary and counterproductive in an election. More so I suppose if it involved him debating.


A cruel world which asks a state’s chief executive of four years to respond to his opponents in real time on a stage.

Yes, standing up and speaking, who’d think that’s one of the requirements for higher office?


I mean, bowling and Bonsai pruning may be far more necessary to run a state. Square dancing too.


Onn felt dignified discourses should be the sole preserve of the state assembly, not in markets or on TV.

His reply was to an unwelcome invite from former education minister and PKR-Pakatan candidate for Wangsa Puteri Maszlee Malik. To the unacquainted, Malay-Chinese Maszlee rates himself as a speaker. He also rates swimming classes for students.



Onn feels debates are confrontational, when outside the assembly. He really should not be in politics if he’s convinced confrontation is unhealthy. Central to politics is the confrontation of ideas, values, ideology and beliefs. In the pursuit of power.

Elections peak these confrontations.

Except one bit, elections and their debates are civil activities, they eschew violence.



Party flags are seen in Johor Bahru ahead of the 16th Johor state election on July 11. The author argues that public election debates strengthen democracy by allowing voters to scrutinise competing leaders directly, rejecting the view that such exchanges are unnecessary or counterproductive. — Bernama pic



Perhaps he imagines participants clubbing each other with verbs, nouns and adjectives. Metaphors are nuclear escalations. And gesticulations, taunts.

The august chamber vs plain voters

In Onn’s universe, the state assembly is the perfect and only forum. They are rich with decorum, restraint and orderliness.

I could not help thinking that perhaps the menteri besar spent the majority of his four years in power, being abducted by aliens. Mind probes, they can do a real job on you!

Because our legislative gatherings are usually farces.

They are dominated by serial screamers whose key achievements are to prevent others with the capacity to form sentences and articulate them to complete their utterances.

They find it an affront that people can formulate thoughts through speech rather than rage. Since they find it impossible to do it themselves.

But more pertinent, if I am to be permitted, lawmakers in theory rationalise to their equals in the chamber to clarify, elevate or decry resolutions, and in better days shape or amend legislations. Through the interactions of lawmakers, in Johor’s case the 56 elected assemblymen.

An election debate, on the other hand, is to assist the voters to decide if those vying are worthy to be elected.

It’s the step before.

Johor’s 2.7 million voters are better off to see the competitors face off. Which assists them to decide who governs the state.

A debate positions those in contention to speak up but even more to speak about their ideas in the presence of their opponents, and to reply to the queries from their opponents.

Since only one of them wins, and all of them want the support from the rakyat, it is quite extraordinarily simple to assume having them have that argument in the presence of said voters is in the interest of all.

Exactly why politicians like Onn, and his coalition avoid intellectual altercations.

They hate to look silly — my six-year-old niece forbids me from using the other word.

So, they obfuscate the matter and suggest an incomprehensible excuse that Onn is being the good guy by being afraid to be embarrassed. Such sacrifice.

I believe that the Royal Military College which processed Onn in the Nineties, administered education and managed activities conducive to the challenge of replying after listening.

Also, his exceptional opportunity to be raised in a celebrated political family must have added to his armour. Not the least the mentoring by his uncle, Hishammuddin Hussein.

This before adding the amazing political education received in Umno which holds up more than anything, intelligence. Also, nepo-babies, but that is for a different segment. Fellow nepo, pardon party member, Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar led him in Umno Youth before.

Speak like you never have

I have good news for Onn despite his dislike for disorderly arguments from beyond the state assembly, Maszlee is not a monster speaker. In fact, the field from Pakatan to Perikatan Nasional is inundated with the ordinary.

The thing is this. It is not about debating.

This is not a throwback to the 1858 Lincoln-Douglas debates for the Illinois senatorial race which is the modern political debate benchmark.

It is not about format, structure, platform or microphone quality. It is the spectre of facing each other.

Umno likes to win without being exposed or examined.

Without being questioned.

Of course, Onn will struggle to reply to anything related to incessant floods in the state to the economic model as a Singapore satellite.

Umno leaders are not wired to reply, they are wired to declare. Opinions, decisions, deliberations or discord. Their way is that they speak, and we for our own good find a way to agree.

Umno leaders do not like surprises. They want results confirmed upfront which is why they have a distaste for elections. Too much power in the hands of the peasants, sorry, voters.

The biggest reasons I cheer them on, despite almost guaranteed to have a snooze-fest, is that public election debates humanise all of the participants and increase the powers of the people. That we all get to openly judge them.

There are hardly any outright winners in these debates. They have their base to back them regardless.

Onn, if he entered the arena would receive waves of adulation and support. Social media rife with his pictures and ideas, for there are armies of Umno supporters from Muar to Pengerang. Not to mention paid cybertroopers.

The real benefit about a debate is that the people get to hold their own mini-debates after the debate. That’s the real boon from the exercise, the rest talking to each other about what they think about the proponents.

The ideas collide in the debate even if farcical.

Debates are indeed confrontational. They are also our triumphs. They exhibit our ability to contest our thoughts and philosophies verbally rather than with actual clubs.

They add to democracy, not detract from it. Those saying otherwise are unfit to lead.