PAS - what could have been!

Extracts of TMI's The two sides of PAS

Take a bow, Hanipa Maidin, Mohd Sany Abdullah, Wan Kharizal Wan Khazim and their ilk.

These men refused to be cowed into silence or beaten into submission by the boos, walkouts and thuggish behaviour by a segment of delegates at the PAS muktamar this week.

They urged their party men to think carefully before accepting the position of menteri besar of Selangor, pointing out that it would betrayal of trust of their Pakatan Rakyat (PR) allies, not to mention setting in motion the demise of the coalition.

The most erudite of the lot was Hanipa, the party's legal chief and perhaps the one individual who should be an example for Malaysians in this period of bullying and intimidation.

It would have been much easier and rewarding for him to have stuck to the party line offered by Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang and the hardliners. But no, he did not choose the easy way out.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that he has stood up to the hardliners in meetings as the crisis over the Selangor MB's position escalated. For more, read the TMI news article, linked above.

Eight and a half years ago I took notice of Mohamad Hanipa Maidin.

In 2006, then-PAS Youth Information Chief Hanipa Maidin came in from the left field when he condemned the Arab model as unsuitable for democracy and modern civilization.

Undoubtedly that condemnation would have been startling for the PAS Arab-philes. It must have been terribly shocking for them to hear one of the party's top Youth leaders declare that Arabs had shown a detestable example, resulting in a negative image of democracy and Islam.

Hanipa declared that the awful Arab archetype had unfairly dragged other Muslims down into the gutter with them. He deduced, quite correctly, that the West perceived (still does) all Muslims through that detestable Arabic prism.

He even blamed the Arab behaviour as the cause for the Europeans deliberately publishing the offensive caricatures on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Though I did then see his point, I had reckoned his analysis of the cause for Europe insensitively publishing the caricatures might have been a wee over the top.

I had greater suspicions that the ultra Zionists did that, to wit, sponsoring or instigating the publishing of the offensive caricatures on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), so as to deliberately inflame the easily provoked Arabs in Europe to go on a muddle-headed self-destructive rampage (in Europe) which would frighten, offend and disgust their European benefactors into stopping their annual aid of nearly one billion Euro to the Palestinian Authority.

And sadly, for those stupid lame-headed European Arabs, the Zionists succeeded on this score. The Palestinians suffered, the Zionists and Israeli government were overjoyed.

Anyway, Hanipa didn't stop there and went on to attribute the phenomenon of the terrorist group al-Qaeda to the undemocratic practices of Arab leaders. He was spot on in this assertion, though he neglected to mention that those undemocratic Arab leaders were all (still are) propped up by the USA for the latter's own interests.

Indeed, currently it’s quite painful and very annoying to see those stupid Yanks support Saudi Arabia (for oil of course) while preparing to fight ISIL and (unfortunately) dragging Australia in AGAIN to join in a senseless battle in the Middle-East, but ignoring or 'acting dunno' (closing an eye) to the reality that today’s turbulent violence by ISIL terrorist elements in the Middle East has been directed and financed by Saudi Arabia.

It’s basically a war fermented by the rich Arab state to disrupt, diminish and where possible, destroy Shia influence in the region (Iran, Iraq, etc). For more, read the PressTV news report which informs that ISIL militants confess to direct Saudi links.

Back to our local hero, Hanipa Maidin - Obviously Hanipa had then started (or attempted) to move PAS away from the ultra-conservative right (for Malays-Muslims-only), and its low class brand of campaigning a la the blasphemous 'ticket to heaven' promotion prior to the 2004 general election. His attempted direction for his party appeared to be a more centrist Islamic democracy.

Then I was unclear of what Hanipa had in mind though I had hopefully visualized PAS new politico-religious ideology as one promoting and merging together the noble values of Islam and democracy, and returning to a gold standard a la the enlightened, knowledgeable and tolerant golden age of Islam during the acme of Islamic civilization, but within the practical reality of a modern 21st Century multiethnic multicultural Malaysian civilization.

I though how exciting that would be as it would make PAS more palatable to the non-Muslims and thus a viable alternative to UMNO, and enhance the Islamic party's 2008 campaigning as Malaysians were getting impatient with Ahmad Abdullah Badawi's non-functioning Islam Hadhari.

Hanipa Maidin, Mat Sabu, Nizar Jamaluddin, and the PAS Erdogens – a new breed of Muslim pollies for all Malaysians.

But I had then wondered too whether Hanipa was merely acting on his own accord (or his Erdogen group's accord) as he had radically sembelih (ritually slaughtered) the sacred ‘Arab’ camel, which in itself was a blasphemous act within the Arab-philic PAS.

Anyway, then to further show his democratic credentials and at the same time jab sideways at UMNO's ribs, Hanipa said PAS would not agree to use the Internal Security Act (ISA) against those who published the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) caricatures because the security law was wicked. He said: “Those who insult the prophet are definitely wicked but the ISA is worse and it is a law that has been abused.” 

I admired Hanipa for showing his cool on this lamentable caricature issue instead of behaving moronically like those Arabs who were wont to take to the streets to uselessly burn tires, effigies and Israeli-American flags, or if they had rifles, shoot meaninglessly into the air (wasting bullets for gaya only).

But I did wonder how many PAS leaders had agreed to his cool-headed wisdom?

And then in an amazing show of humility and frankness, Hanipa stated that Muslims in this country should also not assume that all of PAS actions were right, but they need to understand that PAS was a political organization, and sometimes would be forced to act according to its political agenda.

Like currently in Selangor? Wakakaka.

Anyway, he was a clever bloke, no doubt then (2006) covering his behind just in case, in the worst case scenario, some loose cannon in PAS started to sell 'tickets to heaven' again, wakakaka.

On a side issue, in 2006 I did wonder whether that 'salesman' or 'salesmen' had the permission of Allah swt to make such political promises? Aiyah, such would be those 'priesthood caste', as sneeringly mentioned by Kassim Ahmad.

Kassim Ahmad had said: “This priesthood caste did not exist at the time of the Prophet or the four caliphs. They only emerged about 300 years later by appointing themselves as interpreter of religion for Muslims.”

“They (Muslims) view their religious leaders like gods and goddesses, that these leaders are seen to be protected from maksum (protected from sin) and must decide on everything about their lives.”

But back to Hanipa again - Wouldn't we agree that we wouldn't have expected to hear the courageous and appropriately correct anti-Arab criticisms and equally courageous and frank confession of humility (namely, not to assume that all of PAS actions were right) from a PAS leader in a million years, but there you are, Hanipa Maidin did it.

Then, I wondered whether indeed PAS would abandon its unnatural and unhealthy infatuation with all things Arab and Arabic, which to be fair to UMNO, then-Cultural Minister Rais Yatim had already long urged Malay-Muslims to do so.

My thoughts then were that the PAS Turks (Erdogens) might have taken over and adopted a new and more inclusive direction in the party's political campaigning. I believed that would be a wise move as its previous campaign had been directed at the converted when their votes, while not 100% guaranteed, were more or less already assured.

By adopting a new liberal and more inclusive political direction, its campaign could then attempt to win over the yet-to-be converted voters (non-Muslim Chinese, Indians etc) because that's where the additional votes for PAS would have to come from.

I thought, and still do, that if PAS aspired to be the federal government (or at least its backbone), it needed to accommodate the 15% non-Malay bumis and the 35% non-bumis, their beliefs and concerns, before it could convince them that the PAS brand of Islam would not be oppressive or marginalizing.

There was/is no necessity for PAS to ever abandon its central pillar of Islam, but under the Erdogens it would hopefully be an Islam which would preserve the highest compassionate and just values of Islamic democracy, or if you like, democratic Islam without any medieval cruelty in legal punishment [eg. such as chopping off hands, gouging of eyes, whipping, beheading, stoning and misogynous practices].

The additional advantage for PAS in moving towards this direction was that it would maintain the political initiative against UMNO, who would then be forced to play catch up with the leader or leading political light.

And PAS indeed did succeed on 05 March 2008 in winning over, for the first time, significant numbers of non-Muslim vote, with the help of DAP and PKR.

But alas, post 2008 we saw PAS in Kedah forgetting its non-Muslim supporters when it started to interfere with non-Muslims activities and interests in the state (eg. dress codes, koe-tai, abattoir, the (ethnocentric) housing allocation, etc).

PAS in Kelantan wasn't any better in its intrusions into non-Muslim areas of interests in KB (eg. hair dressing salon, two males watching aeroplanes at airports wakakaka, non-Muslim women wearing tight jeans, etc).

Today, the conservative sector in PAS (ulamas and even some youth sections) have behaved badly in the Selangor MB issue, allowing its selfish interests to betray Pakatan coalition consensus, and its concealed but latent-brewing ethnocentric DNA to push aside its self-proclaimed but unpracticed Islamic credentials.

The PAS conservatives seem not to understand that the values of Islam are supra-nationalistic, meaning the values are above race, colour and creed. The ulamas and its youths seem more concerned about ketuanan Melayu, and just how would such an ideology of ethnic supremacy be in accordance with Islamic values?

Its conservative group has reiterated its un-Pakatan go-it-alone mentality by heckling Hanipa and his like-minded brethren at the recent PAS Muktamar. 

Hanipa, Mat Sabu and their Erdogens colleagues could well have been the future of Malay (and thus Malaysian) leadership, and there’s no denying this country still needs/depends on Malay leadership.

As PKR has lamentably shown it's devoid of the required leadership for Pakatan, and DAP still has a long way to go in developing its own Malay leaders, the Malay leadership requirement within Pakatan would have fallen upon PAS.

But PAS ulamas have shown their shameful shortsightedness in allowing their selfish interests, petty paranoia, puerile hubris and ethnocentric DNA to diminish PAS into nothing more than a kampung-or-Kelantan-limited political party.

Sadly, the Malay political leadership will now by default go to UMNO, thanks to Pak Haji Hadi Awang and a badly done rancid satay.

chao tar = overburn and too dry