MCA took decades to become a 'running dog'. How long will it take DAP?

Malaysiakini:

'Running dog' narrative returns to bite DAP

OPINION  |  S THAYAPARAN

Published: Today 9:16 am  |  Modified: Today 9:16 am

"Either Umno and the police are covering up an impending terror attack, or MCA is making things up to scare non-Muslims into submission. The most concerning problem before us is that senior officials from the same ruling coalition are telling two conflicting stories to justify a policy decision that runs against the grain of the Malaysian social fabric, and is severely dividing our society. It is no wonder that there is a deficit of trust and confidence in government institutions." 

– Howard Lee, DAP Youth chief

COMMENT | DAP’s scorched earth policy when it comes to MCA was always a dubious strategy. Recent events have demonstrated that in the same position,  DAP espouses the same kind of rhetoric and manoeuvrings that MCA was demonised for. 

In 2012, when debating MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek, Lim Guan Eng, DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng claimed: “We should not bow to fate and have the right to equality. We should not kneel and beg. We should be brave enough to stand and ask for it.”

The implication being that under MCA, the Chinese community – the non-Malay communities – were begging for scraps from the Umno dining table, and that under DAP stewardship, non-Malays would have political leaders who would demand their rights as accorded in the constitution, unlike the supine nature of MCA politics.

Even back in the days before the dream of Putrajaya was even on the table, the political warfare between DAP and MCA – a dog-eat-dog fight, if you will – was an indication of the shape of things to come. 

Looking back at the debate, it was more a debate about realpolitik and false expectations.

While DAP had bragging rights on the management of Penang and their performance in Selangor – again depending on who you ask – MCA’s history of nation-building, the kind which involved managing expectations, compromise and yes, complicity, became a big juicy target for a mob fueled by ahistorical polemics, ready for a change of leadership, even if it meant non-Malay leadership.

Last March, I wrote about how the MCA-DAP rivalry was merely fueling anti-Chinese sentiment. 

"Non-Malay political parties have this delusion that they are independent operators. They are not. They are in reality proxies for Malay power structures, with varying degrees of public and private influence within Malay hegemons. 

"To believe otherwise, would be delusional. While it is easy to paint MCA as running dogs of Umno, the same could be said of DAP, who have had to bend over backwards to accommodate the return of Dr Mahathir Mohamad into the opposition ranks."

The non-Malay political narrative post-May 9 has been one of backpedalling, reversals, sycophancy and Orwellian doublespeak, because the weight of expectation collided with the realpolitik of Malay rule. 

It was something MCA had learned over the decades, and which was something that DAP managed to navigate in state politics extremely well. 

But ultimately, the lure of federal power meant that whatever “good” intentions the coalition had withered away in the face of the old maverick’s take no prisoners, make no apologies strongman political skulduggery.

Years of demonising MCA as a 'running dog' for the establishment should have been a lesson for DAP, but now they are slowly learning the cost of doing business with Malay power structures on a federal level.

When some non-Malay Harapan partisans tell people who demand reform to not rock the Harapan boat – much like how Lim told non-Malays that they do not need to “beg” – it is exactly the same position MCA was when it was balancing expectations in the BN coalition. 

DAP never gave MCA the benefit of this excuse, and neither should anyone who believes in a New Malaysia.

We are always told if we do not support Harapan, then former premier Najib Abdul Razak will return, but there are worse things than a kleptocrat, and corruption is something we have been through, especially during the first Dr Mahathir Mohamad era.

Have you noticed that what MCA was blamed for – the dereliction of its duties when it came to important social, economic and political policies – are now termed as “distractions” by some partisans. These are not traps, distractions or sandiwara, but rather the gestalt of a functional democracy.

Race-based policies affect the economy. Najib, before he slipped into a kleptocratic stupor, understood this, which is why he "cast himself as a moderniser who would roll back the privileges that have deterred investment and alienated minority Chinese and ethnic Indians. He has also pledged to base government assistance more strongly on needs than on race.

"But those plans have largely failed to advance due to stiff resistance from within the ruling, ethnic Malay Umno.”

Who was the prime mover in Umno during that time? What we are talking about here when it comes to the reform agenda – which DAP championed and which it claimed MCA was not up to the task to carry out, and which ultimately was connected to bread and butter issues?

A new national car, backtracking on Lynas, backtracking on egalitarian policies, backpedalling on institutional reforms, be it the state security apparatus or local council elections – all this is connected to the economic ecosphere and not some pie in the sky distractions, which some would have you believe.

These days, the people are left wondering if DAP will cave when it comes to important policies issues because since May 9, all they seem interested in doing is justifying the policies of the government, even if it goes against their campaign manifesto or more damning, their positions before the election.

Some DAP political operatives tell me that their Malay counterparts are not picking up the slack. Really? Did DAP allow MCA this luxury?

When Bersatu youth demands the resignation of Penang Second Deputy Chief Minister P Ramasamy (photo) – because the young boy minister does not have the cojones to demand it himself – we should realise we are heading back to familiar political territory. 

What was the response of DAP and its partisans when that happened? How many times did Umno Youth demand the resignation of an MCA member for not toeing the line? 

Lim claims DAP is not taking the non-Malay vote for granted, but he offers up feeble excuses for the khat controversy, stood by while Harapan power structures abandoned International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, says nothing of the moves made by the religious czar of Harapan when it comes to Islamic policies, and generally lays the blame on the former regime for mistakes and missteps that DAP makes.

How long is DAP going to coast on the 1MDB issue? How long is DAP going to coast on the excuse that it would take years to fix the problems of this country? This last point was not made before the election. 

How long is DAP going to rely on partisans who are willing to cut them slack because anything is better than Najib?

MCA took decades to become a 'running dog'. How long will it take DAP?

---

S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. A retired barrister-at-law, he is one of the founding members of Persatuan Patriot Kebangsaan.