SOME may hastily label the Timah fiasco as merely a storm in a teacup, an unnecessary distraction from the discourse of policy and politics in 2021, which should have focused primarily on Covid-19 and recovery.

Yet, we have witnessed established political names such as Abdul Hadi Awang, Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man, Idris Ahmad, Mujahid Yusof Rawa, Khalid Samad and even seemingly progressive civil society representatives such as the Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) wading into the issue.

Given the public reaction on social media, even some devout Muslims would find it perplexing that the word “Timah” could be construed as deriving from the traditional Muslim name “Fatimah”.

This is because, if that makes any sense at all, then surely PAS’ very own mouthpiece Harakah Daily should be banned from publication because it has the word “arak” in it.

While there is a belief that the issue of a whisky brand name is another tactic employed by politicians to deflect bread and butter issues, constantly barking on such seemingly superfluous matters makes Malaysia risk deserting its principles as a multi-racial, moderate nation, and gives rise to a more hard-line and intolerant country.   

This is more so because of the Islamically charged discourse that was first perpetrated by PAS and Umno during the 1980s in a political contest of who could better defend Islam that has since continued unabated.

The Timah incident is a classic case of the chicken coming home to roost for PAS because of the holier-than-thou approach they had adopted when they were in opposition.

All along, the contradiction within PAS’ brand of politics is how they have promised their supporters and voters a country where, under their governance, Islamic principles would be prioritised and the “secular” path taken by BN or PH would be abandoned.

Naturally, in the country imagined by PAS, there is no room for a whisky brand named “Timah” in Malaysia. This is what PAS supporters were led to believe and the reason why some find it so uncomfortable for Malaysia to have produced an alcoholic spirit named after a Malay word.

As with the case of firefighter Muhammad Adib Mohd Kassim (Adib) and the infamous RUU355, this is a governing mismatch that PAS needs to contend itself with since they are now in government.

PAS is learning a painful lesson that while religious and race rhetoric may win votes in elections or tarnish the government, it is an unsustainable strategy if they harbour any aspiration to govern.

The tendency for political parties to govern moderately once they are in power also suggests that the country’s psyche is one that is pragmatic and moderate.

Therefore, in the “Timah” issue, Tuan Ibrahim, as a federal minister and arguably PAS’ most senior minister in the cabinet, has said that “Timah” means tin and has no Islamic connotations, a statement which contradicted that of PAS President Hadi Awang, who is only a special envoy to the Middle East, albeit one who enjoys ministerial benefits.

Yet, this would not sit well with those supporters who have previously bought into PAS arguments, and dissatisfaction towards PAS would only lead to even more populistic politics that is incompatible with the multi-ethnic fabric of this country.

PAS’ continuing mismatch between rhetoric and governance would only slowly but surely, lead to a shift in what is deemed politically acceptable to the mainstream population.

That is why Amanah’s overall response towards the controversy is particularly disappointing because it was seen as perpetuating an unhealthy discourse.

Instead of confronting the crux of the matter, which is defending the whisky brand “Timah”, they chose to battle it out with PAS in their familiar territory by emphasising that PAS is not Islamic enough.

Amanah has a point that PAS is hypocritical; imagine the response if the controversy had happened during PH’s tenure. But still, Amanah’s attempt to out-Islamise PAS on this occasion would only drag Malaysia further down the mire of faith-baiting politics.

Politically, Amanah does not derive any advantage as these are the same tropes that PAS had utilised when Amanah was in government.

The question is, would Amanah react differently if they were being confronted with the same problem while in government?

It is undisputedly clear that the “timah” incident is a form of bad karma politics, and it appears that both PAS and Amanah have not learned the lesson despite being given the responsibility to govern moderately. – October 24, 2021.

* Kenneth Cheng has always been interested in the interplay between human rights and government but more importantly he is a father of two cats, Tangyuan and Toufu. When he is not attending to his feline matters, he is most likely reading books about politics and human rights or playing video games. He is a firm believer in the dictum “power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will”.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.