PAKATAN Harapan parties are stating the obvious when they harp on the seeming instability in the federal government and that the state elections in Malacca and Johor are the work of the Umno “court cluster”.

Isn’t politics and decision-making in the framework of a government all about groups of individuals each trying to maximise their interests? 

Prior to May 2018, even though the country had been ruled by a single coalition for more than 60 years, it was accepted that Umno was the lynchpin of the coalition. Within Umno, a minority consisting of members of the economic elite and policy-making networks holds power. 

Through positions in the various government agencies and government-linked companies, this group can exert significant power over the policies of corporations and the government. These elites determine who rules, how the economy operates, and whether to allow competition for entities they own. 

This organisational structure has its downside, requiring huge amounts of money to maintain the factions and relationships with politicians, bureaucrats, and interest group. Many are led to believe that this is the root cause for the structural corruption in the country, which has increased in tenacity for the last 20 years or so.  

It is the framework upon which Umno is built. Obviously the members also benefit from a favourable electoral system, especially in the rural areas where their influence is the strongest.

Malaysians have always tended towards established parties such as Umno, PKR, MCA, MIC and DAP, which compete for the support of the fence-sitters while holding on to their loyal bases.

In fact, for the last 60 years – minus a temporary blip in May 2018 – BN has won every single general election. Electoral realignment appeared a forlorn dream. 

The political landscape has since evolved from a single dominant coalition to its present state where political power is and is likely to remain a continuous bargaining process between the various groups. 

It is thus of no surprise that Umno had been scheming to return to power since May 2018 and it succeeded in doing so in February 2020. 

What has been a surprise is the constant sniping by PH parties which blame Umno elites for wanting to win back power and whose efforts to do so have led to elections being called in Sabah, Malacca and now Johor.

Isn’t is natural for Umno to wish to have back the power it had enjoyed uninterrupted for 60 years? Political parties exist for the purpose of winning elections and it is natural for them to build coalitions across a wide range of partners who share similar ambitions.

PH has been doing the same. It has repeatedly tried to get back into Putrajaya since February 2020  but has unfortunately failed each time.

BN imploded with a spate of defections post May 2018 and has since had to answer for a string of legal proceedings against its leaders yet it remains stolid, having regrouped and strategised. 

PH also saw a string of defections but did it regroup and strategise post February 2020? 

When PH ascended to governance in 2018, analysts predicted a “sea change” in the country’s politics. Instead what we saw PH retreat into its shell.

PH has become so meek that it has even signed a MOU with the ruling coalition to support the government. Events that have transpired since the signing show that PH has once again been outmanoeuvred and outwitted by Umno with the government reneging on several agreements in the MOU.

A recent statement from the DAP national organising secretary expressed the hope that an arrangement can be made for the opposition to present a united front in the coming Johor elections. It appears that a trouncing awaits PH there as well. 

PH components appear reluctant to admit that they had failed in the two years when they were cast out into the wilderness by illegal manoeuvres. To save face against the drop in their approval ratings, they tried to shift blame away from themselves by bringing attention to the court cluster in Umno. 

Since PH’s loss of Putrajaya in 2018, it is evident that Umno has risen from the ashes. It has identified and aligned itself with issues that are important to voters. This is clear in the home runs BN has scored in every election held since May 2018, before the coalition was handed a free pass to return to Putrajaya by default. In the intervening elections, Umno and BN had provided choices on critical issues, in contrast to the then ruling coalition of PH. 

It appears that Umno is good at shape shifting. If voters tire of one version of the party, it pivots in another direction. It is like a Lazada or Shopee. You will find everything you want in Umno, and they will deliver your order to your house. People do not need opposition parties to offer something else.

When PH came into power in 2018, it said it would break up the “iron triangle” of Umno, the bureaucracy and vested interests. But they waffled on a slew of promises in their manifesto and the push for cuts in infrastructure spending sealed its impression as a bungling ruling coalition. The volatile manner in which PH pursued its “unachievable” policies never made any serious inroads into limiting bureaucrats’ power – which was never going to be easy to do - despite promising signs in the initial stage. Sidelining bureaucrats not only meant dealing with losing policymaking knowhow, but also the loss of crucial institutional support and goodwill among a powerful body of people.

PH was able to pull off a historic election victory but shortly after, the disparate origins of the coalition came back to haunt it. Since February 2020, events have made it harder for the coalition to capture voters’ attention. If PH leaders had been able to stay united, it could have stood up to the pressure from the bureaucracy and even the Sheraton move. Instead it suffered internal fragmentation and power struggles. 

Added to the fact that parties in PH failed to staunch membership losses post Feb 2020 indicate that each of the parties in the coalition needs to institute more internally deliberative procedures or discussion and debate among members and revitalize partisanship, which can potentially lower alienation from and indifference to their respective parties and reduce party system volatility. Greater internal party deliberation could make otherwise apartisan voters into more reliable supporters by satisfying their increasing demands for political participation.

PH should stop saving their face but place emphasis in highlighting economic policy differences with the government because economic policy convergence has been a key driver of voter dealignment and party system volatility. The leadership in PH should step out from their present `accustomed role’ of seeking a return to Putrajaya but to focus on representing the interests of the middle and lower class who are more attuned to collective values regardless of electoral consequences.

With PH’s declining’ influence and accompanying voter hostility to all political parties, unless they re-energize their connections to voters, PH could see the emergence of new parties continuously in the future that would challenge the 2 party systems.

As it is now, Malaysians have low political expectations of their leaders. They do not rely on them and instead do things for themselves, as shown by the white flag movement #kitajagakita . 

If PH continues to play the blame game on the court cluster, politics in the country will continue to drift. And the ruling elite will do little more than follow its meandering course. – January 27, 2022.

*FLK reads The Malaysian Insight.