Nurul Izzah

COMMENT | The latest Pakatan Harapan kerfuffle is the interview Nurul Izzah Anwar gave The Straits Times of Singapore, on how difficult it was working with a former dictator. Some Harapan political operatives are up in arms about this interview and are attacking Nurul Izzah and condemning her remarks as detrimental not only to the current prime minister and Harapan, but also to the country.

Meanwhile, the opposition, having nothing really to run but race and religion, are hoping to manipulate the situation and cause confusion in the enemy's ranks. Former PKR vice-president N Surendran gave a rather queer response to this interview. His response begins with a question – Is this acceptable? – and then he goes on to tweet that in the middle of a bilateral dispute, the timing, manner and platform were all wrong. What if there was no dispute between Malaysia and Singapore? Would Nurul Izzah’s comments be acceptable then?

The key point is the platform, I guess. For some, the Singapore press is not the place to wash our dirty linen. This is hypocritical, especially coming from people, who were on the sidelines for decades before the historic May 9 reversal of fortune, and who used every opportunity to voice their opinions, especially in the foreign press.

If an opposition MP had made a similar attack against former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak in the Singapore press, that MP would have been lauded. The then Umno establishment would be calling out such behaviour, but the opposition would throw their support behind the political operative citing freedom of speech and expression and seeing no wrong in speaking truth to power, even though the platform was the Singapore press.

Some will argue that the reason why Nurul Izzah is getting flak is because she is speaking as part of the establishment. Well, imagine if someone from the Najib regime was critical of the regime in the foreign press. You can bet your last ringgit that the then Opposition would be calling that political operative the last honest man or woman in BN and singing his or her praises.

The only people who are upset with Nurul are people who cannot make a rational defence of Harapan backtracking and diktats from the prime minister's office.

"Our Great Leader"

To brew real trouble, Nurul Izzah should have made these comments in the local media. That’s about the only issue I have with the MP. I would like her to have made those comments to the local Malay press, instead of the alternative press. I will take it a step further - I would like her to have made those comments to Bernama TV and would like to have seen a panel discussion about her comments. 

Talking to the foreign press in English cuts down on the audience which should be listening to the interview. In fact, the content of this interview has been overlooked in the hypocritical outrage that Nurul Izzah has, somehow, betrayed the country and Harapan.
Her comments were anything but immature. Immature are the comments from the defenders of the prime minister. 

Syed Saddiq, the youth and sports minister, rambles on about what a great leader the prime minister is, forgetting the fact that it was the prime minister who argued that the Harapan manifesto was written with the knowledge that it was a manifesto impossible to fulfil.

The affable Mat Sabu claims that, at times, Mahathir is too democratic - which, if that were the case, would mean that the reason why reforms have been sidelined is because a majority of Harapan political operatives have abandoned reforms.

Others have skipped defending Mahathir and gone straight for the ad hominem. Already the smear campaign is portraying Nurul Izzah and the Anwar clan as some sort of duplicitous pretenders to the throne when the reality is that the former prime minister and his boys are attempting to get the old gang together again. 

Should we question the motives of Nurul Izzah for her interview to The Straits Times? Of course we should. When political operatives give interviews, it is to gain publicity and send a message. What message was she sending and who was she sending this message to? PKR is riddled with internal schism and personality conflicts.

My take on comments that Anwar will be slaughtered soon, last December: “Maybe this is the deeper implication of this fight. Is Anwar relevant in this political climate? While the Harapan grand poohbah has his loyal and public admirers, Anwar does not, unfortunately. Nor does he have a legacy which he can shake off, unlike the old maverick. In other words, Anwar’s 'sins' are never forgiven, while Mahathir’s seem to be. And who are the other interested parties in the schisms of PKR? Who benefits most from this squabble? There are people in this government and outside of it who never really liked or trusted Anwar. They view his ascension to the highest office of the land as something calamitous.” 

Nurul Izzah's detractors do not want to address the deeper, more provocative aspects of her interview. If you read the spouting of Harapan political operatives, policy decisions begin and end with the current prime minister. Nobody seems interested in formulating policy or tackling issues without the backing of the prime minister. In the old days, he wielded brute power to get people in line, but these days it seems Harapan political operatives are just begging for his attention and his imprimatur. 

Another interesting part of the interview was this quote: “The government should take the lead in bridging differences among races, rather than stoking a further divide.”
How has the government been stoking the divide further? Anwar ‘s recent tweet is the opposite from his “don’t’ spook the Malays” - “It is politically convenient to rile people up. But I will not compromise on this issue – our economic agenda must be needs-based, not race-based. We must shed racial politics and fear-mongering in order for Malaysia to progress.” This, of course, runs contrary to Azmin Ali's unapologetic bumiputera economic policy. 

Nurul Izzah's critics want to limit her platform. People who are taking potshots at her and bending over backwards to justify the kind of behaviour they said would never happen in a Harapan regime are the charlatans who, unfortunately, play the game better with their slavish partisans. 

Questioning the motives of someone who is drawing attention to the rot in the system is the kind of strategy that enables the kind of politics Harapan claims it wants to depart from.