Russian Model as Palestinian Child Killed But Still Alive

COMMENT | On May 16, why did opposition MPs sign a letter meant to highlight the cause of Palestinians promising a myriad of policy initiatives that were unworkable for various reasons (refer to R Nadeswaran's excellent piece) and did so under the cover of anonymity?

Furthermore, calling for the boycott without having the gumption to carry out such policies (for oftentimes logical reasons) merely makes a mockery of the plight of the Palestinians and provides ammunition for those who claim that supporters of the cause are insincere.

All of this was done under the cover of anonymity and published in a mainstream news platform under the heading 'MP Speaks', which has been a platform for various political operatives across the political divide and serves as a direct conduit between an elected representative and the public he or she serves.

This last part is important because it means that elected representatives would be judged by their actions based on the words they claim define their agenda. 

What this means is that those MPs who signed this letter would be judged on their fidelity to the Palestinian cause by how they carried out this agenda in Parliament, but more importantly how they advocated redefining international and local partnerships based on the agenda of ending Israel’s apartheid policies.

I have no idea what these MPs meant by one of their demands of sending a peace envoy to Gaza. Do these people who signed this letter even understand what this entails? Do they understand what this means internationally when Malaysia has been a hotbed of anti-Semitic rhetoric by a former prime minister and mainstream Malaysian politicians?

This would also mean that the credibility of these MPs would be based on their record of rejecting systemic inequalities and apartheid-like policies wherever and whenever they encountered them. After all, you do not endorse a letter of such political and economic magnitude without having the cajones to back up your speech.

Or maybe you do.

I despise it whenever political operatives reduce issues to talking points and attempt to profit (politically) from international causes which cost them very little in political capital but merely serve to reinforce certain narratives and policy decisions based on nothing more than racial and religious agendas.

Dig a little deeper

By not signing their names to this letter, these opposition MPs have demonstrated that they are reluctant to publicly endorse policy initiatives because they know that it is either unfeasible or because it is damaging to the country's economic interests.

The only reason they signed it was because they wanted to take a position without actually having to defend it. All of this was merely a sandiwara to fulfil certain propagandistic obligations when it comes to sustaining mainstream political narratives with regard to the Palestinian issue.

And, of course, some of these “opposition MPs'' are worried about attaching their names to this letter. The discourse in this country falls not along ideological lines but rather racial and religious ones. 

The politically correct narrative is that we should all support the Palestinian cause but dig a little deeper and you will discover that many use the Palestinian quagmire as a proxy for their grievances against race and religion-based policies of this country.

When the special envoy to the Middle East Abdul Hadi Awang claims that non-Muslims should be “Pak Turut" decrying the loss of human rights of the Palestinians, not only is this hypocritical, it also points to the deeper divisions in this country which affect how we coalesce as a nation around specific issues.

The always provocative Siti Kasim said it best when it comes to this issue in a series of tweets:

“In Malaysia, it is selective humanity. The plight of a Palestinian is greater than that of an Afghan or a Yemeni. The killing of a Palestinian evokes more compassion than the gunning down of schoolgirls in Afghanistan.”

And when it came to the fact that a Hamas operative was trained here, she tweeted: “I guess nobody will be outraged with this revelation except people like me who think Hamas should not be supported. They are part of the problem with the suffering of the Palestinians and the Jews.”

Of course, this type of ideas is not part of the official and politically correct establishment narrative. What is are letters signed by these anonymous MPs, who hide behind their anonymity while reinforcing state narratives because they do not want to face public scrutiny and accountability for their words or actions.

Whatever your stand on this issue, this should be of concern to you. I admire politicians who stand by their views even when they know they are going to get hammered for them and even though they are advancing mainstream narratives.

What these MPs did was disingenuous. They did a great disservice to the cause they purportedly support, but you have to understand that these are just empty words that they could not be bothered to attach their names to. The Palestinians have the right to self-determination, but unfortunately, their cause and narrative are always conflated with issues that detract from their struggles.