Non-Malay politicians act as if they have no power, or when they attempt to use it, they are vilified by being labelled anti-Malay, at which point they fold and conform to official state and federal religious and ethnic narratives of superiority.

In Pakatan Harapan’s brief tenure in the federal government, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad publicly castrated Lim Guan Eng when he said that Lim had to run everything through him before he made any important decisions.

There was a concerted effort to give the Malays more at the expense of the Chinese community, but nothing could be said at the time because this would upset the DAP’s non-Malay base.

This is how the Malay establishment wants it. Read Aminuddin Yahaya’s piece in Malaysiakini back in 2020 - “MCA boleh jatuhkan kerajaan Melayu-Islam?”

What the author describes in his piece is what the Malay establishment wants from its non-Malay partners. What they want is subservience.

Aminuddin is gleeful of the fact that the MCA only survived because Umno breathed life into it, and bemoans the fact that even though the MCA relies on Malay-dominated polities, they continue insulting the Malay uber alles government with the interests of the community they represent.

He even makes the point that the MCA, in order to get back Chinese support, mimics the DAP.

“Pada PRU 14, MCA sebenarnya sudah mati tetapi diberi nafas kembali oleh Umno. Ini kerana lebih 90 peratus daripada masyarakat Cina sudah menyokong DAP melalui PH dan menolak MCA. MCA yang memang sudah sekian lama terdesak mahu memenangi kembali hati pengundi Cina, mereka sanggup berbuat apa sahaja termasuklah ‘berperangai’ seperti DAP.”

(In GE14, MCA already met its end but was given a new breath of life by Umno. This is because more than 90 percent of the Chinese community is already supporting DAP through Harapan and has rejected MCA. MCA has indeed long been desperate to win back Chinese voters’ hearts; they are willing to do whatever it takes, including ‘acting’ like DAP.)

Ideals clash with reality

The non-Malay political narrative post-May 13 has been one of backpedalling, reversals, sycophancy, and Orwellian doublespeak because the weight of expectations collided with the realpolitik of Malay rule.

Deputy Investment, Trade and Industry Minister Liew Chin Tong’s description of how the DAP gave everything to then-home minister Muhyiddin Yassin, but it wasn’t enough, points to how non-Malay political operatives were desperate for some sort of consensus or compromise, but this still made them targets of opportunity for the Malay establishment.

The DAP, which should have been an outspoken political bloc in the regime, is neutered by Umno and sidelined by the chief executive because Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim understands that the very appearance of relying on them or defiance from them would be bad optics for the voting base he wants to cultivate.

We see all these non-Malay political operatives in government at the state and federal levels, but what changes have they made to the way this country is governed?

Partisans have this really dumb line about how non-Malay politicians are “hard working”, and you have to ask yourself what exactly they are working hard for, or better yet, who are they working hard for?

Some non-Malay partisans are contributing to the racist narrative that non-Malay politicians ab initio are hardworking compared to their lazy Malay counterparts. The reality, of course, is all these politicians are doing is nurturing a conducive ecosystem of political and corporate malfeasance.

These days, the DAP seems to be the connective tissue between the mainstream Malay establishment and the plutocratic class rather than the connective tissue between democratic ideas and their non-Malay base.

What other choice do we have?

The reality, of course, is that all these politicians are doing is nurturing a conducive ecosystem of political and corporate malfeasance.

During election season, all these non-Malay political operatives start banging the drum when it comes to issues facing the non-Malay communities, and of course, the threat of the Green Wave is shouted from the rooftops of Putrajaya and urban and semi-urban centres.

Anwar is very well aware that although non-Malays rant and rave on social media, the reality is that when it comes to the ballot box, they will vote for his proxies because they believe that, as flawed as he is, there is no alternative.

Rational Malaysians have to understand that it is pointless to be in any kind of supremacist government because the price of admission is subservience. Better to be on the outside on your feet than inside on your knees.

The problem is, being on your knees inside gets you paid. As it is, non-Malay governing seems more like gaslighting for entrenched supremacist interests.

I truly believe when non-Malays realise that it is better to have a strong opposition voicing baseline democratic ideas and not be involved in the current swamp of policymaking and becoming contributors to the swamp, there will truly be a movement of reform for rational Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or class.

This is what mainstream Malay politicians fear.

DAP lawmaker Teresa Kok was chastised by the prime minister over her comments on halal certification, even though her comments were, in fact, taking into account the hardship faced by small Malay businesses and the economic effects mandatory halal certification would have on them.

So, even when DAP voices out concern, which would help the Malay community, it is demonised, and more often than not, the head of Madani would side with the far-right ethnocentric agitators who really do nothing for the Malay community.

The big July meeting is approaching, and what is DAP going to do? The deadline was already kind of a joke because if you announce ahead that you are not willing to let Madani fall, then you are telling everyone that there is nothing serious about this deadline.

DAP, through its minions online, always harasses and attempts to deflect from its failings. DAP asks if not a unity government, who else? Would you rather see Perikatan Nasional take over?

Ok, hold it right there, you disingenuous cretins. DAP has worked with every race-based party that has come into existence, so do not for one minute think this card plays with rational people.

Look at Umno. A party in a weaker position, which is running roughshod over DAP while the prime minister does nothing to help his loyal reformasi ally, not to mention Umno’s brazen moves in Johor, which should tell rational Malaysians what Umno thinks of Madani.

And let us not forget this manufactured pig farming controversy. Selangor BN information chief Jamal Yunos said DAP representative Wong Siew Ki “can leave Selangor if she does not want to abide by the decree of his royal highness”, even though his party has historically curtailed the powers of the royalty.

The Umno rejects, or those ejected from the party, had also openly defied the royalty. Former Umno bigwig, now Bersatu president, publicly said, “No matter what the purpose is, we will not agree to it. So when I was asked to sign the offer letter, I signed ‘disagreed’.”

DAP demonised

DAP representatives have been vilified. DAP representatives and ministers had police reports made against them. DAP representatives had their cars firebombed.

DAP representatives have been reprimanded by the prime minister of their coalition and forced to make retractions and apologies.

At this point, if DAP said, “We are not going to leave Anwar hanging, but we are going to relinquish all posts at the state and federal level and leave it to people who defend race and religion to lead this country,” I would be okay with that.

Why? Because it affords a shred of dignity in how non-Malays view this fiasco, which is Madani. And if Madani were to carry out reforms genuinely, it would have the electoral power of DAP backing its political plays.

This is what these Malay uber alles politicians want, right? They want to demonise DAP or have the party kowtow to them, so do not play their game.

And maybe the rakyat would understand what happens if a PN-like government takes over. We saw how that went when Muhyiddin Yassin and Ismail Sabri Yaakob were in charge.

I keep watching that old Karpal Singh clip during the Perak crisis back in the day, where he said, “Anwar has created enough trouble for the country. Anwar must repent,” and “PKR and DAP have fallen to the temptation and even followed Anwar’s rhetoric in supporting crossovers, and some have not said a word when they ought to have all this while.”

History really is prologue.

Initially, I wanted to suggest that DAP sit out GE16 altogether, but after further thought, a minimum level of representation is needed to ensure the party is kept abreast of happenings in the august house.

And we also need some opposition members (yes, I am expecting DAP to head this way) to sit in the parliamentary special select committees to scrutinise bills.

The same goes for state assemblies. Just nominate candidates for safe seats and pray for the best.

Being in the opposition would allow DAP time to do some soul-searching and reconnect with its grassroots, which it had long abandoned after tasting federal power.

It will also help the party reassess ties with its allies, which brings me to my next point.

Leave Harapan, or ditch PKR

PKR is now a liability for the entire Harapan coalition, and we can thank the PKR president for this.

DAP leaders have stood by Anwar since 1998, rain or shine, only to get a raw deal despite having the power to make or break the coalition government.

While DAP did its best to keep the coalition government intact, to the extent of not only embarrassing itself but also alienating its voter base, Anwar took the party’s sacrifice for granted and did his best to squander it.

Plus, ditching PKR would also help DAP find new allies that are more in tune with its progressive principles and perhaps be part of a new coalition that is truly committed to taking Malaysia forward.

And we desperately need such leadership and new ideas as the geopolitical scenario has changed dramatically, and we need leaders who can prepare the country for present and future challenges.

Loke must go

Removing Anthony Loke from the secretary-general post is a no-brainer, and there is little need for further elaboration.

But in addition to Loke, all DAP leaders holding cabinet portfolios and state exco posts should also be removed.

Let’s be blunt here. While Loke should take responsibility for DAP’s current predicament, the party’s ministers and excos are equally guilty of throwing mud at the progressive forces that elevated them to power.

Following their departure, reorganise the party from top to bottom, go back to its founding roots, and move forward.

Now, I have given some ideas on how DAP could not only salvage itself but also become stronger for the 17th general election.

The question is, would the party listen? I doubt it.

The state can use the Land Acquisition Act to take over the site, since a hospital is obviously a “public purpose”. If this freelance journalist can find the place with a 10-minute Google search, it’s mind-boggling to think that the Pakatan Harapan state government can’t.

There are also derelict industrial land plots near PJ Old Town, with some as large as 50,000 to 150,000sq ft. Just two or three of these will come to2ha. The private Beacon Hospital is also located in this area.

Worst-case scenario, there are other green areas in Puchong and Petaling Jaya for a hospital – for example, the huge Padang Astaka, behind the Tun Hussein Onn National Eye Hospital.

It’s a shame to lose a green area, but arguably, a hospital is more important. In any case, there is another field called Padang Timur nearby.

So there are many alternatives – unless the politicians want to sell these lands cheaply to developers, as happened with the Ayer Hitam forested areas in Puchong.

If such shady deals take priority over public wellbeing, then Putrajaya should at least step in to reduce steep charges at the Universiti Malaya Medical Centre, where one night in a four-bedded ward costs a whopping RM300, much more than private hospitals.

UMMC is under the Higher Education Ministry, and it’s galling to think that patients are being squeezed to pay the salaries of “kangkung professors”, such as those who claim that the Romans learned shipbuilding from the Malays.

Ayer Hitam forest fiasco

And now we come to the third own goal. Subang MP Wong Chen has urged the Selangor government to explain why 68ha of land in or adjacent to the Ayer Hitam Forest Reserve had been sold to Jakel Group at a low price of only RM13.80psf.

Amirudin replied that a “property consultant” had assessed the land value at RM13psf. But hello, that was way back in 2012 lah. Obviously, prices have risen since then.

Wong has been asking when the land was sold to Jakel, but there has been no answer.

What are prices now? A simple Google search reveals the answers quickly.

For example, the nearby Aseana Puteri condo sells units at a median price of RM420psf according to the Property Guru website. Multiply that by 20 floors of the condo.

Or take the nearby terrace houses of Puteri 8 in Puchong, which sell for between RM600 and RM700psf, according to Iproperty.

Obviously, that is way above the measly RM13.80psf Jakel paid. The ever honest menteri besar said that 75 percent of the land is “unsuitable for development” as there are Class 3 and 4 steep slopes. If so, why was the land sold?

Is Jakel building an “eco education centre” to augment the very popular Bukit Wawasan hiking trails there? Or will they build lucrative condos, even though this will destroy the existing forests and cause soil erosion?

Compromise with greed

But I grudgingly accept that politicians and developers have a sweet tooth, or lips, for each other. I was involved in trying to save the Shah Alam Community Forest and saw various smokescreens and obstacles thrown up by the Selangor Harapan government.

Even a faulty forest degazettement was fixed – by backdating it 22 years to the glorious era when Umno ruled Selangor. That’s when I had to admit that Harapan in Selangor was turning into BN 2.0.

Wong and Lee, who are both in Rafizi’s reformist group, propose that the state government buy back the land. Sadly, this probably won’t happen as Jakel will demand its pound of flesh.

Perhaps a more realistic option is for the state to impose tight conditions for development. A compromise solution is to preserve 80 percent of the forest while allowing condos around its fringe.

The condos will carry a premium price as residents have serene forest views and fresh air, plus a nature getaway in their backyard. They will have the same pristine setting as condos next to Bukit Gasing and the Kota Damansara Community Forest.

It’s a win-win-win solution that caters to developers’ and politicians’ vested interests while saving most of the forest. Will the Selangor government do it to avoid further damage to its reputation?

Its three own goals only add to voters' anger about other broken reformasi promises – be it curbing corruption or racial hate speech.

I was a supporter of Anwar before and even attended Harapan rallies in the rain. But I am now very disappointed, especially with PKR or Parti Kelentong Rakyat (Bluffing People’s Party).

The final whistle for elections is coming. Can the PKR-led Selangor government recover after repeatedly shooting itself in the foot?

“We run a statistically competent national and local poll every month. We track a question on which parties are supported. Harapan, BN, and PN have about equal support, plus or minus two percentage points.

“’Not sure’ (answer) is the most ticked and has been growing since October, accounting for 32 percent. The remaining 68 percent is divided amongst the three.

“We wanted to know there was empirical evidence for our hypothesis (that a new party was needed). By February, we knew there was a market for a new party.”

He said political analysis is simplistic - historical.

“We have validated demand and interest in a new segment - it is there. We will cross 20,000 members in a week - that’s not bad. In PKR, if we got 5,000 members in a week, that would be fantastic.”

The membership rose to 16,000 over four days. It includes PAS sympathisers, former Harapan supporters, and some Umno supporters as well.

“We are getting interest from a wide section. We ask for a declaration of age, race, previous parties, etc. The majority are those who have not belonged to a party. We will get a breakdown in a week.

“Many were unexpected - ex-colleagues from Petronas, one of them a CEO (in one of the companies), who retired 10 years ago. We can’t use previous figures to assess our chances. We are sure we won’t lose our deposits,” he quipped.

The immediate question is how much progress the party will make in the coming election. That will decide much of its future. But first, Rafizi has to secure his former constituency, Pandan, where an interesting development is unfolding.

Initial panic

The initial panic among PKR and Anwar is already reflected in the party president focusing attention on Pandan, Rafizi’s constituency before he resigned recently as MP. If you get Rafizi down, then the movement is nipped in the bud.

Anwar has brought former Umno member and investment, trade and industry minister, Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz, to Pandan. Most likely, it will be Zafrul who will contest against Rafizi, but it does not seem likely that the former has a good chance of winning.

Harapan's Dzulkefly Ahmad retained his Kuala Selangor seat in November 2022 after a tough challenge from Zafrul. The former health minister polled 31,033 votes to Zafrul's 30,031 for a majority of 1,002.

Remember, Zafrul was in Umno at that time. But Anwar let him continue as a minister through an appointment to the Senate. He was forced to step down when his six-year term with the Senate expired in December 2025.

Despite that, Zafrul was appointed senior political adviser to the prime minister for a two-year term starting in March and Malaysian Investment Development Authority chairperson, serving a two-year term that began in December last year.

Zafrul’s rapid rise

Zafrul became a PKR member in July 2025 following his resignation from Umno shortly before, in a move, together with a rapid rise in party ranks, that attracted animosity and criticism from long-time PKR members.

Zafrul has been cultivating Pandan already, now with Anwar’s direct help, with the clear intention to topple Rafizi in the next election and get himself a parliamentary seat.

But that’s not going to be easy with Rafizi’s popularity increasing and many seeing him as the last hope for an equitable Malaysia.

A lot will depend on election timing. If it is at full term, that will give Bersama time to organise, get members and raise money, which will mean it can gain considerable strength and contest many seats.

For that reason alone, an election is likely to be early despite public pronouncements that component parties have committed to supporting the Madani government to the end of the full term.

Bersama has the potential to take things far. It is extremely unlikely to win this round of elections, but it is likely to build a base, perhaps up to 30 seats. Anything much above that seems unlikely, although not impossible.

Cultivate Pandan

Rafizi and Nik Nazmi have captured the imagination of many Malaysians with their grand, some will say grandiose, visions. But one piece of advice, Rafizi should make sure he cultivates Pandan to ensure he is there to fight the battle.

Remember Nurul Izzah Anwar, against all expectations, lost in Permatang Pauh, thought to be a PKR and Anwar stronghold, to PAS’ Fawwaz Jan at GE15, defeated by a majority of 5,272 votes, securing 32,366 votes against Fawwaz's 37,638.

Rafizi needs to be there to fight the good fight, but he has to win at Pandan, where PKR will put all its resources into defeating him. At the same time, he needs to work to put in a significant number of MPs to be, hopefully, kingmakers at least.

He is saying all the right things: “We can’t continue as before, there has to be change - in the economy, education, wages and others. Anwar has not succeeded in handling racial issues because he is tiptoeing around Umno.

“We need a unity dept to handle this, the PM must chair this and do things. We have it for the economy, why not here? Bring everyone down to common ground.”

Rafizi said that there are 10 MPs with “our own views, we hold the 10 MPs card”, referring to how the bloc can be used to stop legislation and gain concessions.

“We know the leverage of a small party. You have to know your strength and leverage it to pressure the government. Pushing our agenda is more important than going for seats. We intend to disrupt, not to take control,” he added.

If anybody can disrupt, Rafizi can. But in the long run, we hope that he can do more than that. Let’s have some patience. Malaysia won’t be rebuilt in a day.

Lawyers Ambiga Sreenevasan and N Surendran demanded that Anwar withdraw his remarks as the directive was unprecedented and had serious consequences.

“For starters, only a court can declare with finality that a temple is occupying land illegally, and a court order is required before it can be demolished. In no circumstances can temple management be labelled trespassers, and police action taken against them,” they said.

But vigilante groups were already on the prowl. A temple in Rawang was demolished, a rally was organised, and other minor incidents were reported.

‘Misconstrued’

On May 10, Anwar appeared to acknowledge that some of his remarks about Hindu temples had been perceived as tacit support for hostility directed at the Indian community.

Speaking to Indian students at Universiti Malaya, Anwar suggested that his call for stern enforcement against houses of worship built without permits may have been “misconstrued”, describing such interpretations as attempts to sow division.

Anwar had faced criticism from leaders within the Indian Malaysian community, who argued that his use of the term “kuil haram” (illegal temples) could be seen as endorsing unilateral action.

At the same event, he announced that the allocation for the Malaysian Indian Transformation Unit (Mitra) had been increased from RM100 million to RM150 million.

He was in an apologetic mood, acknowledging his imperfections while reaffirming his commitment to carrying the responsibility entrusted to him.

“I realise that no human being is perfect, and there are still shortcomings within myself that I constantly reflect upon.

“However, I continue to shoulder this responsibility with all my heart and soul, because every step taken is to ensure that the future of the nation and homeland will always be protected,” he said.

Then, on Saturday, speaking at the Madani Harmony Discourse, he called on the peace-loving majority to speak up against narratives of hatred and slander being propagated by a minority group against society in the country.

He said the situation appeared to reflect a “tyranny of the minority”, where a small group of loud, angry individuals who spread slander were attempting to impose their will on the majority of the people.

“Now, it is the noisy minority - angry, cruel, and stirring up emotions. They gather, sow hatred, spread slander, and instil fear in others. This seems like a tyranny of the minority. The oppression and cruelty of a small group forcing the larger group (majority).”

What more can people do?

But on how many occasions has he sung the same song? Countless times, he made the same threat - don’t touch on race, religion, and royalty but it has not abated.

On the contrary, the tempo has increased, especially on social media, which has become a snake pit of sorts for racist remarks.

Many, including this writer, have repeatedly spoken up against the escalation of racist remarks, and many have made police reports. What more can be done if action is not taken?

Lack of enforcement and, in some cases, selective prosecution have caused religious extremists and racists to accelerate their display of hatred.

Anwar’s shifting tone - from arrogance to apology, from “victory” to victimhood - only underscores the government’s failure to enforce some laws fairly and consistently.

When temples are singled out while other illegal structures remain untouched, when threats against minorities are tolerated, but criticism of leaders is swiftly acted upon, the message is unmistakable - selective prosecution is not a peculiarity; it is the operating principle.

Until enforcement is blind to race, religion, and political convenience, we will remain trapped in a cycle where extremists thrive, minorities feel besieged, and the prime minister will go unheard against the din of unchecked hatred.

Blinkered justice

Anwar’s rhetoric, from declaring “victory” over a century-old temple to pleading that his words were “misconstrued”, is more than a matter of tone.

It exposes a deeper malaise: a government that speaks of unity while practising division, that warns against racial and religious provocation while leaving enforcement conveniently selective.

By branding temples “illegal” while thousands of unlicensed eateries and workshops escape scrutiny, the administration signals that the law is not blind but blinkered.

Each apology, each new allocation, each call for harmony rings hollow when there is unequal treatment and unchecked hostility.

The prime minister’s refrain about the “tyranny of the minority” is itself a paradox. If extremists are truly a minority, why does their venom dominate the discourse?

Because selective prosecution has emboldened them, and silence from institutions has given them space to thrive. Social media, left unpoliced, has become the echo chamber of hate, while temples become the scapegoats of enforcement.

What the nation needs is consistency: a rule of law applied without fear or favour, a government that protects all communities equally, and a prime minister whose words do not inflame divisions but extinguish them.

Furthermore, it was Umno which curtailed the powers of the royalty under former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad. It was probably the one utilitarian thing the party did, no doubt for self-serving reasons.

Where does Bersama stand?

I do not care which DAP faction Pua belongs to because I believe that the party has become part of the problem.

What I want to know is where Bersama stands on issues that affect the country, like fidelity to the Constitution.

Rafizi said, “We don’t care if the seats are held by PKR, DAP, Amanah, Bersatu, or Umno - if there is a need for us to fight, we will do so.” What does this mean?

Honestly, nearly every seat has been infected by Madani’s neo-BN-ism. How would this translate when it comes to his belief in multiethnic middle-ground politics?

To this, we should add that when Rafizi criticises PKR, it is welcomed with open arms, but supposing he is critical of the DAP, then what happens?

Data determining where candidates are fielded sounds suspect.

The urban areas, for instance, are rife with political and corporate corruption, which determines a kind of bureaucratic mafia controlled by ruling regimes, which is ultimately destroying this country.

And yet, urban voters, especially non-Malays, are willing to throw in their lot with legacy parties for various reasons.

Do not get me wrong. I will be more than happy if Bersama breaks up the monopoly in urban and semi-urban areas because power and policies flow down from these areas.

If Bersama even becomes a fly in the ointment that powers the gravy train, which is what is destroying the majority community, this would be a welcome change from what we have now.

Indeed, what we are witnessing is that our urban and semi-urban areas, which used to be somewhat progressive enclaves, are slowly succumbing to the religiosity of Madani.

Take the recent alarm raised by Petaling Jaya MP Lee Chean Chung about the guidelines regarding non-Malay houses of worship.

As usual, we are told these guidelines are suspended pending review, but it is the old game being played over and over again.

It might just work

If Bersama walks the progressive talk and the majority community sees leaders who are willing to slay sacred cows for the betterment of all Malaysians, who knows, this may affect the local politics of rural areas.

The majority have never really had an alternative when it comes to mainstream politics. While the non-Malays had to choose the lesser of two evils, the majority, for whatever reasons, were content with the status quo.

Except now, geopolitics is changing everything so fast, and the economic competition brought upon by migrant workers and encroachment into traditional Malay domains is fueling resentment.

Let us not forget that Nik Nazmi understands that appealing to the Malay far-right is not a viable strategy, especially since Perikatan Nasional does that so well.

“At the end of the day, we can’t outflank PN in terms of playing the Malay or Islam card, because we know that that is their comparative advantage in a way.”

Nik Nazmi’s words were prophetic when he said this about PKR: “It’s always a challenging balancing act, and I think PKR feels it the most. We get squeezed out in the middle because our constituencies are multiracial.

“For many political parties, they have easy template answers or solutions. But for PKR, we can’t, because, you know, we have people who are very, very liberal on one end and you have people who are quite conservative on the other in our constituency.”

Now we have Bersama, which is supposed to be unabashedly progressive, which means there should be no balancing act.

Same old, same old doesn’t cut it

This is an important point because the mainstream political establishment is going to attack Bersama by trolling them on race and religion issues.

Blaming Umno or even the prime minister just doesn’t cut it. We do not need a collection of political types coming out and spewing bromides.

What is needed are leaders who are unafraid to speak out against those seeking to inflame communal tensions.

We need leaders who would understand that these so-called fringe voices are merely parroting mainstream policies of racial and religious superiority.

Keep in mind that policy decisions and implementation are based on race and religion, and it remains to be seen if Bersama will face these issues head-on or will quibble, which means it is not really on a kamikaze mission.

Rafizi seems to understand this. In 2017, he said that in order to save Malaysia, the Malays must be won over.

“We are partly responsible for the predicament we are in because we have taken the approach that they don’t understand. The more we talk down to them, the more they don’t trust us.

“We just have to convince the people enough that we can do a better job. We must honestly accept failings and offer solutions that may be controversial.”

If Bersama is really on a kamikaze mission, it would offer controversial solutions, which may even be controversial to the non-Malays.

Rational Malaysians have heard feel-good rhetoric, but action is what saves a country.

In September 2025, he declared: “We must firmly reject any form of extremism or fanaticism that could jeopardise our unity. Inclusivity in Sarawak is not merely a slogan; it’s a way of life.”

He further stressed that the government under his leadership remains deeply committed to honouring and celebrating Sarawak’s rich religious and cultural diversity (Borneo Post Online, Sept 15, 2025).

These are not empty slogans. They are reflected in governance practices, institutional arrangements, and public policy.

Perhaps the clearest example is the establishment of the Unit for Other Religions (Unifor), which provides direct state assistance to non-Islamic religious bodies for the construction, repair, and maintenance of churches, temples, and other places of worship.

For 2026, the Sarawak government allocated RM120 million under Unifor to support non-Islamic religious communities, reaffirming its commitment to religious harmony and inclusivity (Dayak Daily, May 20, 2026).

This initiative is profoundly significant within the Malaysian context. While religious issues in parts of Peninsular Malaysia are often politicised and exploited to generate division and suspicion, Sarawak has institutionalised interfaith respect through state policy itself.

Abang Johari has also openly reaffirmed Sarawak’s multicultural and multi-religious character. He affirmed that non-Muslims in Sarawak were free to use the word “Allah” in their religious practices and publications, wisely reiterating that politicians should focus on major public issues instead of quarrelling over the usage of the word “Allah”(MalaysiaNow, April 6, 2021).

He has likewise maintained Sarawak’s opposition to the implementation of the hudud law, recognising the state’s unique social fabric and constitutional realities.

Emergence of Bangsa Sarawak

Under Abang Johari’s leadership, Sarawak has increasingly strengthened a shared sense of Bangsa Sarawak - a common Sarawakian identity that transcends ethnic and religious boundaries.

In Sarawak, Muslims routinely attend Christmas celebrations, Christians participate in Hari Raya gatherings, and people of different ethnic and religious backgrounds generally interact with a degree of ease and mutual respect that has sadly become less common in parts of Peninsular Malaysia.

Abang Johari himself highlighted this social reality when he remarked that “only in Sarawak do we find Christian and Muslim families living under one roof” (Dayak Daily, Dec 24, 2022).

More recently, he described Sarawak as a “convergence point” capable of helping move Malaysia forward through religious harmony and inclusivity (Borneo Post Online, April 26, 2026).

Sarawak is certainly not free from challenges. Rural development gaps, indigenous land issues, and socioeconomic inequalities still require continued attention.

Nevertheless, and most importantly, the state has largely avoided the severe racial and religious bickering that periodically destabilises Peninsular Malaysia and holds us back from advancing into a mature society.

The Sarawak governance model did not happen accidentally. It required political leadership that consciously refused to inflame communal sentiments for political advantage.

Economic transformation, shared prosperity

Abang Johari’s leadership also demonstrates that social harmony and economic development are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, they reinforce one another.

Under his administration, Sarawak has embarked on one of the most ambitious socio-economic transformation programmes in Malaysia. His government has aggressively pursued digitalisation, renewable energy, hydrogen technology, infrastructure development, food security, and high-value industrial investment.

Sarawak is increasingly positioning itself as a regional leader in green energy and the digital economy.

The results have been impressive. Sarawak first achieved high-income status in 2022, with gross national income (GNI) per capita reaching RM56,213. The figure rose to RM70,536 in 2023 and further to RM73,100 in 2024, enabling Sarawak to maintain a high-income status for three consecutive years.

State revenue also increased dramatically. In 2024, Sarawak recorded a historic revenue of RM14.2 billion - approximately double the figure before Abang Johari became chief minister in 2017.

Infrastructure development has accelerated significantly, particularly in rural areas long neglected in the past. Major investments in roads, bridges, water supply, electricity, telecommunications, and digital connectivity have strengthened economic opportunities and improved living standards across the state.

Sarawak has also invested heavily in education and human capital development. Among the most notable initiatives is the Free Tertiary Education Scheme beginning in 2026, with an initial allocation of RM250 million.

The scheme will cover approved programmes at state-owned higher education institutions and seeks to expand access to quality education for Sarawakians.

These initiatives reflect a broader philosophy of developmental inclusivity - namely, that progress must benefit ordinary people across communities rather than merely enrich political or economic elites.

Peninsula’s entrenched communal politics

The contrast between Sarawak’s relatively inclusive and moderate political culture and developments in parts of Peninsular Malaysia is difficult to ignore.

For decades, communal politics have remained deeply entrenched in the peninsula. Political parties and pressure groups frequently mobilise support through ethnic insecurities, religious exclusivism, and fear-based narratives.

Issues involving ethnicity, religion, language, education, and even culture are routinely politicised. Public discourse has become increasingly polarised.

This has significantly hindered the emergence of a genuine Bangsa Malaysia consciousness rooted in shared citizenship, constitutionalism, justice, and common destiny.

Instead of nurturing a common Malaysian identity, divisive politics have often reinforced communal boundaries. Meritocracy is frequently viewed through ethnic lenses. Religious moderation is sometimes portrayed as weakness. Calls for inclusivity are occasionally attacked as threats to ethnic or religious supremacy.

Such politics may produce short-term electoral gains, but they carry enormous long-term national costs. They weaken social cohesion, undermine trust between communities, discourage national integration, and erode confidence among many Malaysians - especially younger generations who increasingly aspire towards a more inclusive and progressive national identity.

Lessons for national leaders

Sarawak under Abang Johari offers important lessons for the rest of Malaysia.

First, nation-building must transcend communal politics. Leaders must stop treating ethnicity and religion primarily as instruments of political mobilisation.

Second, inclusivity must extend beyond rhetoric into institutions, policies, and governance practices. Sarawak’s support for all religious communities through Unifor demonstrates how governments can actively institutionalise interfaith respect and equitable treatment.

Third, moderation is not weakness. Sarawak’s relative harmony and stability have strengthened social cohesion, investor confidence, and long-term development.

Fourth, leaders must articulate a clear and compelling shared vision. Abang Johari’s emphasis on shared Sarawakian identity demonstrates how leaders can inspire collective belonging without marginalising minorities.

Finally, Malaysia’s future depends upon whether it can evolve from communal nationhood towards civic nationhood - from narrow ethnic politics towards a truly inclusive Bangsa Malaysia consistent with the spirit of the Federal Constitution and the aspirations of the nation’s founders.

Paradigm shift urgently needed

Malaysia urgently needs a paradigm shift: from communal nationhood to civic nationhood; from religious extremism to religious harmony; from mediocrity to excellence; and from national drift to a clear, compelling, and unifying national vision.

Our nation is crying out for courageous, principled, visionary, and inclusive leadership - leadership prepared to rise above communal politics and genuinely promote justice, moderation, shared prosperity, and national cohesion.

At a time when parts of Peninsular Malaysia continue to grapple with growing ethnic and religious polarisation, Sarawak’s model of inclusive governance and shared nation-building offers more than a source of hope.

It provides a practical example of how moderation, mutual respect, equitable treatment, and a common civic identity can help build the Bangsa Malaysia we have long aspired to achieve.

This is why the concern of the Chinese community matters.

It was not simply “we want pig farms”, but whether the current political leadership still knew how to manage the sensitive relationships, Islam, bureaucracy, and minority anxieties, without turning every sensitive issue into a public cultural confrontation.

Not wrong, but perhaps misjudged

DAP’s response was predictable. Seri Kembangan assemblyperson Wong Siew Ki argued that modern farming could address environmental concerns, while the party’s secretary-general, Anthony Loke, stressed that elected representatives had the right to raise policy matters.

Former DAP leader Ronnie Liu later suggested a judicial review, while former Damansara MP Tony Pua framed the issue around constitutional monarchy and constitutional supremacy.

Legally, those arguments were not baseless, but politics in Malaysia has rarely been governed by legal reasoning alone.

The Rukun Negara itself reflects this tension. It contains not only the principles of constitutional supremacy and the rule of law, but also loyalty to king and country, courtesy, and morality.

That is precisely why the sultan’s response resonated strongly among many Malays. The palace was speaking in the language of adab (manners), dignity, and cohesion. Pua was replying in the language of constitutional boundaries.

To DAP’s core supporters, that sounded principled. To more moderate Chinese, it risked turning their lifestyles and culture into political controversy. To many Malays, it sounded like publicly challenging the sultan.

That is the gap.

DAP’s recent posture in Negeri Sembilan sharpened the contrast. There, Loke defended the dignity of the monarchy during a royal dispute.

Legally, the positions were not necessarily inconsistent. But to the critics, DAP defended royal dignity only when it supported their agenda.

Keeping all sides mollified

This is where BN-era statecraft becomes relevant. Its strength was never merely that it was “pro-Raja”; many parties can shout “Daulat Tuanku”.

Its real advantage, developed over decades of governance, was that it understood the informal machinery of Malaysia: palace protocol, Malay sentiment, minority reassurance, bureaucratic compromise and private negotiation.

The old BN model was imperfect, often opaque, and criticised for patronage, but it was built around multi-ethnic power-sharing under Umno dominance.

University of Melbourne political scientist Sebastian Dettman has noted that BN projected a multiracial governing structure while accommodating minority interests through MCA and MIC.

Sunway University political scientist Wong Chin Huat similarly links Malaysia’s political stability to coalition management and negotiated coexistence.

The practical effect was this: sensitive matters were often settled before they exploded.

An Umno menteri besar could speak to the palace quietly. MCA leaders could raise Chinese concerns without making the monarchy lose face. Civil servants could search for compromises. Public statements could be kept respectful. Minority anxieties were handled without inviting a Malay backlash.

Nobody had to win loudly because nobody was forced to lose publicly. That is what my Chinese friend was really saying.

He was not asking political leaders to fight for the existence of pig farms or to secure pork supplies.

He was asking whether the current political class still knows how to negotiate sensitive matters without making minorities feel culturally cornered or Malays feel that their institutions are being publicly challenged.

What Harapan is missing

This concern should not be dismissed as a narrow debate over pig farms or pork supply. It is about cultural autonomy, business predictability, and confidence that non-Muslim life will not suddenly be reclassified as a political problem.

BN-era statecraft understood how to protect Islam, the monarchy, and Malay institutions while also keeping Malaysia liveable, predictable, and fair for non-Muslim communities.

For Pakatan Harapan and DAP, the public constitutional argument may satisfy a core support base, but if every sensitive dispute becomes a public duel with royal institutions and Malay-Muslim sentiment, then minority concerns may become more exposed to backlash.

You may win the applause of hardcore loyal supporters, but risk weakening national harmony and peace.

For Umno, the lesson is not to weaponise the issue racially. The opportunity is to remind Malaysians of another political competence: managing contradictions with tact, restraint, and institutional finesse - what the Malays describe as “menarik rambut dalam tepung; rambut tidak putus, tepung tidak berselerak” (to handle a delicate situation with fairness and tact).

Malaysia is a country of symbols and stomachs, of Rukun Negara and dinner tables, of constitutional doctrine and lived sensitivities.

It does not survive because every side wins its argument in public. It survives because enough leaders know when to speak, when to negotiate, when to reassure, and when to leave dignity intact.

You may not always like BN, but at its best, it understood something Harapan/DAP is still learning: in Malaysia, the balance is not only upheld by the law.

It is upheld by relationships, timing, language, and the ability to prevent private anxiety from becoming public rupture.

For six decades, BN’s greatest political product was not merely development or stability. It was managed tolerance.

Given such profiteering, we expect Putrajaya to step in as a guardian of public interest. But what if health industry towkays have made “political donations” to influence policy?

This is notorious in the United States, where big health corporations have given huge legal bribes called “campaign contributions” to ensure that medical bills stay sky high.

But surely, such a disease has not affected our “highly moral” Madani government?

Well, let’s see. A law was proposed to stop the sale of cigarettes and vapes to youths born after Jan 1, 2007. Yet, the deputy health minister admitted that lobbying by the tobacco industry killed this proposal.

Money politics

Umno is infamous for money politics, but it may have infected PKR too. Rafizi revealed there is a culture of “kepit beg duit bawah ketiak” (clutching a money bag under the armpit) when going round to buy support.

To combat this disease, he explained that Bersama will be the first party with a constitution where leadership must be based on merit and hard work, not goodies given out.

But there is a “deep state” in Malaysia of powerful vested interests which is resistant to change. Can that be overcome?

Perhaps that’s why Bersama has announced a rather modest 12-point agenda that includes free preschools for children, more government doctors to reduce waiting times and improvements in education.

These are technocratic issues and won’t really dethrone the deep state, but the 12 points will really help people. So, it's doable.

I believe Bersama has competent and committed leaders to achieve this – unlike our education minister, who rushed to start “Pendidikan Karakter” after cases of school rapes and bullying.

But can Bersama even win? Rafizi has said they are on a “kamikaze mission”, and it doesn’t matter if they all lose.

For me, what’s crucial is that we finally have a party to pressure Harapan to do more progressive reforms, rather than bending over backwards to please Umno, which has betrayed Madani in Johor and Negeri Sembilan.

Kingmakers in hung Parliament?

Rafizi, Nik Nazmi and eight other PKR MPs in his camp already have 10 seats. This number could swell because the huge group called Pamu (Parti Aku Malas Undi ie non-voters) was 24 percent of the electorate in 2022.

They could be energised to go to the polls and drive Bersama to victory in 15 to 25 mixed seats.

This will put the party in a “kingmaker’s position” because the next elections are not expected to have a clear winner, given the multi-cornered fights involving Umno/BN, Harapan, PAS and Bersatu, which have “berpecah” (broken up) with Hamzah Zainudin’s faction.

In that scenario, Bersama can insist that any coalition they join must do certain reforms, just as small groups like the Green Party of Germany have done. The party would live up to its kancil or mousedeer logo of outwitting bigger opponents.

If DAP decides to walk out of the Madani government at their upcoming July congress, they may want to ask: do they want to sink with a tainted Anwar? Or find alternatives?

Some people say Rafizi is clever but arrogant. But I prefer “sincere sombong” to “charming cunning”. Former Singapore prime minister Lee Kuan Yew was also arrogant, but he got the job done.

Half of Malaysians are under 31. But the leaders of PAS, PKR and Bersatu are all around 79 years old. Will they take short-term moves to stay in power, without bothering about future problems after they have passed on?

The ultimate dream is of a new wave to sweep away our worn-out politics. The launch of Bersama focused on Gen Z, Gen Alpha and new solutions.

Rafizi himself has cited how voters who wanted true change have propelled various reformists to surprising victories over the status quo. These include Zohran Mamdani in New York, Move Forward in Thailand and recently, Joseph Vijay’s TVK party in Tamil Nadu.

Do we dare to dream of something bigger than voting for the “least bad” option?