PAS delegates lined up to salam with the incoming and outgoing leadership
after the muktamar officially closed on 7 June 2009
WITH PAS, it was never really about “progressives” versus “conservatives”, or “professionals” versus “ulama”. It is, and always has been, about setting up an Islamic state.
And so, given Malaysia’s dramatically shifting political landscape, this is the struggle within PAS: what is the best vehicle to deliver an Islamic state, especially now when the taste of political power is so sweet for the Pakatan Rakyat (PR)? Would it be via steadfast cooperation with the PR? Or via negotiations with a much weakened, but still formidable, Umno?
In this sense, the debates during this year’s 55th muktamar were not very different from the debates held during last year’s congress.
Was the idea of cooperating with Umno for the “advancement” of Islam not mooted last year? It was.
Did delegates and party leaders not affirm, however, that PAS’s allegiances were with the PR? They did.
Were PAS’s grassroots convinced then, as they are now, that they have the capacity to not only form a coalition, but to lead federal government after the next general election? They were.
And did deputy spiritual leader Datuk Dr Harun Din not chastise the anti-Umno, “Erdogan” camp for not respecting the ulama? He did.
The only thing different about this year’s muktamar was that the party saw contests for some very high-ranking posts — namely for the deputy and vice-presidencies. And in that sense, we can be forgiven for wondering why the dynamics of the PAS elections so closely mirrored that of the Umno party elections in March 2008. The Umno elections, too, saw contests for nearly all high-ranking positions except for the presidency, which Datuk Seri Najib Razak, like his PAS counterpart Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, effectively won unopposed.
The difference between PAS and Umno’s elections, though, is this: the contest in Umno was symptomatic of an embattled party still entertaining delusions of grandeur. The infighting in Umno seems motivated by blame — people are offering themselves for leadership, therefore, to restore the party to its rightful, pre-March 2008 glory.
PAS, on the other hand, is actually a very powerful party whose grassroots are resenting having to kowtow to Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) and the DAP within the PR. They want, and are confident the party can get, more.
And it is this unique position that is giving PAS an edge when it makes its political bargains now — when the party flexes muscles, it makes both Umno, and its PR partners jump.
A view of the stage where the delegates were seated
Islamic state paramount
Yet, despite its undeniable momentum, the party seems afraid. Delegates at this year’s muktamar repeatedly lamented that the party was leaving Islam behind in its quest for federal power. Again, this was a familiar complaint at last year’s muktamar.
Incumbent central working committee member Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad says that this is merely the party’s “fear of success”. Last year, however, he told The Nut Graph that some quarters of the party were getting too big for their own boots. Back then, he said that harping on the Islamic state agenda would end up with PAS getting a “bloody nose” at the next general election.
Dzulkefly’s caution last year represents what endeared him and his allies within PAS — the “professionals” — to multiracial supporters of the PR. These were, as many pointed out, the “liberals” in PAS. Consisting of personalities such as Dzulkefly, Shah Alam Member of Parliament Khalid Samad, and defeated deputy president candidate Datuk Husam Musa, they were staunch PR supporters and talked about democracy, multiculturalism and human rights.
This is the group that favours a “soft” approach to Islam. This faction, for example, opposes the BN government’s ban on the use of the word Allah in church services and Christian publications. It is thus willing to make certain multicultural concessions in the interest of attracting wider support for its overarching Islamic goals. It does not even want to mention the phrase “Islamic state” in its outreach campaigns. In its rhetoric, at least, the substance of the “Islamic state” is more important than the form.
And then there is the faction that favours a “hard” approach — namely the faction that is open to negotiating with Umno in the interest of Islam and Malay Malaysian rights. Judging from this year’s debates, this is probably the faction that wants the BN government to maintain the 30% quota for bumiputera equity.
But at the end of the day, both factions within PAS are united by a common goal: finding the best and most sustainable way to set up an Islamic state. And going by recent developments — from the party’s leadership right down to its grassroots delegates — neither the “progressives” nor the “conservatives” have ever abandoned the Islamic state agenda.
For example, as Husam demonstrated in January 2009 in his public debate with current Umno youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, even the “liberals” would defend hudud if push came to shove. And Husam’s slip was not the only example of the kind of Islamic state the party wants. Even the division that “liberal” Khalid leads, Shah Alam PAS, during this year’s muktamar called for the women’s rights organisation Sisters in Islam to be “investigated” and “rehabilitated” by the National Fatwa Council.
The crowd still packed the hall on the last day of the muktamar
Whose and which Islam?
And so, it is an amazing sight to see the party’s grassroots merge so swiftly when it comes to addressing those who disagree with the Islamic state agenda. PAS Kota Raja Member of Parliament Dr Siti Mariah Mahmud says the party is very unlike Umno in this sense. She says the grassroots, especially, will decide what is best in the interest of Islam — and she is right. This is probably why it is much easier for PAS leaders who are at loggerheads to reconcile, compared to those in Umno. Deep down, PAS leaders know that they are all struggling for that altruistic Islamic state.
And given recent political developments, it is easy to sympathise with PAS. For instance, new Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has cracked down on many an activist and PR politician, including PAS leaders and supporters. The humiliation that embattled Perak Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin has suffered at the hands of the Umno-linked media is astounding.
But this does not remove the need for citizens to ask PAS some difficult questions now. Namely, why does the party’s leadership still insist on keeping its Islamic doors to Umno open despite being criticised so badly, including from within the party?
More importantly, PAS needs to be asked, point blank, what it really envisions as its ideal government, whether or not it calls it an “Islamic state”. The questions must go beyond such easy-to-fudge concepts as “democracy” and “good governance”.
What will the party’s position be on apostasy? On the religious conversion of minors? On homosexuality and bisexuality? On moral policing? On concert banning? On the rights of other religious communities? On turning personal sins for Muslims — not going to the mosque on Fridays or not fasting during Ramadan, for example — into crimes against the state? On the status of “deviant sects“? On marital rape? On polygamy in Islam?
PAS delegates and leaders have been using the metaphor of marriage ad nauseum to describe their position within the PR. In these analogies, party leaders joke about polygamy as though it is second nature and desirable in many circumstances.
Is it any surprise then if PAS feels it can stay married to its PR partners and court Umno at the same time — especially if consummation of these marriages gives birth to an Islamic state?