http://dapmalaysia.org Forward Feedback
Media Conference Statement by Lim Kit Siang
at the DAP Ipoh Timur Election Ops Centre, Ipoh on Wednesday, 5th
March 2008 at 2 pm:
More seats won by
MCA will only result in worsening UMNO political hegemony When MCA should be
most influential and powerful after the 1999 general election when
Chinese voters saved UMNO and Barisan Nasional to ensure their getting
two-thirds parliamentary majority, MCA was weakest in allowing the rise
of UMNO political hegemony. New Straits Times
has turned into a MCA and Barisan Nasional (BN) propaganda broadsheet
today with the front-page headline: “Chinese voters have a simple
choice: a bigger say in parliament and government, or a louder voice in
parliament without real influence…” Quoting the MCA
strategist, Datuk Wong Mook Leong,said “the reality was that whenever
the DAP did better than MCA, it was a major setback for the community”. Wong said: “In
1986, DAP won 24 seats while MCA got 18. In 1990, DAP continued to lead
MCA by two parliamentary seats. “DAP claims that
in those two terms, it was a major step for democracy. But the truth is,
it was two terms of major setbacks for the Chinese community.” This is a very
dishonest distortion of Malaysian political history. Firstly, this
analysis flies in the face of the truth that it was after these two
major successive wins by the DAP in the 1986 and 1990 general elections
that UMNO finally relented and abandoned its three-decade-long
nation-building policy of assimilation and finally accepted the DAP
contention that for a plural nation like Malaysia, with diverse races,
languages, cultures and religions, only a policy of integration can
succeed to unite the people and hold the nation together. It was after the
DAP’s consecutive electoral gains in 1986 and 1990 general elections
that Vision 2020 with its objective of creating a Bangsa Malaysia was
proclaimed by the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad
in February 1991, marking the abandonment of the assimilation policy of
“one language, one culture” and acceptance of the integration policy of
“many languages and many cultures” in Malaysia. This was
subsequently admitted publicly by Mahathir in September 1995, when he
said that citizens should be proud of being Malaysians and work together
instead of being preoccupied with ethnic origin. He said to realise
the goal of Bangsa Malaysia, the people should start accepting each
other as they are, regardless of race and religion. Mahathir said at
the time that certain quarters may condemn him for wanting to achieve
Bangsa Malaysia and not struggling for the Malay cause as he did during
his early years in politics. He said when he
was fighting for the Malay cause per se, he was young and his thoughts
were that of an inexperienced politician. He stressed that
in future; there would be no nation in the world which would have a
single ethnic group as its citizen.
“Zaman berubah. Kalau dahulu tumpuan ialah kita kepada asimilasi. Di
mana-mana negara juga tidak ada lagi usaha untuk “asimilasi”, bahkan di
Amerika Syarikat mereka sering bercakap berkenaan dengan “roots”
asal-usul mereka. Jadi kalau kita sudah terima bahawa itu tidak mungkin,
kita perlu cari jalan lain untuk merapatkan perhubungan antara kaum ini.
Seperti kata De Bono, Lateral Thinking, kalau kita tidak boleh merentas
satu jalan maka kita pergi ke jalan lain untuk sampai ke matlamat yang
sama.” Again in his
interview with TIME magazine in December 1996, he said in a Q & A: Mahathir: The idea
before was that people should become 100% Malay in order to be
Malaysian. We now accept that this is a multi-racial country. We should
build bridges instead of trying to remove completely the barriers
separating us. We do not intend to convert all the Chinese to Islam, and
we tell our people, the Muslims, “you will not try to force people to
convert”. I had at the time
commend Mahathir for the evolution of his thinking on nation-building
for Malaysia, for this was one of the cornerstones of the DAP political
struggle when we were formed in 1966, to establish that Malaysia is a
multi-racial, multi-lingual, multi-cultural and multi-religious nation
and that the only viable and successful nation-building policy must be
one based on integration and not on assimilation. Many DAP leaders
had to pay a heavy price in terms of loss of personal freedoms or being
persecuted in courts for courageously defending and upholding the rights
of all races, languages, cultures and religions in a multi-racial
Malaysia. There is no doubt
that if there had been no DAP in the last three decades, the attempt to
impose a “One Language, One Culture” Policy in Malaysia would have been
taken to extreme lengths with disastrous results both for national unity
as well as development. As a result of
this paradigm shift in nation-building caused by the DAP’s consistent
political stand, there was what I called “minor liberalization” in
government nation-building policies and programmes on language,
education and culture, which fell far short of the “full liberalization”
that envisaged as the successful path for Malaysian nation-building. In 1995, 1999 and
2004, DAP suffered electoral setbacks with the MCA making great
electoral gains. The 1999 general
election deserves special mention. In 1999 general election, the Anwar
Ibrahim “black eye” effect created political ferment among the Malay
voters, with the Malays prepared for change, resulting in UMNO suffering
its worst electoral defeat in its party history. UMNO and Barisan
Nasional would have lost their two-thirds parliamentary majority if the
Chinese voters had not come to their rescue, voting to shore up Barisan
Nasional’s two-thirds majority. Instead of DAP
winning some 30 parliamentary seats, which would have resulted in the BN
losing its two-thirds parliamentary majority, and ushering in a new era
for democratic change and greater liberalization in economic and
nation-building policies, DAP suffered a major setback and won only 10
parliamentary seats. MCA won 36
parliamentary seats. Did MCA’s huge slate of parliamentary seats and the
role of the Malaysian Chinese voters in saving the UMNO and BN from
losing its two-third parliamentary majority in the 1999 general election
resulted in a more just and equal nation-building policy and greater MCA
representation in government, as increase in the number of MCA Cabinet
Ministers and their appointment to key Ministries, like Finance and
Industry which was previously occupied by MCA Ministers in the early
years of Merdeka? None at all. When
MCA should be most influential and powerful after the 1999 general
election when Chinese voters saved UMNO and Barisan Nasional to ensure
their getting two-thirds parliamentary majority, MCA was weakest in
allowing the rise of UMNO political hegemony from 1999 – 2008. Examples are
galore of the rise of UMNO political hegemony, which marginalizes not
only the other BN component parties but all communities, whether Malays,
Chinese, Indians, Kadazan-Dusun-Murut and Ibans. There is a long
list to illustrate the rise of UMNO political hegemony in the past nine
years, but I need only mention the following few: • The “929
Declaration Malaysia as an Islamic state on Sept. 29, 2001; • The UMNO Youth
threat to burn down the Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall over the Suqiu
controversy; • The extension of
the New Economic Policy from a 20-year span to 50 years and beyond; • UMNO Youth
Hishammuddin Hussein’s wielding of the Malay keris at the UMNO Youth
assembly; • The rejection of
the Bangsa Malaysia objective of Vision 2020 by powerful circles and
forces in UMNO; • The humiliation
suffered by non-UMNO Ministers who had submitted a memorandum to the
Prime Minister in 2006 about freedom of religion over the Moorthy
snatch-body case, coupled with rapid increases of religious polarization
over body-snatching, banning of Christian Bibles in Bahasa Malaysia
using “Allah”, restriction of freedom of religion of non-Muslim
communities like the Kudat Mazu controversy; • Blatant abuse of
NEP to spawn even worse corruption, cronyism and nepotism (CCN) in the
Abdullah administration as compared to the Mahathir premiership, with
the bumiputras being used to serve the interests of Umnoputras; and • The Hindraf
phenomenon of nation-wide Indian protest at their long-standing
marginalization. Wong Mook Leong is
wrong. The more seats the MCA wins, the greater the trend towards Umno
political hegemony. This is why in the 12th general election, a vote for
the BN is a vote for UMNO political hegemony, and why all Malaysians
regardless of race or religion should unite to smash UMNO political
hegemony, which is completely different from UMNO dominance in BN and
can be a Frankestein in the Malaysian political landscape. *
Lim
Kit Siang, DAP Parliamentary
Candidate & DAP Central Policy and Strategic Planning Commission
Chairman |
||
|