With speculation of an imminent Cabinet reshuffle gathering momentum, it is reasonable to assume that MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek has spent some time thinking about whether he should rejoin the Cabinet.
He knows that his decision will affect not only his own future but also his party’s. It is not an easy decision, and he may or may not find comfort in recalling British statesman John Morley’s observation that in politics the choice is constantly between two evils.
Much have happened since Chua declared that he was not interested in a minister’s post. He said this last year, soon after the prime minister made him Barisan Nasional chief coordinator for Pakatan-ruled states.
“I have no other agenda,” he said. “I’ve said I am not interested in becoming a minister. So please don’t speculate. There is no need to be suspicious of me.”
He had expressed a similar sentiment earlier, just before the 2008 party election.
“I have never thought of contesting the presidency,” he said when asked to confirm a rumour.
Yet time—or perhaps it was fate—has proven him wrong, and his detractors have another opportunity to accuse him of going back on his words.
Having crossed one hurdle after another, Chua is not likely to stop dead in his tracks by not rejoining Cabinet.
One may perhaps take as a pointer his reaction to the incident in which MCA Alor Gajah Youth divisional secretary Chai Ming Swee held a placard calling for his resignation as party president. Chua said then that he was democratically elected.
Some see that reaction as a clear signal that he considers MCA’s future more important than his personal past.
On that count, Chua has said that the old style of leadership in MCA must change. He has indicated that he would use the 2008 political tsunami as a guide in assessing the party’s weaknesses and strengths and throwing out bad policies.
Chua has also promised to cut a new deal for the party with its political master, Umno, and to work towards opening up democratic space for Malaysians.
Very probable
Will he decide to rejoin the Cabinet pending the PM’s approval? The answer is “very probable,” judging from pointers from the recent past.
In 2008, just before the MCA election, he lamented that his campaign for the deputy presidency had to be low key because he was not in government.
He said: “If you don’t have a government posting while campaigning (for a party post), you have to adopt a low profile approach. Otherwise, your supporters would be voted out.
“Leaders with government posts can offer many things—from projects to title awards or political appointments. You must not forget these things happen.”
The resistance against him and the debate over his suitability as president of MCA will continue for as long as there is no outstanding achievement to overshadow the exposed skeleton in his cupboard.
If Chua adopts the self-punishing attitude of Ong Ka Ting—who decided not to join the Cabinet after the 2008 debacle—he will, like Ong, be a lame duck president.
If this happens, the implications for the party will be serious. The debate will not be just about his tainted past but also the standing of the party leadership within the BN coalition.
It will be more difficult for MCA to meet the expectation of its political master, Umno, to win back Chinese support for BN.
MCA has twice before made the mistake of not having its president in the Cabinet. Before Ong Ka Ting, there was Tan Koon Swan, who in 1985 decided to stay out of the Cabinet after he defeated Neo Yee Pan for the presidency following a protracted leadership crisis.
If his personal past is tormenting him and interfering with his decision-making, he may perhaps find comfort in what Barry Goldwater once said:
“If everybody in town connected with politics had to leave town because of chasing women and drinking, you’ll have no government.”
Free Malaysia Today
13/05/10
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment