Knives are being sharpened for Liow

PETALING JAYA: It has just been weeks since Liow Tiong Lai and team had taken over the MCA leadership but rumbling voices and undercurrents of factional grievances are making its round again.

Party insiders acknowledged that an underground campaign, in the form of a cyberwar, is building momentum.

It is learnt that these undercurrents are being stoked by members of the losing faction who were marginalised and deprived of appointments to key posts in the new party line-up.

Liow’s key supporters claimed the dissenters were previously linked to the former party president Dr Chua Soi Lek although they have little evidence of the ex-president’s direct involvement.

FMT columnist Stanley Koh, a former head of MCA’s research unit, gives his insight into the party’s current dilemma and its immediate stake on the leadership’s future.

FMT: Some public comments seem to view that the newly-elected MCA leadership under Liow Tiong Lai has failed to spell out clearly the new or future directions for the party. Do you agree? If that is true, why do you think it happened?

Koh: Yes, there were some comments suggesting Liow should have articulated the MCA’s vision through his key address during the general assembly or sound it out during the press conference after his election victory.

I remember that when he launched his presidential manifesto, he had mentioned three key words, “inform, reform and perform”. If we also remember, he had led a team or taskforce gathering information after the GE13 on his party’s disastrous electoral defeat and he was responsible to compile a blueprint based on those feedback and findings.

That so-called blueprint was never tabled to the central committee led by former president Dr Chua Soi Lek. I believe that blueprint will form the basis of Liow’s study and formulation for the party’s new directions.

I can only guess that there are deeper issues facing the party and rhetoric announcement on the new directions, for example, between MCA and Umno or BN needed some drastic changes in relationship. There is no point talking about transformation of the party when the status quo within BN remains the same.

FMT: This question will probably tickle some. How long do you think Liow will last as the new president?

Koh: Your question is probably linked to feedback of a coveted anti-Liow campaign currently ongoing. Based on party insiders’ feedback, some claimed that the problem had arisen following the recent key appointments which had marginalised the pro-Chua faction.

Others alleged that this ongoing political character assassination campaign is an orchestrated one with certain influential party leaders involved. There are also other accusations made that a large sum of money paid to cybertroopers and others to be engaged specifically in a narrow political agenda.

On one occasion, I was taken aback when a party member showed me a photo taken of a banner purportedly hung at a pedestrian bridge along a main road in KL. The photo showed characters of the banner written in Chinese, basically condemning the newly-elected president, and shockingly with a foul language against his mother. This has never happened in the party’s history, showing such a degrading behaviour to belittle another political rival.

Twitters from unknown source or sources messaging that Liow will not last longer than former president Ong Tee Keat’s tenure, which, if I am not mistaken, was 17 months. A source discreetly sounded out to me that a plan is being orchestrated to exploit another EGM sometime in March this year.

So we don’t know at this stage of events what is fact or fiction. Rationally, I don’t think the majority of central delegates are interested to change their voting preferences so soon unless Liow and his team fail to deliver later. Like the Chinese proverb says, “kung dao cai ren xin”…..natural justice lies in the hearts of men.

I think based on this sentiment they will give Liow and his line-up a chance to perform. I think the next three years, the shortest before the next national polls in four or five years, or until the next party elections in three years.

The central delegates had made a wise decision in their voting preferences given the limited choice of capable candidates and I think they should stick with this.

FMT: What is the influence of the former president Dr Chua Soi Lek and his impact upon the new leadership? Or is it the end of Chua in the party?

Koh: Briefly, Chua still has much influence in the big MCA states, with reigning party warlords already elected as divisional chieftains aligned to him. A week before the party elections, he spoke of a “unity plan” and all that. Some rationalised that the plan was to ensure his core supporters can share a slice of the power in the new line-up, particularly his son, Tee Yong can politically survive the drastic changes of a rival faction taking over the leadership.

In short, until the last days of his leadership Dr Chua continued to call the shots through negotiations and manipulations. He is an elected central delegate until 2016, I think. He has a personal blog and many of his supporters have propaganda venues like Facebook, twitters and so on. I am sure, his influence continues but only in varying degrees and probably tapering off in time. But at the meantime, we expect Chua imitating our former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad who is known for his gift of the gap, fearing we might forget him in time.

But at the meantime, it does not need a rocket scientist to know that Chua and his gang are pretty upset with the party’s key appointments. Many I have spoken to in the public domain tend to agree that the appointments should be made according to seniority or on merit. Merely appointing whoever based on factionalism or appeasing factionalism is an old party culture.

FMT: Under Liow’s leadership, should the party “kow-tow” to Umno or BN?

Koh: This is a tough decision for the new leadership to make. But it is not a new predicament facing the party. It took decades for the party leadership to realise this and a heavy price to pay for by losing massive electoral support. In 1986, the party leadership had discussed some options in its role in BN and there were basically three.

The first option, to remain in BN. The second, MCA to leave the BN coalition. And lastly as an independent party. After 64 years, MCA still faces these options for obvious reasons.

MCA cannot keep playing the “apple-polishing” game even when the government is wrong and myopic in policy-making or double standard implementation.

Defending the indefensible has been the party’s infamous brand of leadership. As Chinese wisdom dictates, “Lies are lies and cannot be the truth whereas the truth cannot be convinced as lies”. Paper cannot wrap up a fire. The truth always burn out. It took MCA 64 years to realise this and unless Liow’s leadership acknowledge this, even a political Viagra as mentioned by the prime minister will not work.

The reformed leadership, which Liow claims, must re-valuate and critically re-think the role of the party should his team collectively decide to remain in BN. Any decision otherwise necessitates a massive referendum from both the Chinese community and party members, and not just the 2,385 central delegates. In short, the appeasing culture “kow-towing” to Umno or BN is a dead-end road for the party.

FMT: What do you foresee the 100-day achievements of the new leadership under Liow?

Koh: I don’t know whether Liow places great emphasis on this 100-day achievement. During Ong Tee Keat’s tenure, he had brushed this notion aside. Under Dr Chua, he had spun out in propaganda and had it printed out despite nothing much accomplished during his 100 days in power.

As for Liow, perhaps, he should move forward quickly and wisely on national issues, the bread and butter issues or whatever, and not to be bogged down by internal sabotaging, or with efforts to resolve rivalry within.