I personally take a pessimistic view towards the Islamist parties and groups in any countries. Please see the No.2 in Malaysiakini news collection about the Islamist Party in Malaysia, PAS and the Hudud issue. (Lily)
1.（http://www.bicom.org.uk/analysis-article/5351/）
Setting Standards: How the West should respond to political Islam, 14 February 2012
by Brig. Gen. (Ret.) Michael Herzog
Key points
・Islamist parties have taken the opportunity provided to them by the ‘Arab Spring’ to achieve power through elections, benefitting from their strong organisational structures and good public image in a traditional societal environment.
・This phenomenon has sparked a debate in the West between optimists, who believe these parties will moderate to cope with the realities of political power, and pessimists, who fear they will simply use democracy to gain power and promote radical, ideological agendas.
・Islamists themselves are not monolithic, and are struggling to balance practical political demands with their ideological roots. At a regional level they are offered two competing models of Islamic governance in Turkey and Iran.
・The West should use the leverage it gains from its economic support to apply criteria for dealing with Islamist parties, in order to influence their development. Those criteria should relate to the Islamist parties’ positions on: non-violence, adherence to values of democracy, the application of Sharia law in public life and attitudes to the West and Israel.
・For the sake of the peace process, it is particularly important to maintain strict conditions with regard to Hamas, and to make clear to Egyptian Islamists that tampering with the Israel-Egypt peace treaty is a clear red line.
Introduction: ‘Arab Spring’ or ‘Islamist winter’?
As winds of dramatic change sweep across the Middle East, observers wonder how to characterise what is happening. To many observers, what was originally dubbed optimistically as the ‘Arab Spring’ has now turned into an ‘Islamist Winter’. In recent months Islamist parties have won elections by relatively wide margins in North Africa. In Tunisia the al-Nahda Party took over 40% of the vote. In Morocco the Justice and Development Party (JDP) took over 25%. In Egypt over 70% of votes went to the political alliances led the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) and the Salafist Al-Nour Party. Islamist parties also stand a good chance of winning upcoming elections in Algeria and Libya.
They seem strong in other parts of the region too. In a recent parliamentary election in Kuwait, Islamist political parties won 46% of votes cast. In Syria, the Muslim Brotherhood is an important part of the organised opposition against the regime. Several years before the Arab awakening, Islamist parties scored successes in Iraqi elections, in the Palestinian Authority (where Hamas won Parliamentary elections in 2006) and in Lebanon (where Shiite Hezbollah has become the dominant party in the government). There is a longer precedent for the role of Islamic parties in Arab politics, such as in Algeria (where the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS) won elections in 1991 and was forced out of power leading to a civil war) and in Sudan. In Saudi Arabia the royal family has a long-established and close cooperation with the clerical Wahhabi establishment, drawing legitimacy from it, and many religious laws apply.
The strong showing of Islamist parties in recent elections comes despite the fact that they did not spearhead last year’s revolutions, but stood on the sidelines when they broke out. Several factors explain their success. First, Arab societies are characteristically traditional. Islam plays an important role in people’s lives, making them receptive to Islamic messages or messages with a religious tone. Second, Islamist parties are better organised and funded than other parties, due to decades of organised overt and covert political activism under oppressive regimes, and have made good use of mosques as centres of recruitment and activity. Third, whereas the autocratic regimes were perceived as neglecting the needs of the common citizen, Islamist movements have filled part of the void and provided a network of basic social services, especially to the poor and needy, as a form of religious and political outreach known as ‘da’wa’. Finally, Islamists enjoy an image of being non-corrupt. They have mostly campaigned on platforms emphasising socio-economic issues and anti-corruption over their Islamic ideology and traditional simplistic slogan stipulating, “Islam is the solution.”
Between optimists and pessimists
The rise of political Islam stirs a serious debate between optimists and pessimists, first and foremost in the Middle East itself. Optimists contend that we are currently witnessing a new, modern version of political Islam, which is more moderate and open to democracy and Western liberal values than we have known in the past. As examples they cite moderate public statements by Sheikh Rachid Ghannouchi, leader of the Tunisian Islamist Al-Nahda party, as well remarks by officials in the Egyptian and Moroccan Islamist parties, upholding respect and adherence to the rules of democracy, basic freedoms, the rights of women and religious minorities and pluralism. Also cited are promises not to enforce strict Islamic rules in public life, such as banning alcohol, bikinis and interest-based banking.
Optimists mention the fact that these parties had women and non-Muslims run on their lists[1] and are forming coalitions with secular parties. They note that the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood recently joined secular and Coptic leaders in signing the Al-Azhar Charter, a declaration initiated by Al-Azhar Islamic University calling to protect broad basic freedoms, including the freedoms of belief, opinion, expression, scientific research, and creativity in literature and arts.[2] Optimists also underline certain statements by Muslim Brotherhood officials in Egypt exhibiting openness to the West and promising not to abrogate the Israeli-Egyptian peace agreement.
On the other hand, pessimists retort that these statements do not represent a genuine transformation towards liberalism. Rather, they say they are a thin veneer covering a deep-rooted ideology to serve short-term tactical aims. In the pessimists’ view, Islamist parties have not internalised the real values of democracy and liberalism, nor can they be expected to do so overnight. They are, for the pessimists, essentially anti-pluralistic and xenophobic groups, who are merely exploiting democracy to gain power, but will abandon it once elected, like Hezbollah and Hamas. In this context, the former Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Muhammad Mehdi Akef, is cited. Akef, following the 2005 Egyptian elections, said that, “for us, democracy is like a pair of slippers that we wear until we reach the bathroom, and then we take them off.” Pessimists also point to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s website which is rife with antisemitic text.[3] There is also a notable difference between Islamists’ statements in Arabic and English, which are often contradictory.[4] Ultimately, say the pessimists, Islamists will have to be tested over time by their deeds, not merely their words.
The debate also relates to the future direction of Islamist parties. Optimists contend that under the pressure of governance and political responsibility, Islamists will have to moderate or else face losing popular support and power. Some believe that we are currently experiencing a necessary historic phase until the myth surrounding Islamists, born out of years of fighting corrupt repressive regimes, dissipates and they are reduced to their ‘natural size’. Pessimists, on the other hand, ask what damage, perhaps irreversible, will be inflicted in the meantime. Furthermore, who guarantees that Islamists will cede control through a democratic process in the future and not use their power to silence opposition, entrench their own position and ban free fair elections, as exemplified by the Islamic Republic in Iran and Hamas in Gaza?
Political Islam is not a monolithic phenomenon across the Middle East. Islamist movements and parties exhibit differences and nuances varying between different countries and within the same country. The Muslim Brotherhood movement in Egypt, for example, has split into several parties and there is a clear difference between the Brotherhood and the Salafists, who advocate strict Islamic laws in the public domain and national life. No less important are the contradictory statements made by Islamists on a variety of topics, which demonstrate that in moving from opposition to government, they find themselves compelled to balance conflicting pressures. On the one hand stands their deep-rooted ideology. In the case of Egypt (unlike Tunisia) civil society at large is much more traditional than secular and the Brotherhood is also under pressure from the more extreme Salafists. On the other hand, Islamists face the need to provide practical solutions to the population, especially socio-economic solutions in the face of severe economic crises. In contrast to Iran this is, in the words of Thomas Friedman, “political Islam without oil”.[5] These movements are therefore compelled to present as moderate a face as possible to the international community.
The result is at times ambiguity, or a somewhat awkward compromise. Some Islamist leaders choose to emphasise that while they will seek to introduce Islamic values into the public domain, they will pursue education and public activism rather than legislation and enforcement, and in any case will seek a gradual societal transformation. A recent article written by the Muslim Brotherhood party’s leader, Muhammad Mursi,[6] is an example of this ambiguity. Mursi wrote: “This new structure [of Egypt] respects freedom and protects the basic rights of every Egyptian within the framework of the original religious values… The new structure… also gives women all their rights in a way that establishes balance between their rights and duties.”
An important balancing factor is that the winning Islamist parties are not alone in the field and have to reconcile their ideology and political positions with those of other internal forces. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood has to come to terms with the ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and in the coming months will have to do so with a newly elected president. In Morocco, the King still calls the shots even though he acknowledged the Justice and Development Party’s victory and appointed its leader, Abd-El-Illah Ben-Kirane, as prime minister. In all cases where they have attained electoral success, Islamist parties’ ability to govern depends on forming coalitions, and they are forging such partnerships with secular parties.
In Tunisia, the new president Monsef Marzuki, a former dissident and human rights activist, comes from a secular party. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood campaigned as part of a coalition with secular parties under the title the ‘Democratic Alliance’, and made known its clear preference for a coalition with secular parties rather than with the Salafist Al-Nour party. Finally, all of these parties have to take into consideration the voice of the street, empowered by the revolution. The initiators of the mass Tahrir Square demonstrations may have been shoved aside but now the populace has found its voice it will not easily accept the substituting of one form of dictatorship for another.
In the broader regional context, Islamists rising to power are offered two competing models of Islamic governance in the Turkish model and the Iranian model. The Turkish model seems much more attractive to Islamists who now have to shape their own future. For one thing, they are Sunnis and reject the Iranian-Shiite model of clerical rule (‘Wilayat El-Faqih’). For another, their perception of the Turkish model is that it implies no necessary contradiction between political Islam on one hand and democracy and economic success on the other. [7] The Tunisian al-Nahda party openly cites Turkey as a source of inspiration and it is no coincidence that the Islamic party in Morocco took the same name as the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Turkey.
What to do about it?
While the international community had little to do with the eruption of revolutionary energies in the Middle East and is limited in its ability to affect their direction, it does have some tools of influence. The tension between Islamic ideology and political responsibility, including dependence on international economic support in the face of dire economic straits, affords the international community some leverage over developing policies in this new landscape. In practical terms, the international community should apply four main criteria for judging Islamist parties and movements rising to power, for conducting a dialogue with them and for dealing with them in general. These four criteria are:
・Commitment to non-violence. Many of the Islamist parties and activists have a history of violence but renounced it at a certain stage under regime pressure. It should be noted, however, that most of them have expressed support for the use of ‘armed resistance’, including suicide bombings, against US, Western and Israeli targets in the Middle East.
・Adherence to values of democracy. This breaks into a long list of sub-categories, including safeguarding the variety of basic freedoms, protecting the rights of women and of religious and other minorities, making room for internationally supported local pro-democracy movements, and allowing for free and fair elections even when Islamists stand to lose.
・Approach to Islamic law (Sharia) in public life. To what extent are Islamic norms introduced into public and national life and enforced in a manner that contradicts internationally accepted norms of democracy and human rights? This category covers the framing of Sharia in newly-written constitutions and its application in public life.[8] It also refers to contentious issues such as the freedom to criticise religion[9] and to convert from Islam to another religion.[10]
・Attitudes towards the West and Israel. This includes honouring the Israeli-Egyptian peace agreement. The thinking and rhetoric of even the more reform-minded Islamists are by and large characterised by anti-Israeli and anti-Western attitudes. Tunisian Rachid Ghannouchi, for example, last year called Israel “a germ” which ought to be removed from the Arab region, and predicted this would happen by 2027. In the past he supported violent attacks against US forces in Iraq and suicide bombing against Israelis. An attempt to introduce an article banning normalisation with Israel into the newly drafted Tunisian constitution was recently aborted through Western insistence.
There are varying degrees with which Islamist parties might apply these criteria. No Arab country has ever met all of them to their fullest extent, yet the international community has dealt with most of them and has cooperated with many of them. In applying these standards therefore, the international community should first decide where to draw red lines which set conditions under which they will reject direct engagement with Islamist groups. These should include groups with violent or extreme anti-democratic, anti-Western and anti-Israeli attitudes and behaviours. The international community should also decide where to draw the line of extending or withdrawing economic and other forms of support to Islamist governments it engages. This is not a rigid formula. Elements have to be weighed by their relative significance in a given context.
It is along these lines that the international community should relate to the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas. Following the recent wave of Islamist electoral victories, Hamas prime minister in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, stated that Hamas is a “Jihadi movement of the Brotherhood with a Palestinian face.”[11] By referring to the origins of Hamas as a Brotherhood-affiliated movement he was implying, among other things, that the international community should engage with it as it now engages other Islamist parties. The international community ought to stick by existing conditions for an international dialogue with Hamas in Gaza, as put forward by the Quartet (composed of the US, the UN, the EU and Russia) in 2006, following Hamas’s victory in Palestinian elections. These conditions include renouncing violence, recognising Israel and accepting past Palestinian agreements with Israel. In the specific intra-Palestinian and Israeli-Palestinian contexts it is important to maintain these conditions in the face of an organisation that has never renounced violence, opposes peace with Israel and any recognition of it, threatens Palestinian moderates and has yet to practically enable Palestinian elections.
Furthermore, maintaining the Israeli-Egyptian peace agreement intact is of special strategic importance as an essential pillar of regional stability. While Egyptian Islamist leaders indicated that they would abide by official Egyptian agreements, some of them have said that the agreement with Israel should be put to a national referendum. The international community would do well to make clear that any tampering with the peace agreement, including a national referendum, would be regarded as crossing a red line.
Conclusion
The rise of political Islam ushered in by the Arab awakening sets the stage in the foreseeable future for an environment less favourable to Israel and the West. There should be no illusions about the Islamists. Left to their own designs they will lean heavily on their ideology. However, under domestic and international pressure they will have to mitigate it. That is where the international community should step in and play a role.
・Brigadier General (Ret.) Michael Herzog is a Senior Visiting Fellow at BICOM. He served as chief of staff and senior military aide and advisor to four Israeli ministers of defence over the last decade and was previously the head of the IDF’s Strategic Planning Division. He participated in all of Israel’s negotiations with its neighbours since 1993.
________________________________________
[1] In fact, women make up only about two percent of the newly elected Egyptian parliament. In the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party their representation is even lower and there are no non-Muslims in the party’s parliamentary faction.
[2] This did not stop the Muslim Brotherhood from producing its own, different, version of a suggested new constitution for Egypt.
[3] See Chernitsky, B., Anitsemitic and Anti-Israel Articles on Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood Website, MEMRI, 13/1/2012.
[4] See Pollock, D., Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and its Record of Double Talk, The Washington Post, 27/1/2012.
[5] Friedman, T., Political Islam Without Oil, New York Times, 10/1/2012.
[6] Egypt’s Freedom and Justice Party: Our Vision for the Future, A-Sharq Al-Awsat, 8/1/2012.
[7] It should however be noted that Turkey has shown some disturbing illiberal trends, with a very high number of journalists put in jail.
[8] The 1971 Egyptian constitution defined Sharia as the main source of legislation but this was not interpreted in a strict way.
[9] Egyptian telecoms mogul and political activist Naguib Sawiris faced death threats and legal charges in recent months after he tweeted a picture of Mickey Mouse with an Islamic beard and Minnie with a veil.
[10] Ghannouchi was recently asked, while speaking at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Washington-based think tank, about his attitude towards the issue of conversion from Islam. Conversion is protected under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights but most Muslim jurisprudents consider it forbidden. Ghannouchi replied that he does not believe conversion from Islam is forbidden by Islamic law, but noted that this view is not yet accepted by Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, his superior in the International Association of Muslim Scholars.
[11] Haniyeh made this statement in a meeting with the Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, in December 2011.
2. Malaysiakini （http://www.malaysiakini.com）
(1) Hudud will create more jobs, PAS tells Chua, 15 November 2012
by Abdul Rahim Sabri
PAS Ulama chief Harun Taib slammed MCA chief Chua Soi Lek for claiming that hudud will cost the country millions in job losses.
Instead, said Harun sarcastically, hudud law would result in more jobs rather than less.
“With hudud, if we need to chop off hands, training is needed. There will be more positions open. We need to train investigators,” he said jokingly.
“For those who drink alcohol, they would be caned and that needs training too. You can’t just hit them simply.
“So many more positions (will be available),” said the Ulama chief when officiating the wing ’s muktamar in Kota Bharu today.
Harun was referring to Chua’s video statement last month where he cited some anonymous SMS claiming that 1.2 million jobs would be lost should hudud be implemented.
According to Chua’s estimates, these jobs would include those from massage parlours and gambling.
'It's for the best'
Commenting on Chua's claim that tourism would be affected if liquor factories are forced to close due to implementation of the Islamic law in the country, Harun said that would be "for the best".
"Westerners do not come here because they want to drink. There's more (liquor) where they come from than we have here," he said.
"We can have other factories instead. We can produce rambutan juice, mango juice and much more. This can be exported, and foreigners need not come here (to get it)."
Harun said countering such "ignorance" as spread by Chua was a challenge in light of the many "malicious clerics" and "filthy clerics", referring to government appointed religious officials.
"(These are) ulama who are installed by the government. Government mufti, government ustaz...many of them, though not all.
"These people are armed with all kinds of information, different ways to challenge PAS ulama's arguments.
"We do something good, and they say it is bad... this is what the government is doing because they look through dark glasses," he said.
When asked about the issue of Lembah Pantai Nurul Izzah Anwar's recent statements about religious freedom, Harun said it was a "small matter".
"I have no time to discuss small things, let us only discuss major issues," he said, citing preparations to "steamroll" BN in the coming general election.
(2) ‘Those thinking hudud unimportant are confused', 15 November 2012
by Abdul Rahim Sabri
Party members who felt the issue of hudud need not be discussed in light of political cooperation within Pakatan Rakyat were “confused” and have failed to grasp the party teachings, said PAS’ Ulama wing chief.
“On the issue of hudud, there are confused members who feel (hudud) need not be discussed in the era of political cooperation (tahaluf siayasi), following all sorts of views and ideas from outside the party,” said ulama chief Harun Taib.
“This all represents confused thinking, because of a failure to follow PAS’ teachings. Our struggle to uphold hudud represents an Islamic agenda that surely is PAS’ agenda,” he said in his policy speech at the wing's muktamar in Kota Bharu today.
Harun's deputy Mahfodz Mohamed read out the speech on his behalf as the former was feeling unwell.
The comment was likely referring to members who have put hudud on the backburner in pursuit of cooperation with other Pakatan Rakyat components.
“We struggle to make hudud part of the laws based on the forces of democracy that we possess,” he said.
“Once it becomes part of the country’s laws, its implementation would be carried out by a judicial body to determine the level of implementation.”
Harun added that the PAS ulama have searched for the path to politics in Islam by referring to the Quran and the hadith, and that the texts allow for political cooperation, with its guidelines, with other parties with the aim of winning the elections.
He therefore encouraged PAS members to support and vote for Pakatan’s non-Muslim candidates in the coming election.
However, he reminded that the guidelines should be adhered to and that the ulama needed to advise the party when these guidelines and broken.
(3) PAS' Harun Taib wrong on my position on hudud, 16 November 2012
by Karpal Singh
To my knowledge, the DAP has not at any time agreed to the introduction of hudud in the country as claimed by PAS ulama chief Harun Taib at the 51st dewan ulama muktamar in Kota Bahru yesterday.
The assertion by Harun Taib is certainly mischievous and a long way from the truth. The DAP has time and again publicly asserted its stand against the introduction of hudud in the country. Hudud cannot exist in Malaysia which is a secular state.
A 5-man bench of the Supreme Court (the equivalent of the Federal Court), the highest court in the country, headed by Salleh Abbas, the then lord president, declared as far back as February 29, 1988 that Malaysia was governed by secular laws, which meant the country was a secular state.
Hudud is not secular law, but law in an Islamic state. It would be incongruous for Islamic criminal law in the form of hudud to exist in a secular state like Malaysia.
The position of the DAP on this issue cannot be subject to any compromise. It is fundamental to its existence.
It is most unfortunate that such an assertion was thought fit to be made at the muktamar. The position is further compounded by Harun Taib’s statement that even before Pakatan was formed, PAS had clarified its views on hudud with DAP on many occasions when both parties sat together to exchange their views.
It is preposterous for Harun Taib to add to insult to injury by saying, “As for Karpal he only sounds to be disagreeable (on the hudud issue), but that does not mean he disagrees.”
Of course, I have always disagreed and publicly stated my reasons for saying so based on the provisions in the federal constitution and interpretation of those provisions by the highest court in the country.
・Karpal Singh is DAP chairperson and Bukit Gelugor MP.
(4) PAS, to each his own on religion and hudud, 16 November 2012
‘PAS, if you want to be in Putrajaya, then talk and debate about what is close to the hearts of all the rakyat of Malaysia.’
Anonymous_3f4b: Hudud will not create more jobs. On this score, I have to agree with MCA chief Chua Soi Lek. Give me an example of an Islamic country that practises hudud and is successful, prosperous and at peace with its people and the world. I can think of none.
Instead, the people in these countries try to get out at the earliest available opportunity and head for the more developed and secular countries such as United States, UK, Canada, Australia and the like.
No one in the world will migrate to countries that practise hudud and this will mean no foreign direct investment and employment opportunities, leading to loss of jobs, chaos, instability and sectarian violence, which is evident in parts of the Islamic world.
Onyourtoes: Well, PAS Ulama chief Harun Din, never mind about Chua's attacks and innuendoes, but we still expect you to engage in a meaningful response. Your sarcasm is contemptuous of the people of this country, particularly the non-Muslims.
We need clear articulations, not vague posturing. I know hudud is one of the obligations of the Muslims. But can we have a referendum among the Muslims in this country whether or not they really want hudud?
You ulama are not god, so don't assume you know everything. Yet you are controlling the thinking and agenda of this country. Why must you talk everyday about stuff that has no relevance to the lives of the people?
I read somewhere and I want to repeat it here so that we can all debate about it. Many Muslims are not happy in so-called Muslim countries - you can name them, from Afghanistan, Somalia, Palestine, Egypt to Sudan.
But then they want to destroy the system of those countries where Muslims are generally happy and where many from the Muslim countries would try to get into at the first opportunity they have - Australia, US (the so-called Satanic country), Norway, UK, Sweden and you name it. Why?
Ahmad4: Onyourtoes, we need not just a referendum for Muslims only, but a referendum for all citizens in Malaysia as the outcome will affect everybody and might bring down the country to the same backward level and endless problems as the countries in the Middle East and North Africa.
I cannot imagine that anybody seriously wants that. Many countries have learnt the lesson that it is better not to mix politics and religion.
Timothy: Forecasts point to an economic slowdown in the next quarter. The cost of essential foods and items are increasing. The cost of children's education is increasing. We fear for our children and our safety when we walk the streets. Even our home is not a safe place.
Parents want English for their children's education, except for some under the 'tempurung'. Thousands born here are without MyKads. The rich become dirt rich (through all means), while the poor and marginalised become dirt poor. And so on.
PAS, if you want to be in Putrajaya, then talk and debate about what is close to the hears of all the rakyat of Malaysia.
Kadaram: Hudud will put our multi-religious nation off balance. Even with syariah laws, there are lots of issues between Muslims and non-Muslims that have not been settled, especially on body snatching, etc.
Please do a detailed study and have open forums involving all segments of society before implementing it.
Wira: There are many people on this earth whose only job is to stay relevant by claiming to hear from God. As long as they don't encroach on my personal freedom and beliefs, they don't bother me.
I may even join hands with them to fight the evil and the corrupt, because I love my country and my brothers.
If you don't drink alcohol nor gamble, good for you and your health, but you have no right to deprive me of those. I vow to fight you if you do.
Odin: I agree with Wira. I enjoy alcohol, Mark that, please - ‘enjoy' and not ‘abuse'. Specifically, the types of alcohol I enjoy are wine and extra old brandy. I sip, not guzzle, them. And I consume a glass or two. That is all.
I consume them to savour their taste, not to get tipsy and never mind drunk. I have no wish to be deprived of the pleasure, especially not when in acquiring it I do absolutely no harm to anyone.
Incidentally, it has been confirmed by various qualified parties that when consumed in moderation, alcohol actually has medicinal value.
Blind Freddo: You guys obviously have zero understanding of corruption if you think that Pakatan Rakyat with all the self-righteousness of PAS and its religious laws will have any effect on corruption.
The vast majority of Malaysians have an unhealthy relationship with honesty, add that to an obsession with money and you are getting somewhere near the real cause.
Remember for every case of corruption, you need a corruptor and a corruptee and a lack of ethics in both parties.
Anj2208: Yes, voting for Pakatan doesn't guarantee that there will be no corruption. Corruption stems from greed for money. Even in the country that topped the list of least corrupted, corruption is not unheard of.
You have a choice to vote either for BN or Pakatan. Which party has the political will to fight corruption? My choice is clear. What about yours?
・The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments.
(5) Hadi rubbishes 1M'sia, says PAS' concept key to unity, 16 November 2012
by Nigel Aw
PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang today rubbished the government's 1Malaysia concept to foster national unity, saying that the real key to that end was with PAS' 'Negara Berkebajikan' concept.
"Unity in our country will not exist with just 1Malaysia slogans, coupled with the fanning of narrow racism and oppressing the people of various religions and races in this country," he said when delivering his keynote address at the opening ceremony of the 58th national PAS muktamar in Kota Baru this morning.
Instead, he said, it is political Islam that would help shape unity in a multi-racial society.
Abdul Hadi reiterated that PAS' 'Negara Berkebajikan' concept was a form of political Islam and not be likened to the Western conception of a welfare state.
"Unity and compassion are the main objectives of Islam," Abdul Hadi said when unveiling this year's muktamar's theme entitled ‘Negara Berkebajikan Teras Perpaduan’ (The welfare state is the core to unity).
Contrasting its policies with BN’s, Abdul Hadi told the 1,116 delegates present that Pakatan Rakyat sought to permanently increase the disposable income of the rakyat rather than one-off remedies made by the ruling coalition.
“Even during the Islamic era free lodging and services were provided for musafir (travellers). Therefore here, taxes that burden the rakyat such as tolls can be abolished, free education and treatment provided,” he said.
Weighing in on the government’s National Education Blueprint (NEB), Abdul Hadi criticised it for being void of religious spirit.
“The vision the education system that was suggested failed to give spirit to genuine religion to students in facing the crisis of character in future,” he said.
‘Typhoon of money’
Abdul Hadi said the five years given to Pakatan and by extension PAS was not enough to bring about big changes, on top of facing constraints from the federal government which had interfered in and pressured the states that they ruled.
“Other than that, there are also some weaknesses of our own which must be continuously rectified through the wisdom of problem-solving,” he said.
He urged delegates to be steadfast in facing the next general election as BN will hit the electorate with a “typhoon of money”.
“The whole country will face a typhoon of money that will enter every house and person’s soul.
“PAS must face this test where the rakyat will be courted with money, projects and the like, on top of dirty tactics used by our opponent,” he said.
As such, he said PAS members must be patient in dealing with the mainstream media, which he predicted would be used by the ruling coalition to fan racism in the run-up to the national polls.
He also called on all levels of the party machinery to work together with Pakatan Rakyat in preparing for the next general election.
(6) ‘Party of devils' can't uphold justice for all, says PAS, 16 November 2012
by Nigel Aw
The "devil party" that is "controlled by the devil" is incapable of providing justice for all, said PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang.
"The devil party which is controlled by the devil - the devil that people know - is incapable of upholding justice for all," he said during the opening of the 58th PAS muktamar in Kota Bharu this morning.
However when asked who was he referring to at a press conference later, Hadi replied that he did not name any names.
"Siapa yang makan lada, dialah yang rasa pedas," he added - a Malay idiom that means if a person feels the description fits them, they will know it.
Meanwhile, PAS secretary-general Mustafa Ali said the best person to explain this is former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohammad.
“Go and ask Mahathir, that was said by Mahathir, he was the one who coined the term,” he told a press conference.
Dr Mahathir in a blog posting had urged the people to opt for the “devil they know” rather than risking the country’s future with an “angel they don’t know” in reference to Pakatan Rakyat.
The comments were subsequently used to attack the ruling coalition which Mahathir led for 22 years.
‘Harakah at crossroads’
On a separate matter, Abdul Hadi parried the heavy criticism directed towards party organ Harakah during the muktamar of the party’s youth and ulama wings yesterday.
“So far, I am satisfied with Harakah even with their limited resources.
“We must realise that Harakah is at a crossroads between catering to party members and also the public at large, so there is a dilemma,” he said.
Yesterday, the two wings had called for Harakah’s editorial team to be revamped, accusing it of giving more space to Pakatan Rakyat than its own party.
Abdul Hadi said the party will take into account all views and will discuss the proposal.
On the announcement of election candidates, the Marang MP said it will only be done when the election date is announced.
(7) Remove thorns in PAS' flesh, urge delegates, 16 November 2012
by Nigel Aw
Central PAS delegates at the 58th PAS Muktamar today took a more assertive stance than their counterparts in the ulama and youth wings to back Pakatan Rakyat, even calling for leaders who have gone rogue due to opposition to the political union to be purged from the party.
“PAS has continued to be strong even though it has come under attack from inside and outside, from friends and foe, and former members or leaders.
“We must take strong action and not keep these thorns in the flesh until they become pus, it will become dangerous for the party,” said Perak PAS representative Razman Zakaria during the debate on the party president’s policy speech.
Earlier, Zakaria hailed the PAS supporters wing which comprise of non-Muslims, stating that multi-racialism was the key to political survival in contrast to race-based parties that were narrow.
The confidence towards Pakatan Rakyat was even expressed by the central body’s ulamas, including Salahuddin Nasir, who represented Selangor PAS.
“PAS members must give undivided loyalty to the leaders, we don’t want members who are in PAS but pledge loyalty to those ouside of PAS. For such people, please get out,” he said.
He went on to praise DAP Youth chief Anthony Loke for defending PAS spiritual leader Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat against MCA’s attacks.
He later read out in Mandarin: “I hope the moon is with your heart” in reference to PAS’ flag.
These assertions were made in the absence of former PAS deputy president Nasharuddin Mat Isa at the muktamar today.
The ousted senior leader, who remains as a member of the Syura council, along with sacked former Selangor PAS commissioner Hasan Ali, had accused the party of becoming “lost” due to its cooperation with Pakatan Rakyat.
Before the debates, PAS deputy spiritual leader Haron Din had conceded that some members had made statements in contravention of decisions made in the syura council meetings that provided ammunition for their opponents.
“These people had never raised their issue during the syura council meeting - where we deal with everything in the proper manner - but they do so in the media.
“Sometimes this individual views when brought out of the meeting, without realising it, is exploited by others to blow them out of proportion,” he said, without naming anyone when queried by a delegate who asked why decisions in the syura council were not being obeyed.
Members urged not to jump the gun
Taking the podium during the debates later, Perlis PAS representative Yaakob Abu Seman urged members not to jump the gun in making statements to the media and should instead emulate PAS’ handling of the freedom of religion controversy surrounding PKR's Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar.
“... For example, in the case of Nurul Izzah, the party took a stance not to comment until there was an explanation, that is the best way to handle such an issue,” he said.
Meanwhile, Terengganu PAS representative Azman Ibrahim, too, criticised members for arbitrarily making media statements on hudud law.
“When it concerns faith or syariah, how can one argue based on logic and common sense.
“Some say hudud is not yet suitable to be executed, some say there needs to be understanding from the rakyat first, others say that this hudud polemics is healthy.
“If we are incapable of referring to authoritative sources then it is best to just keep quiet,” he said.
He stressed that PAS should not compromise its principle in its quest to capture Putrajaya.
The debates will recommence tomorrow before concluding on Sunday.
(8) PAS ready to rule M'sia with Pakatan, declares Hadi, 16 November 2012
by Nigel Aw
PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang today declared at the party’s last muktamar before the general election that it is prepared to take federal power with its Pakatan Rakyat allies.
“PAS is ready to accept the responsibility as a component of the federal government or state governments together with Pakatan Rakyat in the next general election.
“We believe with the support of the rakyat and the PAS membership comprising of various areas of expertise along with technocrats that can work with a PAS and Pakatan Rakyat government, we are ready to fulfill a greater responsibility,” he said.
Abdul Hadi added during his keynote speech at the 58th national PAS muktamar at the Pusat Islam Tarbiyah Kelantan in Kota Baru this morning that the party will continue to focus on common ground in upholding tahaluf siyasi (political consensus) with Pakatan Rakyat.
“PAS conducts tahaluf siyasi with an understanding that Pakatan Rakyat upholds the concept of commonality and not focus on differences,” he said.
He added that the party will uphold the coalition’s common policy framework under the banner of Buku Jingga.
“Other than pushing together with Pakatan Rakyat as outlined in the Buku Jingga, PAS would also like to expand its commitment to rectify the damage that has been inflicted on the nation if it is given the chance to hold Putrajaya,” he said.
He said that the coalition will unveil a specific manifesto at an appropriate time.
However, he reminded the 1,116 delegates present that even with this tahaluf siyasi with Pakatan Rakyat, they must abide by PAS’ constitution.
“This tahaluf siyasi should not make us lose sight of PAS members’ understanding towards the concept of Fiqh al-Taat (loyalty) to the party,” he said.
Striking a conciliatory tone, Abdul Hadi said PAS will not seek vengeance if it captures federal power.
“PAS’ commitment gives a guarantee that all levels of state and federal machinery will not be oppressed or taken revenge upon because they will execute the policies of the government of the day elected by the people,” he said.
（End）
