Sajakkini

James Wong Wing On

For several weeks up to last weekend, the Malaysian Chinese Association’s (MCA) elections dominated space in local newspapers, in particular the Chinese-language dailies.

Contradictory impressions have emerged from the coverage. One common impression gained is that MCA is more democratic than the United Malays National Organisation (Umno) and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC).

Umno seems to allow procedurally freer elections at all levels of the party, while the MIC is more autocratic and paternalistic.

However, there is also an observation that MCA’s ‘internal democracy’ has been plagued by money politics, triad connections, warlord-ism, phantom members and poison-pen letters.

The media image also suggested that the MCA is a significant political party, although this is disputed by those who warn of distortion of the reality, since a large segment of the Malaysian media is owned and controlled by component parties of the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition. For instance, MCA alones owns The Star, Nanyang Siang Pau and China Press.

To explore this and related issues, malaysiakini talked to Phoon Weng Keong, a specialist observer of Chinese Malaysian politics. A researcher at the New Era College, he holds a MA from the Centre of East Asian Studies at Cheng Chi University in Taiwan. He was formerly a feature writer at Sin Chew Jit Poh.

Malaysiakini: Is there still a Team A and Team B in MCA and does the factional division persist? If not, what has brought about reconciliation?

Phoon: This year’s party elections showed up contests motivated by the animosity between Team A and Team B in some places. Many outsiders have also been using the bipolar paradigm to comprehend MCA’s factional politics, but the reality is that the bipolar paradigm is gradually losing its original meaning. There is now a process of re-fragmentation that transcends the Team A-B divide.

Since the reconciliation in May last year, (MCA president) Ong Ka Ting and (his deputy) Chan Kong Choy have reached a consensus and have built a tactical alliance because both of them have obtained what they want. However, some elements of the factional divide still linger at the grassroots level. There is also a complex process of re-fragmentation within the original Team A and Team B.

In MCA, the emergence of factions is not based on any differences in terms of policy or along political lines. Even within factions, there are no common ideas or ideologies. It is all based on power and interest. Above all, it is determined by whether there is a common enemy to fight. So, under such circumstances, the level of factional coherence is very low and the durability is also very limited. The factional configuration in MCA has always highly unstable. There is no group discipline and obligation within any faction: one can join one faction at one moment and defect at another moment when personal expectations are not met or commitments are not fulfilled.

The emergence of Team B was motivated by a desire to confront a common enemy, namely former president Ling Liong Sik. Once Ling left, Team B’s coherence was downsized. Lim Ah Lek, for example, decided to retire from politics. His strategist, Wong Mook Leong, has kept a very low profile since Ling’s departure. The tactical alliance between Ong Ka Ting and Chan Kong Choy - who is not willing as well as incapable of leading Team B - has caused the disintegration of Team B. So, supporters have had to part ways and save their skin. Some of them have also been contained and suppressed.

Team A also faces dilemmas and problems. One such problem is how to handle the elderly leaders of Team A who refuse to retire. So, the reconciliation of the top leaders of Team A and Team B has caused frictions like the reported discord between Ong Ka Ting and Dr Chua Soi Lek.

It is unlikely there will again be a bipolar confrontation between Team A and Team B. However, within the teams, there is a process of re-fragmentation and re-grouping. There are also local groups and loners who play the wild card. MCA is facing a situation of warlord-ism.

Judging from the heated and emotional campaign for the chair of MCA’s Serdang division between incumbent Yap Pian Hon and his former protégé Liew Yuen Keong, there is an issue of a generational power struggle. Liew has publicly charged Yap with staying in power for too long. How serious is the generational gap and friction among the leaders and members?

Overall, many MCA members are ageing and the party has recently become aware of the problem. It wants to attract youth, especially young professionals, as members. But the MCA, having been preoccupied with the factional power struggle, has lost a sense of idealism, while its influence within the government is limited. It does not find it easy to attract youths of quality. What it has succeeded in enrolling are some younger people with special personal interests. They hope to use politics to enhance their career and social standing, or even business interests.

One reason for this is that Ling Liong Sik and Lim Ah Lek were in power for too long, thus adversely affecting peers like Dr Ting Chew Peh and Jimmy Chua Jui Meng. Youth chief Ong Tee Keat has also been stagnant politically.

Is there generational power struggle in MCA? Not necessarily. The case of Yap and Liew using age and generation as campaign themes is a pretext to cover up the struggle over their real interests as well as local animosities. Using age and generation as campaign themes also exposes their poverty of political ideas.

If, at the national party elections, Ting, Chua Jui Meng and Dr Fong Chan Onn are questioned or challenged because of their age, then what it actually reflects is dissatisfaction with their remaining in power. In any case, there are actually not many differences of thinking, ideas and perspectives between the so-called veterans and Young Turks.

Former president Ling was reported to have publicly campaigned for his two sons during the elections. How powerful or influential is Ling? Given that Ong Ka Ting’s elder brother Ka Chuan is still the MCA Perak chairperson, is it true that family cliques are slowly becoming a feature of MCA?

Ling’s retirement was not voluntary. He retired because he had lost the support of (former premier) Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Ling is now president of the council of University Tunku Abdul Rahman. This obviously is a quid pro quo arrangement between him and Ong. So, Ling still has a certain degree of influence within the MCA.

JAMES WONG WING ON is chief analyst of Strategic Analysis Malaysia. He is a former DAP member of Parliament for Kampar (1990-1995) and a former columnist for the Sin Chew Jit Poh Chinese daily (now Sin Chew Daily). He read political science and economics at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.

That Ling has declined to retire fully has obviously much to do with unsettled personal and family financial problems. Seen in this light, it is not difficult to understand why his two sons have come out to contest in the party elections. This, of course, is an attempt to extend Ling’s family influence within MCA. However, Ling’s credibility and standing within the party and the society at large is not that positive. After his departure, his supporters turned to other leaders for patronage. If Ling does not know his place and time and still tries to excessively extend his influence, then more frictions would surface between him and his successor.

There is a history of family politics in MCA such as the case of Tan Cheng Lok and Tan Siew Sin, HS Lee and his son, as well as Alex Lee and his father. They were there on their own merit and were acceptable to MCA at the time. However, subsequent MCA leaders have gradually lost those credentials and credibility. Since family politics tend to monopolise resources, it is no longer acceptable. In today’s MCA, warlords are aplenty and it is therefore very difficult for Ong Ka Ting and Ong Ka Chuan to extend their family power. Their image and standing are also not very powerful.

Why haven’t Ong Ka Ting and Chan Kong Choy been challenged by more senior party leaders who are also more technocratic like lawyer Chui Jui Meng or medical practitioner Dr Chua Soi Lek or economist Fong?

Over the last 10 years, MCA politics have undergone a huge transformation. From the presidency of Tan Siew Sin to that of Lee San Choon, there was a shift at the leadership level with grassroots politicians and leaders taking over from the technocratic and professional elite. These top leaders, who come from the grassroots, understand the language of the masses and are good at managing the mass media. They enjoy tremendous advantages.

The shift in MCA’s organisational culture accelerated in the 1980s when Tan Khoon Swan and Neo Yee Pan openly confronted each other. At the time, after the Chinese community had experienced the pressures of the New Economic Policy and the consolidation of state capitalism, a split surfaced between the traditional technocratic elite and a new political-business elite.

Moreover, as MCA grows in its organisation, those leaders who are conditioned by a bureaucratic and administrative culture like Chua Jui Meng or former academicians like Ting and Fong may not meet the needs of the grassroots. This has led to the rise of Chinese-educated grassroots leaders like Ong Ka Ting and Chan Kong Choy. Because they were once political secretaries, they know politics from the inside and are also supported by their bosses. They have been able to combine grassroots political skills and insider-knowledge to build their political capital.

Tomorrow: Does MCA politics really matter?

Malaysiakini: Dissecting MCA politics