The season for political theatre has begun

One of the most common things people say about politics is that it is complicated. Malaysian politics certainly is.

But contrary to popular belief, it is not that difficult to read. After all, Malaysian politicians are generally not as sophisticated as many imagine.

Their statements, behaviour, alliances and betrayals often reveal far more than they intend. If voters pay attention to what politicians do rather than what they say, the picture becomes much clearer.

Johor state election 

Over the past few months, we have witnessed a series of political manoeuvres that have dominated headlines.

Rafizi Ramli and Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad left PKR and later launched Bersama.

In Johor, Menteri Besar Onn Hafiz Ghazi, had been making a series of political announcements before eventually dissolving the state assembly.

Not long afterwards, he issued a strong statement suggesting that Barisan Nasional should contest alone and not cooperate with Pakatan Harapan component parties, particularly DAP, despite both parties being part of the same federal government in Putrajaya.

Meanwhile, in Negeri Sembilan, Umno withdrew support from a PH-led administration and attempted to form a new government with Perikatan Nasional.

In political terms, this is no longer considered theatrical; it is more akin to backstabbing.

The move, however, collapsed. The menteri besar eventually dissolved the assembly and accused Umno of political betrayal.

To ordinary voters, these developments appear confusing. To politicians, however, it is just another day in politics.

This is because election season is approaching. And when elections approach, many politicians switch from governing mode to theatre mode.

Media hype 

The media naturally focuses on dramatic announcements, emotional speeches, political quarrels and public confrontations. These stories generate attention, attract clicks and dominate the news cycle.

Social media is full of such theatrical acts, but while the public is distracted by the drama, the real political calculations are often taking place behind closed doors. That is where realpolitik begins.

The latest big news is Hamzah Zainudin.

After his departure from Bersatu, he spent months promoting what he called a “reset agenda”.

Many observers wondered whether it was merely a pressure tactic, a negotiating position or a genuine political project.

On Saturday the 13th, the answer became clearer.

With strong backing from PAS, the agenda evolved into the formation of Parti Wawasan Negara.

Hamzah’s speech was calm but pointed. Wawasan will want to be part of PN, which will make it awkward for his former party, Bersatu, to remain.

I think they will eject Muhyiddin’s party from the cockpit soon.

Zaid Ibrahim 

During that same weekend, PAS was involved in another political development in Negeri Sembilan, welcoming new members, including Zaid Ibrahim, a maverick politician long associated with liberal and centre-left views.

Listening to the speeches of three senior PAS leaders welcoming him, one cannot help but notice that they think highly of Zaid.

The fact that he was among the rare few to defeat PAS for the Kota Bharu parliamentary seat, doing so in the 2004 general election despite the party’s control of the state, was no small feat, said Takiyuddin Hassan, the current PAS secretary-general.

Zaid reciprocated by saying that he has a role to play in helping improve PAS’s image. I saw that as a genuine statement that deserves applause. For a 75-year-old veteran to assume that role, and for PAS to embrace that ambition, is highly admirable.

On the surface, these developments appear inconsistent.

Why would conservative PAS embrace figures with very different political backgrounds?

The answer is simple: elections are won through arithmetic before they are won through ideology. That is realpolitik, and I think Malaysians should work out this simple mathematical equation.

When political theatre ends, realpolitik takes over. But politicians will not talk about realpolitik now. The theatre is what they want voters to see, and they are actively scripting this play.

Realpolitik is what politicians actually need to govern in our 222-seat Dewan Rakyat.

This distinction becomes even more important as elections draw closer.

Political theatre is designed to create emotions. It relies on slogans. The more outraged voters become, the better it is for politicians.

In Malaysia, it also relies on identity politics. Bumiputera versus non-Bumiputera narratives become amplified, while race and religion become increasingly intertwined.

The campaign becomes about creating enemies and telling supporters what they want to hear. Malaysia has seen this repeatedly.

‘No Anwar, no DAP’ 

Many voters still remember Umno’s famous slogan before the 2022 general election: “No Anwar, No DAP.”

The slogan generated excitement among their own supporters. It created headlines and mobilised the party base.

Then the results were announced, and reality kicked in.

Following the election, Umno, left with only 26 seats, had little choice but to join a government led by Anwar Ibrahim, and worked alongside DAP. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi still became deputy prime minister.

So be careful the next time you attend a political theatrical event.

Our current prime minister seems very adept at political theatrics. He comes alive and whips up audience emotions. Various slogans have served his political purposes during election campaigns.

After the election, however, other practical political considerations take over.

That is the difference between theatre and realpolitik.

The same caution should be applied to current statements coming from various politicians and parties.

When leaders say they will never work with a particular party, voters should ask whether they truly mean it or whether they simply need applause from their own supporters before polling day.

When politicians suddenly become champions of reform, voters should ask where those principles were applied during the previous term.

When parties discover new enemies every week, voters should ask whether the conflict is genuine or carefully scripted for electoral advantage.

The closer Malaysia gets to election day, the more political theatre voters will encounter.

There will be dramatic speeches and apparent public quarrels.

There will be threats, declarations, resignations, defections and grand promises.

Some will be genuine; many will not.

The challenge for voters is not to become emotionally invested in the performance.

Instead, voters should judge politicians using a much simpler standard.

What did they actually do when they held power?

Did they improve governance?

Did they strengthen our institutions?

Did they fulfil major promises made in their campaign manifesto?

Did they solve real problems, especially unemployment?

Why do 350,000 Johoreans cross the causeway to Singapore daily?

Where’s the solutions to affordable housing?

And many more bread-and-butter issues.

Wise voters will learn to recognise the difference. Once they do, they will know exactly which parties and candidates deserve support, which deserve scrutiny, and which deserve rejection.

The author can be reached at: [email protected].

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.