One of the most interesting aspects to come out of the election agreement (or of you like, contract) between Anwar Ibrahim and Najib, namely, a 'reconciliation clause' regarding post election, has been denied by both sides.
And like all boleh-stuff, the denials by both sides are damn attractive because a 'clause' in an agreement couldn't have existed or come into mention unless at least one side had raised or proposed it, and besides, we Malaysians just love a conspiracy theory.
Thus it's up to us, if we have nothing else to do wakakaka, to academically speculate on the basis of likelihood as to who had proposed the 'reconciliation clause'. I shall not add my usual 'wakakaka' lest I give my own thoughts away ..... ooops-a-daisy!
Besides, in the midst of all the distractions provided by questions such as: who was the initiator of the 'peaceful (or gentlemanly) handover' agreement, how legal would it be when one party signed the agreement whilst the other didn't, and finally but not least, how dare Jusuf Kalla, the Indon mediator, venture beyond his role as mediator (not negotiator) and mere witness to the agreement, in making alien intrusive comments on Malaysian politics, we somehow missed out an interesting 'clause'.
Yes, with all these controversial questions dangling around the issue of the so-called peace agreement for a post election situation, we have somehow missed the 'reconciliation clause' which could have raised or impacted upon the political significance, potential ramification and future cohesive (or likely lack of) consequences for the Pakatan Rakyat coalition.
Indeed, even today we're still debating the revelations by, firstly, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) of Anwar Ibrahim's alleged reneging of the deal, and secondly, Jusuf Kalla in his condemnation of Anwar as 'mad' to believe he won GE-13 with only 89 federal parliamentary seats against Najib's 133.
Hmmm, re the second, namely Jusuf Kalla's condemnation of Anwar as 'mad', I recall Anwar making the same claim in 2008 with only 82 seats against AAB's 140 in the notorious 916 demand, so if we were to accept Jusuf Kalla's accusation, Anwar must have been 'mad' since 2008.
But of course we aren't going to tolerate a foreigner, any foreigner even if he was Anwar's friend in Indonesia's Ikatan Cendekiawan Muslim Indonesia, (ICMI), condemning our dearly beloved DSAI.
I just wonder whether the UMNO Youth-led violent disruption of Apcet II in KL Asia Hotel until its abandonment had anything to do with ICMI. Yup, why would Malaysia jeopardize its international reputation by violent disruption of an international forum that had nothing to do with Malaysia?
Maybe we should seek enlightenment from that Apcet II Destroyer, Saifuddin Nasution, who's now in a powerful political position in the Selangor government, very much akin to that gained by a BN back-door senator.
Oh, while you're pondering about Anwar's Kalla-rized 'madness', you may wish also to reflect on Anwar reneging on his personal promise to retire from politics in the event Pakatan did not win the election.
If all those are done with, let's now re-examine that 'reconciliation clause' that we missed out completely in the general brouhaha about who initiated the deal and Jusuf Kalla's objectionable 'kah-liu' (extra ingredients) after Anwar refused to accept the election results.
According to a WSJ report, there was a clause in the pact that the winner was to offer the loser a role in a 'reconciliation government'. However, post election, both Najib and Anwar denied or claimed they had rejected it.
But as I mentioned, there couldn't have been such a 'clause' unless at least one party had proposed it.
 |
| like good old times .. eh? hmmm, maybe not lah |
And like all boleh-stuff, the denials by both sides are damn attractive because a 'clause' in an agreement couldn't have existed or come into mention unless at least one side had raised or proposed it, and besides, we Malaysians just love a conspiracy theory.
Thus it's up to us, if we have nothing else to do wakakaka, to academically speculate on the basis of likelihood as to who had proposed the 'reconciliation clause'. I shall not add my usual 'wakakaka' lest I give my own thoughts away ..... ooops-a-daisy!
Besides, in the midst of all the distractions provided by questions such as: who was the initiator of the 'peaceful (or gentlemanly) handover' agreement, how legal would it be when one party signed the agreement whilst the other didn't, and finally but not least, how dare Jusuf Kalla, the Indon mediator, venture beyond his role as mediator (not negotiator) and mere witness to the agreement, in making alien intrusive comments on Malaysian politics, we somehow missed out an interesting 'clause'.
Yes, with all these controversial questions dangling around the issue of the so-called peace agreement for a post election situation, we have somehow missed the 'reconciliation clause' which could have raised or impacted upon the political significance, potential ramification and future cohesive (or likely lack of) consequences for the Pakatan Rakyat coalition.
Indeed, even today we're still debating the revelations by, firstly, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) of Anwar Ibrahim's alleged reneging of the deal, and secondly, Jusuf Kalla in his condemnation of Anwar as 'mad' to believe he won GE-13 with only 89 federal parliamentary seats against Najib's 133.
 |
| Malaysia's smiling tigers, wakakaka |
Hmmm, re the second, namely Jusuf Kalla's condemnation of Anwar as 'mad', I recall Anwar making the same claim in 2008 with only 82 seats against AAB's 140 in the notorious 916 demand, so if we were to accept Jusuf Kalla's accusation, Anwar must have been 'mad' since 2008.
But of course we aren't going to tolerate a foreigner, any foreigner even if he was Anwar's friend in Indonesia's Ikatan Cendekiawan Muslim Indonesia, (ICMI), condemning our dearly beloved DSAI.
I just wonder whether the UMNO Youth-led violent disruption of Apcet II in KL Asia Hotel until its abandonment had anything to do with ICMI. Yup, why would Malaysia jeopardize its international reputation by violent disruption of an international forum that had nothing to do with Malaysia?
Maybe we should seek enlightenment from that Apcet II Destroyer, Saifuddin Nasution, who's now in a powerful political position in the Selangor government, very much akin to that gained by a BN back-door senator.
Oh, while you're pondering about Anwar's Kalla-rized 'madness', you may wish also to reflect on Anwar reneging on his personal promise to retire from politics in the event Pakatan did not win the election.
If all those are done with, let's now re-examine that 'reconciliation clause' that we missed out completely in the general brouhaha about who initiated the deal and Jusuf Kalla's objectionable 'kah-liu' (extra ingredients) after Anwar refused to accept the election results.
According to a WSJ report, there was a clause in the pact that the winner was to offer the loser a role in a 'reconciliation government'. However, post election, both Najib and Anwar denied or claimed they had rejected it.
But as I mentioned, there couldn't have been such a 'clause' unless at least one party had proposed it.
If according to Jusuf Kalla, Anwar was the one who approached him to mediate the agreement for a peaceful acceptance of the election outcome, then could it possibly be that Anwar had proposed the 'reconciliation clause'? I don't know but do you?
Nonetheless, we need to bear in mind that Anwar had denied two issues, where he insisted that, firstly, it was Jusuf and not him, who first proposed such a peaceful agreement, and secondly, he had rejected the 'reconciliation clause' in the agreement, which was for the winner of GE-13 to offer the loser a role in a 'reconciliation government'.
And may I safely say that around half the voting population believes in him, regardless?
But let's see what the speculation has been on the Malaysian grapevine.
Pre-election, many political experts/analysts predicted that BN would continue to hold Putrajaya, and it would be a fair while (perhaps 2018) before Pakatan becomes the majority ruling coalition.
Some (including one of my better known visitors AR, as well as RPK) even forecast accurately that Pakatan would win 80 to 90 federal parliamentary seats and BN 130 to 140 seats.
Look matey, if the pundits had predicted this outcome, wouldn't Anwar Ibrahim and his team of political analysts logically come up with the same figures?
What the grapevine had indicated (well, more like ‘speculated’) that Anwar, having known such an outcome that he would lost the election and not become the PM, had strategized by laying grounds for the future, namely the next general election in 2018. And isn't that exactly what strategy is about?
AR, my blog visitor, suggested that the strategy identified the most important outcome of the so-called peaceful agreement was not the part that required the loser to acknowledge the winner but actually the part that provided for the loser to be possibly given a role in the new administration – in other words, a real implementation and manifestation of the ‘reconciliation clause’.
And who came up with this ‘reconciliation clause’ in the agreement? Surely not Jusuf Kalla who was only a mediator and not a negotiator. Since I don’t know, I'm afraid you have to work it out yourself.
Both Najib and Anwar have already rejected the provisions in that clause, who knows (and speculating again), perhaps one out of embarrassment for being rejected and the other not wanting to touch it with a 10-foot pole.
But to reiterate, both Najib and Anwar have pordah-ed that ‘reconciliation clause’, wakakaka.
I wonder, mind you, only academically since the ‘reconciliation clause’ was rejected, whether it could have involved a ‘reconciliation’ cabinet position for, say, young sweetie Nurul Izzah, in Najib's administration, perhaps in a not so politically powerful role as, say, Minister for Women’s Affairs or Minister in the PM’s Office, that sort of window dressing ministerial role unlikely to impact on UMNO’s own power grid or be privy to UMNO's sub rosa stuff.
Or, instead of Nurul, perhaps a good PKR candidate like Azmin Ali who would feel quite comfy in an UMNO-dominated cabinet where he could once again be a giant instead of his current (more 'diminished') status in Pakatan, wakakaka.
And we mustn't forget PAS as the 3rd of the 'Malay Unity' Triad. But WTF should we even speculate on how many cabinet positions might have been offered to PAS since both Najib and Anwar have rejected the ‘reconciliation clause’ in the peaceful agreement, but oooh, just wondering what orgasms that could possibly have given people like Nasharudin Mt Isa, Hasan Ali and company ;-)
But what could possibly be the profit for each party in such an unlikely scenario, unless we speculate wildly, like for example:
... Najib gaining from the ‘reconciliation’ implementation of at least 15 MPs to give him the desired 2/3 majority in Parliament (remember, pre election, 'twas said Najib's future depended on him winning at least a 2/3 majority), and
... most importantly for Anwar (by then, back from the cold) regaining a foothold once again in UMNO via either Nurul or Azmin being in the midst of UMNO's power centre, where then his powerful manmanlai skills, networking and smiles would see him reassert his charismatic magnetic leadership a la his iconic status of the early 1990’s.
Speculating once again, but what about DAP, the ‘other’ Pakatan member?
Well, for a start fuck them and tell them to be satisfied with and ‘grateful’ (wakakaka) for Penang.
Anyway, all the above are wild speculations of no worth, and you read them at your own discretion, wakakaka.
Related: The Anwar-Najib contract
Nonetheless, we need to bear in mind that Anwar had denied two issues, where he insisted that, firstly, it was Jusuf and not him, who first proposed such a peaceful agreement, and secondly, he had rejected the 'reconciliation clause' in the agreement, which was for the winner of GE-13 to offer the loser a role in a 'reconciliation government'.
And may I safely say that around half the voting population believes in him, regardless?
But let's see what the speculation has been on the Malaysian grapevine.
Pre-election, many political experts/analysts predicted that BN would continue to hold Putrajaya, and it would be a fair while (perhaps 2018) before Pakatan becomes the majority ruling coalition.
Some (including one of my better known visitors AR, as well as RPK) even forecast accurately that Pakatan would win 80 to 90 federal parliamentary seats and BN 130 to 140 seats.
Look matey, if the pundits had predicted this outcome, wouldn't Anwar Ibrahim and his team of political analysts logically come up with the same figures?
What the grapevine had indicated (well, more like ‘speculated’) that Anwar, having known such an outcome that he would lost the election and not become the PM, had strategized by laying grounds for the future, namely the next general election in 2018. And isn't that exactly what strategy is about?
AR, my blog visitor, suggested that the strategy identified the most important outcome of the so-called peaceful agreement was not the part that required the loser to acknowledge the winner but actually the part that provided for the loser to be possibly given a role in the new administration – in other words, a real implementation and manifestation of the ‘reconciliation clause’.
And who came up with this ‘reconciliation clause’ in the agreement? Surely not Jusuf Kalla who was only a mediator and not a negotiator. Since I don’t know, I'm afraid you have to work it out yourself.
Both Najib and Anwar have already rejected the provisions in that clause, who knows (and speculating again), perhaps one out of embarrassment for being rejected and the other not wanting to touch it with a 10-foot pole.
 |
| Besides, Najib wouldn't dare offend someone who hates Anwar wakakaka |
But to reiterate, both Najib and Anwar have pordah-ed that ‘reconciliation clause’, wakakaka.
I wonder, mind you, only academically since the ‘reconciliation clause’ was rejected, whether it could have involved a ‘reconciliation’ cabinet position for, say, young sweetie Nurul Izzah, in Najib's administration, perhaps in a not so politically powerful role as, say, Minister for Women’s Affairs or Minister in the PM’s Office, that sort of window dressing ministerial role unlikely to impact on UMNO’s own power grid or be privy to UMNO's sub rosa stuff.
Or, instead of Nurul, perhaps a good PKR candidate like Azmin Ali who would feel quite comfy in an UMNO-dominated cabinet where he could once again be a giant instead of his current (more 'diminished') status in Pakatan, wakakaka.
 |
| wakakaka |
And we mustn't forget PAS as the 3rd of the 'Malay Unity' Triad. But WTF should we even speculate on how many cabinet positions might have been offered to PAS since both Najib and Anwar have rejected the ‘reconciliation clause’ in the peaceful agreement, but oooh, just wondering what orgasms that could possibly have given people like Nasharudin Mt Isa, Hasan Ali and company ;-)
But what could possibly be the profit for each party in such an unlikely scenario, unless we speculate wildly, like for example:
... Najib gaining from the ‘reconciliation’ implementation of at least 15 MPs to give him the desired 2/3 majority in Parliament (remember, pre election, 'twas said Najib's future depended on him winning at least a 2/3 majority), and
... most importantly for Anwar (by then, back from the cold) regaining a foothold once again in UMNO via either Nurul or Azmin being in the midst of UMNO's power centre, where then his powerful manmanlai skills, networking and smiles would see him reassert his charismatic magnetic leadership a la his iconic status of the early 1990’s.
Speculating once again, but what about DAP, the ‘other’ Pakatan member?
Well, for a start fuck them and tell them to be satisfied with and ‘grateful’ (wakakaka) for Penang.
Anyway, all the above are wild speculations of no worth, and you read them at your own discretion, wakakaka.
Related: The Anwar-Najib contract
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.