Bersama: a new political choice?

 Without a credible coalition strategy, Bersama risks becoming yet another party that voices public frustration without being able to translate it into political power.

From Tian Chua

The launch of Parti Bersama Malaysia by Rafizi Ramli has reignited debate about the future of reform politics in Malaysia.

Through an energetic social media campaign and familiar reformist rhetoric, the party presents itself as a fresh political force capable of restoring ideals that many believe have been abandoned by the existing political establishment.

The question, however, is not whether Bersama can articulate public frustrations. The more important question is whether it can transform those frustrations into political power capable of delivering meaningful reform.

Malaysian political history suggests that the success of reform movements depends not merely on the strength of their ideas, but on their ability to build broad coalitions capable of winning and exercising power.

On this front, Bersama faces its greatest challenge.

From reform movement to fragmented politics

For more than two decades, “change” has been the defining theme of Malaysian politics.

When Reformasi emerged in 1998, the political landscape was fundamentally different. Barisan Nasional, dominated by Umno, held an overwhelming monopoly on power. There was already criticism of authoritarian laws, restrictions on civil liberties, and abuses of power by civil societies and the opposition.

Before PKR was born, DAP and PAS had long served as parliamentary watchdogs, while Parti Rakyat Malaysia, despite limited electoral success, offered a progressive and principled alternative in Malaysian political discourse.

At the time, the idea that the government could be replaced through elections seemed almost unimaginable. PKR did not introduce entirely new critiques of the political establishment. Its historic contribution was something far more significant: it produced a credible political vehicle capable of challenging Umno’s dominance.

That effort culminated in the 2018 general election, when Pakatan Harapan achieved what many had long considered impossible – the first peaceful democratic transfer of power in Malaysian history.

Unfortunately, the post-2018 period exposed a different reality. The collapse of one-party dominance did not automatically produce a stable governing system. Instead, Malaysia entered an era of fragmented coalitions, shifting alliances, and competing centres of power. Governments became more fragile, while reform efforts faced resistance not only from entrenched institutions but also from within ruling coalitions themselves.

The central challenge of Malaysian politics was no longer how to defeat a dominant ruling party. It became how to govern and reform within a fragmented landscape.

Rafizi’s departure

Despite being one of PKR’s most recognised figures, Rafizi’s relationship with Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim deteriorated following PKR’s internal elections. After losing the contest for the deputy presidency, Rafizi resigned from the Cabinet. He and former PKR vice-president Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad subsequently resigned as MPs and later left PKR altogether.

They argued that the party had drifted from its founding ideals and no longer embodied the reformist vision that once inspired its supporters. Bersama was launched as an attempt to reclaim that lost idealism.

Yet a closer examination of the party’s stated objectives reveals little difference from PKR’s own platform. Many of Bersama’s policy positions would not be controversial among PKR members. The dispute appears to be less about policy than about leadership – or more precisely, personality.

Rafizi has built a reputation as PKR’s most prominent firebrand. But successful politics requires more than persuasive rhetoric and political agitation. Building a governing force demands coalition management, grassroots mobilisation, organisational discipline, and the ability to reconcile competing social and political interests. Political change is rarely achieved by individuals alone; it is the product of collective effort.

In this sense, politics is like football: a team cannot survive on strikers alone. A complete team needs forwards, midfielders, defenders, and a goalkeeper. A party’s strength ultimately depends on team performance, not individual talent.

A political party, especially one aspiring to govern, must be able to respond to complex and sometimes contradictory societal demands. Governance requires compromise, institutional management, coalition-building, grassroots machinery, and long-term organisational discipline. Conviction and rhetoric alone are insufficient.

Bersama: a vehicle for change or merely noise?

According to Rafizi, Bersama exists to offer voters a courageous and principled alternative to the existing political order.

However, this endeavour is neither new nor unique. Malaysia already has many voices – primarily from civil society – capable of criticising the government.

What transformed Malaysian politics over the past two decades was not the existence of criticism, but the construction of coalitions capable of replacing those in power. This was PKR’s greatest historical achievement. Its significance lay not primarily in ideological innovation, but in its ability to unite diverse political forces behind a common electoral project.

Through Barisan Alternatif, Pakatan Rakyat, and eventually Pakatan Harapan, PKR functioned as a bridge between political actors who might otherwise never have cooperated. It succeeded because it recognised a fundamental truth of Malaysian politics: reform requires alliances.

This lesson remains highly relevant today. Many parties before Bersama – Muda, Pejuang, Parti Sosialis Malaysia, and others – attempted to channel public dissatisfaction into political support. Their primary problem was not a lack of good ideas or reform agendas. Their limited impact stemmed from their inability to generate sufficient political strength, organisational capacity, and, most crucially, the strategic partnerships needed to convert ideals into governing power.

Alliance-building is the real test

Malaysia’s first-past-the-post electoral system rewards cooperation and penalises fragmentation. Opposition parties that compete against one another often end up strengthening larger, more established rivals. Electoral history repeatedly demonstrates that opposition unity is frequently the decisive factor in defeating incumbents.

For this reason, Rafizi’s apparent reluctance to prioritise coalition-building represents Bersama’s most serious strategic weakness.

Political purity may appeal to disillusioned voters, but purity alone rarely wins elections. Unless Bersama can secure an outright parliamentary majority – an almost certainly unlikely outcome for any new party – its ability to influence national policy will ultimately depend on cooperation with other political actors.

The paradox is unavoidable. The very compromises Rafizi now criticises may eventually become necessary if Bersama hopes to achieve the reforms it advocates.

Limited reform potential: disruptive, not transformative

In the near term, Bersama is unlikely to fundamentally reshape Malaysian politics. Building a viable national party requires far more than charismatic leadership and social media visibility. It demands grassroots networks, organisational discipline, financial resources, electoral machinery, and years of sustained political work.

For now, Bersama appears content to occupy the comfort zone of the fearless critic. It has not positioned itself to function as an agent of structural change. As a result, its immediate impact is likely to be disruptive rather than transformative.

Even if it wins only a handful of seats – or none at all – it could weaken the broader reform bloc by splitting votes in marginal constituencies. The irony confronting many splinter parties is that they are founded in the name of strengthening reform, yet often end up assisting the very forces they seek to oppose.

Without a credible coalition strategy, Bersama risks becoming yet another party that voices public frustration without being able to translate it into political power. Reform is not achieved merely by identifying problems. It requires the difficult work of raising awareness, building consensus, accumulating strength, and assembling majorities.

A party may have the right ideas. But without the capacity to unite people behind them, those ideas remain aspirations – not change. - FMT

Tian Chua is a former two-term Batu MP and a former PKR vice-president.

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