|Laman Webantu KM2A1: 4242 File Size: 18.3 Kb *|
TJ MT MGG: Di Bawah Lindungan Bayang-bayang
By M.G.G. Pillai
18/4/2001 5:10 pm Wed
[Mahathir mahu menonjolkan kehebatannya dengan merasmikan UIA
sedangkan semua orang tahu Anwarlah yang bersudah payah merencanakannya
sejak dulu. Kalau nama, jasa dan pujian pun sanggup dicuri apakah lagi
yang akan selamat di bumi Malaysia ini?
Mahathir memang tidak layak langsung memijak universiti itu - kerana
dia menuduh Anwar melakukan perbuatan jijik tanpa syarat sah di sisi
perundangan Islam - salah satu fakulti penting di UIA. Kehadiran
Mahathir hanyalah akan mencemarkan nama baik UIA. Malah ia akan
mencemarkan lagi nama beliau sendiri kerana sengaja mahu memadamkan
jasa Anwar bertahun-tahun di situ. Seseorang itu akan menjadi baik
dengan sendiri - bukannya dengan mencuri atau menumpang puji.
- Editor ]
Di Bawah Lindungan Bayang-bayang
(In his shadow, he opens IIU)
Apabila perdana menteri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, mengisytiharkan pembukaan
Universiti Islam antarabangsa (UIA), dia akan memulakan perpecahan di
kampus itu dan umat Islam negara ini, sekali lagi. Inilah dia
kemuncaknya setelah berlakunya tiga tahun yang panjang dalam
perbalahan politik yang akan berkhir dengan kematian di antara beliau
dengan musuh ketatnya yang kini terpenjara, timbalan perdana menteri,
Majlis hari ini dilaksanakan di sebalik kawalan yang ketat. Satu
senarai jemputan antarabangsa dikatakan mampu mewarnai majlis itu.
Malangnya ramai yang sengaja tidak mahu datang, termasuklah
para penderma yang istimewa yang a menghantar wakil ataupun pegawai
bawahan sebagai proksinya. Media perdana telah memuji-muja wawasan
keIslaman Mahathir sambil memeprlekehkan peranan Anwar sebagai orang
tidak bernama sahaja. Kedua-dua pendapat itu sedang tercabar.
Apa yang berlaku kepada Anwar bukanlah satu perkara yang baru.
Penulisan semula lakaran sejarah merupakan satu kerja harian di
Malaysia. Tanggapan feudal membuatkan perkara itu sesuatu yang tidak
dapat dielakkan. Tidak ada orang yang lebih tinggi pangkatnya daripada
manusia yang sedang mencengkam kuasa, dan tidak ada sesiapa yang begitu
rendah martabatnya yang mampu keluar daripada cengkamannya. Inilah
sebabnya manusia berpaut kepada cebisan kuasa selagi terdaya olehnya,
sanggup bermati-matian mempertahankan kuasa itu selagi belum nazak
untuk dikuburkan pula. Apa yang berlaku kepada UMNO, MCA, MIC,
Gerakan adalah ketakutan munculnya bayang-bayang kegelapan itu yang
akan menelan para pemimpinnya.
Mahathir sedar di waktu itu, tanpa Anwar pembinaan Universiti Islam
Antarabangsa akan menghadapi jalan sukar. Kewibawaan Anwar di kalangan
dunia Islam memang tidak perlu dipertikaikan, dia aktif dalam World
Assembly of Muslim Youth (Perhimpunan Pemuda Islam Se Dunia), mengetuai
Abim, menguruskan satu institusi tutorial berdasarkan ajaran Islam. Anwar
menjadi presiden UIA pada 1983 dan memegang jawatan itu sehinggalah
dipecat. Selama 15 tahun, seluruh dunia sudah menerima hakikatnya bahawa
bayi yang dilahirkan oleh Anwar dalam bentuk UIA itu telah menaikkan
ketokohan Anwar dan juga Mahathir.
Sememangnya tidak ada perubahan yang ketara lagi.
Tuesday April 17
In his shadow, he opens IIU
IIU claims Anwar, its president for 15 of its 18 years, is a digit of no
consequence in its growth, and all credit must go to Mahathir.
Whatever Anwar did is at Mahathir's orders, an IIU spokesperson
insists, and therefore deserves no credit for what IIU is today. It is
Mahathir who should get the credit. He was just, in Umno parlance, a
IIU's growth is hamstrung in this unresolved but relevant conflict. A
collegiate of men under an inspired leader turns institutions around,
not the man who ordered it set up. There is no mistaking that in IIU's
development, it was Anwar who set it on firm foundations, just as his
successor, Sanusi Junid, ensures its financial foundations. But
without Anwar's inspired leadership, Mahathir could not declare it
Since Mahathir laid the foundation of the Gombak campus in 1983, it
should have been the Yang di-Pertuan Agong who should have
done the honours. But it is done now to boost Mahathir's credentials
as an Islamic leader. Unfortunately, it does not. Ever since his
humiliation of Anwar, he cannot step into the campus except under
Today's event therefore is under tight security. An international guest
list sweetens the occasion, but many just stayed away, including
prominent donors, sending second-ranking or no representatives.
The mainstream media praise Mahathir's Islamic vision, and
denigrates Anwar as an Islamic nobody. Both assumptions are
But is that the issue? An Islamic institution with a growing reputation
is charred by its opening conducted in such contentious arguments. It
is made worse by a Prime Minister who looks more to burnishing his
tarred reputation than of the institution he opens. There is nothing
wrong with this. But when it is at the expense of rewriting its history,
something surely is wrong.
In Malaysia, the leader of the moment denigrates his predecessors
and those he wants destroyed. Go to the National Monument in Kuala
Lumpur. No where in the plaque is the name of the man who had it
sculpted - Malaysia's founding father, Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra
Al-Haj. That plaque was put up under the aegis of Mahathir, who at
the time it was put could not forgive the Old Man for challenging his
Umno Baru. Tun Abdul Razak Hussein assiduously turned the Tunku
into a non-person after he took over. Who remembers Tun Hussein
Onn, the immediate past prime minister?
What happens to Anwar is then not new. The rewriting of history is an
everyday affair in Malaysia. The feudal overview makes that
inevitable. There is none so high as the one in charge, and none so
low who is out. This is why men cling on to high office for as long as
possible, fighting tooth and nail not to be put to pasture. What
happens in Umno, MCA, MIC, Gerakan is this fear of the darkness
which would consume its leaders.
When Anwar was in power, he destroyed his potential challengers as
assiduously as Mahathir destroys his now. But should Mahathir have
been as petty when he opens IIU today? Should he not have been
more magnanimous? Why did IIU not accept Anwar's role in its
growth, and insist that what Anwar did was at Mahathir's bidding for
which he should not be remembered by?
But IIU's arguments reek of megalomania. If Mahathir should take
credit for IIU, then he should also take blame for all that is wrong. He
must accept blame or credit for what happened to Anwar. He and he
alone takes credit and blame for all that happened as prime minister.
This goes against the grain. The need to seek others to blame is so
ingrained in Malaysian culture, that one accepts it as routine. His
cabinet ministers quickly shift blame for what goes wrong and are
quick to take credit for what they do right. And so the Prime Minister.
He, for instance, takes credit for appointing his deputy prime
ministers, but not for destroying them.
But what was Anwar's role in the development of IIU? When Mahathir
became Prime Minister in July 1981, he weaned Anwar, then a
leading Islamic intellectual, into Umno to boost his Islamic credentials
to confront PAS' growing theocratic power. One of Anwar's first tasks
was to raise the Islamic College, founded in 1955 by the British, to a
university; another was Islamic banking.
Mahathir knew at the time that without Anwar it could not have been
as well received as it was. Anwar's Islamic credentials were
unquestionable; he was in the World Assembly of Muslim Youth,
head of Abim, ran a well-regarded tutorial institution on Islamic
principles. Anwar became president in 1983 and held it until after he
was dismissed. It was widely accepted during that 15 years that it
was Anwar's baby, and how well he managed it enhanced both his,
and Mahathir's, reputation.
When he fell in 1998, he retained that support within the Muslim
world, one Mahathir tries to this day to destroy. Two Malaysian
ambassadors to the Middle East have that as their main
preoccupation. But the more Anwar is sidelined, the more he looms
large. When credit is deliberately denied, and by official fiat, as now,
it is Mahathir's stature, not Anwar's, that is diminished.
Malaysia was once a society of institutions, in which they were more
important than who worked in them. Under Mahathir, they were
systematically broken down, and credit given to the leader. The
Leader was all important. That worked so long as there was not a
Leon Trotsky or a MarshallLin Piao or a Nelson Mandela or an
Anwar Ibrahim to contend. Stalin and Mao Zedong survived because
they destroyed their challengers. Mandela succeeded, but Anwar is
not yet defeated.
The IIU opening is therefore a much ado about nothing. It had a dual
role - to enhance Mahathir's Islamic credentials, and denigrate the
man who helped him achieve it. That is where everything fell out of
place. It was important that in the formal opening, Anwar was
forgotten. But it is his shadow that is the unseen and most important
guest today. That should worry Mahathir no end.
Nothing has changed.