Najib and Anwar came to Sarawak these last 2 days -Najib to Miri and Anwar to Kuching. It is interesting to compare the different messages brought by the 2 leaders to see what the future vision these leaders have for Sarawak if not the country as a whole:
Najib reportedly asked the 63 BN Assemblypersons in closed door sessions about the chances of winning for each of them. The impression is one of active preparation for elections-whether state or simultaneous state and Parliament elections. Another impression is that: he cannot trust the report of the paramount state leader-Taib Mahmud. It could not be reported if he asked the Assemblypersons if they prefer Taib to step down and who is their preferred new state leader. Najib give a very personal approach to dealing with the BN reps-jumping over the head of the state bosses. But there could also be an issue: is this direct questioning of the state reps aimed at the Sarawak reps than reps from all other states?
Anwar reportedly made 2 new-1 intended to take advantage of the unheavals in Tunisia and Egypt to pile pressure on Taib to step down, another unintended, which is to explain the loss of their 1-month old Sabah state leader to UMNO. On the 1st issue he draw a line between the Eypytian and Tunisian up-rising approach and his Pakatan’s `peaceful’ and democratic approach through the ballot box. Wonder if that may give an impression that he does not endorse a people’s peaceful gathering, a democratic right, to express opposition to the current CM.
On the Sabah issue the `sympathetic’ explanation given for the defection was that the state chief could not take the removal of him from the post due to lack of support from other factionalised PKR state leaders. This `sympathetic’ explanation may be needed to partly explain the initial appointment of this state chief by the party HQ-which apparently was made without endorsement of the aforementioned state leaders.
Comparison: which leader’s approach is more effective to remove Taib as an over-staying leader? Najib”s `polling’ of the state reps may be a more direct means to gauge Taib’s support. Should he fail to find the kind of support for Taib’s retirement basically there is no way to proceed. It is not clear if the controlled state reps(who are scared if they are not re-apointed by Taib as candidates in coming state elections) can speak freely and represent the voices of those they formally represent! By comparison Anwar’s message is more ambivalent: he want the result but not the methods of the Tunisians and the Egyptians in toppling the tyrants. The lapse of the party in appointing an unpopular state chief also add to the confusion. So: Sarawakians themselves need to make up their mind as to the means and ends in replacing their over-staying leader.