IN the beginning, there was Umno (est 1946).
In 1989, Semangat 46 splintered off from Umno.
In 1999, KeADILan (now PKR) splintered off from Umno.
In 2016, Bersatu splintered off from Umno.
And then there were the splinters from the splinters.
In 2015, Amanah splintered off from PAS.
In 2020, Pejuang splintered off from Bersatu.
And now, in 2026, PKR has finally hit “big party” status, achieving membership in this club by having its very own splinter party: Parti Bersama Malaysia (Bersama).
And just yesterday, former Bersatu deputy president Hamzah Zainudin announced his new splinter party, Parti Wawasan Negara.
In many ways, the history of Malaysian politics is the history of an amoeba: splintering and splintering, again and again, repeating a seemingly endless pattern.
The very first PAS split may have been somewhat ideological, as was the case of Amanah splitting from PAS. But every other split has been a lot more about power struggles between individuals than it has been about principles or ideology.
Semangat 46 was largely about Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah. KeADILan was largely about Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Bersatu was all about Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. And Pejuang was about, well, Dr Mahathir again.
These splits are largely due to the “winner takes all” structure of most Malaysian political parties.
If you are not the absolute No.1 boss in the party, then more often than not, your ability to influence the direction of the party, or (more importantly) who gets named to important positions is reduced to basically zero.
Your incentives for continuing to stay around in a party as an impotent ghost, just floating around, then also basically drop to zero.
I’m not here to wring my hands at this sad state of affairs. There’s no value in that. There may be some value in at least recognising this pattern, and recognising why it is so.
That is the first step towards one day breaking it.
We are also now seeing a complete realignment of coalition politics, unfolding before our eyes in real time.
The old Pakatan Rakyat stayed together to contest one general election before it fell apart.
Pakatan Harapan has contested two general elections as a coalition. Most likely, they will contest a third. Even this small number is already likely record-setting for a non-Barisan Nasional coalition.
Perikatan Nasional has only contested one general election together, and it seems unlikely they will contest the next one in any similarly recognisable form.
Each of these coalitions and the plethora of newly formed political entities are likely to be tested in the Johor and Negri Sembilan state elections.
I think we can posit three main possible outcomes here.
First, an Umno-led coalition scores a clear victory.
Second, a different coalition scores a clear victory.
Third, no coalition scores a clear victory.
I could be very wrong, but the current rumblings on the ground suggest that option two is not worth splitting into more specific sub-options.
This is partly because there have probably been some gaps over the last few years when it comes to communicating exactly what a Pakatan Harapan-led coalition has brought to the table, and in what ways it has succeeded in making Malaysia a better place.
The results of these state elections will of course heavily influence how things will unfold in the general election (GE).
In the event option one or two is the outcome, then of course that winning coalition will go into the next GE as is, with great confidence.
If it is option one, Umno will likely go all out to secure as early an election as possible, and will likely put immense pressure on PMX to dissolve Parliament. It remains uncertain to what degree Anwar can parry that pressure.
If option three materialises, which is entirely possible, Anwar has a brief window of oppor-tunity to pivot into a particular value proposition going into the next GE, and argue:
“Look, haven’t you had enough of all this bickering?
“Enough of this endless splintering, and splintering from splinters?”
PMX could then somewhat plausibly argue that even though there were many pitfalls, challenges, and roadblocks, he managed to hold together one coalition for most of one full term at least – bringing together people like Umno and DAP in a historical alliance, never done before.
Ideally, he would be able to present a much clearer case than before of relatively good economic management as well, to add some substance to this flowery idea.
Ultimately, there is no doubt that this endless splintering and bickering does not benefit the country – not without massive structural change, and truly fresh ideas that serve as rocket fuel for actual, groundbreaking paradigm shifts.
If a group of people can truly achieve the latter, then we could finally be talking about a seriously new dawn, and an actual break from the past.
Experience, however, has taught me just how difficult such an endeavour can be. Not impossible, but difficult.
It’s also not impossible that such a thing could happen before the next GE, but perhaps we should not be holding our breath, for now at least.
Part of the reason for this is – and I am open minded enough to say that this can change – the current “new players” on the scene are (like every splinter party before them), not so much “new players”, but old players who failed to gain control of their old parties.
It may be a tad hasty to say so conclusively, but one could be forgiven for suspecting that we would be in for an old wine and new bottles kind of scenario – at least until we see some clear signs of that groundbreaking paradigm shifts that we want.
Absent that, it may be worth maintaining, at the very least, the relative political calm of the last few years.
To be fair, it has not been an exciting time, filled with grand, progressive reforms. To be fair, we’ve seen our fair share of very disturbing corruption.
I am also extremely wary of using old arguments that pivot on “Well, we should get excited about this and support unconditionally just because it’s the lesser of two terrible evils”.
That said, I do remember the chaotic days before Anwar, which can be summarised in the shortest of sentences: three prime ministers in four years.
As the world falls apart around us, and the global order is being reshaped at lightning speed, that kind of excruciating political instability is likely to be the last thing we need.
Nathaniel Tan is a strategic communications consultant, who wonders how long before he starts having AI write his articles. He can be reached at nat@engage.my. The views expressed here are solely the writer’s own.
