A Unity Government Is Not Enough: Sabah Proved It, Now Putrajaya Must Do More
A Unity Government Is Not Enough: Sabah Proved It, Now Putrajaya Must Do More
Why Sabah’s verdict is bigger than a “Chinese tsunami” or Rafizi’s exit – and how unity governments from the UK to New Zealand keep failing for the same reasons Malaysia is now repeating.
We love easy stories in politics.
When Sabah delivered a brutal verdict on Pakatan Harapan, the instant narratives came thick and fast:
- “This is the Chinese tsunami against DAP.”
- “This is what happens when Rafizi is no longer around.”
- “This is PMX insulting the Chinese community with ‘lu siau eh’.”
All of that contains fragments of truth. But if we stop there, we are just scratching the paint, not the metal.
If we really want to understand what just happened – and what is coming in GE16 – we must step back like an eagle, look at the map, and admit something uncomfortable:
Sabah is not just a local protest. It is a structural verdict on the logic of unity governments in Westminster systems – from London to Wellington to Kuala Lumpur.
I’ve been in Sabah since October, moving around, listening, watching. The ground is saying something deeper than “we hate PH”. It is saying: “We are done subsidising your illusions.”
1. The Unity Government Trap: Calm First, Collapse Later
Malaysia treats its “unity government” as something almost romantic – “all sides coming together for the sake of the nation”. But if we zoom out across Commonwealth countries with the Westminster system, a pattern appears.
Hard question #1: If unity governments are so brilliant, why do they keep bleeding their own supporters everywhere they appear?
United Kingdom: The Cameron–Clegg Coalition (2010–2015)
The Conservatives needed stability. The Liberal Democrats wanted influence. They formed a coalition after the 2010 election.
- Lib Dems compromised on tuition fees and austerity.
- They were punished by their own base in 2015.
- From 57 seats, they were reduced to just 8.
The senior partner (Conservatives) survived. The junior partner (Lib Dems) almost died.
Does that sound familiar to DAP and PKR today?
New Zealand: Jacinda Ardern & the Impossible Balancing Act
Jacinda came in as a global icon – empathy, communication, crisis leadership. She led a Labour government that tried to be:
- progressive enough for the left,
- calming enough for the middle,
- reassuring enough for business.
In the end, she was attacked from both sides:
- “Too little, too slow” on housing and inequality,
- “Too much, too disruptive” on regulation and rights.
She stepped down, visibly exhausted. Her successor was punished at the ballot box.
Hard question #2: Are we expecting Anwar to succeed where Jacinda, with all her goodwill and clarity, still struggled – while he carries far heavier baggage?
Thailand, Indonesia, Japan – When Reform Governments Hit Reality
- Thailand: Youth-driven Move Forward Party won hearts and seats, but the establishment blocked them. Voters felt cheated. Street legitimacy rose, institutional legitimacy fell.
- Indonesia: Jokowi’s popularity did not shield his coalition from backlash over dynasty politics, court interference, and high living costs.
- Japan: The DPJ (Democratic Party of Japan) promised reform, won in 2009, and fell apart within three years. Inexperience, infighting and poor execution crippled them. The old guard (LDP) returned with even more control.
The script is familiar:
Post-crisis unity or reform government → Overloaded expectations → Internal contradictions → Half-measures → Public disappointment → Collapse or punishment.
Malaysia is not special. We are simply replaying a script others already suffered through.
2. Sabah Was Never a Fixed Deposit – 2018 Was the Anomaly
One of the laziest stereotypes in Peninsular analysis is this: “Sabah is a fixed deposit for whoever gives them money.”
Hard question #3: When will we stop talking about Sabah like a ATM machine instead of a political civilisation with its own logic?
Sabah politics is:
- multi-layered and personality-driven,
- rooted in “Sabah first” instincts,
- deeply sensitive to federal arrogance,
- and shaped by memory of broken promises.
2018 was not Sabah falling in love with PH. 2018 was Sabah using PH as a tool to break BN’s monopoly.
DAP’s urban wins in 2018 and 2020 were not an eternal marriage. They were:
- a protest against UMNO–BN excesses,
- a reaction to Sheraton and “katak-katak” politics,
- a test: “Show us you’re different.”
From October on the ground, talking to people, it was clear:
- They were not saying “We love PH forever.”
- They were saying “We are watching. Don’t treat us like decorations.”
Sabah 2025 is not a sudden swing. It is a correction. A recalibration back to what Sabah has always been:
“We will work with you. But we belong to nobody.”
3. Rafizi: Symptom of a Deeper Disease, Not a Fallen Messiah
It is tempting to write a dramatic story:
- Rafizi the whistleblower,
- Rafizi the data wizard,
- Rafizi the Economy Minister,
- Rafizi the sacrificed reformer,
- Now Rafizi as the “I told you so” ghost haunting PH.
There is truth in his journey. But if we reduce everything to “PH fell because Rafizi left”, we are missing the real danger.
Hard question #4: If your entire project collapses the moment one man leaves, was it ever a project – or just a personality cult with better branding?
Rafizi represented an approach:
- data before rhetoric,
- systems before slogans,
- policy experiments before press conferences,
- spreadsheets before selfies.
He warned about:
- minority fatigue,
- Indian frustration,
- Chinese drift,
- youth disillusionment,
- Sabah & Sarawak rethinking their loyalties.
When that approach was rejected, it signalled something deeper:
This unity government chose comfort politics over correction politics.
Even if he had stayed in Cabinet, the structural pressures would remain:
- multi-party contradictions in one government,
- constant need to balance right and left,
- ethno-religious anxieties,
- limited budget space,
- internal warlords protecting their networks.
Rafizi could delay the bleeding. He could not rewrite the whole system alone.
4. Hard Questions for Leaders – And For Us
If Sabah is a warning, then we must stop talking in comfort language. We need to talk in cross-examination mode:
Who are you actually serving?
The party? The donors? The palace? Your own network? Or the rakyat who line up quietly in the rain to vote you in?
When was the last time you walked the ground without an entourage?
Most “turun padang” are parades – 5 bodyguards, 3 media officers, 2 PA, 1 social media guy. Sabahans can smell staged humility from a kilometre away.
If you say you have nothing to hide, why is transparency so frightening?
Why are asset declarations partial? Why are some case files untouchable? Why are certain names never mentioned in anti-corruption speeches?
Why should voters trust you if you don’t trust independent institutions?
If leaders keep interfering – or appearing to interfere – with:
- MACC,
- AGC,
- courts,
- police,
- media,
then voters will interfere where it hurts you most: the ballot box.
Do you want to be popular—or effective?
You cannot be a reformist and a people-pleaser at the same time. Real reform disappoints someone. If you are pleasing everyone, you are probably fixing nothing.
Why is Malaysia so allergic to competence?
Why do we:
- promote loyalists instead of problem-solvers,
- reward yes-men instead of administrators,
- fear thinkers but embrace operators?
We cannot complain about governance while celebrating anti-intellectualism in politics.
5. Managing Expectations: The Reform Government Trap
Reform or “unity” governments everywhere walk into the same expectation trap:
- They promise to save the country from crisis.
- Voters expect dramatic improvement within 12–24 months.
- Institutions resist change because reform threatens the powerful.
- Opposition weaponises the gap between promise and reality.
- The reform coalition fractures under pressure and internal ego.
Hard question #5: Did PH ever sit down with Malaysians and honestly say, “We cannot fix everything, but here are the three big things we will deliver, and here is the timeline”?
Instead, we got:
- a long list of slogans,
- overlap of committees and councils,
- mixed signals on key cases,
- and an obsession with optics over clarity.
If you cannot manage expectations, expectations will manage you.
6. Don’t Please Everyone – Solve Real Problems
A serious government must choose: Do we want to be loved, or do we want to leave the country in better shape?
To fix Malaysia, someone will have to:
- offend some business cartels,
- offend some religious extremists,
- offend some political warlords,
- offend some civil servants who refuse performance,
- offend some middle-class groups who demand benefits without trade-offs.
Right now, our unity government seems afraid to offend anyone important – so it ends up disappointing everyone else.
Hard question #6: Which battle has this government deliberately chosen—and stayed with—knowing it will cost them votes, but save the country in 10 years?
If the answer is “none”, then we are not living under a reform government. We are living under a caretaker government that fears its own shadow.
7. Put Wrongdoers Behind Bars – Or Retire the Word “Reform”
Nothing destroys credibility faster than selective integrity.
If you say:
- “No one is above the law,”
- “We are serious about corruption,”
- “Institutions must be respected,”
then the rakyat will naturally ask:
Why are some cases fast-tracked and others frozen?
Why do some powerful figures face full consequences, while others quietly “settle”?
Why do we see small fish in orange lockups and big names in VIP lounges?
Either:
- apply the law consistently,
- publish clear reasons when decisions are made,
- protect investigators from political interference,
or stop using the vocabulary of reform. Because the more you say “bersih”, the more hypocrisy stands out.
8. The Youth Voter Reality: No One Owns Gen-Z
Undi18 and automatic voter registration changed the game forever.
Young voters do not:
- idolise 90s political heroes,
- inherit party loyalties from their parents,
- tolerate obvious hypocrisy,
- get scared as easily by racial ghost stories.
They want:
- affordable food, housing, and education,
- decent wages, not just side hustles,
- non-corrupt leadership,
- non-racist, non-fanatic politics,
- freedom to think, create, and move.
Hard question #7: What has this unity government done—clearly and measurably—that a 22-year-old can feel in their daily life?
PH does not automatically own the youth vote. PN does not either. No one owns them. They are the new swing bloc.
To earn them, leaders must:
- talk straight, not in paragraphs of jargon,
- admit when policy fails,
- publish KPIs and hit at least some of them,
- be seen on the ground without media crews,
- stop using race and religion as a shield for incompetence.
9. DAP, PKR & Brand Value: Who Really Matters to the Public?
Right now, the bigger “brands” in Malaysian politics, in the eyes of many, are not necessarily the old warlords. They are the governance brands:
- Rafizi Ramli – data and anti-establishment intelligence,
- Gobind Singh Deo – legal integrity and competence,
- Hannah Yeoh – delivery-oriented administration,
- Steven Sim – policy depth and visible hard work,
- Young Syefura (Rara) – youth magnet and progressive Malay voice,
- Syahredzan Johan – consistent rights-based governance stance,
- Khairy Jamaluddin – modern governance appeal,
- Syed Saddiq – youth mobilisation and courage to break ranks,
- Abang Jo & Hajiji – state-first leaders who appear focused on delivery and dignity.
Hard question #8 (for parties): Are you empowering these governance brands—or are you quietly afraid they outshine the party logo?
DAP is not weak because it has no talent. It has Gobind, Ramkarpal, Hannah Yeoh, Anthony Loke, Steven Sim, Nga Kor Ming, Rara, Syahredzan, Tengku Zulpuri and more.
PKR is not brainless. It has Rafizi-style thinkers—even if not many.
The problem is not a shortage of capable leaders. The problem is:
A political culture that still treats competence as a threat and loyalty as a qualification.
10. Back to Basics: What Anwar & PH Must Do – If They Are Serious
If we strip away ego, history and sentiment, Anwar Ibrahim and PH now stand at a fork in the road.
- Chase those who hate you: Spend the rest of this term trying to “win” ultra-conservative hearts that may never accept you, moving rightwards, diluting reform, sacrificing your base, and losing everyone slowly.
-
Return to those who carried you:
Rebuild trust with:
- urban Malays who believed Reformasi meant something,
- Chinese and Indian voters who took risks backing PH twice,
- Sabah and Sarawak voters who demanded a fair federation,
- youth who showed up expecting a different kind of politics.
Hard question #9: Who is more important to you – the “walaun” who will never accept you, or the ordinary Malaysians who stood by you when you had nothing?
Going back to basics does not mean replaying 1998 speeches. It means:
- Clean, visible, consistent governance – no more double standards.
- Radical honesty about what can and cannot be done.
- Prioritising a few big reforms and delivering them properly.
- Protecting institutions even when it hurts your own side.
- Letting thinkers and doers lead, not just loyalists and orators.
11. The Public’s Responsibility: We Cannot Keep Rewarding Mediocrity
It is easy to say:
- “Politicians fail us.”
- “Leaders are corrupt.”
- “Parties are useless.”
Hard question #10 (for all of us): How many times have we still voted for the same faces because they were “famous”, “from our community”, or “the lesser evil” – even when we knew they were mediocre?
We cannot rebuild governance if:
- we cheer race-baiting when it suits our side,
- we forgive corruption as long as “our people” benefit,
- we attack whistleblowers and protect personalities,
- we are impressed by big crowds instead of big ideas.
If Sabah has taught us anything, it is this:
Voters are no longer married to anyone. They are dating performance.
12. The Eagle View: What Sabah Really Signalled
Sabah is not the end of the story. Sabah is the first loud siren on the dashboard.
It is telling PH, PKR, DAP, PMX and all future leaders:
- Unity governments calm crises, but bleed support if they forget reform.
- Rafizi was a warning system, not a magic shield.
- Sabah was never your fixed deposit; 2018 was your probation period.
- You cannot preach Madani while practising selective integrity.
- You cannot win Gen-Z with 90s thinking.
- You cannot save institutions while constantly testing their limits.
Final question: When the next election comes, will this government say “We stabilised the country”, or can it say “We corrected the direction”?
Because history is not kind to unity governments that choose comfort over courage.
In the UK, New Zealand, Thailand, Japan, Indonesia and beyond, the story is clear:
Those who manage expectations honestly, execute a few hard reforms well, and stay on the ground—not on the stage—earn a second chance. Those who live in echo chambers do not.
Malaysia still has a window. But Sabah has reduced the margin for error.
If leaders continue living on slogans while agencies are infiltrated by greed and fanaticism, the voters will do what Sabah just did: quietly, surgically, and without drama—they will change the cast.
— Amarjeet Singh @ AJ
Comments