RP Exodus unlikely to be PAP's work

Disclaimer

I have not been involved in grassroots work or politics for more than ten years. As such the opinions I give here are not based on direct feedback from the ground, but just my gut feeling, which is based on what I have experienced when I was involved in ground politics in the past.

I have seen how the PAP (and opposition) worked more than ten years ago. I also note that there is NO CHANGE from both sides in the way they operate, as election strategies. As such, I feel that what is happening today, is still very much the same it was more than ten years ago.

==========



My usual Introductory Yakking -

There are those who feel that the mass exodus of Reform Party (RP) members, which includes the Central Committee members, is the work of PAP. I doubt so. That's because traditionally, PAP has never used this method to weaken the opposition. PAP has never had the record of "trying new things" to hold onto power just before elections. As such, infiltrating the opposition camp is highly unlikely.

In other worlds, why would PAP divert from its usual practice?

Here's what the PAP does just before the General Elections, to strengthen its position and to weaken the opposition.


Tactics used by PAP to strengthen its position -

Race Card Game -
In many past GEs, the theme is about race. That's how the GRC started, remember? Before that, it was all single wards. One of the reasons given was that we need minority representation. In a particular GE, we also had Tang Liang Hong branded a Chinese Chauvinist - a variance of the usual race card game where the Malays have always been the target. And this year, we have Old Man Lee in his book "Hard Truths", questioning the loyalty of the Malays - yet again. Race is a favourite GE tool for the PAP.

Redrawing of boundaries -
Yes, it happens about every GE.

Hand out the goodies -
We had that too.

Play the mass media game and PR game -
Need I say more?

Here are the tactics used to weaken the opposition.


Tactics used by PAP to weaken opposition -

Sue and sue -
PAP does this to ensure that certain opposition members either get jailed or fined just before the GE, so that they will be disqualified from seeking elections. This happened to JBJ and is still happening to Chee Soon Juan.

Sliming individuals rather than attack the parties -
Note that PAP hardly attacks any opposition party as an organisation? They go for the "most threatening" opposition candidate (but sparing CST and LTK). And they do that DURING the campaigning period, not before that. This happened to Francis Seow, Tang Liang Hong and even James Gomez.

The above are the usual "proven and safe" tactics PAP has been using for years since the 1980s, to strengthen itself and to weaken the opposition whenever there's a GE.

Why should it try something different like using moles to infiltrate? Isn't that a stupid thing to do, trying something that is untested, when past tactics have been shown to be "sure winners"?



Dangers of infiltrating enemy camp -

First and foremost, this is something that PAP has NEVER done before as an election strategy. Why risk something that is untested?

Secondly, there is a high risk of the moles cracking up, giving away the game too soon.

If it was designed that moles were put up by PAP so that they could then pull out, this is the stupidest time to do so. It gives the opposition time to regroup and re-strategise. Not to mention it also makes the opposition put up "real" candidates this time round just before GE, because the filtering process would now be much more stringent.

The best time for a planned exodus would be JUST BEFORE nominations. As such, I really do not believe moles have infiltrated the RP.

Another reason for the PAP not to use moles as election strategy would be the highly unpredictable outcomes of such missions. Nobody can predict which way the game would be played out.

Besides moles cracking up under pressure, it also involves high intensive pre-planning, which takes up a lot of resources. It is just not worth the effort and time when the "sure methods" as explained earlier have shown to be very effective.

Putting in a nutshell, why try something that is unknown, when there is a known tested and proven solution to the "problem"?



What (in my opinion) most likely happened -

Kenneth Jeya -
Let's take a look at the man himself. He is new to politics and probably green and wet behind the ears. While he is as intellectual as his late dad, he probably does not have the political astuteness his dad possessed to be able to handle internal conflicts. As such, he allowed it to escalate it to a public level.

Tony and Hazel -
Like Kenneth, these two former PSC scholars are newbies. Being academically smart does not necessarily mean politically smart - or for that matter street smart. After all, they have led the cozy life in the civil service. Politics on the other hand, is a whole different ball game altogether.

I strongly believe it is their inexperience, like Kenneth, that allowed this issue to be blown out of proportion.

As for the mass resignations of about 20 members leaving, including the President, I would also attribute it to the leadership's inexperience and lack of political astuteness, rather than anything else as the cause.

As leaders, if you don't contain or address internal conflicts, members will be disillusioned, no matter how good your intentions may be.



My Conclusion -

Looking at the points I have put up, I really do not believe that PAP has any part in the mass exodus of RP members. It was most likely the ineptness of the leadership, due to inexperience in handling internal conflicts rather than anything else.

This conclusion is drawn from the fact that PAP has traditionally NEVER used infiltration as an election ploy. Why should they abandon their "tested and proven" traditional methods and go for something untested?

This incident in my opinion has damaged Tony and Hazel much more than Kenneth Jeya. Like Chee Soon Juan, who was seen as the villain in the Chiam-Chee dispute, Tony and Hazel in all probability will see their political career severely curtailed, if not end here.

Likewise, as with Chiam, who consolidated his position after the Chiam-Chee saga, I feel that Kenneth will now be in a stronger position, garnering fence sitters to sympathize him.

In the meantime, PAP has benefited for the moment. Without lifting a finger, the opposition has torn itself apart. But if Kenneth is able to recover and pull this through, it surely would be testimony of his mettle (like his dad) at such at early stage - and that will open a new chapter in Singapore's politics. He may well be in a position to finish off what his late dad failed to accomplish.

Kenneth may be the wild card opposition supporters in Singapore have long been waiting for.