SHAH ALAM – Bersatu’s decision to support the government led by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim through a Confidence and Supply Agreement (CSA), while continuing to oppose Pakatan Harapan (PH) in the Melaka State Election, reflects a pragmatic approach that tests the consistency of its principles and voters’ trust in the party.
Political analyst Dr Mohamad Hafis Amat Simin said the move reflected Bersatu’s attempt to balance cooperation at the federal level with its political interests and survival at the state level, including its decision to contest eight state seats under its own banner.
He said that from the perspective of rational choice theory, the approach could be understood as an effort by Bersatu to expand its political space and strengthen its bargaining power amid changing relationships between political parties.
“However, behind this approach lie more fundamental questions about consistency of principles, leadership credibility and Bersatu’s ability to maintain voters’ trust,” he told Sinar Harian.
He explained that the CSA allowed Bersatu to cooperate with the government on specific matters, including administrative stability, Budget 2027, institutional reforms and development allocations for parliamentary constituencies, without necessarily joining PH.
However, he said Bersatu needed to explain why it supported Anwar’s government in Parliament while continuing to compete against PH in the state election.
“The distinction between institutional cooperation and electoral competition may be acceptable within democratic practice. However, without a consistent explanation, this approach could create confusion over the party’s political identity and position,” he said.
Commenting on Bersatu’s selection of eight seats in Melaka, Hafis said five of them had been won by Barisan Nasional (BN) in the 2021 state election, namely Lendu, Gadek, Pantai Kundor, Kelebang and Pengkalan Batu.
Two others, Sungai Udang and Bemban, were won by Perikatan Nasional (PN), while Ayer Keroh was held by PH.
He said this pattern suggested that Bersatu was not merely seeking to maintain its rivalry with PH, but was also attempting to defend its influence among voters who had previously supported PN.
“The changing political relationship between BN and Pas makes the contest in Melaka more significant, as supporters of the former coalition now face different party choices and political alliances,” he said.
PN votes may not automatically shift
Hafis said support for PN in 2021 did not necessarily stem solely from Bersatu’s strength, but might also have been influenced by Pas, the leadership of Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin or voters’ desire for an alternative to BN and PH.
This is particularly important in three marginal BN seats - Gadek, Kelebang and Pengkalan Batu - which were won by majorities of just 559, 876 and 131 votes respectively.
“In contests with a history of narrow majorities, a shift in support among a few hundred voters can influence the outcome.
“However, it would be unreasonable to assume that all previous PN votes will automatically shift to BN following BN-Pas cooperation. From the perspective of voter behaviour, votes are not transferred mechanically through agreements between party leaders,” he said.
He explained that voters also considered party identity, the acceptability of candidates, local issues, economic interests and government performance before making their choices.
Therefore, Bersatu’s presence could influence the distribution of votes among BN, PH and other parties, depending on voting patterns in each constituency.
On Bersatu’s decision to contest Ayer Keroh, which DAP won with a majority of 5,624 votes in 2021, he said the move added a different dimension to the party’s political strategy.
“The contest can be seen as an attempt to demonstrate that cooperation through the CSA at the federal level does not mean Bersatu is ending its rivalry with PH. It could also be an effort to build political influence in urban areas and test voters’ acceptance of the party’s identity,” he said.
However, Hafis stressed that Bersatu’s participation in Ayer Keroh did not prove that the contest was merely symbolic or intended to conceal a political understanding with PH.
Similarly, he said the existence of the CSA did not necessarily prove that there was an informal agreement between the two parties on seat allocation.
“Electoral patterns can be used to develop hypotheses about a party’s strategy, but they are insufficient to establish its actual motives without stronger supporting evidence,” he said.
Lessons from the Negeri Sembilan defeat
Commenting on Bersatu’s performance in the Negeri Sembilan state election on Aug 1, he said the party failed to win any seats despite contesting 24 of the 36 state constituencies under its own banner, including losing Labu, a seat it had previously held.
He said the results highlighted the challenges Bersatu faced when contesting outside a coalition that had previously been a source of its political strength.
They also raised questions about the extent to which support for Bersatu depended on its own organisational strength, the networks of coalition partners or the popularity of its national leadership.
“A party may have considerable influence at the national level, but that influence cannot necessarily be translated into victories at the constituency level without candidates who are accepted by the local community, an organised grassroots machinery and continuous engagement with voters.
“Therefore, Bersatu’s decision to contest only eight seats in Melaka, compared with 24 in Negeri Sembilan, could be interpreted as a possible shift in its approach to constituency selection and resource allocation,” he said.
Hafis said the experience demonstrated that a party’s strength within a coalition might not be the same when it contested independently.
Commenting on Bersatu’s direction ahead of the 16th General Election (GE16), he said cooperation and competition could coexist in a parliamentary democracy. However, a pragmatic approach needed to be accompanied by consistent explanations to maintain voters’ trust.
“If a party changes its position without a convincing explanation, voters may find it difficult to determine whether its actions are driven by policy interests or considerations related to the organisation’s survival,” he said.
Nevertheless, he said it was too early to conclude that Bersatu had chosen a new political alignment, as the CSA might simply represent limited institutional cooperation, while its decision to contest in Melaka showed that the party was still defending its autonomy.
“The party’s true direction can only be assessed more clearly through its official decisions and political actions after the election,” he said.
He added that one of the key tests would be Bersatu’s position if it won seats in the Melaka State Legislative Assembly, including whether it would remain in the opposition, conditionally support the state administration or participate in negotiations to form the government.