Sampai bila, Ayah Chik?

Why should fear of different ethnicities and religions be used as a tool to keep political support? This question should be asked every time religion and ethnicity are used to portray political opponents as threats to people's lives. PAS President Hadi Awang's latest statement that DAP leading Pakatan Harapan is continuing the colonialist work to wipe out Malay Islam is not just an attack on a political party.

When a party is accused of wanting to eliminate a nation and religion, the message received by the people is not simply "don't vote for them." It is that they are a threat to us. This is where politics becomes dangerous. This is not the first time Hadi has made strong statements against DAP. Everybody knows this, so there is no need to dwell on it.

Hadi, known as Ayah Chik among his supporters, has every right to criticize DAP. PAS also has the right to reject the foundations and struggles of that party. However, accusing someone of wanting to eliminate Malays and Islam requires evidence. If it is true, provide the evidence. If not, the people have the right to question why fear is being used as a political weapon.

History should teach us. For those who have followed Malaysia's politics since the 1980s, Hadi's political approach is not a new story. The name of Marang MP is still linked to Haji Hadi's orders given in Kampung Banggol Peradong, Terengganu on April 7, 1981. This order became one of the major debates in the history of PAS-Umno, especially regarding faith, politics, and secular-humanistic culture.

We do not need to revive all the controversies. It is enough to learn from them. When politics becomes too intertwined with issues of faith and identity, the struggle between parties can turn into division within society. After four decades, it has changed. Once Umno, now DAP. But the question remains: why must political opponents be portrayed as a threat to the nation and religion?

Show evidence If it is true that DAP wants to eliminate Malays and Islam, show evidence to the people. What do you want to eliminate? Islamic status as the national religion? The Malay language? The monarchy's special status? The special status of Malays? Which foundation? Which decision? State the claim, not repeat the accusation until people start treating it as fact.

This does not mean DAP is safe from criticism. If there is a foundation that harms Malays, criticize it. If there is a decision that undermines Islamic interests, question it. That is democracy. But there is a difference between criticizing foundations and accusing a party of wanting to eliminate a nation and religion. Claiming something is wrong is an argument.

Claiming a party wants to eliminate Malays and Islam is a serious accusation. And serious accusations require evidence. No wonder Hadi's statement received harsh reactions from DAP, who accused him of being a religious judge and claimed that his political approach was dangerous because it seemed to make PAS an Islamic party. He said, Hadi does not practice the advice of Ikhwanul Muslimin leader Hassan al-Hudhaibi: "We are witnesses, not judges."

The question is not who is more Muslim or who is more Malay, but how far religion should be used to determine who is considered right and who should be feared in politics. If every political opponent is labeled as a threat to religion, political differences will no longer be just differences in foundations. They will become moral and religious battles.

Malays do not always need to be frightened. The issue of Melayu is often used in politics with an easy formula. The people are told they are threatened, then a certain group appears as a defender. Every time an election arrives, a new enemy can emerge. Ultimately, society is divided between us and them. But after decades of playing this politics, why are there still Malay families struggling with education, jobs, income, homes, and the future of their children?

If you want to defend Malays, talk about all of this. Malays do not become strong because every moment they are told they are being chased by an enemy. Malays become strong when their education, economy, and opportunities for living improve. So does Islam. Islam does not become stronger because its name is used as a bullet to attack political opponents.

Islam also brings values of justice, trust, morality, and responsibility. Hadi knows the weight of his words, Ayah Chik, has been circulating in politics for decades. He must know how powerful Malay and Islamic sentiment is in shaping support. That is why his responsibility is greater. A leader is responsible not only for what he says but also for the impact of his words on society.

After a statement is made, what remains? Does the people now understand the foundation? Or are they more afraid of a relative from another ethnicity, suspicious of people of different religions, and hating a different political party? If this situation continues, our society may ultimately be taken where? Do not make the people a victim.

Hadi can defend Malays. PAS can advocate Islam. PAS can oppose DAP. There is nothing wrong with that, but the accusation should be based on record, foundation, figures, arguments, and evidence. Do not turn every political difference into a threat to the nation and religion. Elections will come and go. Governments can change. Parties can win and lose, but the people must always live together.

Malays can still work with Chinese. Muslims can still trade with non-Muslims. The children still learn and grow in the same community. This is reality. Therefore, if Malays and Islam want to be defended, defend them with foundations, arguments, and results - not by frightening the people with an enemy that never existed.