EVENTS in Malaysia beginning last weekend have received widespread attention globally. When the Prime Minister announced his retirement, shock waves were felt throughout the nation and the region.
Questions as to who will succeed Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad were posed and pondered upon by many. Fortunately, all the doubts, questions and uncertainty were cleared up with the statement that was announced on Tuesday afternoon. Among other things, we have been informed that the successor to the Prime Minister will be his deputy, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
The fact that the Prime Minister named his successor shows that there will be continuity in the country’s policies. This is important to the business community, in particular investors.
Continuity ensures stability. For a country to prosper and succeed, its political and social climate must not only be stable, but at the same time should be seen as stable. As such, the move to pinpoint the person to become the country’s fifth Prime Minister is crucial in ensuring that confidence in Malaysia is not eroded.
In other words, the status quo is ensured – and this is not a bad thing. If we look back at the history of Islam, “positive status quoism” was practised by the Prophet himself in ensuring that there existed socio- political stability in the community.
For a “young” Muslim community to gather strength more than 1,400 years ago, the Prophet adopted the approach of positive status quoism so that the Muslims would not bicker among each other when it mattered most.
Malaysia is, relatively speaking, a “young” nation. As such, positive status quoism is much needed in ensuring that stability is not compromised by anyone especially in this day and age where threats can come anytime anywhere in any form.
It is crucial for Malaysia to be united, strong and resilient in facing the many challenges that globalisation will bring. To do this, Malaysia must have a strong leader and he must receive undivided support from all quarters.
Let us return to the discussion on “positive status quoism”. In actual fact, this is one aspect of the Prophet’s style of administration and leadership approach which is rarely, if ever, touched upon.
The basic principle of Islamic activism is displaying restraint in adverse situations and forbearing from any negative reaction. This is clearly stated in verse 35 of Surah al-Ahqaf of the Quran to the effect that: “Therefore patiently persevere, as did (all) apostles of inflexible purpose; and be in no haste about the unbelievers”.
In other words, when confronted with unexpected circumstances or unfavourable situations, actions to be taken should be based on the socio- political reality whereby decisions are based on facts and not emotions. Without actually meddling with the predominant state of affairs, one should instead try to ascertain the opportunities from the situation and benefit from these opportunities.
Challenging the status quo would, more often than not, result in a negative starting point for any kind of activism. Antithetically, putting faith in the status quo and benefiting from the present opportunities would bring a positive starting point.
A complete machination of positive status quoism can be traced in the biography of the Prophet of Islam. Prophet Muhammad received his first prophetic call in 610 A.D. in the city of Mecca. The city was then dominated by idol-worshippers.
The Prophet was, on the other hand, an upholder of monotheism. Nonetheless, he did not upset the status quo. Instead he used whatever opportunities available to him.
The Kaabah was then the centre for the people of Mecca, where daily meetings were held. The Prophet began to treat these gatherings for the purpose of dakwah. He visited the Kaabah daily and, rather than intruding on the idol-worshippers, he would recite Quranic verses to them.
This peaceful approach attracted many people to Islam and brought many positive results to the Prophet. The calm environment, which was quintessential for dakwah activities, remained uninterrupted in Mecca. As a result of the inspiring success of his dakwah efforts, the increasingly worried idol-worshippers issued a death warrant on the Prophet 13 years after his prophethood.
When the Prophet heard this, he did not seek either to repeal the decision of the Meccans or initiate a demonstration. The course of action he took was to quietly migrate to Yathrib (which was later renamed Medina). Even after arriving in Medina, the Prophet did not plan any countermeasures. Rather, he focused on the task of dakwah.
This was another illustration of positive status quoism. By evading a direct showdown with the status quo, the Prophet benefited in that he found another avenue to proceed with his peaceful movement.
The community of Medina consisted of the Muslims (the Muhajirin from Mecca and the Ansar of Medina), the idol-worshippers and the Jews. Welcoming the social equilibrium as it was, the Prophet instituted a system based on plurality, which was the first of its kind. Under this unique system, Medina was a city-state with the Prophet as the head of state.
The other communities were granted the right to lead their lives and decide their disputes in accordance with their respective religions, beliefs and cultures. This is yet another classic example of status quoism as practised by the Prophet. The result of this strategy was phenomenal. The initially multi-cultural society progressively metamorphosed into a united unicultural society.
The Meccans, meanwhile, did not put an end to their animosity towards the Prophet. They launched two major battles, Badar and Uhud, against the Muslims. These wars disturbed the peaceful atmosphere needed to accomplish dakwah activities.
Consequently, the Prophet negotiated with the Meccans and, accepting all their terms unilaterally, entered into a 10-year peace covenant, known as the Hudaibiyyah Treaty. Many of the Prophet’s companions protested against this lopsided treaty but his wisdom prevailed.
Yet again this was another excellent example of positive status quoism. While the terms of the Meccans seemed skewed and biased on the surface, the Prophet succeeded in utilising opportunities for dakwah under the existing status quo. This resulted in a victory as stated in the first verse of Surah al-Fath of the Quran to the effect that: “Verily We have granted thee a manifest victory”.
After the Prophet’s death, the question of who should be chosen as the head of state was raised. This was decided with the aid of the Prophet’s own words: “The head of state will be selected from amongst the Quraish”. This appeared to be a strange injunction as the teaching of Islam clearly stated that all mankind is equal. To some, this guideline seemed to be an apparent discrimination.
Nevertheless, far from being a case of discrimination, this prophetic injunction was actually based on the socio-political reality of that time. As a matter of fact, over the centuries, the Quraish had acquired the position of leadership in Hijjaz (present-day Saudi Arabia). Upsetting this status quo would have resulted in insurmountable uncertainties. This was the underlying reason that the Prophet advised the Muslims to accept the existing political system.
In due course with this wise policy, the unity of the Muslims had endured and, at the same time, dakwah efforts proceeded unobstructed even after the Prophet’s death. Positive status quoism is thus viewed as a permanent and practical policy of Islam in sociopolitical matters.
Looking at our present state of affairs, it is perhaps wise for us to seriously study “positive status quoism” as practised by Prophet Muhammad. We can learn much from this great man by analysing his way of thinking, particularly with regard to his sociopolitical pragmatism.
The events that took place over the last one week in the country are a very good example of positive status quoism as practised in Malaysia. By naming the Deputy Prime Minister as the next Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir has maintained the status quo in guaranteeing that the present leadership style and Government policies would be continued.
This would provide for the much needed confidence by many quarters in ensuring that the country’s social, political and economic climate is healthy.