a warning one must not ignore

And so it goes on - Mahathir last week renewed his critical remarks and scathing attacks on the current administration headed by Pak Lah, responding to the 'answers' given by the members of Pak Lah administration towards Mahathir's earlier queries.

In this latest round, Mahathir's attacks reached new stratospheric heights when he implied that someone else - a 'brilliant Oxford graduate' - is controlling crucial government decisions from behind the scenes.

Ardent followers of Malaysian politics have no doubt exactly who he is referring to.

I do not know to what extent that statement is true but I think one thing that this entire episode between Pak Lah and Mahathir had clearly revealed to us all is that there are a lot of behind-the-scenes, shady and unspoken dealings within the Malaysian government.

I think more than anything else, it gave the public a glimpse of the discreet discussions and underhanded political maneuvering that took place at all levels of the government; it shows us the tussle of power being fought between the different blocs and interest groups in the government.

Granted, such things may exist in almost every government in the world; I always have the impression that there is an 'invisible hand' pulling the strings and nudging the government in certain directions.

I felt that being Malaysians, we are always quick to pre-suppose that there is often an underlying reason, a hidden machinery at work which moves the gears of the government rather than take the official versions given by the government at face value.

For instance, in the case of the half-bridge in Johor, we much prefer to believe that the decision to build the half-bridge in the first place was because a select few individuals in or related closely to the government would benefit financially from it rather than see the project as benefiting the entire nation.

Similarly, when the half-bridge project was discarded, we are more inclined to look beyond the official explanations provided by the government and instead, tried to search for a far more sensational and more realistic - at least to us - reason.

I am not saying that it is entirely fanciful or wasteful to do that because at times, such degree of probing could disclose several important matters behind certain actions taken by the government, hence giving greater insight into the governmental machinery.

But one must not get too carried away with it as well; if we are inclined to look under every rock and stone for answers rather than taking the rock and stone at face value, we may find ourselves in a position where it is exceedingly difficult for us to separate the truth from fiction.

I guess there is a fine line between being insightful and being delusional; once the line separating the two is crossed, there is a danger of our prophesizing to become self-fulfilling.

And in the running of a government, such situations bids trouble and disaster to its well-being.

Of course, the quality of the decisions made by the government is as good as the quality of the information it receives from the public. The government cannot be expected to act in a just manner if those responsible for providing continual feedback on the latest development in the country sugarcoat their reports and statistics.

Hence, the role of an unbiased, honest and critical media is important in the smooth-running of the delivery system of a government; just as significant as the role played by a credible and strong opposition and a trustworthy and selfless circle of advisors.

If the media fail to realize the importance of their role in the hierachy of the society, they are in danger of leading the society astray because they have the power to shape and fuel the opinions of the general public.

The media should see itself as an independent entity from those in power and act in a manner fitting for those in such position, rather than allow themselves to be a pawn in this sly political game of chess.

The media coverage of the on-going battle between Pak Lah and Mahathir reflects how the local media have failed in this respect.

By skewing their reports towards one party and posturing their editorials into a defensive position, they only manage to highlight how lame and weak one of the party is compared to the other.

In this case, I guess there is something as too much of a good thing.

Much worse than that is such actions by the media to spoonfeed the masses with shameless one-sided propaganda leaves the public incapable of effectively evaluating the current situation on their own.

I believe the danger of this is that eventually the public - who has suffered total media blackout on such issues or if they are fortunate, to be fed constantly with convoluted spin on such issues - will loose sight of what is at stake for themselves and the country if such confrontations continue unabated.

After all, if you are too occupied with the things going on directly in front of you, you would not have much time to look far down the tracks, to see down the road and where that road would eventually take us.

Because at the end of the day, the battle is not so much a conflict between two diammetrically opposite personalities but also a battle for the future of the country and its people.

It is a shame if the grudges and differences between two individuals threaten to plunge the country into the abyss.

But then again, bigger and stronger empires of the past have fallen due to similarly trivial fracas involving individuals of lesser significance.