The definition of a two party system is a democratic political system where two major parties dominate and either party wins in almost all elections.  This does not exclude the existence of smaller parties but essentially only one of the two dominant parties has a chance of winning and forming the government.

Two party systems are the norm in matured democracies such as the Democrats and Republicans in the United States, the Conservative and the Liberal Party in U.K., Labour and Liberal in Australia and the Christian Democrats and Social Democrats in Germany. Often, a two party system is formed by two dominant coalitions rather than two single parties. Smaller parties in a two party system may play a kingmaker role by aligning with one of the dominant parties.

In contrast, politics in a one party system is dominated by only one party which alone has any chance of winning the election. Malaysia (before the tsunami) and Singapore are prime examples with Taiwan and Japan also one party systems until recently.

The benefits of a two party system are obvious. Both the dominant parties have to compete for votes to remain in power or to gain power. This democratic competition imposes a check and balance on the government of the day, promotes transparency and accountability and ensures that service delivery to the people are prioritized or it will be given the boot.

On the other hand, the government of a one party system can get away with all manner of abuses and may only pay lip service to serving the people. Corruption, social injustice and authoritarianism become ingrained and arrogance of power takes root. This is not to say that all one party systems end up this way but such abuses are far easier to become entrenched when the ruling party has no fear of being voted out.

Do we have a two party system?

Prior to the 12th general election, a one party system existed in Malaysia with the Barisan Nasional coalition playing the dominant role against a fragmented opposition led by the DAP, PAS and PKR with a host of smaller, insignificant parties in tow. BN has formed the government since independence.

But the political tsunami generated by the election of March 2008 has changed the political landscape irreversibly. From disparate parties with dissimilar ideologies, the three main opposition parties have been thrown together by the people’s vote and forced into a coalition. Politically we now have two coalitions instead of one but is this sufficient for a two party system?

Naturally the one essential feature of a two party system is there must be two political entities with practical chances of winning enough seats to form the government. Up to the 12th general election, only BN could fill this role as the disparate opposition parties could not even contest in sufficient seats to form the government collectively. This is no longer the case for PR so this condition is fulfilled.

But a two party system is more than having two political entities which contest in enough seats to form the government. Another essential feature is that the mindset of the people must be able to accept being governed by either party or coalition.

In the 1999 general election, DAP, PAS and PKR formed a coalition called Barisan Alternatif to take advantage of public anger over Mahathir’s treatment of Anwar. BA did contest in every seat in the Peninsula to give BN a one to one fight but that did not constitute a two party system. As the mindset of the people could not accept being governed by the three opposition parties in 1999, BA had no practical chance of winning enough seats to form the government. In fact the coalition failed to deny BN two-thirds majority even though it rode on the wave of public anger over Anwar.

Prior to March 2008 it would be correct to say that Malaysians have never entertained or considered being governed by any coalition other than BN. But since then it would be fair to say that many Malaysians now see Pakatan Rakyat as a possible alternative to BN. Such a sea change is evident in the public discourses that proliferate through cyberspace and the traditional media. Hence the second essential condition is also fulfilled.

However we should note that it does not mean that both dominant parties should have equal or roughly equal chances of winning. One party may be the voters’ favorite for a certain time span and win a string of elections. However the winds of political fortune may shift from one party to another and what is important is that there is another party which can benefit should the winds shift. In other words, an alternative must exist for voters.

The accidental two party system

The emergence of Pakatan Rakyat coupled with a sea change in mindset means that we already have a two party system in Malaysia. It does not matter whether PR can unseat BN in the next election; the structure of a two party system is already in place.

How did this happen? The three main opposition parties went into the 2008 general election with an electoral pact to give BN a one-to-one fight in the Peninsula brokered by the political skills of Anwar Ibrahim. They had certainty no thoughts of governing together as a coalition; their purpose was to deny BN as many seats as possible.

But the loose grouping of PKR, DAP and PAS without even a common name did so well that they captured 5 states and denied BN its customary two-thirds majority in Parliament. They had no common ideology or platform but they reaped the harvest of a people sick of the abuses and arrogance of BN.

After the election the opposition parties found to their astonishment that they had captured Kedah, Penang, Perak and Selangor in addition to Kelantan. They had no choice but to form a coalition to govern these states together and thus Pakatan Rakyat was born.

It would not have happened without an electoral pact to have one-to-one fights and it would not have happened without Anwar Ibrahim. But he was not the architect of the two party system. He was just as surprised as anybody else on how things turned out. Our two party system happened by chance, almost a gift from above although social forces may have created it sooner or later. But then again it may not happen without a confluence of extraordinary events.

Cheers and jeers

Of course not everybody agrees that we already have a two party system. BN leaders are fond of dismissing PR as a fragile coalition held together in a marriage of convenience which will not last. Tun Mahathir opines that the opposition gains are only temporary to ‘teach BN a lesson’ and the people will come flocking back to BN as they do not want to be governed by the opposition. Among BN leaders, there is outright denial that a two party system exists.

Political scientist Wong Chin Huat of Monash University Sunway is of the opinion that Malaysian society is not ready for a two party system because our political system is not sufficiently fair and election outcomes may not be respected by all parties. For example he postulates the possibility of a coup d'etat should one party lose. According to him, the country could slide back to a one party predominant system via defections, or worse still, through a military-backed installed regime.

However it is not for anybody to say whether we are ready or not for a two party system. A two party system is the culmination of social forces and there is no question whether civil society is ready for it if does exist. The only question to ask is do we have it or not?

The readiness of political parties especially the ruling party to play fair and accept election outcomes is not a necessary condition. A poor-loser response by BN only means that a two party system has been subverted and not because it did not exist in the first place. It is then up to the people to defend their democratic system or accept its subversion.

Naturally, a one party system with an entrenched ruling clique tries to perpetuate its rule by not playing fair. It will use all the instruments of government at its disposal, control the mass media and create laws to suppress democratic dissent. To ask for fair play first before a two party system can exist is putting the cart before the horse. Political fair play will come after a two party system is well established and fear of losing support forces them to play by the rules of democracy.

But Wong Chin Huat’s brooding pessimism is the exception. Other political analysts and writers such as Josh Hong, David Quek, Neil Khor and Kee Thuan Chye are supportive and cheering on the birth of our two party system. Kee who wrote ‘March 8: The Day Malaysia Woke up’ said, “Choice is what we have now. That has been the gift of March 8. We should exercise that choice - for the betterment of our country. And exercise it without fear”.

Birth pangs of a new order

But the clearest indication that we already have a two party system can be seen in how Umno aggressively attacks PR to try to break it up. Some examples include PAS being wooed by Umno, religious issues created to bait PAS, MACC doggedly pursues opposition politicians at the faintest whiff of corruption, federal funds are withheld from Pakatan states, elected representatives lured to defect, a disreputable power grab in Perak and Anwar Ibrahim dragged to court on trumped up sodomy charges. The controlled mainstream media has also been used to blow up any problems within the component parties to give an impression of a coalition which is cracking and about to break up.

To be sure, PR has its own share of problems as it is an alliance of parties with diverse ideologies and backgrounds which have never worked together before as a team. It is also a partnership of equals unlike BN, where Umno is the unquestionable big brother who calls the shots. Since 2008, there have been squabbles - some petty, some serious. Some members have even left the party due to Umno’s instigation, but overall, the coalition seems to have settled down pretty cohesively despite the odds.

The relentless attacks on PR exhibit Umno’s abject fear of the two party system. To Umno, Malaysians must not be given an alternative or it would be forced to compete with PR for the hearts and minds of the public. This would put an end to the corruption and abuse which Umno thinks it has the right to practice.

Some Malaysians may long for the old days of stable politics during which the BN dominated. They disdain the intense political fights between BN and PR, the heavy handed use of power and threats to peace by rabid politicians trying to instigate racial disharmony. But tumult is a necessary phase of transition.

What we are now witnessing are the death throes of a dying regime and the birth pangs of a new order. Our nascent two party system is still a baby, can it survive the unrelenting attacks?

Harassed by police, pursued by the MACC, sodomized by the judiciary, forsaken by royalty, maligned by the mainstream media, seduced by Umno, and their leader threatened with imprisonment, PR’s only friend is the people who yearn for a better Malaysia.

Bruised, battered and covered with scars as it stumbles to the next general election, PR is set to give BN a valiant fight for the seat of power.