Robert Abela’s tribal entrenchment: Rallying the core to save his skin?

The country is not doing badly. The economy keeps growing, workers’ pay cheques have received a budget boost, and despite soaring inequalities and pockets of poverty, austerity as government policy is now a distant memory. Sure, the economic model that made this possible is increasingly questioned, and while the government is keeping a lid on social tensions by throwing money at the situation, it lacks the resolve to address inequality —arguably the most pressing yet overlooked issue today. Still, Abela deserves credit for steering Malta through times of crisis. 

But instead of focusing on his track record, Robert Abela has embarked on a head-on collision with the Opposition and civil society on governance issues – namely by introducing a regressive reform of magisterial inquiries, which diminishes the right of common citizens to request an inquest into apparent wrongdoing. 

While the reform is craftily portrayed as a way to curtail the abuse of this instrument by the maverick Jason Azzopardi, the proposed Bill risks having a chilling effect on the citizenry, who will first have to wait for the police to investigate and even risk paying court expenses if their claims are not substantiated. In the end, we all know that it is only thanks to magisterial inquiries triggered by requests made by Opposition politicians like Simon Busuttil and David Casa, and NGO Repubblika that we are now wiser about the scandalous hospital deal and opaque offshore structures like 17 Black. 

Abela also continues to dilly-dally on media reforms intended to protect journalists. The government recently blocked an Opposition amendment to the anti-SLAPP law that would have offered protection to journalists from SLAPP cases introduced in local courts. Significantly, Abela has become fiercer in his language, pitting his party against "the forces of darkness" and the Opposition’s politics of "hatred" and "envy."

Why this strategy now? 

One reason is the timing, as it marks the final full year before the country shifts into electoral mode. In short, it is the ideal time for Abela to rally the troops before reaching out to the wider electorate in the final year of his administration. Another reason is that after the Clayton Bartolo debacle, Abela seems adamant about not being put in a position of having to kick out another cabinet member. In short, he cannot afford to keep losing pieces and be put in a situation where he has no choice but to punish fellow Labourites.

The worms are coming out of the woodwork 

The risk is that Abela may be conjuring devils he cannot control. His divisive actions and statements risk bringing out the worms from the party’s woodwork—worms that could ultimately eat away at the foundations of the movement created by his predecessor, Joseph Muscat, in his best days.

The tragicomic scene of a former PN propagandist, once deployed to provoke trade union militants like Tony Zarb, hounding Jason Azzopardi over a parking spot in Sliema is a reminder of how this strategy can go awry—especially if Karl Stagno Navarra becomes a role model for others. Stagno Navarra’s antics are not isolated. Neville Gafà’s placement of anti-Daphne posters on the makeshift shrine dedicated to her in front of the law courts risked resurrecting ugly memories of when the state itself tried to cleanse the monument before Abela courageously intervened to stop this nonsense in his first days as Prime Minister when his popularity was also soaring in opinion polls. Ironically, one major trigger for Abela’s relapse into tribalistic confrontation was the result of the MEP elections last June.

Karl Stagno Navarra

The result robbed Labour of its supermajority and weakened Abela’s authority within his own party. Abela had to contend with bloggers like Neville Gafà, who openly challenged his leadership, and had to work out a compromise with the Muscat faction to ward off a Jason Micallef candidacy for the deputy leader post. The only way out of this impasse was to start the new year by adopting a more divisive tone and deliberately creating an issue that would set him against Muscat loyalists' bête noire: Repubblika. In doing so, however, he risks alienating others who, while wary of Jason Azzopardi’s kamikaze and divisive antics, are also concerned about the erosion of checks and balances and are turned off by the toxic political climate.

Ironically, while Abela seeks to shore up support among his own extremists to save his skin after a devastating electoral drubbing in the mid-terms, he is ignoring the root causes of his party’s debacle.

Lessons from a failed campaign 

For Abela had used the same divisive card by attacking the judiciary over the hospital inquiry to rally the party’s hardcore and ward off the specter of abstention in this election. But this strategy backfired badly—possibly because it came at a cost: alienating both middle-of-the-road floaters who gravitated to Muscat’s Labour in 2013 and principled left-leaning voters disgusted by the shady dealings that Abela failed to disown.  

The risk for Abela is that his relapse into divisive tribal politics triggers a downward spiral, cementing a negative perception among a segment of the population that voted Labour in the past thanks to Joseph Muscat’s inclusive approach.  While in those days Labour was perceived as the ‘beautiful party’ offering hope, it now risks becoming the ‘ugly party’ which thrives on invective and division.

Abela's attacked the judiciary over the hospitals inquiry in the European election campaign and it backfired

And here lies one of history’s greatest ironies: the so-called loyalists are eroding the best legacy of their idol—opening up the party to different voices and nuances. While Muscat can be blamed for becoming intimate with big business and even for bringing opportunists from the other side who had absolutely no ideological affinity with Labour, it must be recognised that, in his best days, he projected himself as a unifying figure with whom one could work even if one disagreed with him on some issues.  In short Abela risks being compromised by the worst aspects of Muscat’s legacy while ditching its most redeeming aspect.  

Abela seems oblivious to the fact that his strategy of pitting his party against the "extremists" is as hollow as his rants against the “establishment” before the MEP elections. This is particularly the case when the party depends on individuals like Emmanuel Cushcieri, Karl Stagno Navarra, and Neville Gafa to take down the “extremists” on the other side.

Where does this leave the Opposition? 

Faced with Abela’s regressive reforms, the Nationalist opposition seems keen on not being seen as a single-issue party. This is why the party is also focusing on issues like the cost of living and parental leave, even if the party remains too conditioned by its free-market ideology to tackle wealth inequality head-on.

Yet to be credible the party still has to come in terms with its very recent past, having contributed its fair share to tribal warfare by failing to draw a line between substantiated corruption allegations like the Vitals scandal and wild allegations like Jason Azzopardi’s taking on board claims made by convicted murderers that Carmelo Abela was involved in a bank heist, a claim from which the PN never distanced itself, even after Abela was awarded €7,000 damages in a libel case against Azzopardi.

For it was no surprise that Carmelo Abela’s case was re-exhumed by Labour and effectively deployed to counter an opposition motion to grant Maltese journalists greater protection from multiple libel suits.

Abela risks being compromised by the worst aspects of Muscat’s legacy while ditching its most redeeming aspect

Yet despite adopting a more disciplined approach under Grech, the PN still struggles to find the confidence of a party that can move forward with its own agenda as an alternative government without competing with civil society organisations who have every right to pursue their uncompromising agenda.

Ultimately, this boils down to leadership that commands authority and respect. Crucially, the opposition must project itself as a unifying force bent on national reconciliation, capable of delivering justice without sounding vindictive.

In short, the PN needs to take a leaf from the Fenech Adami playbook, which was crucial in reassuring the country, including non-Nationalists, before it voted for a change of government in 1987.

The PN still struggles to find the confidence of a party that can set its own agenda

Still, while the opposition remains at best a ‘work in progress’, which is still vulnerable to Labour’s counterattacks on various fronts, Abela should not forget that the PN is not the only choice voters will have in the next election. Apart from voting with their feet, disgruntled voters may turn to new parties appealing to both middle-of-the-road and progressive voters.

In fact, the greatest lesson Abela should have learned from the MEP elections is that he may still lose the next general election by default, thanks to a growing mass of voters who never had or have lost their tribal attachments. Reigniting tribal warfare may not be the best way for him to reach out to these voters.

And while Abela may see his relapse into the politics of tribal entrenchment as temporary—before reverting to a more inclusive and unifying approach—he may be sowing the seeds of discord that will come back to haunt him, even if he wins the next election by a small or relative majority.