Lim Guan Eng and Chow Kon Yeow are no ordinary DAP members. They are party veterans, and had served or still serving as senior government leaders at both state and federal levels.

Currently, Lim is the DAP advisor while Chow is serving out his final term as the chief minister of Penang. Both are MPs and Penang state legislators.

Many expect them to be exemplary political leaders, but alas, public perception of the duo has not been positive.

The fallout between Lim and Chow and their frequent war of words in public is something party members would want to see an end to, the sooner the better.

It has proven to be an embarrassment not only to the duo but also to the DAP and members at large.

When two political leaders who were once close allies or “sworn brothers” fall out and stop communicating due to political differences or personal disputes, it sends a powerful—and often troubling—message to the public and other members of their party.

This situation reflects not just on their personal relationship, but also the broader health of political camaraderie, leadership maturity and institutional integrity.

When the Lim-Chow public spat first surfaced two years ago, eventually causing a split in the Penang DAP, I had suggested that both men step down and allow others to take over the leadership of Penang.

That didn’t happen, and for a while I thought the duo’s relationship has improved.

Apparently, it is just as bad today as Lim continues to criticize some of the CM’s policies which he does not agree with.

What prompted me to touch on this subject again was Lim’s statement on May 21, urging Chief Minister Chow to explain the deterioration of the state’s finances which led to the administration requesting RM100 million in advance from the federal government.

This was reopening an old wound as Lim, the former Penang chief minister, had previously pressed for details on how RM1.1 billion was spent in the past five years.

Then, Lim also expressed dissatisfaction with Chow’s intention to pay bonuses and arrears to the board members and staff of the Penang Development Corporation (PDC), arguing that it was a bad idea as Penang was heavily in debt.

I know Lim is also a Penang state assemblyman and he has the right to question the chief minister and the state government.

But hello, isn’t Lim part of the Penang government and isn’t he a party colleague of CM Chow and both should be on the same side?

The measure of great political leadership lies in humility, emotional intelligence, and the ability to reconcile differences for the common good.

Why? Lim could easily walk up to Chow and ask him what he wanted to know, instead of hammering the CM publicly and condemning him even before he could offer an explanation.

If they are not talking to each other at this stage having worked together for many years, I can only describe their behavior towards each other as “pathetically childish.”

When political leaders refuse to engage in dialogue or even avoid being seen together, it can come across as childish or unprofessional, especially in the eyes of the public.

Politics, at its core, is about negotiation, compromise and leadership—even across sharp ideological divides.

I’m not aligned with the DAP in any manner, but I have counted several DAP leaders, past and present, as good friends.

As an outsider, let me send this message to Lim and Chow in good faith: When politicians behave in a way that mirrors playground feuds, they risk losing credibility.

This perception of immaturity may be especially damaging in times of crisis or when cooperation is essential to governance.

If leaders are unwilling to communicate, it suggests an inability or unwillingness to prioritize the public good over personal or partisan grievances.

The public spat between Lim and Chow has tarnished the DAP’s image, potentially affecting voter confidence and support.

Let’s get real. There is only one route for the two leaders to go for the sake of the DAP and thousands of its hardcore supporters—reconciliation!

As both leaders approach the twilight of their political careers, reconciliation would help unify the party, strengthening its position ahead of future elections.

Ultimately, the measure of great political leadership lies in humility, emotional intelligence, and the ability to reconcile differences for the common good.

Leaders who once stood as symbols of unity owe it to their supporters, and to the principles they represent, to maintain civility, if not friendship.

Even if full reconciliation is impossible, open communication and mutual respect are crucial.

Public displays of mature disagreement can help rebuild trust, while personal feuds only deepen cynicism.

For the sake of their party, their principles, and public confidence in political institutions, Lim and Chow must strive to manage disagreements with grace, keep channels of communication open, and prioritize the greater good over personal pride.

In short, the two senior DAP veterans must strive again to be exemplary leaders—individuals who lead with integrity, competence and a strong sense of public service.

(Francis Paul Siah is a veteran Sarawak editor and currently heads the Movement for Change Sarawak, MoCS. He can be reached at [email protected].)