Bekor: Prelude to 13th May

During the 13th May 1969 tragedy, a well-known Imam in Kampung Baru by the name of Dahlan made an amulet to protect his brother, Abdullah (a.k.a Abdullah Botak) who was a senior police officer, from harm as the racial clashes escalated.  Abdullah declined and asked Dahlan to use it to protect himself saying:

Don’t be fooled by the Chinese. I have seen what they are capable of in Bekor!

Not many young Malaysian would know where Bekor is, let alone what had happened there.  But Bekor was witness to what was to come 23 years later.

A subtle reminder of the atrocities that had taken place in Bekor
A subtle reminder of the atrocities that had taken place in Bekor

The incident in Kampung Bekor, near Manong in the district of Kuala Kangsar was not the first incident that had involved the killing of Malays by the Chinese, led by the Malayan People’s Anti Japanese Army. What is even sadder is the fact that some Malays were also involved in assisting the Chinese slaughter their own kind.  To understand the mood of the day, we would need to go back in time to when migrant Chinese workers started flooding into the Malay states.

According to a paper jointly written by Mohamed Ali Hanifa and Mohammed Redzuan Othman of the History Department, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, the University of Malaya, the Chinese immigrants first came to the Malay states in 1777, and first settled in the state of Perak in 1830 (Patrick Sullivan, 1982: 13). Within 44 years, they numbered 26,000 in Perak alone.  In 1921, the number of Chinese immigrants in the Malay states numbered 1,171,740.  Ten years later, it was 1,704,452. In 1941, it became 2,377,990 while the Malays were at 2,277,352 (Paul H Kratoska, 1997:318).  The explosion of numbers of Chinese immigrants brought about social ills.  In 1901, the ratio of Chinese women to men were 1:100 in the Federated Malay States alone (Victor Purcell, 1948: 174) and this brought about the setting up of prostitution dens.  According to the Straits Settlement Annual Development Record 1906, there were 543 prostitution dens in the Straits Settlement alone, employing 3,894 women (Siti Rodziah Nyan, 2009:200). The Malays remained a minority in their own land until 1970.

When the Japanese invaded Malaya, they portrayed themselves to the Malays as liberators, getting rid of the pseudo-colonialistic British, and began hunting for the Chinese whom were known to have sent money back to assist the Chinese in their war against the Japanese.  As such, the Malays did not face as much hardship as the Chinese did during the Japanese occupation. Although the Malays and Chinese share the same hatred towards the Japanese, it was the Chinese that ran a boycotting campaign against the Japanese. This led to the execution of 70,000 Chinese in Singapore labelled by the Japanese as Communists (Colonial Office Records CO 537/3757: 27-28).  As a result, many Chinese formed the Malayan People’s Anti Japanese Army (MPAJA), a subversive organisation that was administered by the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) (War Office Records WO 172/9773, No 23: 384).

After the war, the Sino-Malay relations took a turn for the worse.  The Chinese, known for their coarse and rude behaviour began upsetting the Malays. Kenelm O.L Burridge quoted the Malays as saying:

Before the war we and the Chinese lived in peace. But now they want to swallow the people (makan orang). We Muslims do not chase money. That is the Chinese way. They are not Muslims and they do not have the same understanding (faham). If they became Muslims it would be all right (Kenelm O.L Burridge, 1951:163)

Economic competition caused the Chinese to spread rumours about the Malays to put the latter in bad light (War Office Records WO 172/9773, No.30:479). In Batu Pahat, Johor, there was a community that did not respect the local culture (Kenelm O.L Burridge, 1951: 166) and brought about the culture of drinking alcoholic drinks and gambling, and were often found meddling in the affairs of the Malay customs (Seruan Ra’yat, 17 November 1945: 2).

Between the Japanese surrender in August 1945 and the formation of the British Military Administration on 12 September 1945, the MPAJA/CPM left the jungle and occupied police stations and towns and displayed its authority (WO 172/1784, No.51: 180). They took the opportunity to take revenge on the Malays.  Throngs of Imams, religious teachers, Malays who had worked in Japanese offices, and commoners were captured and executed.  Many Malay houses were burnt at night while their occupants were fast asleep (Mohamed Ali & Mohammed Redzuan, 2011:280).

The violation of the sanctity of Islam also became a factor in the bloody Sino-Malay conflict (WO 172/9773. No.30: 478) when the Bintang Tiga/CPM disrupted religious activities in Muslims places of worship.  This started in Batu Pahat, Johor, just before the surrender of the Japanese occupiers, during the Muslim month of Ramadhan.  Muslims were forbidden from congregating at mosques or suraus to perform the Terawih prayers (Hairi Abdullah, 1974/5: 8-9).  The same occurred in Perak and some parts of Batu Pahat where Muslims were gunned down and burnt together with the mosque they were in during Friday prayers.  Mosques and suraus were often used as places of meeting for the Chinese community (WO 172/9773, No.30: 478) and were tainted by incidents such as slaughtering of pigs, and mosques’ compound was used to cook pork, where Malays were forced to join the larger Chinese groups. Pages were torn from the Quran to be used by the Chinese using these mosques as toilet paper.

Facing the atrocities by the Chinese communists, and the betrayal by the British through the formation of the Malayan Union, the period between 1945-46 saw the Malays struggling for the survival of their race and religion.

According to Dr Cheah Boon Kheng, a historian at the School of Humanities, University Sains Malaysia, who is also the author of “Red Star over Malaya”, the Sino-Malay conflict in Johor began between march and August of 1945 (Cheah Boon Kheng, 1981:109). In May 1945, a Moain bi Saridin @ Shahidin, and a Hassan Akasah were brutally murdered by the Chinese communists. When found, they were just a mixed pile of bones without their head. They were murdered for not supporting the CPM. In another incident, a group of Chinese communists attacked the house of the penghulu of Kampung Sungai Tongkang near Batu Pahat, where 30 Malays sought refuge and shot them repeatedly before burning down the house. This conflict spread to the towns of Semerah and Sungai Balang.

On 10th June 1945, the Chinese killed the District Officer of Batu Pahat, Ismail Abdullah; the Kadi of Batu Pahat, Tuan Haji Hasbullah; and Dr Woodhull, the Medical Officer for Batu Pahat) while they were negotiating with the MPAJA Chinese in Benut, Johor (Ho Hui Ling, 2006: 3).  In response. Kiai Salleh from Simpang Kiri in Batu Pahat, who happens to be the grandfather of a close friend, united the Malays, the Javanese and the Banjars to form the Tentera Sabil Selendang Merah (Holy War Army of the Red Bands) to protect the Muslim community. Assisted by Kiai Wak Joyo, Kiai Kusin, Kiai Mashudi, Kiai Mayor, Kiai Saudi, Kiai Maskan, Kiai Sarbini, Kiai Mustahir, Kiai Haji Shamsuddin and Kiai Haji Shukor, Kiai Salleh waged war against the Chinese, the MPAJA and their Malay counterparts (CO 537/1580:3).

When the Japanese announced their surrender on 15th August 1945, the CPM assisted by the Chinese in the MPAJA began to round up Malays suspected of working or assisting the Japanese.  Many Malays had their hands and feet bounded and put into gunny sacks before they were thrown into the sea alive (Ibrahim Mahmood, 1981: 32).  The Chinese community in Kampung Koh, Sitiawan, Ipoh, Kampar, Langkap and Chuchap assisted the Chinese community in Sungai Manik.  Several small skirmishes ensued.  In one incident, two of my granduncles were slaughtered by the Chinese near the Sungai Manik railway bridge, while their friend was put into a suitcase alive before he was thrown over into the Bidor river.  In another incident, two Malay men returning to Sungai Manik were attacked by a group of Chinese who stabbed and slashed to death one of them while the other jumped into the Bidor river and hid for four days, moving only at night, before he reached safety.

In Bekor, near Manong in the Kuala Kangsar district, alarmed by the growing attacks by the Chinese, the villagers united and held a discussion with the Chinese in January 1946.  Pressured by the Chinese who outnumbered them, the Malay representatives stated three demands to the Chinese:

Sa-orang guru Tauhid di-Manong di-dalam suatu mashuarat antara China dengan Melayu kerana hendak mendamaikan perkelahian di-situ telah mengeluarkan 3 tuntutan dengan chakap yang keras dan menghentam-hentam meja dengan tinju-nya sa-hingga China-China yang di-dalam mashuarat itu puchat muka-nya (Suara Ra’yat, 7 Januari 1946: 1)

The first demand was to return all the Malays captured by the Chinese and held in the jungles. If they were executed, the Malays demanded that their grave be shown. The second demand was for the return of their belongings confiscated by the MPAJA, while the final demand was for the Chinese to surrender all their weapons to the government.

Shamsiah Pakeh, a former Quran teacher, and member of the Communist Party of Malaya, approached the villagers of Kampung Bekor to persuade them to join the CPM. In a blog by Amam Fuadi, a descendant of one Haji Hassan bin Khatib Mat Sin who was present when the Chinese attacked Kampung Bekor, he described the story as told by the late Haji Hassan:

” Shamsiah Pakih pakai baju kebaya putih datang kerumah mengajak Tok masuk komunis Tok tak mahu. Pada masa itu siapa yang tidak mahu masuk kominis akan di bunuh. Orang Bekor banyak terlibat dan berdosa kerana bersubahat dengan kominis dan membunuh orang melayu yang tidak mahu masuk kominis. ” (Akhirnya mereka juga mati dibunuh komunis dalam perang Bekor- Penulis)
” …………….dibekor Ada telaga yang di panggil telaga lubang raya tempat memancong orang yang tak mahu masuk kominis.”
”Tok ngah juga hampir hendak dimasukkan kedalam lubang.
Salah seorang penduduk Semat yang mati dalam lubang raya ialah yeob tali”

On 5th March 1946, the Chinese began their attacks on Kampung Bekor. At 10am, approximately 100 armed Chinese attacked the village, but this attack was repelled by the defending villagers (WO 172/9773, DT00 07:281). This attack was believed to be the CPM’s gauging the village’s defence.

On 6th March 1946 is what Abdullah Botak was talking about to his brother, Imam Dahlan, on 13th May 1969.

Between 5am to 5.30am, Kampung Bekor was again attacked by the Chinese, assisted by the CPM. All roads leading in and out of the village were guarded by members of the CPM while the Chinese, reinforced by 500 Chinese from Kelian, attacked the villagers.  It was a well-planned and orchestrated attack (CO 537/1580: 21 and Majlis, 24 Februari 1947:5).

The attack lasted two hours.  57 men and women who were about to leave the Kampung Bekor mosque after Subuh prayer were murdered by the Chinese (WO 172/9773, No.19: 234-235). From this figure, only one had gunshot wounds while the rest had slash and stab wounds. 24 children were murdered while they were sleeping in their homes, while 15 men, seven women and eight children were missing. The defence of Kampung Bekor was quickly organised by Tuan Haji Abdul Rahman bin Abdul Manan, Tuan Haji Kulub Alang, Tuan Haji Salleh bin Abdul Manan and a few others who managed to kill several Chinese attackers.  The Chinese moved in three waves: the front-most attacked, followed by a second wave whose duty was to retrieve bodies and injured Chinese attackers, then move behind the third attacking wave to carry out the dead and wounded.  As a result, not one single body of the Chinese attackers could be found in the aftermath of the attack.

The above was what senior police officer Abdullah Botak had described to his brother, Imam Dahlan.

More Malays were attacked and killed by the Chinese in Kota Bharu (Kelantan) on 19th September 1945, in Alor Gajah (Melaka) on 26th September 1945, in Selangor, the districts of Selama, Taiping, Parit, and Sitiawan in Perak, and in Terengganu.  In Batu Malim, Raub (Pahang), a skirmish at the local market on 11th February 1946 involving 200 Malays and 150 Chinese caused the death of 30 Chinese including 10 children, while 16 Chinese and 10 Malays were injured.

So heightened was the anger of the Malays towards the Chinese that when the British formed the Malayan Union and planned to grant Chinese and Indian immigrants with automatic citizenship, the Malays united for a common cause, and that is to return the power of the Sultans and reinstate the ownership of the land to the Malays. Left behind economically and lacking education, as well as being the minority in their own land, the Malays never saw any good in granting citizenship to the outsiders.  To appease the Malays, the administration saw it fit for the Chinese to be sent back to China.  Some 15,000 were sent back until Mao Zedong proclaimed the People’s Republic of China in October 1949.  This led to closure of ports, and subsequently beaches, to prevent overseas Chinese from returning. Hence, the Chinese in Malaya had no choice but to learn to live with the Malays. The administration insisted that only those Chinese who would pledge loyalty to Malaya would be granted citizenship.

The Malays and Chinese lived peacefully side-by-side. But when China launched the Cultural Revolution, the Communist Party of Malaya issued a directive on 1st June 1968: Hold High the Great Red Banner of Armed Struggle and Valiantly March Forward. This brought about the Second Emergency and again, the Malays being minority, prepared to defend themselves and their religion.  Almost every weekend strikes and rallies would be organised by opposition parties, supported by the Communist Party of Malaya, and this culminated in the 13th May 1969 tragedy.

The history of Malaysia, contrary to belief, has been filled with bloodshed.  We, as a growing nation, have seen more than enough to last us a life time. And as time goes by, piece by piece our history is being forgotten.  When we are a nation without a past, we will become a nation without soul.  The above demonstrates how dangerous racial strife can be, and how easy it is to explode again if sensitivities and assimilation is not done or handled well.  I strongly believe that both vernacular schools and Islamisation of the National schools do not benefit anyone in Malaysia, and will only contribute to greater rift between the races.  Children who do not grow up together will never learn about or respect each other.

As for the Malays, we seem to feel comfortable hiding behind the fact that we make up 71% of the population of this country (including the Bumiputras of Sabah and Sarawak) but we fail to see that we are in fact split into various groups.  I doubt if ever an event such as the above were to happen, that the Malays would unite, as we now have the Malay liberals, the so-called Islamists, and the pro-Malays.  I won’t be surprised if only 20 percent of the Malays would be prepared to defend their race and religion again.The Malays, are once again, minorities in their own land. But this time, they are asleep as the villagers of Kampung Bekor were almost 68 years ago.

Tanda Peeing – History Has Taught Us Nothing

Tanda Putera is finally shown on the silver screen, slightly more than a year too late, more than a year since I watched it. It would have been better to show the movie BEFORE the previous general elections. But of course, no matter whether you are a recalcitrant or a minister, not everyone was born smart.

Anyway, for a year there was this question related to a scene in the movie where two members of the Opposition was shown urinating at the base of a flag pole. If you were wondering if it was Lim Kit Siang, the answer is a big NO.

Kit Siang was busy doing even worse elsewhere, and on 13th May 1969, he was in Kota Kinabalu; as shown below:

STATEMENT UNDER SCTION 11(2)(b) ISA, 1960.
NAME OF DETAINEE: LIM KIT SIANG.
GROUNDS ON WHICH THE ORDER OF DETENTION IS MADE:

Since July, 1968, you, Lim Kit Siang, have been acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order in Malaysia in that in the several speeches you have made since the date you have deliberately and intentionally roused intense communal feelings thereby promoting feelings of hostility between different races in Malaysia and causing suspicion and disunity to grow between them.

ALLEGATIONS OF FACTS:

1) On the 27th July 1968, at a DAP public rally at Tanjong Malim, Perak, you deliberately distorted the Government policy on Education by telling your audience that the policy was designed to achieve and eventual extermination of Chinese newspapers, Chinese schools and Chinese languages. Such distortion was made by you with the deliberate intention of creating and furthering suspicion and animosity between the Chinese and the Malay in this country.

2) On the 24th August 1968, at a public rally at Slim River, Perak, you deliberately distorted the Government’s policy on language by telling your audience that a tourist poster with the Malay wordings “speak the National language only” clearly illustrated the one language policy of the government and that the dubbing of English, Chinese and Tamil T.V. films with Malay was unfair to the other races as their languages were not being given equal status such distortion was made by you with the deliberate intention of creating and furthering suspicion and animosity between the Chinese and the Malays in this country.

3) On the 7th September 1968, at the DAP public rally at 24 milestone, Sg. Besi road, Kuala Lumpur, and on 21st. September 1968, at Sungei Way new Village Selangor, on both these occasions you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the MCA had instead of striving for the rights of the Chinese Language and Education in fact assisted the government in suppressing the Chinese Language as evidenced by the Non-recognition of Nanyang University project. The speeches are evidence of a deliberate misinterpretation of actual facts and had resulted in generating suspicion and animosity between the Malays and the Chinese in Malaysia and thereby creating a feeling of tension and racial hatred.

4) On the 29th September 1968, at the DAP public rally at Batu Pahat, Johore, on 2nd November 1968, at Lawan Kuda Bahru, Gopeng, Perak, and on 26th January 1969, at Jalan Yow, Pudu, Kuala Lumpur, on these three occasions you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the alliance’s policy was a “racialist policy” as the Alliance had given more privileges to Bumiputras in University education and that there were first and second class citizens – the Bumiputras being first class citizens, and that the awards of honour such as P.P.M, are not worth anything because they were given to men in the streets and that P.P.M. stands for “ PELAN PELAN MATI”. By these utterances you had deliberately distorted the actual Government policies and by doing so you had generated racial tension, hatred and disharmony in the country.
5) On 12th, Feb 1969, at a DAP public rally held at Jalan Lengkongan Brunei, Kuala Lumpur, you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the Government was showing discrimination between the various races in examination entry to University of Malaya, employment and in the distribution of land and that special privileges were being given to the Malays. By these utterances you deliberately distorted the Government policies and thereby causing suspicion and animosity between the various races.

6) On 13th May 1969, at a public rally held at Kampong Ayer, Kota Kinabalu, you deliberately roused intense communal feelings by telling your audience that the Government was trying to have a Malay Malaysia by dividing the people into bumiputras and non-bumiputras, that “the Malays were first class Bumiputras” and that the Government was carrying out a policy of “Malaysiation” of Sabah whereby all top post were held by the Malays. You also stirred anti-Malay and anti-Islamic religious feelings by telling your audience that the Government was pursuing the policy of exploitation by Malays of other races and that the Government by holding an International Islamic Conference in Kuala Lumpur had intended to send Malaysian citizens to die in the Middle East in order to capture Jerusalem for the Muslim World. By this speech you had made dangerous statements of a communal nature there by fostering communal resentment fear and apprehension amongst sections of the public in Sabah.

By direction,
Sign:
b/p SETIA USAHA,
KEMENTERAIN HAL EHWAL DALAM NEGERI,
MALAYSIA.
DATE: 11 JULY 1969
– See more at: http://bibliotheca.limkitsiang.com/1969/07/#sthash.eyQZiGB5.dpuf

If you read the allegations above, tell me what is not being repeated today, before and after the 13th General Elections?

Screwing History

20120910-010742.jpg

“Patriotism is the scoundrel’s last refuge,” was a statement made on the evening of 7th April 1775 by the Tory-supporting poet, Samuel Johnson. Johnson’s statement was not referring to patriotism at all. He was in face criticising the false-patriotism of John Stuart, the 3rd Earl of Bute, and his supporters. This is the statement I would like to direct to Kua Kia Soong for his attempt at screwing up the nation’s history.

PUTERA-AMCJA

In January of 1947, Lai Tek or Loi Tek or Loi Tak, the Secretary-General of the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) before Chin Peng, backed and finance the establishment of the multiracial Malayan Democratic Union (MDU) which adopted a CPM programme, and the Malay Nationalist Party (PKMM) to form part of the CPM’s United Front to oppose the British – Malay Rulers – UMNO consultations to replace the Malayan Union and call for immediate representative government based on a Republic Model. The United Front was under the banner of the Pan Malaya Council for Joint Action (PMCJA).

However, the PMCJA sounded too pro-non-Malays and Burhanuddin Helmi, co-founder of the PKMM, was forced by other left-wing Malay leaders to take the party out. He did so, and formed the Pusat Tenaga Rakyat (PUTERA) as a new vehicle to carry out left-wing Malay demand for a pro-Indonesia republic-type representative government, free of the Malay rulers’ influence. (read more about the PKMM/MNP, KMM et al here)

The CPM saw their mistake that had deprived their United Front of the illusion of Malay support, reformed the PMCJA into the All Malayan Council for Joint Action (AMCJA), wooed the PKMM’s PUTERA to rejoin a PUTERA-AMCJA coalition jointly chaired by each organisation’s President, namely Burhanuddin Helmi and Tan Cheng Lock.

Just to remind us all, it was a time when the non-Malays who formed the majority of the population of Malaya, were either immigrants or British subjects even though some were born in Malaya. Therefore, Malayan citizenship was being sought by the Malayan Democratic Union.

PUTERA-AMCJA then drafted a People’s Constitution (Perlembagaan Ra’ayat) in anticipation of, and to counter the Federation of Malaya Agreement being put together by the British, the Malay Rulers, and UMNO. The Federation Agreement was expected to restrict non-Malay citizenship to assuage right-wing and majority Malay fear of being swamped by the non-Malays who already outnumbered them. At Page 199 of his memoir, Chin Peng wrote:

“The AMCJA was not exactly a communist front but…it was firmly under our influence. It was never in Cheng Lock’s mind to become a CPM stooge. But that is what exactly happened.”

Later, the British were to dismiss the PUTERA-AMCJA pretentions of representing the people because the PKMM was confined to a small group of radical left-wing Malays, while the bulk of the Malays supported UMNO. Even the Ulamas were in UMNO until 1956 when they splintered out to form the Pan-Malayan Islamic Party (PAS).

As for the Chinese, they were divided. On this basis they convinced Cheng Lock to leave the AMCJA and talk to UMNO for citizenship and other related matters.

THE TUNKU WAS OUSTED AS PM…???

Tunku was NOT ousted by Razak. UMNO Youth and many of the younger UMNO leaders blamed the Tunku for not doing enough for the Malays, and giving too much face to the Chinese. They wanted Tunku to step down and make way for Razak.

Tun Razak, Tun Dr Ismail, Khir Johari (who is NOT the biological father of Zairil Khir Johari contrary to skewed popular belief) and the UMNO old guards, would have none of that and wanted Tunku to be given his own time to decide. Tunku saw the writing on the wall and said he would step down as soon as his nephew is installed as the Yang DiPertuan Agong (Sultan Abdul Halim, also the present Yang DiPertuan Agong) as it would not be right for an uncle to sembah his own nephew.

The Inspector-General of Police, Tun Salleh, was not the kind of man to lend himself to Tunku’s ouster. The Chief of Armed Forces Staff, General Tengku Osman Jiwa, was the IGP’s close friend and also was the Tunku’s nephew.

DID THE HOME MINISTER PURPOSELY ALLOW A FUNERAL PROCESSION AFTER THE POLICE HAD DENIED ITS PERMIT?

(read more about the Home Ministry over-riding the police’s decision to deny a funeral procession permit)

It was not certain why was the permit for the funeral procession of the Labour Party member denied by the police. It was either because of the pro-communists wanted it held on Elections eve, or because the organisers wanted an extended route, or whether because they did not want to be policed by the ‘red helmets’ (FRU).

An appeal was made to the concurrent Home Affairs Minister, Tun Razak who, like Tunku and the other ministers, was back in his constituency, Pekan. His concern was that no cause should be given to anybody to disturb the elections. So, he approved the permit as per the application.

But without the FRU to police, the procession really went to town. With 10,000 people in the procession, coupled with its shouted and hand-carried slogans crying blood debt will be paid with blood, it set the tone for the behaviour of the two opposition processions post-elections on the 11th and 12th of May.

As for the reported Tunku Tapes, I have not heard them, nor do I know when in the duration of Tunku’s life, were the recordings made. It could have been made in his twilight years, out of spite, much like Kua Kia Soong’s writings.