Dato Sri Najib Razak flanked by Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed and Datuk Seri Mah Siew Keong at the press conference in Germany at 1500UTC (11pm Malaysian time) on the 28th September 2016Prime Minister Najib Razak’s 3-day visit to Germany has been a success. Starting with a dialogue session with German Business Leaders made up of 24 German renowned companies and four Malaysian companies that have invested in Germany, together with various trade and industrial associations that have operations and investments in Malaysia. This dialogue session focused on the manufacturing sector as Germany is a renowned high-technology industrial nation that is highly innovative especially in the automotive, machineries, electrical and the electronics sectors.
The objective of this dialogue session was not only to inform the German business community about the two-way trade and investments between the two nations, but also to obtain feedbacks and views from German investors. With Germany being the largest trading partner from the European Union, with investments in the manufacturing sector reaching USD11.4 billion, it is apt for Malaysia to propose itself to become the host for the 16th German Asia-Pacific Business Conference. The last time Malaysia played host to this conference was in 2000.
Najib Razak also witnessed and attended MoU signing ceremonies and trade discussions with companies that are involved in the pipeline, semiconductor, aviation, automotive as well as the shipping industries with one company committing to a second wave of investment to set up three competence centers.
The Prime Minister also held a bilateral meeting with Chancellor Angela Merkel discussing international terrorism, the refugee situation as well as the South China Sea disputes.
In another development, Najib Razak says that Malaysia wants to see those involved in the crime of the downing of Flight MH17 to be brought to justice, and would like to see nations involved to hold a discussion to identify the ways forward to fulfill promises made to the victims’ next-of-kin.
It is unfortunate that Mahathir thinks that Malaysia has slid into the abyss of failed states when she continues to enjoy the confidence of foreign businesses and investors and continue to prosper under the stewardship of Najib Razak.
Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi delivering his speech at the 71st UNGA in New York – photo courtesy of BERNAMA
I admit I cringed when Zahid Hamidi delivered his speech at the 71st UNGA in New York yesterday. My wife and cousins were in fits. This wasn’t the first time that I cringed when a Malaysian stood in front of an international audience delivering a speech or presentation with a poor command of the English language. The first was the late Tun Ghafar Baba who also delivered a speech on behalf of the government also at the UNGA 27 years ago next month talking about the Antarctic Treaty System. In various oil and gas meetings and conferences, I had to endure speeches delivered by Malaysians and cringed everytime they burst out in a self-made English-sounding slang to accompany their already poor command of the English language. Definitely Zahid et al need to brush up their command of the English language. However, there have been meetings and conferences that I have attended where even non-Malaysian speakers struggle with their English-language presentations and discussions. It is not just Malaysians who have this problem.
Most of those who criticise Zahid are those who still use ‘CONGRATES’ and/or ‘STUCKED.’ And many cannot even converse in Bahasa Malaysia despite having Malaysian birth certificate and identity card. Zahid could of course speak in Bahasa Malaysia, Javanese, a Chinese dialect (his foster father is a Chinese) and as we know now, some English. My only complain is of the quality of some of the English language teachers that we have. I still see some English teachers on social media
Grammar?
We have had two reports on the importance of Bahasa Melayu becoming the National Language published prior to the 13th May tragedy (Razak Report, 1956 and Rahman Talib Report, 1960). The Mahathir Mohamad Cabinet Report (1985) emphasised the importance of Bahasa Melayu as the unifying language for all races in Malaysia. In fact, Article 152 of the Federal Constitution and the National Language Act 1963/1967 have uphold Bahasa Melayu as the National Language. The Razak Report pointed out not only should the medium of teaching in schools be in Bahasa Melayu, but also for a uniformed curriculum to be taught at all schools. However, this was not thoroughly implemented. Children still went to schools with different medium of language. Different languages instill different values; and the use of Bahasa Melayu as a medium of teaching became a serious issue (Abdullah Hassan, 1996: 265).
As an outcome of the 13th May tragedy, political leaders got together and agreed that a single language as a medium of teaching is the way to foster unity amongst the different races of Malaysia. Tun Datuk Patinggi Hj Abdul Rahman Bin Ya’kub, the Education Minister in 1970 instructed all English-medium schools to use Bahasa Melayu in stages. Only a few Chinese schools continued to teach lessons in Mandarin (Abdullah Hassan, 1996: 266).
The rift is getting worse now. We have chauvinistic organisations championing the right to teach subjects in the vernacular to their students, while the National Language becomes just one of the subjects. Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, Myanmarese now have better command of the National Language than many of the people’s representatives. Who are we to blame? So, stop complaining about Zahid. If he can improve his command of the English language, can you improve your Bahasa Malaysia too?
For the people of Petaling district, this is the second time that taps have run dry. The first was just before Aidil Adha (2nd September 2016) when a pipe burst caused taps in Subang Jaya, USJ, parts of Puchong and Pinggiran USJ to not have water supply for about three days. The second time which began two days ago is caused by contamination of the raw water supply to the Semenyih River Water Treatment Plant and this time several districts are affected namely
Hulu Langat (Bangi, Bandar Bukit Mahkota, Kajang, Semenyih and Rinching),
Kuala Langat (Morib, Banting, Saujana Putra, Bandar Rimbayu and Teluk Panglima Garang),
Petaling (USJ1-27, Puchong, Seri Kembangan and Serdang),
Sepang (Putrajaya, Cyberjaya, Bandar Nusa Putra, Putra Heights, Pulau Meranti, Kota Warisan, Bandar Bukit Puchong and Sungai Merab).
If you have no idea how huge an area that is, let me represent them using the map below:
Both these situations were totally avoidable. Since 2010 various water-related non-governmental organisations, water industry players as well as the Federal Government have advised the Pakatan-led Selangor state government to allow for the construction and completion of the Langat 2 Water Treatment Plant. Else, Selangor would face a water crisis by 2014. The state government vehemently denied that Selangor would face such a crisis.
True enough, people in Selangor had to undergo scheduled rationing in 2014 and 2015. 60,000 accounts were affected. That translates into at least 360,000 people who were directly affected. This time it could be far more.
When a pipe burst on the 2nd September 2016, instead of helping by explaining the situation, an assemblyman decided to take it out on Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor (SYABAS). This assemblyman gave the most absurd ideas on how to manage water cuts:
This invited a basket of zombies to support her statement, some even blaming the Federal government for the problem. In one of the community WhatsApp groups one even said that maybe the problem was created by the Barisan Nasional to create hatred towards the Selangor state government. What they failed to realise is that the Selangor state government IS the one managing it’s water treatment and supply:
Not clear enough? How about this? From September 2015, the Selangor state government owns the water concessionaires in the state!
The second problem is that unlike Penang, Selangor does not gazette its water catchment areas. Factories, loggers have no problem whatsoever to encroach into the water catchment areas. It is a no-brainer that this is the contributing factor to the hundreds of cases of contamination of the Langat and Semenyih rivers and their tributaries.
Let us not kid each other. The Selangor state government has been in denial about the dire water situation in the state since 2008. It was made worse when the whole situation was not dealt with properly and by not heeding the advice of the industry players.
So, I hope Hannah Yeoh actually means it when she said there should be a management change. It should be a change in the management of the state. It can’t even handle the basic but extremely critical issues and it’s members are spending more time bashing others than actually looking into the problems the rakyat is facing! And when shit actually hits the fan, this is the sorry excuse to say “Oh! We’re with you! We feel your pain!”
Yes, Hannah Yeoh. Let us have that change in the management soon. Your voters are already supporting your call.
In the famous words of your fellow party member and former USJ resident Jeff Ooi,
General Tan Sri Roslan bin Saad TUDM, Chief of the RMAF
“We would like to see at least a 20 percent participation of the non-Bumis in the RMAF,” said the Chief of RMAF, General Tan Sri Roslan bin Saad TUDM to reporters after witnessing the Farewell Parade for Major General Dato Ahmad Tarmizi bin Elias TUDM, the outgoing Chief of Staff (Administration) at the Air Force Training Institute in Ipoh.
“Right now, they number between 5 percent to 10 percent in a force of about 15,000,” he added. “We need all the expertise that we can get as we have aircraft with high technology, electronics, computers where they can contribute their skills and expertise in the defence of the nation.”
“20 percent is not the ceiling but that is the minimum level of non-Bumi participation that we would like to see in the RMAF.”
Low pay is the excuse given for not joining the Air Force which is not the case. Diploma holders could earn a basic pay of between RM2,300 to RM3,000, while degree holders start at RM3,600. On top of that there are allowances that they can be eligible for depending on the trade they are in. This does not include other perks such as free medical and dental treatment at the various Armed Forces Medical Centres as well as housing. Even a recruit could earn up to RM1,200 inclusive of service and special service allowances upon completion of training.
The RMAF used to have about three non-Bumi generals (from the rank of Brigadier General) out of a total of 10 back in the 1980s. In the current line up there are only three out of about 40. The non-Bumis have to realise that they have as much responsibility as the Bumis do in defending this nation. Among the youngsters we could see how non-Bumi children partake in physical games such as paintball, or electronic war games on computers but this however does not translate into their participation in the Armed Forces in general. To say that the military (and the police) are Bumi organisations is not true at all – the large number of Bumis in these services only reflect the unwillingness of the non-Bumis to serve their nation.
On the issue of cross-border encroachment, on the part of the RMAF, General Roslan reiterates that the RMAF is and will continue to support enforcement operations in the ESSZONE together with other agencies that make up the ESSCOM. ESSCOM is not just about the RMAF but encompasses all border protection agencies such as the Army, Navy, Police, the MMEA, Customs and the Immigration department.
General Roslan hopes that the media could play a bigger role in making the Armed Forces attractive to the general mass and hope to see better participation of the non-Bumis in each of the services.
Having found a partner-in-crime in Mahathir, Lim Kit Siang pushes aside all allegations that he had made against the founder of the Pribumi party.
Three years on, as the DAP Parliamentary Leader still owes the people of Sabah an answer pertaining to Mahathir’s involvement in the IC-for-vote scam otherwise known as “Project IC” or “Project M.”
I am not making this up. I am merely asking Lim Kit Siang if, now that he has Mahathir’s ears, the allegations he had made against the latter are true, or if he had been misleading the Sabahans especially in a scam of his called “I-Lie-For-Votes”?
—-———————————
KUALA LUMPUR, 21 JAN: Rakyat bukan setakat tidak yakin terhadap integriti institusi negara, malah pertikai iltizam kerajaan Barisan Nasional (BN) terhadap dasar 1Malaysia terhadap fitnah bekas Perdana Menteri paling lama memerintah, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad kepada Bapa Malaysia, Tunku Abdul Rahman dan satu juta warga generasi Merdeka apabila cuba menjustifikasikan Projek IC atau Projek M yang melakukan jenayah dan pengkhianatan “kewarganegaraan-untuk-undi” di Sabah bagi mempertahankan kuasa UMNO di negeri itu.
Ketua Parlimen DAP, Lim Kit Siang berkata, Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Razak sepatutnya membersihkan nama Tunku Abdul Rahman, bapanya sendiri Tun Razak dan satu juta warga generasi Merdeka daripada fitnah Mahathir itu.
Katanya, Mahathir juga sepatutnya menjawab kepada rakyat Sabah dan Malaysia mengapa beliau hidup di dalam pembohongan selama dua dekad iaitu 10 tahun sebagai PM dan 10 tahun selepas bersara apabila menafikan kewujudan Projek IC atau Projek M yang melakukan penipuan “kewarganegaraan-untuk-undi”.
“Persoalannya, bagaimana rakyat Malaysia mahu melihat dasar 1Malaysia Najib sebagai sebuah dasar yang serius bagi menjadikan Malaysia yang lebih berdaya maju, lebih produktif dan lebih berdaya saing apabila usaha pembangunan bangsa bukan saja oleh Tunku Abdul Rahman, juga satu juta warga generasi Merdeka diperkecil malah difitnah seperti yang dilakukan Mahathir.
“Mahathir mendakwa Tunku melakukan sesuatu yang lebih teruk daripada Projek IC atau Projek M apabila memberi kewarganegaraan kepada sejuta warga semenanjung Malaysia yang tidak layak,” katanya dalam kenyataan media mengenai Pengiraan Detik 82 hari ke PRU-13, semalam.
Kit Siang yang juga Ahli Parlimen Ipoh Timur berkata, matlamat 1Malaysia adalah untuk menjadikan Malaysia lebih berdaya maju, lebih produktif dan lebih berdaya saing, dan kemuncaknya sebuah negara yang hebat: sebuah negara yang diharapkan agar setiap warga Malaysia melihat dirinya terlebih dahulu sebagai rakyat Malaysia, dan kemudian barulah melihat dirinya berdasarkan bangsa, agama kawasan geografi dan latar belakang sosial, dan juga sebuah negara yang diharapkan agar prinsip 1Malaysia dijalin dalam struktur ekonomi, politik dan sosial masyarakat.
Menurutnya, Rakyat Malaysia sekarang bingung dengan jawapan Najib selepas mesyuarat Majlis Tertinggi Barisan Nasional Khamis lalu mengenai pendedahan penipuan “kewarganegaraan-untuk-undi” oleh Suruhanjaya Siasatan Diraja (RCI) mengenai pendatang tanpa izin di Sabah dan reaksi Mahathir.
“Sebenarnya, Najib tidak katakan apa yang lebih penting daripada yang beliau katakan iaitu masih awal untuk membuat kesimpulan daripada RCI memandangkan ia masih di peringkat permulaan dengan 167 lagi saksi akan dipanggil, Najib juga berhati-hati mengelak memberi komen kepada fitnah Mahathir terhadap Tunku serta satu juta warga generasi Merdeka.
“Adakah ini bermakna Najib menyokong fitnah Mahathir bahawa Tunku memberi kewarganegaraan kepada sejuta warga tidak layak iaitu bukan saja mengaitkan Bapa Malaysia tetapi juga bapa Najib, Tun Razak
“Saya harap Najib segera membersihkan bukan saja nama Tunku tetapi juga bapanya, Tun Razak dan menjauhkan dirinya daripada fitnah Mahathir itu,” katanya.
Katanya, klip video terkenal “Listen, listen, listen!” Sharifah-Bawani adalah bukti terkini berterusan dan bahaya tersembunyi pusaka 22 tahun pemerintahan drakonian Mahathir, mendedahkan kepalsuan dakwaan bahawa pemerintahan Najib membuang segala beban lampau yang bersifat Mahathir dan kini menganut kepercayaan “Era kerajaan tahu semua telah berlalu”. – Roketkini.com
——————————
I would like to call upon Malaysians now to ask Lim Kit Siang if Mahathir has answered him, and make the answer known to us all, especially the Sabahans, in the mass and electronic media.
Lim Kit Siang can read the original article here in case he is absent-minded.
Jeff Ooi’s done it again! The latest Muslim he had targetted was the late Haron Din who passed away early Friday morning (Malaysian time).
In a Tweet in reply to a similarly rude Tweet at 1.41pm on 16th September 2016, Jeff Ooi used Adios Harun Din. It may have been alright albeit sounding disrespectful had it been a stand-alone Tweet, replying to an earlier rude Tweet made it sound much like the cocktail drink I posted above.
It is reported that Jeff Ooi has deleted the Tweet but no apology has been made. An apology is not a culture embedded in Jeff Ooi’s DNA.
Almost three years ago, the Member of Parliament for Jelutong drew the wrath of the members of the public as well as from Pakatan assemblymen when he called officers from the Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang ‘kucing kurap.’ A defiant Jeff Ooi refused to apologise for the remark. He did apologise a week later but only after he was instructed by the late Karpal Singh to do so.
A year after being elected Jeff Ooi had called Mohd Razali Abdullah, a MPPP councillor an Islamic terrorist. Razali was a member of the Jemaah Islah Malaysia, a registered organisation that had a close tie with the DAP Socialist Youth (DAPSY). It took an order from recently-charged Chief Minister of Pulau Pinang, Lim Guan Eng, before he retracted his remark. However, to date, Jeff Ooi has never offered any form of apology to Razali.
In 2011, Jeff Ooi organised a Christian function at the Red Rock hotel in Pulau Pinang where Sarawak pastors were his guests. The function, according to Big Dog and Helen Ang, was to pledge their support for the Christian agenda to have a leader of their faith to become the Prime Minister of Malaysia.
I blame the voters of Jelutong for returning him to the MP seat. I also pity them for having a wretched outsider to become their voice. And I would like to remind them to give Jeff Ooi the boot in the next general election.
We don’t need racists and chauvinists in this country, and we don’t need people who have very little respect for others to lead us. Come GE14, should say to Jeff Ooi “Adios Motherfucker!”
Children in different costumes holding the Malaysia flag – BERNAMAThis article is the last installment in a series on the Formation of Malaysia, and is a continuation from The Road to Malaysia: Part 3 – The Cobbold Commission.
“… there is no doubt about the wishes of a sizeable majority of the peoples of these territories to join the Federation of Malaysia.” (UN Secretary-General U Thant, 13th September 1963]
After World War 2, the British was economically and financially strained to maintain its colonies especially those east of Suez. It would be a matter of time before Britain would have to give up all of its colonies abroad, save for some of the smaller ones. The Cobbold Commission’s report agreed unanimously that a decision in principle should be taken by governments as soon as possible; that the new state should be called Malaysia; that the constitution of the Federation of Malaya should be adapted for Malaysia, instead of drafting a completely new one; that there should be no right to secede from Malaysia after merger.
Although the Tunku had asked the Malayan Commissioners to sign the report, he was still apprehensive about what “Malaysia” would do to his political position, and what kind of repercussions “Malaysia” would have on Malaya’s relationship with Indonesia and the Philippines.
The Malaysia Agreement was signed on the 9th July 1963. Although not sovereign nor self-governing, the leaders of both North Borneo and Sarawak were invited to sign it. Annexed to the Agreement were a number of Constitutional instruments that included admission to the federation of the three former British dependencies; state constitutions for Sabah (as North Borneo would be called), Sarawak and Singapore; a scheme to compensate officers retiring from government service in North Borneo and Sarawak.
A separate legislation ending British jurisdiction in North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore was enacted at Westminster. It did not provide for the separate independence of the three territories but transferred sovereignty to the new Federation of Malaysia (Commonwealth Relations Office and Commonwealth Office Briefs for Malaysia Bill, 1963 – Dominions Office DO 169/329). Therefore the self-rule given by the British to Sarawak on the 22nd July 1963 and the declaration of independence by Sabah on the 31st July 1963 were not a recognition of the independence of either Sarawak or Sabah, but an independence of the states in adherence to Malaysia (Ghazali Shafie’s Memoir on the Formation of Malaysia, p438). For all intents and purposes, both North Borneo and Sarawak remained as Colonies of Great Britain until the coming into operation of Malaysia.
If the appointment of a Chief Minister is to be taken as the point when independence had been achieved, Malaya would have been independent in July of 1955!
The late President Wee Kim Wee of Singapore, then a young Straits Times reporter, covered Sabah’s Merdeka Day and filed a report that, from all the obvious evidence, it was a declaration of independence within Malaysia.
The Malaysia Agreement referred to North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore as Colonies.Malaysia Day was supposed to have happened on the 31st August 1963. However, several last minute events forced Malaysia Day to be postponed.
1) a last-minute interference by British officials prevailing upon Iban leaders to demand for the post of Sarawak Governor whilst also keeping the post of Chief Minister, thus reneging on an earlier understanding that for the first two years, the post of either the Chief Minister or Governor should go to a Malay if the other was given to an Iban. The Tunku was livid and decided that Malaysia would happen without Sarawak. All the cabinet ministers of Malaya except Tun Razak agreed with the Tunku. Through Ghazali Shafie, Razak negotiated with the leaders of Sarawak and in the end Abang Haji Openg was the Governor designate, Stephen Kalong Ningkan as the Chief Minister, and Temenggung Jugah as a Federal Minister in-charge of Sarawak Affairs. Had it not been for Razak’s persistence, the Tunku would have had things go his way and Sarawak would not have been in Malaysia.
2) the protest by both the Philippines and Indonesia at the United Nations against the formation of Malaysia. They requested that the UN secretary-general, or his representative, should ‘ascertain’ the extent of support in the Borneo territories for Malaysia, that observers from all three governments should accompany the UN mission, and that the formation of Malaysia should be postponed until the completion of the UN report.
Led by Lawrence Michelmore (the American deputy director of the UN Office of Personnel) the mission consisted of Argentinian, Brazilian, Ceylonese, Czech, Ghanaian, Pakistani, Japanese, and Jordanian members of the UN Secretariat. It was accompanied by observers from Indonesia and the Philippines—an arrangement which the British government grudgingly accepted. From 24th August to 4th September they held public hearings in widespread locations and reconvened in Kuching on 5th September, past the 31st August 1963 deadline. This forced Malaya to change the date for Malaysia Day to 16th September 1963.
The UN report, which was published on the 14th September, was generally favourable to Malaysia. In his assessment of the mission’s findings, U Thant was in no doubt that ‘a sizeable majority of the peoples’ wished to join Malaysia, although he also rebuked the Malayans for fixing a new Malaysia Day before the mission had completed its work. Even before the survey was finished, however, Indonesia and the Philippines were attempting to discredit it and, on its publication, they rejected the report and refused to be bound by its findings.
3) was of the PAS Government in Kelantan wanting the Malaysia Agreement and Malaysia Act to be declared ‘void and inoperative.’ Kelantan argued that the Act would abolish the Federation of Malaya, thereby violating the Federation of Malaya Agreement of 1957; that the proposed changes needed the consent of each state of Malaya and that this had not been obtained; that the Sultan of Kelantan should have been a party to the Malaysia Agreement in the same way as the Malay rulers had been signatories of the Malaya Agreement of 1957; that constitutional convention called for consultation with the rulers of individual Malay states regarding subsequent changes to the constitution; and that the federal parliament had no power to legislate for Kelantan in this matter.
On the 14th September 1963 the Chief Justice ruled that both the Malaysia Agreement and the Malaysia Act were constitutional (Tan Sri Mohamed Suffian bin Hashim, An introduction to the constitution of Malaysia (Kuala Lumpur, 1972) pp 13–14).
By 16th September 1963, we are all Malaysians.
Looking back, I remember an article quoting Tan Sri Abdul Ghani Gilong relating his experience visiting Kuala Lumpur on the invitation of the Tunku, he said:
“Kami naik kenderaan yang dipandu. Bagi sesetengah anggota delegasi saya, itulah kali pertama mereka menikmati air paip dan tandas berpam.”
“Kami dibawa ke beberapa tempat dan kampung yang sudah mendapat pembangunan seperti jalanraya dan sebagainya. Saya sendiri apabila balik ke Sabah telah berkempen menyokong penubuhan Persekutuan Malaysia dengan memberitahu kawan-kawan mengenai pembangunan yang ada di Malaya ketika itu.
Katanya satu kejadian lucu ialah apabila ada anggota rombongannya tidur di lantai dalam bilik hotel mereka dan bukan di atas katil yang empuk.
“Apabila saya nampak, mereka memberitahu saya mereka ingatkan katil itu adalah untuk ‘tuan’, seolah-olah hanya orang kulit putih boleh tidur di atas katil dan anak tempatan tidur di atas lantai sahaja.”
“Saya beritahu mereka katil itu mereka punya untuk tidur di atasnya.”
(“We rode on a vehicle that came with a driver. For some members of my delegation, that’s the first time they enjoyed tap water (running water) and flushing toilets.”
“We were taken to several places and villages that have received development such as roads and so on. When I went back to Sabah I campaigned in support of the establishment of the Federation of Malaysia by telling my friends about the existing development in the then Malaya.
He said that one funny scene was when there were members of his entourage who slept on the floor in their hotel room and not on their comfortable.
“When I saw, they told me they thought it was a bed especially for the ‘master’, as if only the white people could sleep on the bed while the local people sleep on the floor.”
Such was how inferior the people of Sabah and Sarawak felt of themselves before Malaysia existed, and it was not that long ago.
I believe that there has been progress that has been made in both Sabah and Sarawak although there should be more. When I was working offshore, most of my drilling and marine crew are from Sabah and Sarawak, especially the Ibans. My last Chief Mate is a Kelabit from Bario, while one of our vessels’ Captain is a Kedayan from Limbang. In my opinion, both the Merdeka Day on the 31st August and Malaysia Day on the 16th September are equally important to us. Without the 31st August 1957 event, Malaysia would not have happened and I shudder to think what ill-fortune would have befallen the people of Sabah and Sarawak, especially with China, Indonesia and the Philippines staking a claim in both the states.
I also believe that the current Federal Government is doing all it can to fulfill the promises made back in 1963, an uhill task given that previous Prime Ministers, especially a particular former Prime Minister for 22 years, did not do much for the people of Sabah and Sarawak.
Let us concentrate on nation-building, and put aside state-nationalism as that brings about nothing beneficial to any of us. And let us not let hatred destroy us. Our forefathers who agreed to form Malaysia did so following the democratic system, and not through violent nor nonsensical demonstrations or coups.
And let us remember the famous words by the great Temenggung Jugah ak Barieng:
“Anang aja Malaysia tu baka Tebu, Manis di pun, tabar Di ujung”
(Let’s hope Malaysia does not end up like a sugarcane. Sweet at the beginning, bland at the end)
In Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia the communists were making advances while the number of American servicemen in Vietnam tripled the number sent in 1950. In Indonesia, the influence of the Partai Komunis Indonesia on President Sukarno was strong. In Singapore, all the political parties except Singapore UMNO accused the PAP of having carried out negotiations to be merged with Malaya without first consulting the people. This gave ammunition to the communists in Singapore and their sympathisers to attack both Lee Kuan Yew and the Tunku.
In British Borneo, the communists and their sympathisers tried to intimidate the natives thinking that it would work as it did in Singapore. Truth be told, it had quite the opposite effect. Lee Kuan Yew observed that as in Singapore, those anti-Malaysia in Sarawak were the Chinese communists, chauvinists and their sympathisers, while in North Borneo, they were Chinese businessmen and Chinese who were under the influence of individual British officials who were opposed to the Malaysia Concept, or ignorant of it. Kuan Yew noted that the direct links between the Chinese in Perlis throughout Malaya and Singapore to the British Borneo are the Chinese newspapers. Hence, Kuan Yew suggested to the Tunku for the Chinese chauvinists be separated from the Chinese communists and the two groups should be separated.
Members of the Cobbold Commission arrived in Kuching in the morning of the 20th February 1962. The members were:
Sir Cameron Fromanteel Cobbold, former Governor of the Bank of England, also Chairman of the Commission of Enquiry,
Sir Anthony Foster Abell, former British Governor of Sarawak and the High Commissioner to Brunei,
Sir David Watherston, the last British Chief Secretary of Malaya,
Wong Pow Nee, the Chief Minister of Penang, and,
Ghazali Shafie, Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Malaya.
They were first brought to the Astana, a house that was built in 1870 by the second White Rajah, Charles Anthoni Johnson Brooke as a wedding gift for his wife, Margaret Alice Lili de Windt. It had been occupied by the British Governor since 1946. Ghazali Shafie could not help but notice a Jawi inscription at the entrance of the Astana left by one of the Brookes “BERHARAP LAGI BERNAFAS, (Have Hope While There Is Still Breath)” perhaps an apt motivation for the colonial officials who did not want Sarawak to be part of the Federation of Malaysia.
The Brookes had built the Astana on the northern bank of the Sarawak river because it was where the Malays were. The Brookes depended on the Malays for safety and security, the Chinese for prosperity and trading, while the natives were not entirely trusted. The same compartmentalisation was practised in Sarawak by the colonial officials after taking over the state from the Brookes in 1946.
The first groups of interviewees were interviewed in Kuching on the 21st February 1962. The first group amongst these interviewees was extremely pro-Malaysia. They were led by Abang Mustapha, Datu Bandar of Kuching. The second group was led nby Ong Kee Hui from SUPP. This group was against the special rights to be accorded to the natives of Sarawak unless if it is not stated in the to-be-formulated Constitution. This group had a contempt for the backwardness of the natives and had regarded their leaders as men of no consequences. This stand prompted an Iban by the name of Jonathan Bangau whom the SUPP had nominated as the party’s leader in Sibu to resign.
The next day, another group of Chinese in Kuching were interviewed. Their spokesperson, a Chinese woman, twisted and distorted events in Malaya into something truly hateful. She accused the Malayan Government of policies that turned very young girls into prostitutes and had labour laws that accorded workers not more than Ringgit 1.50 per fourteen-hour working day without holidays! When these allegations were countered by Ghazali and Wong Pow Nee, she informed the Commission that she had read the stories from Chinese newspapers to which Wong Pow Nee murmured that these must have been communist publications.
In Bau and Simanggang (now Sri Aman), banners and placards expressing anti-Malaysia slogans in Chinese characters plastered the town in anticipation of the Commission members interviewing residents there. The scene was different in Kanowit and Kapit. People shook the hands of the Commission members, especially the Malayan ones. One of the Tuai Rumah even held Ghazali Shafie’s hand as they walked through Kapit town. They were all awaiting the arrival of Malaysia!
However, Ghazali learnt that under the colonial administration the Iban had suffered oppression and suppression. This began when Sarawak was under the Brunei Sultanate and continued under the Brookes and subsequently the British. When they faced the Commission, they were all for Malaysia and some even emphasised on the need for a speedy arrival of better education and development for the Iban community.
At Binatang (now Bintangor), the division between the wishes of the natives and the Chinese was most prominent. The natives were all for the speedy arrival of Malaysia while the Chinese were divided into two groups: one favouring a referendum, while the other favouring a Federation of North Borneo, Brunei and Sarawak – a line maintained especially by the communists.
In North Borneo, the only negative views were given by the British officials and expatriates as well as the rich local businessmen. At this juncture, Ghazali noted that these British officials knew nothing or chose to disregard Harold MacMillan’s famous “Wind of Change” speech in Cape Town made on the 3rd February 1960.
Cobbold, not having any experience in dealing with the Far East, succumbed to the ideas of these officials that in his draft, he recommended that both the British and Malayan Governments should have executive powers over the British Borneo states for five years. Both Wong Pow Nee and Ghazali believe that the Malayan Government would never agree to perpetuate colonialism in any form. However, the two governments should discuss the matter should they want the British officials to stay on in Borneo in the service of the two territories. Wong Pow Nee quoted the state of Penang where he was once a Chief Minister to demonstrate the point that the British fears were groundless and that the Tunku, the Malayan people as well as the 70 percent who advocate the creation of Malaysia in the North Borneo and Sarawak would not agree to Cobbold’s suggestions as it would still be a form of colonialism. What more that the communists in Malaya, Singapore, Indonesia, China and the Soviet Union had branded the Malaysia Concept as neo-colonialism. Interesting also to note here is that in April 1962, the Philippines House of Representatives had made a formal claim on North Borneo. On the 20th January 1963, Drs Subandrio, and alleged communist and also Sukarno’s Foreign Minister and Second Deputy Prime Minister announces Indonesia’s “confrontation” towards Malaysia.
In the end, on the 31st July 1962, Prime Minister Harold MacMillan told the Malayan delegates that Her Majesty’s Government was just as anxious to see Malaysia succeed. Soon after, an Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) was set up by the Malayan and British Governments that would include the North Borneo and Sarawak Governments. On the 12th September 1962, the North Borneo Legislative Council adopted the following motion:
“Be it resolved that this Council do welcome the decision in principle of the British and Malayan Governments to establish Malaysia by the 31st August, 1963…”
Then on the 26th September 1962, the Council Negri of Sarawak adopted the following motion without dissent:
“This Council welcomes the decision in principle of the British and Malayan Governments to etablish Malaysia by the 31st August, 1963…”
The Federation of Malaysia that would include the Federation of Malaya, North Borneo and Sarawak was to come into operation by the 31st August 1963. All in all, the IGC made recommendations in its report pertaining to the States’ Constitutions, legislative powers, financial provisions, elections, the Judiciary, public service, citizenship, immigration, religion, education, the National Language, status of existing laws, the position of the indigenous races and transitional arrangements prior to the formation of Malaysia.
North Borneo was thoroughly satisfied with the IGC report and the North Borneo Legislative Council unanimously adopted the Report on the 13th March 1963. The Sarawak Government was satisfied and considered that the Report contained “generous terms of safeguards for Sarawak.” Stephen Kalong Ningkan as the Secretary-General of the Sarawak Aliance said that his party “fully endorses the Report.” Leong Ho Yuen, the Vice-Chairman of the SUPP said: “All in all, the Report is quite satisfactory. Though we cannot get all we asked for, at least we have been given a high percentage.” The Sarawak Council Negri voted unanimously to adopt the Report on the 8th March 1963, five days before North Borneo.
Donald Stephens who was the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the North Borneo Alliance said: “The whole of North Borneo will now welcome with joy the creation of Malaysia.”
Tomorrow, on Malaysia Day, we shall look into the self-rule granted to the State of Sarawak and why was Malaysia formed on the 16th September 1963 instead of on the 31st August. We will also look at what was said by those who were involved in parts of the process.
During the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association of Asia (CPA) meeting in Singapore on the 23rd July 1961, a conference resolution to establish a Malaysia Consultative Committee led by North Borneo’s Donald Stephens and Sarawak United People’s Party’s Yeo Cheng Hoe. Both would become members of the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee and hasten the formation of the Federation of Malaysia.
We see today how some foreign plenipotentiaries act in contravention of Article 41(1) and (2) of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961 where the diplomat should not interfere with the internal affairs of the Receiving State and all businesses by the mission of the Sending State must be coordinated with the Foreign Ministry or any other relevant ministries of the Receiving State. However, we see today various anti-government NGOs being courted by these foreign missions, even to the extent of having the number one diplomat attending and participating in the programs executed by these NGOs.
Things were not much different back in 1961 – especially for Singapore, although Singapore was still a Crown Colony with self-rule. George Douglas Hamilton, the 10th Earl of Selkirk (Lord Selkirk) was often observed by Lee Kwan Yew to be making special efforts to court left-wing politicians especially PAP’s left-wing politician Lim Chin Siong, who are opposed to the Malaysia Concept. This relationship grew stronger and especially after the Hong Lim by-election in April 1961 where an Independent thumped PAP’s candidate by a 4,927 majority, and later the Anson by-election in July 1961 where the Worker’s Party’s David Saul Marshall trounced PAP’s Mahmud Awang by a 546 majority. Because of Lim Chin Siong’s ties with the communist-oriented Anti-British League, the PAP leadership began to be openly challenged by the pro-communist members of the PAP and were now prepared to assume leadership. Tunku’s grouse with PAP is not that it is a pro-communist party, but that it is not anti-communist.
For the British, they did not mind if Singapore was governed by a pro-communist government as long as they are allowed to keep their base for use by the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO). To the communist, it was a good rallying point for the British to continue keeping Singapore as a colony and a base in order to attract more anti-colonial supporters to Singapore and the Borneo territories, and intensive anti-merger campaign was undertaken by the communists in Singapore. Lee Kwan Yew believed that the British authority in Singapore had encourage the communists in the PAP to revolt against the non-communist leadership in PAP. Kuan Yew coud not take action by imprisoning the communists for fear that he would be branded a British stooge and that would exacerbate the revolt by the communist against the PAP leadership. Merger with the Federation of Malaya was now central in his struggle against the communists.
The mood for Malaysia in Jesselton (now Kota Kinabalu) however was very good. When Ghazali Shafie arrived there, Sir William Almond Condrington Goode, the British Governor for North Borneo who was leaving for Sandakan told Ghazali to use his car to get around Jesselton for the Commonwealth Committee meeting. As he got into Goode’s car, Ghazali noticed that the driver had not removed the state pennant from the car and asked the driver to do so, so he (Ghazali) could travel correctly in the car. The driver turned around and replied that because of “Malaysia” he would drive Ghazali with the state pennant flying, and drove off with policemen saluting.
The Committee agreed that its aims and objectives should be to collect and collate views and opinions concerning the creation of Malaysia; to disseminate information on the question of Malaysia; to initiate and encourage discussions on Malaysia; and to foster activities that would promote and expedite the realisation of Malaysia. While Donald Stephens chaired the meeting, North Borneo was represented by Datu Mustapha, Singapore by S Rajaratnam, and Sarawak by Yeo Cheng Hoe. All of them agreed with the grand plan.
William Goode was not happy with Donald Stephens’s statement on Malaysia, in particular the latter’s target date of 1963 for the formation. Lord Selkirk had prior to this expressed that the people in British Borneo were not ready to govern themselves as they were still headhunters twenty years earlier. Therefore, Selkirk opined that it would be better for the people of British Borneo to come under a Federation of North Borneo, Brunei and Sarawak for five to ten years before they could decide whether or not to merge with Malaya to form the Federation of Malaysia. Sir Alexander Waddle, H.C White and Sir William Goode, the Governors of Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo respectively made mention on how the idea of Malaysia is being received warmly by the people of the respective states; however they were worried that the Singapore Chinese especially, would swamp them.
On the 26th and 27th August 1961, Ghazali Shafie met with Kadazan leaders as well as leaders from the United Kadazan National Organisation (UKNO) to explain to them the Malaysia Concept, and after hearing about the special position accorded to the Malays in the Federation of Malaya Constitution, they all agreed that Malaysia would be the best solution to protect especially the interests of the Kadazans.
Later at night on the 27th August 1961, the British District Officer had invited Ghazali for drinks with British, European as well as Chinese leaders. Ghazali had suspected that it was more of an exercise to intimidate him. True enough some asked what was the advantage that the Federation of Malaya would get from Malaysia to which Ghazali replied saying that the question of advantage to Malaya would not arise as Malaya would simply cease to exist with the formation of Malaysia. Another pointed his finger at Ghazali and poked him in the chest asking why is Malaya in a hurry to form Malaysia since the people of British Borneo were not yet ready and to let the states of Borneo form their own Federation first? Ghazali pointed his finger back at the person and reminded him that the Tunku had merely made a mention about the Malaysia Concept once in Singapore and one or two more statements after that, and if the person felt that he was being pressured it was not because Malaya had pressured him but that he had been caught in a new political whirlpool within the Borneo territories and he had little knowledge of and was not keen on adjusting himself to the new order.
Back in Kuala Lumpur, Lee Kuan Yew was in absolute hurry for Singapore to be merged with Malaysia. The threat of the communist was real. In a discussion, he agreed with the Tunku that the rights of the Malays in Singapore would take precedence as the Malays in Malaya and Singapore, together with the “sons of the soil” in North Borneo and Sarawak, would form the single largest entity in the new Federation. The Tunku lamented to Kuan Yew that Malaya was very short of effective Chinese leaders. Tan Siew Sin of the MCA was a very sincere and clever man but could not speak any Chinese dialect to be really influential among the Chinese masses. It was no secret then that the Tunku would prefer to have Kuan Yew to assist him in managing the politics among the Chinese in the new Malaysia.
Back in North Borneo, trouble was brewing. The British Government had sent Donald Stephens to the UK to attend the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association meeting, while colonial officials in North Borneo worked on to split the Kadazan by saying that Donald Stephens was not a real Kadazan. As a result, UKNO was split into three factions: one following Donald Stephens, another following Abdul Ghani Gilong, while the other following Orang Kaya-Kaya GS Sundang. Datu Mustapha himself was offered two million Ringgit by a wealthy Chinese to form a political party that would espouse the Malaysia Concept but at its own pace, prefering to hang on to the colonial administration. On hearing this, Ghazali advised Mustapha to form a firm relationship with Donald Stephens in order to bring together the natives of North Borneo. Once a strong base was established, the Chinese would have no choice but to capitulate.
It was not an easy task. Donald Stephens was from the Kadazandusun community. The Kadazans and Dusuns were naturally biased towards the colonial officials and the white rulers who served the North Borneo Company before them. These white rulers’ laws protected them from pirates and coastal marauders who plundered their homes and treated them with no respect – the Suluks. Since Mustapha was a Suluk, the Kadazans and Dusuns treated him with fear and distrust though not without awe and respect. That was how the British applied the divide et impera policy to keep them apart.
On the 27th September 1961, the British High Commissioner to Malaya, Sir Geofroy William Tory, called upon Ghazali Shafie to inform the latter that the Governors of North Borneo and Sarawak reported that the people of North Borneo were thinking along the thoughts of the Governors – that is to form a North Borneo Federation instead. When pressed for further explanation, Tory admitted that the Governors were talking in terms of what the Chinese businessmen said.
On the 9th October 1961, Donald Stephens, Mustapha and with about thirty people in the North Borneo delegation arrived in Kuala Lumpur at the invitation of the Tunku who spoke to them both about the need to forget past quarrels and work together for the people of North Borneo. The Tunku also spoke to them about the Chinese community in North Borneo who very much supported the colonial administration there but told them to not be hostile towards the Chinese.
After dinner that night, Mustapha spoke to the attendees about how he and Donald Stephens had decided to form a political movement that would devote itself towards the independence of North Borneo through the Malaysia Concept. He also confessed to have regarded Donald Stephens as a rival for the leadership of the natives, but must now be brothers for the sake of North Borneo and encouraged the other community leaders in the delegation to do the same to one another.
Donald Stephens was more emotional. Tears were rolling down his cheeks when he admitted he had not trusted Mustapha before and asked for the latter’s forgiveness. There was a thunderous applause and both Mustapha and Donald Stephens embraced each other and announced to those present that they were now blood brothers and pledged to work together for the well-being of the people through the Malaysia Concept.
A North Borneo Chinese by the name of Chan also spoke in support of the Malaysia Concept and thought the Chinese should also form a political party. He, Donald Stephens and Mustapha then held hands together with everyone else and shouted Merdeka Malaysia ten times in keeping with the feng shui of the double ten – it was already the 10th October 1961, and this happened inside the Federal Hotel on Jalan Bukit Bintang.
After much deliberation at the second Malaysian Solidarity Consultative Committee meeting in Kuching, as well as some political maneuvering to get the support of Kalong Ningkan and his Sarawak National Party (SNAP) as well as to neutralise the opposition to the PAP within UMNO led by Aziz Ishak, it was decided that an Enquiry Commission, as envisaged by the Tunku and Harold MacMillan, to be appointed to gauge the desirability of the Malaysia Concept among the people of North Borneo and Sarawak.
In Part Three, we shall look into the Cobbold Commission’s work and findings, and reaction by our neighbours.
SeaDemon Says 
You must be logged in to post a comment.