An Interpretation of Malaysian national history

The filling of content for Malysian national history should rightly start from 1963 onwards.  Yet many would not agree with me, vehemently saying that Malaysia as a nation should start with the independence of Malaya from the British rule. But Malaya's independence did not affect the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak.

The formation of Malaysia was hatched by Tunku Adbul Rahman, though some quarters believe that he got the cue from British advisers. But why did Najib consistently say that we should celebrate the 1957 indepedence of Malaya as National  Day? This could be a strong weakness point in Najib as he starts his climb to be the next Prime Minister of Malaysia and continue to garner votes from the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak when his historical sense is totally out of tune with the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak.

Truth be said, Malaysia was conceived in the 1961 and to push the idea through negotiations,investigations and commission were held to gauge the feelings of Sarawak and Sabah peoples especially its indigenous tribes.  As word got around, neighbouring countries like Indonesia, Phillipines and Brunei were against the idea.  But more importantly within Sarawak, the left wing elements especiallly the communists were intent to break the formation.

Small scale wars were fought with the Indonesians ,communists and the rebels from Brunei by the peoples of Sarawak. Blood was spilt . The peoples of Sarawak fought for the formation of Malaysia. This point is critical because the role of the West Malaysian politician seem merely as political lobbyist and power broker. If armies were needed to help the Sarawak people fight then it was a matter of putting the request to the British government for help, which they did.

Finally with the concerted efforts of the British army soldiers and the local Sarawak freedom fighters and of course top level negotiations war was brought to an end. Sarawak was ready to become a partner in the formation of Malaysia . The original idea of a federation of Malaysia became a reality and Malaysia as a nation was established in 1963.

At this point it is relevant to step back and see the implication of this interpretation.

Firstly, for the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak, their 'social contract' started in 1963 where the constitution was specifically made to safeguard their rights, culture and religion. It is this social contract that Malaysia should focus on. Not on the social contract much talked about nowadays between the Indians ,Chinese and Malays of Semenanjung Malaysia when they decided to form Malaya. That was history and really of no relevance to the new Malaysia entity of which the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak fought wars for. I can see no reason for West Malaysian politicians  indulging and conditioning us about their so called social contract when this did not ring a bell to the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak.  For the peoples of Sarawak this ghost of the social contract , frightening and threatening at many times for the  peoples of Semenanjung pales against the easy going, happy and harmonius race relations prevalent in Sarawak and Sabah. For them it is the filling up of content of what is meant to be a Malaysian race and economic strength that should fill the pages of the new Malaysian history, not harp back on what happened in Malaya.

Secondly, the arrogance of Najib which is reflective of the politicians of West Malaysia need to stop.  As true Malaysians, we need to uphold the 16 th of September as the only date to celebrate regarding the formation of Malaysia ( Malaysia Day)  and the independence of the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak through the new polity.  To me this is the only saving grace for the future of Malaysia and race relations in a better and newer context. Forget about Malayan independence. Fo once be serious about putting meaning into the future of Malaysia.

If truth be told, it is just a matter of a referendum to find the sentiments of the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak about which date to celebrate Malaysia as a nation.  I am pretty certain, that they will choose 16 th September 1963.

The Legacy of Abdullah Badawi

His Cons:
1) The unpalatable Islam Hadhari concept - producing much resentment among Muslims and non-Muslims throughout Malaysia
2) Despite his dictum " Work with Me", he failed to rein in his chief lieutenant Najib to garner undivided support from his underhands in UMNO and Barisan coalition partners, thus leading the way to UMNO's fallover
3) Allowing his son-in-law meddle in pre-emptive decision making process giving rise to nespotism and cronyism attacks on his administration

His Pros: 
1) Took daring steps in stamping out corruption inside UMNO and in the government service involving seniour figures
2) Re-emphasise on 'people-oriented'  projects like vast scale regional development corridors
3) Paved the way for late but necessary reforms in the judiciary and police, much tainted and cancerous during Dr. Mahathir's administration

Final Remark: He has kept his head high ( in revoking the infamous legacies of Dr. M) , his eyes low, and a victim of the circumstances as 'the right man at the wrong time'

Least Corrupt Shall Win

Today ( 9 Oct'08) the UMNO President and Prime Minister of Malaysia announced that he is not going to contest the Presidency post in the next UMNO elections slated in March 2009. This gives him slighly less than 6 months to clean up whatever is possible with UMNO. For one thing I think it is his affirmative actions against corruption in the party that got him into real political troubles with the entrenched politicians in his party who had enjoyed power and accumulated wealth during the reign of Dr.Mahathir and would not want to relinguish them. Disappointment over these entrenced power elites have started during Dr.Mahathir's times and Abdullah Badawi couldn't do much except deal with them, some his close friends and comrades in UMNO. By not contesting UMNO Abdullah has opened the floodgates of these remaining power elites to cling further to their power and individual properity it brings into a free for all fight. At least the result as I can see it is that the likely winners would be those perceived as the least corrupted among the corrupts. What I say here is not inconsistent with surveys in Malaysia that conclude that of all Malaysian profession, the politicians are the most corrupt.

Prosperity

We have been taught to prosper the world. A tall order. But it can be achieved by giving/sharing plain good advise. In critical times like these( US financial crisis, global meltdown) what can we advise others such that they can be wealthier,more prosperous ? It is better than misguiding them and making them poorer than they already are? For instance, where should you put your money in the bad times ahead?