The east Malaysian enigma
By Karim Raslan, MySinchew
I was born on the 2nd of August 1963 in a country called the Federation of Malaya. Six weeks later, on 16th September, the federation along with Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore merged to form Malaysia.
A Malayan at birth, I then became a Malaysian.
The date 16th September 1963 marked a significant transition. Indeed, there is a number of crucial differences between “Malaya” and “Malaysia”.
While we often talk about the ‘social contract’— the unwritten agreement negotiated by our Independence-era leaders — we should also remember the terms upon which Sabah and Sarawak joined with Malaya to form Malaysia.
Basically, these states (along with Singapore, briefly) were persuaded to join ‘Malaysia’ because of these promises. Each was allocated specific rights and duties as per in the 20 and 18-point agreements that Malaya signed with Sabah and Sarawak respectively. Sarawak and Sabah theoretically enjoyed more rights than the existing states of the federation, like Johor or Pahang.
Moreover these “points” were not trivial: there was to be no official religion in either state. English was to be Sabah’s official language indefinitely.
Other clauses also promised local control over immigration, finance, education, land and natural resources. Furthermore, the east Malaysian bumiputeras are to enjoy the same special rights as peninsular Malays.
Many east Malaysians, therefore, thought that they were coming together to form a whole new country. Fast forward to 2010, these facts, however, appeared to have been forgotten.
Neither the 20 nor 18-points have been fully honoured, arguably undermined by successive federal leaders. Indeed, their existence has been relegated to little more than mere historical footnotes.
To make matters worse, we are regularly told that “Malaysia” was born on 31st August 1957.
“Malaysia Day”, as a-matter-of-fact, was only declared a national holiday last year when peninsular Malaysia leaders realised the dangers of ignoring east Malaysian sentiments.
The sad truth is that the state of our union is imperfect and 47 years after its actual formation, Malaysia’s founding ideals remain elusive.
Our development policies and ideas of nationhood are biased towards the peninsula.
Indeed, many peninsular Malaysians are more familiar with London or Sydney than Kota Kinabalu or Kuching. In the meantime, the aspirations of our fellow east Malaysians — whether they are Bumiputera, or Chinese — have consistently been ignored.
How did this happen?
Many east Malaysians mark their problems from the ejection of Singapore as it weakened their negotiating positions.
Federal leaders have been seen as having failed to honour the original spirit of the Malaysia agreements.
These differences have led to a different sense of Malaysian-ness across the South China Sea.
Their stated preference of many east Malaysians for 16th September as the “national day” underlines these differences.
