Secession by Sarawak is never an option but the gallery demands its discussion

Umar Mukhtar

That the terms of the 18-Point Agreement may not have been fully met by Kuala Lumpur in its obligations to Sarawak is definitely not a moot point. Until those terms are met, Sarawakians will always have a beef against Kuala Lumpur. But does it justify a complete revulsion of being anything Malaysian? Is it a cut-and-dry case for the need to go it alone? Is it enough justification to opt for unknowns on the egging of parties who have not been proven to be any better?

This is not an apologist’s piece to justify the obligations not met but it emphasises to Sarawakians the cursory choices they have in real terms. Not continuing to be Malaysian is never really an option but to listen to the DAP campaigners it seems that opting out of Malaysia is the ultimate solution, as if to compensate for their own lack of imaginative solutions. It is unsaid but encouraged implicitly by them to float in the air as if it is a real choice, which the opposition hawks around.

Because it is hawked by non-indigenous sources, the threat of neo-colonialism befalling the indigenous population is real. The tiny Republic of Nauru is so beholden to Australia that it is nothing more than an Australian outpost in the Pacific Ocean. The prevailing interest of geopolitical non-indigenous ethnic hegemony in South-East Asia is undeniable. The outlying disputed islands promise strategic and economic returns not beyond the greed of an East Asian power.

The other world powers will not allow it. God forbid but if this were to prevail, they would consider this area as threatening to their strategic interests that they may feel compelled to interfere in its domestic politics like Lebanon and the like. How will that leave peace-loving and benign Sarawakians? From a sleepy hollow to a hotbed of international strife just because ‘loyal opposition’ is a foreign concept to delirious youths who feel that politics is a zero-sum thing.

This is not a ‘cry wolf’ scream but a gentle warning of the deep ramifications of copping out of a domestic political controversy by juveniles unaccustomed to the freedom of expression curtailed during Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s rule. The recent formation of an NGO dedicated to this foolhardy objective by a young Sarawakian woman is a case in point. Surely a less drastic solution is within the capabilities of sound minds.

A political solution for the 18 Points controversy must nevertheless be worked on. Maybe things have changed from the time of the Cobbold Commission to the present that certain points may no longer be relevant. But address them we must. It is still an integral part of the reasons Sarawak joined Malaysia. Ignoring them is counter-productive to our young nationhood. And ignoring them will not make them go away either.

Now that a brand of Sarawak nationalism is being advanced by Chief Minister Adenan Satem, all efforts must be focused to build on it so that Sarawakian voices need no longer be KL-centric. Jeffrey Kitingan’s version of Sabah nationalism, which is to ignore KL completely, was never fashionable.

Similarly, the dismissive belittling as seen from the tone of the current election campaigning by DAP whose long-term interests may not coincide with the indigenous population’s interests, should also be ignored. Adenan’s initiative, on the other hand, opens up to new ideas uninhibited by the cop-out of secession harboured by lazy thinkers.

Secession in the world nowadays is exemplified by the existence of Bangladesh, Eriteria and South Sudan. Singapore is a city-state exception. The rest are all foreign-induced secessions and all of the local population existing in poverty and corruption. Surely, Sarawak need not be short-changed as such, DAP’s perspectives irrespective.