This article was earlier posted at Sarawak Headhunter.
From uppercaise "A political sop from neo-colonial masters":
21 October 2009
by uppercaise
After almost half a century, the Federation of Malaya grudgingly accorded official recognition this week to the State of Sabah and the State of Sarawak as being equal partners in forming the federation of Malaysia.
The post-colonial history of Borneo just lurched foward an inch.
To add insult to injury, the NST (the voice of the post-colonial master) patronisingly described the declaration of a federal public holiday for Malaysia Day on Sept 16 as the blooming of a 46-year love story — the implication being that we were never married, we were just fooling around you know. It ignores the long bitterness felt in Borneo towards this slight, and ignores the fact that not only did the three partners get into bed with each other, they have official papers declaring their union.
The NST also, quite condescendingly, treats the matter as nothing more than an electoral ploy to fend off oppositionist sentiments. It is not surprising that no mention was made of Lim Kit Siang’s statement a year ago on 31 August 2008, calling for the exact same thing: public holidays and recognition of two national days, Merdeka Day and Malaysia Day.
If the effusive over-the-top coverage in the major newspapers was anything to go by, Malayan Malay condescension towards fellow Malaysians in Borneo will take a long time dying. The words of the 1Najib, the federal prime minister, reveal how strongly held is a sense of Malayan Malay political superiority.
He told Dewan Rakyat today that the formation of Malaysia as an independent and sovereign country was an important chapter in the nation’s history. [Bernama, in Business Times]
And the NST’s front page lead story would have had the words an important milestone in the history of the nation but these were excised before publication.
In the history of which nation? There was no political entity as “Malaysia”, let alone a nation, until 16 Sept 1963. But the 1Najib himself, in his own words in his 1Malaysia blog last month, shows unequivocally he believes this distorted version of history:
On this day (16 September) forty-six years ago, Malaysia welcomed Sabah and Sarawak as states… I was only 10 years old when my father, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, witnessed the historic proclamation of Sabah’s independence in 1963, but I remember how proud he was… Sabah and Sarawak occupy a special place in my heart because of that history.
1Malaysia.com.my
How special can they be if on the one hand he says they achieved independence and on the other hand says they were welcomed into an already existing Malaysia? The 1Najib clearly still believes that Malaya absorbed Sabah and Sarawak and gave itself a new name.
That is exactly why for 46 years east Malaysians have taken exception, when the formation of Malaysia — with their consent — is viewed as merely another event in the continuum of Malay political history.
No less an eminence than Prof Shad Faruqi believes so too. Writing in the Sun in 2006, he said:
Last Saturday was Malaysia Day. Forty-three years ago on Sept 16, 1963, the Federation of Malaya was transformed into the Federation of Malaysia.
He discusses a constitutional suit brought by the Kelantan state government and goes on to say:
And so, the Federation of Malaya expanded to 14 states. A new name (Malaysia) was emblazoned on the political firmament.
Malaysia Day remembered
New members admitted. Change of name. You have been assimilated. Case closed. (Or was he merely pandering to the orthodoxy of that prehistoric time before 1Malaysia?)
That argument ignores the real political wrangling at the time, and the opposition of Borneo politicians to domination by Malayans, their proposal that Malaysia be called a confederation, that they be recognised as self-governing territories and that the Malaysia Agreement of 9 July 1963 was made between the Federation of Malaya, the United Kingdom, the colonies of North Borneo and Sarawak and the State of Singapore.
It was agreed that there shall be federated the States of Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore with the Federation of Malaya … and that the Federation shall thereafter be called “Malaysia”.
Up to the 1980s, Sabah and Sarawak took out newspaper supplements in the Malayan newspapers every Sept 16 to celebrate “Independence within Malaysia” and Sabah and Sarawak have continued to maintain a state public holiday on Sept 16.
But the purple prose of the NST’s adulation of the 1Najib reveals that the declaration of the federal holiday is nothing more than a sop towards restless eastern voters by Malayans scrambling to keep federal political power in their hands.
Were he still alive the fiery Indonesian leader Soekarno, who waged war against Malaysia on grounds of neo-colonialism, might feel vindicated. But he failed to pin down the neo-colonialist and imperialistic impulse behind federation as stemming from the nationalism of Malay political leaders revelling in having taken over political authority from Britain. We are the masters now was the unspoken rallying cry, for where London once called the shots in Malaya and Borneo, now Kuala Lumpur would. We are the masters now.
Independence as self-governing territories was what they in Borneo had sought and gained, by retaining most legislative powers including finance and immigration, except foreign affairs and defence, an arrangement similar to other self-governing territories (such as Hong Kong). Their own Cabinets, their own Ministries. Their heads of government were to be titled Prime Ministers, too. But that was negotiated away to being Chief Ministers instead (and reinforcing the false notion of being merely two of 14 states).
There exist a separate High Court of Malaya and a High Court of Borneo, for those reasons, and admittance to the Bar of Malaya does not entitle one to practise without being admitted to the Bar there — just other lawyers must do in other self-governing common law jurisdictions, as, say, between the State of New York, and the State of California.
And as for the two territories retaining powers over immigration — nationals of China, too, must submit to the immigration authority of the self-governing semi-independent territory of Hong Kong.
These powers, inherent to the sense of nationhood of the two states, were fundamental to the formation of Malaysia. But they are pooh-poohed — “these blockades” the NST calls them — as impediments to Malaysian nationalism.
Can the peoples of the eastern territories rise to a Malaysian consciousness when they are reminded in that very manner that for half a century they have been subject to Malayan hegemony in a neo-colonial arrangement?
The 1Najib’s own words show that nothing has changed except for an extra federal public holiday.
© 2009 uppercaise
1. tulisan di atas secara amnya menunjukkan betapa malaya menjadi tuan besar di dalam perikatan malaysia berbanding sabah-sarawak.
ReplyDelete2. tulisan di atas juga menunjukkan malaya seolah menjajah dan dictate sabah-sarawak sedangkan semasa pembentukan malaysia sarawak telah meletakkan harga berupa pelbagai kontrak dan janji yang membentuk perjanjian 18 perkara. apa perlu 18 perkara ini ? untuk menjaga kepentingan sarawak tetapi perjanjian 18 perkara itu seolah telah tercabul melangkau masa.
3. memang benar perkara ini berlaku tetapi butakah penulis ini pada hakikat persoalannya mengapakah ini berlaku ?
4. perkara ini berlaku kerana kelembikan pemimpin sarawak itu sendiri untuk berdiri dalam mempertahankan janji dan persefahaman yg dibuat orang terdahulu semasa membentuk malaysia.
5. kenapa pemimpin sarawak ini begitu lembik ? kerana mereka hanya menjaga tembolok sendiri tanpa memikirkan nasib negeri dan rakyat khasnya. mereka ini bermaharajalela di mata bersultan di hati kerana mekanisme pusat seperti SPRM, POLIS dan semua jentera kerajaan pusat di malaya itu berada sepenuhnya dalam tangan boss besar BN malaya.
6. boss besar malaya pula tidak hairan dengan apa yang berlaku di sarawak asalkan pemimpin politik sarawak tetap berada di dalam kapal yang sama iaitu Barisan Nasional, BN. sokongan BN sarawak ini penting untuk memastikan BN malaya terus berkuasa. maka bolehlah kita kata hubungan BN sarawak dan BN Malaya adalah berasaskan kepada 'marriage of convinience' yang mendatangkan 'mutual benifit' kepada kepentingan masing-masing.
7. jadi pada saya sesiapa sahaja yg menyesali penyertaan sarawak membentuk malaysia dulu itu buta sejarah kerana pada masa itu setiap wilayah yg bersatu itu ada tujuan memenuhi kepentinga politik masing-masing.
8. pada saya juga, orang yg hanya melihat "malayan dominancy" ini tetapi buta matanya kerana tidak melihat kenapa berlakunya "malayan dominancy" adalah disebabkan kelemahan pucuk pimpinan sarawak sendiri adalah orang yang lemah akal analisisnya. besar kemungkinan mereka ini adalah pendokong BN negeri yg bertujuan mengalih pandangan rakyat sarawak dari melihat kegagalan pemimpin sarawak sendiri dalam memperjuangkan nasib sarawak.
JADI DENGAN INI SAYA MENOLAK TULISAN YANG DIPETIK KEBANYAKANNYA DARI PENULISAN SEORANG BERNAMA HJ JULAIHI ITU SEBAGAI ANALISA CETEK YANG HANYA BERTUJUAN UNTUK MENIUP API KEBENCIAN KEPADA MALAYA YG INGIN DIJADIKAN SCAPEGOAT BAGI MENUTUP KEGAGALAN PEMIMPIN SARAWAK ITU SENDIRI. NICE TRY, BUT PLEASE TRY HARDER. ANY TOM DICK AND HARRY CAN POINT TO YOU SUCH POINT AS STATED BY HALF PAST SIX HJ JULAIHI. RAKYAT ZAMAN SEKARANG BUKAN HANYA SEKADAR MENERIMA DAN MENELAN BULAT2 MAKLUMAT SECARA TRADISIONAL TETAPI MEREKA INI LEBIH KRITIS, MELIHAT DAN MENGANALISA SENDIRI KEADAAN SEBENAR DI SARAWAK KERANA MAKLUMAT BOLEH DIDAPATI DENGAN SENANG DARI ATAS KATI DAN SEMASA DUDUK BERAK DIDALAM TANDAS SAMBIL MELAYARI INTERNET.
ye betul. kalau setakat nak cakap dan tunjuk apa berlaku di sarawak sekarang budak kecik pun boleh. tetapi untuk memahami kenapa sebenarnya keadaan seperti itu berlaku memerlukan pemikiran yang penuh kritis malangkaui corak pemikiran tradisi.
ReplyDeleteMun Konsep 1 Malaysia ya benar2 ikhlas.. apalah salahnya mengubah apa yang perlu dalam perlebagaan negaera demi memakmurkan lagi Sarawak & Sabah. Sukar/susah macam manapun kerja penukaran/ pengubahan perlembagaan itu, tak apa.. ada juga usaha kearah itu. Ini tidak kalau isu2 berkenaan dibangkitkan..jawapan akan sama..dah termaktub dalam perlembagaan negara..bukan senang nah nubah perlembagaan negara..!! Ambil satu contoh sahaja.. "Pasal Royalty sahaja".. Ubah / dengarlah rentihan negeri2 yang berkaitan..!! Kan hasil bumi itu hak mereka.! Kalau 50-60 tahun dahulu perjanjian itu sesuai..itu bukan bermakna ia akan "sesuai" untuk selama-lama@nya. Ini bukan pasal "keselamatan Negara" hanya meminta agihan royalty yang lebih munasabah..!!
ReplyDeleteMsemuanya adalerujuk kpd perkara yang sedang dibincang adalah malang untuk membicara hal ini kerana PARA PEMIMPIN SARAWAK SENDIRI MAHU DEMIKIAN menyalah mareka bukan lah keputusan yang baikdan baiknya tukar pinpinan yang ada masa kini yang menjaga kapentingan diri dan mengaut kekayaaan negeri sarawak, dan menyalahkan pemimpin pusat adalahj salah padaa kedudokkan ddimana pemimpin yang ada masa kini disarawak terus dibiar mengaut kekayaan dan menindas ramai anak negeri, RAKYAT IKUT SAHAJA.Pasal kuasa, yang kita salahkan kerajaan pusat, juga salah kita orang sarawak yang meminting diri sendiri,maka hal saperti ini bukanlah pihak pusat ambil kesempatan, dan mareka adalah hanya meneruskan urusan pentadbiran sahaja,dan dalam pilihanraya akan datangd coba tukarkan pimpinan sarawak demi menjaga masa depan sarawak yang cemerlang.
ReplyDeletekami anak Malaysia, desempataean kami tidak sokong idea mengatakan yang pemimpin pusat mengambil kesempatan dalam urusan negeri sarawak? Apa kesempatan? Tiba tiba kini baru tahu yang kerajaan pusaat campor tangan dalam urusan negeri sarawak? Sudah 50 tahun kita aujud, dan sejak pimpinan yang ada telah pun mengadfut berbeilion ringgit kekayaan dan mengapa kita perlu salah kan pimpinan Pusat? Yang menyusahkan kita adalah pimpinan masa kini dan oleh kerana keadaan politik negaraa, maka mareka yang berkuasa disarawak terus bermaharaja lela dan lesapkan kekayaan negeri sesuka hati, ambil tanah dimana mana dan demikian juga banyak perkara terus dikadutkan, dan adnak negeri semua percaya yang pimpinan kini itu benar benar menolong sarawak, tetapi sebaliknya.Rata rata kita salahkan pimpinan pusaat adalah salah, dan fikirlah pada masa pilihan raya negeri akan datang buat lah pilihan terbaik untuk menukar pimpinan dan kita tidak juga afmahu mareka dalam pembangkang saperti di Selangor, p.pinang dan kedah berlaku disarawak, tukar pimpinan dan kekalkan BN.
ReplyDeleteWahat had been mentioned by Sham,Kuching on the colonisation of sarawaka is not a questioned to be asked by anyboday who are really love malaysia, and to those donot like malaysia my addvise is that he or she should go and stay in Singapore or Hong Kong, is better and donot listen to any Malaysian news. In singapore to those who prefered what they called freedom is there for them and stay out.Stay there until your last breath. Buys.
ReplyDeletekemasukkan UMNO di sabah patut membuka mata dan hati kita semua.
ReplyDeleteKemasukan UMNO ke Sarawak jika mengikut acuan tahun 1980han adalah baik untuk membangunan modal ihsan kaum bumiputra dari terjajah oleh mareka bukan Bumi. Tetapi ada mareka yanbg manghalang kerana takut dengan bayangan maeka sendiri yang telah pun buat banyak salah dan mengaut kekayaan negeri ini sesuka hati. Apa bolih buat kini ramaimengeluh dan buat tuduhan bermacam macam yang tidak berasas.
ReplyDelete