STRUGGLE FOR ETHNIC UNITY IN MALAYA AFTER WW2 (PART 1)

Struggle for ethnic unity in Malaya after WWII (Pt 1)

History

Written by Ariffin Omar

Monday, 28 December 2009 19:27

British duplicity and collusion of the Malay elite contributed to keeping the various communities apart and made the struggle for a united nation state post-Malayan Union a distant dream. In our study of Malaysian history we are always told that the best approach for achieving unity in this plural society is the Barisan Nasional way. In other words only by having race based parties that are able to come to some degree of understanding and cooperation can we achieve a fragile unity and some measure of peace in this country. However such a view is indeed erroneous because there were attempts to achieve a meaningful unity among the various ethnic communities based on shared common values and willingness to give and take. These attempts were not successful because of political and social factors that were not conducive towards establishing a genuine unity in Malaya. In order to understand why we are trapped in the maze of ethnic and racial politics today, we must examine the past to see what went wrong. To begin our discussion we will start with the Malayan Union. The Malayan Union was introduced by the British immediately after the end of the Second World War. In order to implement their plan, the British had to obtain the agreement of the traditional rulers in the Malay states. The aim of the Malayan Union was to integrate the large Chinese community and the smaller Indian one into a Malayan polity with a sense of ‘Malayaness’. The British also wanted to do away with the cumbersome pre-war administrative structures comprising 10 government units consisting of the Federated Malay States of Perak, Selangor, Negri Sembilan and Pahang and the Unfederated Malay States of Johor, Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan and Terengganu and the Straits Settlements comprising of Penang, Singapore and Malacca. The British wanted to integrate them into a single, centrally controlled state with Singapore as a separate entity. Finally, the long-term goal of the British was to lead Malaya to independence. To carry out their plan it was necessary to reorganize citizenship qualifications whereby 83 per cent of the Chinese and 75 per cent of the Indians would qualify for citizenship under very liberal laws. The British also intended up open up the Civil Service – hitherto a British and Malay preserve – to all communities.1 The Malay sultans would forfeit their positions as heads of their respective states but retain authority only in Islam. In other words, the British wanted to create a new ‘nation state’ from scratch and Tanah Melayu and other symbols cherished by the Malays as well as the bangsa Melayu would cease to exist. The bangsa Melayu would be subsumed into a bangsa Malayan that would encompass the Malays, Chinese and Indians. 2.25 million Malays, 3 million Malayans The British were well aware that the Malays refused to be categorized as Malayans since they saw that term as a British creation that served the interests of the colonial regime. It was even recorded that, “a Malay is a member of the Malay race; a Malayan is a person of any other origin who happens to live in Malaya. There are 2,250,000 Malays; and 3,050,000 Malayans.”2 Therefore, it was clear that this scheme would not be popular among the Malay sultans but the British felt that through blackmail and coercion they might succeed in their plans.3 Harold MacMichael, a senior colonial administrator, was dispatched to the Malay states as the British representative and through threats and intimidation he succeeded in obtaining the ‘consent’ of the Malay sultans to the formation of the Malayan Union.4 The British felt that if they could coerce the sultans into accepting their Malayan Union scheme, the Malay rakyat would fall in line and accept their rulers’ abject surrender to the British scheme. However, the British underestimated the opposition of the Malay masses to the Malayan Union scheme. When the Malays saw how utterly powerless the sultans were in protecting their status, rights and privileges as well as maintaining their identity as a bangsa, they reacted swiftly by re-establishing their pre-war state associations and opposed both the British and their sultans for signing away the sovereignty of the Malay states and agreeing to the Malayan Union Agreement whereby the Malay states effectively became colonies of Great Britain. In introducing the Malayan Union, the British had sowed the seeds of enmity and distrust between the Malays and the non-Malays in the Malay states. Thus any attempt at rapprochement between the various ethnic groups was now impossible. Before the war, the so called ‘pro-Malay’ policy of the British has alienated the non-Malays because it was seen to favour and benefit the Malays at the expense of the non-Malays. But after the war, the Malayan Union had alienated the Malays by abolishing their rights and giving unrestricted citizenship rights to non-Malays. Thus British policies in the Malay states had always kept the various communities apart in a country which now had a plural society.5 Opposition to Malayan Union The emergence of the various state associations such as Persatuan Melayu Selangor, Persatuan Melayu Perak and Persatuan Melayu Pahang meant that Malay ethnic-based associations were now taking centre stage and that it would be impossible to displace them. In addition, new association such as Perikatan Melayu Perak and Pemuda Melayu Kedah came into existence. The targets of their enmity were the British, the Malay sultans who had betrayed their rakyat and the non-Malays who were now seen as beneficiaries of the Malayan Union as they would soon be citizens enjoying the full rights of citizenship. At the same time, the Malays – who saw themselves as the rightful owners of the Malay states – felt they would be marginalized and reduced to a minority community as well as relegated to the periphery of social, political and economic development.6 In the ongoing struggle waged by the Malay community against the Malayan Union, the sultans caved in first as they realized that without the support of their rakyat their positions as sultans would be meaningless. They disavowed the Malayan Union and joined the masses in opposing it. While the British now faced the wrath of the Malays who were determined to bring down their scheme, the non-Malays suffered collateral damage as they were seen as a threat just because the British had planned to give them some political and social rights in addition to the economic advantages that they already had. The British had cynically roped the non-Malays into their scheme because they were useful pawns in the attempt to dilute Malay power. In addition, they wanted to ensure if the Malayan Union came to fruition, the non-Malays would always be beholden to the British for the favour done to them and that they would always support the British in checking any challenge by the Malays to British domination.7 However, the moment the British realized that Malay opposition to the Malayan Union was formidable and it posed a very serious challenge to their domination, they had second thoughts about their scheme.8 The British quickly abandoned the non-Malays in order to accommodate the demands of the Malay elite. Since the sultans had failed to protect the Malay bangsa, the Malay masses now turned to the United Malays National Organization (Umno) which was formed in March 1946 under the brilliant leadership of Onn Jaafar to oppose the Malayan Union and the Malay sultans who signed the agreement. But after the sultans recanted and disavowed the Malayan Union they were out of the line of fire and Umno concentrated its energies on opposing the British and the non-Malays.9 To begin with, Umno was an ethno-centric organization composed of the various state organizations mentioned earlier. At the time of its inception, Umno had no idea or concept of nation, nationhood, nationalism or independence. It was not a nationalist party that was fighting to throw off the yoke of colonial rule as was the case in many other Southeast Asian countries such as Indonesia and Vietnam or Burma. Umno was not fighting for independence but for continued protection of the Malays under continued British colonial rule for as long as necessary.10 If the British had not introduced the Malayan Union in 1946 but had carried on in the same manner as before the war, it was unlikely that Umno, a pan-Malayan Malay movement would have emerged since the Malay elite found little there was to quarrel about British rule. While there would still be the usual griping in the Malay press about the lack of social and economic progress of the Malays as was the case during the late 1920s and 1930s, precious little would be done to implement any meaningful policy that would bring about substantial changes within the Malay community because an educated and economically progressive Malay community would threaten the position of the Malay elite and their complacent relations with the British. In hoping that the British would return to the status quo ante that existed before 1941, Umno was in effect perpetuating ethnic divisions where in theory Malay rights and privileges would be protected (at least in theory) while the non-Malays were seen and categorized as transients that would have no stake in the country and could be dispensed with as and when it was expedient to do so.11 Alternative: Federation of Malaya However, it soon became clear that the status quo ante could no longer be maintained and that the British had to do away with the cumbersome pre-war administrative structure. In the political flux after the Second World War, there was no longer any possibility of reverting to the administrative system that existed in 1941. Thus we must examine critically what was the alternative to the Malayan Union and whether that alternative would promote ethnic integration among the various communities in Malaya and lead to the creation of a united nation state. It should be noted that for the British what mattered most to them was that they would have able to bring the various Malay states as well as the settlements of Penang and Malacca under centralized control. This would serve their political and economic interests very well. British economic interests were substantial and a united Malaya would serve their interest considerably. The Malayan Union ceased to exist in January 1948. When we examine the Federation of Malaya Agreement that replaced it, we can determine that it benefited three parties: \the British, the Malay rulers and the Malay elite within Umno. Stockwell quoting from British sources notes that though the Malayan Union was withdrawn, the British succeeded on two counts in gaining what they really wanted. First, the MacMichael Treaties (though finally abrogated) gave the British immense advantages in the 1946-47 constitutional talks with the Malay elite. The latter had to agree to a federal form of closer union since the Malayan Union framework was the background for renegotiations as well as accepting a scheme of citizenship for the non-Malays. Second and more important, the Federation of Malaya Agreement retained key elements from the Malayan Union though they survive in such a diluted form as to be unrecognizable.12 The Federation of Malaya Agreement of 1948 that replaced the Malayan Union did not create a nation state nor did it bring about unity amongst the various communities of Malaya’s plural society. It was not a Melayu nation nor was it a Malayan nation. It was just a political arrangement leading to the birth of a political entity.13 The mythical sovereignty of the sultans as well as the individuality of the states was maintained. Malay special privileges were upheld. However a strong central government with legislative powers was established under British control.14 Citizenship was made more restrictive because of Malay fears that the Chinese would overwhelm them numerically and also because there were doubts at that time as to the loyalty of the Chinese towards the Malay states. But by no means can the Federation of Malay be considered a triumph for the Malays because sovereignty was not in their hands. There were no national symbols such as a national language, a flag or a national identity that would be accepted by all. The federal council was established and its members were nominated by the British. Even though the English name of the political entity that replaced the Malayan Union was known as the Federation of Malaya, legally it was named Persekutuan Tanah Melayu thus maintaining the illusion that the British conceded to the creation of a Melayu nation. The fact that there were two contradictory descriptions of the same political entity replacing the Malayan Union emphasized even more the schism that existed between the Malays and non-Malays. For the Malays, Persekutuan Tanah Melayu meant that the country was a Malay country exclusive to the Malays while non-Malays saw it as a federation with a Malayan identity that embraced all the ethnic communities including the Malays. Thus British duplicity as well as the collusion of the Malay elite contributed to keeping the various communities apart and made the struggle for a united nation state a distant dream. That the Malay elite at that point was not even prepared to accept the emergence of a nation state was very obvious in the fact that the Persekutuan Tanah Melayu bestowed citizenship but not nationality.15 The non-Malays were only given citizenship rights. They were not even referred to as Malayans in the final report. The term ‘Malayan’ thus had no legal status. Part 2: The Putera-AMCJA counter proposal of a People’s Constitution was a missed opportunity for the term ‘Melayu’ – that would not have carried any religious or cultural connotations – to designate a nationality for the non-Malays. __________________________________________________ Ariffin S.M. Omar is assoc. prof. in International Studies at UUM. He is a founding member and former president of Aliran. He has published Bangsa Melayu: Malay Concepts of Democracy and Community 1945-50 (Oxford University Press, 1993) and edited a volume on The Bumiputra Policy: Dynamics and Dilemmas (USM Press, 2005). His essay ‘The struggle for ethnic unity in Malaya after the Second World War’ is published in the book Multiethnic Malaysia — Past Present and Future (2009). _________________________________________________________________ Footnotes: [1] K.J. Ratnam, Communalism and the Political Process in Malaya, Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya Press, 1965, p.75. [2] Michael Ardizzone, A Nation is Born, London, 1946, p.34. [3] The British intended to bring up two issues to the Malay rulers in order to bring them to heel. One was the issue of collaboration with the Japanese Army and the other was confirmation by the British concerning their position as head of their states since some of these sultans had ascended their thrones during the Japanese Occupation and they needed to be confirmed as rulers by the British. [4] There are several studies on the Malayan Union that could be read by those interested in obtaining more information. Among the better works are James de V. Allen, The Malayan Union, New Haven: Yale University, 1967; A. J. Stockwell, British Policy and Malay Politics during the Malayan Union Experiment, 1942-1948, Monograph No. 8, Kuala Lumpur: MBRAS. [5] There was no official British plan to apply a policy of divide and rule in the Malay states. However, it cannot be denied that it was British economic policy that led to the entry of vast numbers of Chinese and Indians into the Malay states in the early 20th century to the point that the Malays became a minority in some Malay states. [6] The Malay elite had always pointed out that they would not want to share the fate of the Native Americans who now live in reservations and who are completely marginalized from any social and economic development as well as being politically impotent. [7] This view was expressed to me by several Chinese Malaysians who lived through that period and who are now in the mid 70s or early 80s. Some of them stated that they did not ask for the Malayan Union and that it was the British who had planned the whole thing without consulting any of the communities in Malaya. [8] It was the Malayan Union Governor Edward Gent who recommended that the Malayan Union be scrapped and replaced by another political arrangement that would accommodate Malay demands. [9] While the Sultan of Kedah and Perak objected to the Malayan Union and were forced to sign, there were others who signed because they were merely thinking of their own self-interests or because they had just ascended their thrones and needed British confirmation to remain as sultans. The sultans were aware of the fate of Sultan Ali of Terengganu who was dethroned by the British and the fate that befell Syed Hamzah of Perlis who discreetly stepped down to avoid problems. [10] Umno was willing to put its faith in the British pledges made before the war and in past treaties that they would safeguard Malay interests even though the British hardly did anything to uplift and develop the Malays economically and socially. The fear of the non-Malays was so overwhelming that for Umno continued colonial rule was preferable to any attempt to work with the non-Malays to wrest independence from the British. [11] See Mohamad Noordin Sopiee, From Malayan Union to Singapore Separation: Political Unification in the Malaysia Region, 1945- 1965, Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit Universiti Malaya, 1974, p. 26. see also Utusan Melayu, 15 March 1946 where point 6 of the protest cable sent to England specifically called for a return to the pre-1941 situation; and also ‘Umno – Its Aims and Objects’, in Malay League of Perak, Hidup Melayu, p. 12 where it was stated that the Malay Congress ‘urges H.M.’s Government to withdraw the aforesaid proposal immediately and restore the status quo with no change whatever for the present.’ [12] A.J Stockwell, British policy and Malay Politics, 1942-1948, p.166. [13] The political scientist K.J. Ratnam puts it neatly when he states that “to sum up, it appears that the roots of the conflict lay in a single issue; were the British going to recognize the de facto position of the non-Malay communities who now claim to regard Malaya as their only home and hence considered themselves eligible for widely increased political rights, or were they going to continue recognizing Malaya as essentially a Malay country?” [14] Many Malays now in their 70s and 80s who were either involved in the anti-Malayan Union dispute or who witnessed what took place are of the opinion that the Federation of Malaya Agreement was a modified Malayan Union whereby the British ended up with the substance of power and the Malays were left with the illusion of it. [15] See Constitutional Proposals for Malaya: Report of the Working Committee Appointed by a Conference of His Excellency the Governor of the Malayan Union, the Highnesses the rulers of the Malay States and the Representatives of the United Malays National Organization, Kuala Lumpur: Government Printer, 1946, p.23.