Malaysia @ 62: Crossroads, choices and challenges

By M Santhananaban

Warmest greetings and best wishes for a memorable Malaysia Day. Our sympathies, support and prayers go to our Sabah compatriots as they cope with a devastating flood situation. 

Just past the 68th Merdeka (independence) anniversary for the peninsula, we are now celebrating our 62nd Malaysia Day. It is a time when we should be driven and inspired by feelings of loyalty to the King, patriotism to the nation, compassion for our compatriots and renewed commitment to the wellbeing, unity, inclusiveness, dignity and development of our nation. 

We are undoubtedly a changed, better educated and well-equipped nation.

The most significant concern would be to assess our strengths and safeguard the independence, sovereignty and security of the nation. Those values of loyalty, patriotism and obedience to the spirit of the law are meaningless if the sovereignty or security of the nation is compromised.

Social media has highlighted our many fault lines and weaknesses in every shade.

The conduct of the country’s leaders has also come under increasing scrutiny, especially after the trial, conviction and the jailing of a former prime minister and the huge cash and gold stash traced to a former short-term prime minister. 

The nation enjoys peace, some political stability, a reasonably competitive environment and a good measure of predictability. We have been a cherished oasis of peace for decades in a region that has seen much turbulence, disruption, authoritarianism and occasional steps towards democracy. 

Almost all those countries that supply Malaysia’s manual labour and domestic help – Bangladesh, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Thailand – have seen occasionally violent expressions of people’s power.

It is important that Malaysia does not lapse into becoming a mere supplier of domestic workers and workers for low-end jobs. The economy and education system must evolve to a higher plane to provide jobs for our own highly educated and skilled workers. 

Within the country, we now seem to produce an overabundance of administrative titans and tyrants – or ‘little Napoleons’ – who pronounce on every specialised subject:  attire, food, foreign policy, history, law, medical science, military strategy, policing, road safety, social media, technology and artificial intelligence.

The ageing political leadership seems to have more veteran politicians than technocrats to function as allies of the administrative elite. Missing is the respect and regard that should be accorded to the real economists, educationists, specialists, rainmakers and experts in agriculture, diplomacy, engineering, law, science, sociology and technology.

For a well-placed strategically located, resource-rich country that had had initially a well-educated and diverse workforce and that did not have a high population problem in the 1950s and 60s, we have underperformed.

We must not forget we once had an exemplary civil service and top schools. Our premier university attracted top-notch scholars. The nation also had world–class rubber and oil palm scientists. Most importantly, we had a fair degree of social harmony and unity. 

Today, only Sabah and Sarawak still enjoy a smooth social fabric that transcends ethnicity, faith and tribalism.

In the peninsula, we have created occupational, institutional and residential silos – sometimes along ethnic and religious lines.

The country’s multiethnic diversity, especially after the formation of Malaysia, was an immense asset that we failed to build on in an imaginative and orderly way. 

One glaring example of the failure is the reluctance to absorb more Sabahans and Sarawakians into the highest echelons of the enormous civil service bureaucracy. It is disconcerting that the quota for entry into the premier Administrative and Diplomatic Service is still the unchanged ratio implemented by Gen Gerald Templer in 1953.

Why the inability to alter a quota set seven decades ago? 

Victor Purcell in his Malaya: Communist or Free (Stanford, 1955 ) refers to the country as “a glorified commercial undertaking” rather than a ‘state’. Are we still so beholden to the British rather than to our own sense of nationhood?

The top echelons of the civil service must take responsibility for this unsatisfactory situation, more so decades after Malaysia was formed on 16 September 1963.

Pre-Malaysia

The period of Malayanisation from independence for the peninsula in 1957 to early 1963 period was an immense success. Our own nationals assumed full control of federal institutions, including the various ministries, the judiciary, the police force, schools and hospitals.

Increasingly too, Malaysians also became owners and managers of large private businesses and plantations.

Rubber and tin had put us on the world map. There was then the confidence that with a multiethnic civil service, the communist insurgency could be contained and cauterised.

The nation witnessed impressive progress in agricultural land management and food production. The government handled the provision of facilities for healthcare, education and basic amenities reasonably well and laid the foundations for a communications infrastructure. Rural development with well-managed Felda schemes was in full gear and a source of pride. Corruption was not yet a major issue.

The formation of Malaysia further elevated and enhanced the international stature, importance and impact of the fledgling Federation of Malaya.

Where are we today?

We saw the defeat of two prominent ethnic Malay leaders in the peninsula in the 2022 general election. Both Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah were icons of Malay nationalism. Their defeat in the Malay heartland suggests that Malaysia is evolving beyond strict ethnic-based asymmetrical coalition politics. 

In this time of reflection, we must be courageous in safeguarding the integrity, sovereignty and unity of our country. More specifically, we have to applaud integrity, accountability and justice displayed by anyone in Malaysia, especially those aspiring for political leadership.

By the same logic, we should condemn corruption, cronyism, dishonesty, extremism, nepotism and near-treasonous actions.

Enlightened Malays

Within the peninsula, there should be valid concerns about the growth of ethnic silos and extremism that can prove toxic to overall peace and harmony.

Fortunately, there is a notable emerging trend of plain-speaking Malays in the peninsula who question some of the actions and activities designed to further accentuate such extreme ethnocentric differences.

G25 has played a significant role as a moderating influence promoting integrity and fairness. There are others, including at least one MP, Hassan Abdul Karim, two bloggers based abroad – Mariam Mokhtar and M Bakri Musa – and others who have counselled balance and reasonableness.

Two former chief justices – Richard Malunjum and Tengku Maimun Che Mat – along with some of their distinguished colleagues – Mohd Ariff Mohd Yusof and Hishamudin Yunus – have spoken out on these issues and the supremacy of the Constitution.

Former law minister Zaid Ibrahim often offers enlightened perspectives on various issues. A former MP, Tawfik Ismail, the inspiration behind the Malaysia First project, has been forthright on inclusiveness, mutual respect and integration. Prof Tajuddin Rasdi, Dr Kamsiah Haidar and the Patriot president, Zarazilah Mohd Ali, have repeatedly affirmed that Malaysia belongs to everyone in Malaysia.

Yet the perception remains that a certain segment of the peninsula’s population has failed to embrace and empathise with Sabahans and Sarawakians as co-equal compatriots and partners. 

This is borne out especially with regard to the prime minister’s post. There should be no impediment to someone from Borneo assuming the prime ministership.

Since April 2009, the country has had some rather mediocre leaders who have demonstrated convincingly that the peninsula has lost the high moral ground and integrity advantage it once had over Sabah and Sarawak.

Indeed, we seem to have had a few leaders from the peninsula who are somewhat comparable to two late bigwigs of the two Borneo regions. The latter are remembered for their legendary wealth accumulation, flashy lifestyles amongst other antics.

Six decades of Malaysia have not quite produced the harmonisation of social interaction and a shared sense of empathy and equality between the people of the peninsula and the Borneo region. We cannot expect equilibrium, mutual trust and confidence without a shared sense of some equality and equity.

Peninsula overreach

The most egregious lack of empathy was demonstrated in the peninsula-directed effort to alter the demographic make-up of Sabah.

The sharply unnatural and unnerving increase in the population of Sabah and the transfiguration of that region’s make-up showed arbitrary and atrocious intervention in the innate identity of Sabah.

It was an obnoxious manoeuvre orchestrated by powerful peninsula-based leaders and institutions to satisfy a narrow and nefarious policy objective. Some Sabah officials were complicit in pulling this off.

Justifiably, the people of the resource-rich Borneo region also feel they have not achieved parity with the peninsula in federal civil service participation, modern infrastructure, interconnectivity, internet access and modern medical facilities.

Yet some of us chose to complain that both the Igan and Lubok Antu parliamentary constituencies in Sarawak have less than 10% of the voters when compared to the peninsula’s Bangi constituency. Those much smaller voter bastions must be seen as a small sacrifice to provide political weightage to a large remote area with a dispersed population.

Our progress

Our plantations, timber production, toll-collection companies, fossil fuel sources, hotels and banks are today owned and managed largely by Malaysians. Our country does not have foreign soldiers on our soil. Small and medium industries owned and operated by Malaysians contribute almost two-fifths of our gross domestic product (GDP).

About 80% of the population is now urban – which means the vast majority enjoy easier access to modern amenities such as better medical facilities, schools and socioeconomic services. Public transport and recreational facilities can do with major improvements. Climate change cannot also be ignored.

But the nation’s greatest asset – its rich diversity – is showcased more in its mega-malls and shopping complexes than in the country’s public schools, universities and government establishments (other than the hospitals, stadiums and perhaps prisons).

Proud past 

Sports, particularly football, was seen by the first Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, from the early days as a key instrument in fostering solidarity and celebrating diversity.

Back then, the communist insurgency – which involved economic sabotage, killings and maiming – was largely contained by a multiethnic bureaucracy and the security forces, including the Malayan Armed Forces and the police.

The ‘emergency’ declared on 18 June 1948 ended on 31 July 1960. The tail end of the emergency ushered in a more self-confident and self-assured democratic nation, which held a peaceful general election in 1959.

The Federation of Malaya became a respected political entity, as it excelled in governance, badminton and football. Beyond that, it had another helpful feature. Its leadership was comfortable with the English language and its Commonwealth affiliation.

The Malayanisation programme saw the withdrawal of hundreds of white expatriates from the public and fairly large plantation and mining sectors. Some Asians initially and Malayans succeeded to these positions, and there was no shortage of qualified people to fill these posts. Some locals became school principals at prominent schools in major towns.

Some of the country’s high officials were asked to serve in Brunei, and one was even entrusted to draw up the constitution.

Rubber and tin were the two commodities that put the nation initially on the world map. When the country showed early signs of promise with political stability, growth and pockets of economic prosperity, it became one of the exemplary newly independent countries.

The British, victorious with the help of their Allies, in World War Two, were a weakened power and were coming round to the reality that their earnings from the sterling area were declining. They could not keep their bases in Asia with the rising cost of maintaining their security presence.

Malaya was a well-governed nation under the Tunku, who inspired much trust and confidence. These attributes, however, failed to attract Brunei  and did not, after some time, fully satisfy Singapore, 

Yet, despite such early unsettling developments and misgivings about the peninsula’s leadership, Sabah and Sarawak came to be included and integrated in a sustained partnership.

But increasingly, it was becoming obvious that while the peninsula was fairly open and orthodox about good governance, the two Borneo regions were being stripped of their tremendous timber resources by largely local potentates.

Today’s challenges 

Today, the major threats to the whole country stem from pockets of extremism, widespread corruption, cronyism and corporate capture, where business interests undermine larger community interests.

There is also the well-grounded perception that elected politicians and civil service administrators enjoy far higher compensation than long-serving public servants and private-sector workers in education, healthcare and other essential services.

Let us accept that the Borneo region is not at all a burden but a backbone and bonanza to the peninsula. People in the peninsula should accept and embrace their counterparts in Borneo as co-equal friends, compatriots and siblings.

Malaysia must move on and progress as a united, inclusive and integrated nation.

Happy Malaysia Day!

Dato’ M Santhananaban is a former ambassador with 45 years of public sector experience.

...