KOTA KINABALU: Effort to achieve “Satu Bangsa Malaysia”, where citizens across the nation share the same spirit of oneness and mutual respect towards each other, must begin with telling and recognizing the true history of Malaysia and how this great federation of nations was born.
Distortion of facts, misinterpretation of history and simple ignorance about Sabah and Sarawak among the vast majority of citizens from Peninsular Malaysia have long been a huge stumbling block and source of dissatisfaction among the east Malaysians.
This growing dissatisfaction, according to one forum speaker, Zainal Ajamain, could one day throw the country into chaos and instability if not addressed urgently.
“Our history has been told from an alien perspective, not our own. Almost 51 years have gone by since we formed Malaysia together with Sarawak, Malaya, and Singapore who have left the federation. We don’t have much time left to tell our side of history, our truth.
“History, if not told after two generations, will be forgotten. One generation represents a period of 30 years, which leaves us only nine years to get things done, to tell and document the history of Malaysia the way it should be told,” he said.
Zainal, who was the first speaker at the Progressive Institute of Public Policy Analysis Sabah (PiPPA) public forum here on Wednesday evening, said it was time for the people of Sabah to find their voice and speak of their rights as an equal member of the federation of Malaysia based on facts and the actual history of the formation of the country.
“The problem is, most of us don’t know our own history. I’m not blaming our people for not knowing. When they (Malaya) talk about Malaysian history, they are actually telling us the history of Malaya, not Malaysia.
“Until today, they are still telling us that this year is Malaysia’s 57th independence day when in fact Malaysia did not exist until only 51 years ago,” he said, adding that many other facts, which are simple but of significant importance need to be corrected, such as Sabah did not join but jointly formed Malaysia.
Zainal said it was also a fact that all Malaysians in Sabah and Peninsular should accept that the federation of Malaya was on the brink of bankruptcy and wanted Sabah and Sarawak to join the proposed federation of Malaysia because the two states have abundant natural resources that would save them financially.
Another fact that should be recognized is that the Malaysia Agreement, which led to the formation of Malaysia, is an international agreement that could only be signed by sovereign countries, and by implication Sabah and Sarawak must have been sovereign countries when they signed the document.
The forum, entitled “Dilema Sabah Dalam Persekutuan Malaysia” is a three-part talk and expected to resume tonight after the second part ended last night with four other panelists deliberating a different topic.
Meanwhile, political maverick Datuk Dr Jeffrey Kitingan, who also presented his talk during the opening night, said Sabah was unhappy being in the federation as there were huge gaps between what was expected when the country was formed and what is reality today.
“We were promised a merger, a partnership but this is not what we get. Malaya did not fulfill the requirement to form a federation. We are unhappy because we feel that the formation of Malaysia was more of a takeover manoeuvre, not a joint formation of a new country,” he said.
Another speaker, academician Arnold Puyok, attributed the underlying tension between east and west Malaysians to the over-dominance of the Malay Muslims in policy making over the rest of the population.
The competing ideologies, between the Malay Muslim Nationalism and the way of lives of the people of Borneo, had created dissatisfaction among the dominated groups of east Malaysia he said.
“Because of the over centralization and domination of power in the central government, their way of thinking can be forced on us and we are unhappy because we have our perspective that is different from theirs.
“For example, when Sabah was made to make Islam its official religion, the majority non-Muslim KDM was unhappy. There is imbalanced and unilateral equilibrium in the administration with Malaya being too dominant and exerting control over its partners, namely Sabah and Sarawak
“The dominance is not just in politics but also in the control of economic resources, where about 80 per cent of the nation’s expenditures goes to Malaya,” he said.
Arnold, similar to Jeffrey, believed that Sabah would be better off remaining in Malaysia, provided that a few things are first corrected.
The only forward for Malaysia, he opined, is to decentralize the Malaya-dominated administration and allow Sarawak and Sabah more authority in managing their own affairs while at the same time allowing them greater participation in decision-making at the federal level.
He suggested a National Decentralization Committee to be formed to study what the aspects were that were over-centralized and needed to be decentralized and vice versa.