It will take more than just granting holidays or constant reassurances of goodwill. Sabah and Sarawak deserve their share of the nation’s wealth and attention. Furthermore, the respective points of the two agreement have to be adhered to.
I WAS born on Aug 2, 1963 in a country called the Federation of Malaya. Six weeks later, on Sept 16, the Federation along with Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore joined to form Malaysia.
A Malayan at birth, I then became a Malaysian.
The date of Sept 16, 1963 marked a significant transition. Indeed, there are a number of crucial differences between “Malaya” and “Malaysia”.
While we often talk about the “social contract”– the unwritten agreement negotiated by our leaders during the Independence era – we should also remember the terms upon which Sabah and Sarawak joined with us to form Malaysia.
Basically, these states (along with Singapore) were persuaded to join Malaysia because of these promises.
Each were allocated specific rights and duties as in the 20- and 18-point agreements that Malaya signed with Sabah and Sarawak respectively.
Sarawak and Sabah theoretically enjoyed greater rights than the existing states of the Federation, like the states of Johor or Pahang.
Moreover, these “points” were not trivial: there was to be no official religion in either state and English was to be Sabah’s official language indefinitely.
Other clauses also promised local control over immigration, finance, education, land and natural resources.
Furthermore, bumiputras in these two states were to enjoy the same special rights as peninsular Malays.
Many East Malaysians therefore thought that they were coming together to form a whole new country. Fast forward to 2010, however, these facts appeared to have been forgotten.
Neither the 20 nor 18 points have been fully honoured, arguably they have been undermined by successive federal leaders.
Indeed, their existence has been relegated to little more than mere historic footnotes.
To make matters worse, we are regularly told that “Malaysia” was born on the Aug 31, 1957.
“Malaysia Day”, as a-matter-of-fact, was only declared a national holiday last year when peninsular Malaysia leaders realised the dangers of ignoring Malaysian sentiment in Sabah and Sarawak.
The sad truth is that the state of our union is imperfect and 47 years after its formation, the ideals of founding Malaysia remain elusive.
Our developmental policies and ideas of nationhood are biased towards the peninsula.
Indeed, many peninsular Malaysians are more familiar with London or Sydney than Kota Kinabalu or Kuching.
In the meantime, the aspirations of our fellow East Malaysians – whether they are bumiputras, or Chinese – have consistently been ignored.
How did this happen?
Many East Malaysians mark the beginning of their problems from the ejection of Singapore as it has weakened their negotiating positions.
Federal leaders were seen as having failed to honour the original spirit of the Malaysia Agreements.
These differences have led to a different sense of Malaysian-ness across the South China Sea.
The stated preference of many East Malaysians for Sept 16 as the “National Day” underlines these differences.
Furthermore, disputes over the rights to natural resources and native customary land, as well as religious disputes and questionable immigration policies have heightened dissatisfaction.
Even the New Economic Model’s (NEM) targets seem impossible for Sabah to achieve.
The Federal Government aims to lift our US$7,700 (RM23,876) per capita annual income to US$15,000 (RM46,512) under NEM, but Sabah’s own figure stands at only US$3,000 (RM9302) per annum.
Furthermore, the two states have also avoided peninsular Malaysia’s ugly racial polarisation.
This lack of progress on core issues has been a source of disappointment as well as frustration for East Malaysians.
Nevertheless, one can detect the winds of change blowing. Up until the 2008 general election,
Barisan Nasional (BN) was content to rule as if Sabah and Sarawak were mere appendages of Putrajaya. But now, BN is dependent on East Malaysian parliamentary seats to retain power.
Once-dubbed as BN’s “fixed deposit”, the Sibu by-election has changed all this.
Sabah and Sarawak are up for grabs and both BN and Pakatan Rakyat need to craft substantive policies for these two critical states.
Indeed, many see the upcoming Sarawak elections as a key indicator for the next polls.
The fate of Chief Minister Tan Sri Taib Mahmud as whether he goes or fights on has become a question of national importance.
If BN wants to maintain its hold on the two states, it has to start redressing the 47 years of neglect and this will take more than just granting holidays or constant reassurances of goodwill.
Sabah and Sarawak deserve their share of the nation’s wealth and attention.
Furthermore, the respective points of the two agreement have to be adhered to.
The resources of these two states must reach the ground directly. The political elites in Sarawak and Sabah have gorged themselves while the people have suffered.
In Malaysia such naked abuse of power and greed will meet with defeat sooner or later.
