Ketuanan Melayu
Daripada Wikipedia, ensiklopedia bebas.
 | Tolong bantu menterjemahkan sebahagian rencana ini. Rencana ini memerlukan kemaskini dalam Bahasa Melayu piawai Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Sila membantu, bahan-bahan boleh didapati diKetuanan Melayu. Sumber-sumber bantuan: Pusat Rujukan Persuratan Melayu. |
 |
Sila menterjemahkan rencana: Ketuanan Melayu dari Wikipedia Bahasa Inggeris untuk Wikipedia Bahasa Melayu. Rencana ini merupakan rencana pilihan untuk Wikipedia Bahasa Inggeris
|
Ketuanan Melayu [1] ialah kontrak sosial yang mendakwa bahawa orang Melayu adalah tuan kepada Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (sekarang) Malaysia. Orang Cina dan India di Malaysia yang dianggap sebagai pendatang (yang dibawa masuk oleh British) disifatkan terhutang budi kepada orang Melayu kerana kesanggupan dan kesediaan orang Melayu menerima mereka sebagai warganegara Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (sekarang) Malaysia sebagai prasyarat British memberikan kemerdekaan kepada Persekutuan Tanah Melayu. Sebagai timbal balik kerana kesanggupan dan kesediaan apa yang disifatkan sebagai pengorbanan orang Melayu itu, perlembagaan memberi peruntukan khas kepada orang Melayu dalam bentuk hak istimewa dan ini dimaktubkan di dalam Perkara 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (sekarang) Malaysia). Persetujuan quid pro quo atau saling beri-memberi ini biasanya dipanggil kontrak sosial. Konsep Ketuanan Melayu ini sering kali dijadikan retorik ahli politik Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu yang berpengaruh semenjak 50 tahun Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (sekarang Malaysia) mencapai kemerdekaannya dari British sebagai usaha meraih sokongan orang Melayu walaupun pada hakikatnya tidak ramai orang Melayu yang arif tentang konsep atau fahaman ini.
Walaupun retorik ini wujud sebelum Malaysia mencapai kemerdekaan, frasa ketuanan Melayu tidak menjadi satu perkara yang disebut ramai hingga ke awal tahun 2000-an. Kebanyakan tentangan konsep ini adalah daripada parti-parti yang tidak berdasarkan kaum Melayu, seperti Parti Tindakan Demokratik (DAP), tetapi sebelum kemerdekaan orang Baba dan Nyonya juga menentang konsep ini. Konsep keulungan kaum Melayu mendapat perhatian dalam tahun 1940-an apabila orang Melayu bersatu untuk menentang penubuhan Malayan Union dan kemudian, berjuang untuk kemerdekaan. Semasa tahun 60-an, terdapat usaha yang cukup besar untuk mencabar ketuanan Melayu, diketuai oleh Parti Tindakan Rakyat (PAP) dari Singapura — yang merupakan negeri Malaysia dari 1963 hingga 1965 — dan DAP selepas pemisahan Singapura. Walaupun begitu, sebahagian Perlembagaan berkaitan ketuanan Melayu berakar umbi selepas rusuhan kaumMei 13, 1969 yang terjadi akibat kempen pilihan raya yang menjadikan hak-hak orang bukan Melayu dan ketuanan Melayu sebagai isu tumpuan. Tempoh ini juga menyaksikan kebangkitan ultrayang mendesak agar kerajaan parti tunggal diketuai UMNO, dan pertambahan penekanan bahawa orang Melayu merupakan "orang asal" Malaysia — iaitu hanya orang Melayu boleh dianggap penduduk asal Malaysia.
Rusuhan kaum mengakibatkan perubahan besar dalam pendekatan kerajaan kepada isu perkauman, dan menyebabkan pengenalan Dasar Ekonomi Baru iaitu dasar tindakan pengesahan yang secara agresif menyebelahi kaum Melayu. Dasar Kebudayaan Kebangsaan yang juga diperkenalkan pada tahun 1970, memberikan penekanan kepada asimilasi orang bukan Melayu ke dalam kaum Melayu. Tetapi dalam tahun 1990-an, Perdana Menteri Mahathir bin Mohamad menolak pendekatan ini, dengan dasar Bangsa Malaysia yang menekankan bangsa Malaysia dan bukan kaum Melayu sebagai identiti negara. Dalam tahun 2000-an, ahli-ahli politik mula menekankan ketuanan Melayu semula, dan membidas secara keras menteri kerajaan yang mempersoalkan kontrak sosial.
Isi kandungan[sorokkan] |
[sunting]Melayu Malaysia
Defisi apa itu Melayu di Malaysia berbeza daripada Indoesia. Kaum Melayu merupakan majoriti populasi Malaysia di 55.4% (see Malaysia#Demographics) dan nenek moyang Melayu adalah berkait dengan tempat lain di Malay Archipelago. Buku "Contesting Malayness - Malay Identity Across Boundaries" yang diedit oleh Timothy P. Barnard mencerminkan pandangan ahli antropologi bahawa tidak ada bangsa seperti "Melayu" pada mulanya, walaupun walaupun jika satu telah diwujudkan di Malaysia.
Jika kita mengikuti migrasi asal satu kumpulan tertentu selatan Cina 6,000 tahun yang lalu, beberapa berpindah ke Taiwan (orang asli Taiwan hari ini keturunan mereka), kemudian ke Filipina, dan kemudian ke Borneo (kira-kira 4500 tahun yang lalu) (hari ini Dayak dan lain-lain kumpulan). Orang-orang ini purba juga berpecah dengan beberapa tajuk ke Sabah dan lain-lain maju ke Jawa, dan Sumatera. Penghijrahan akhir adalah untuk Semenanjung Tanah Melayu kira-kira 3,000 tahun yang lalu. Sekumpulan kecil dari Borneo bergerak ke Champa di Vietnam kira-kira 4500 tahun yang lalu. Menariknya, kumpulan Champa akhirnya berpindah ke membentangkan Kelantan hari di Malaysia. Terdapat juga kesan Song Dong dan HoaBinh penghijrahan dari Vietnam dan Kemboja. Terdapat juga penghijrahan Thai Selatan, dari apa yang kita tahu sebagai Pattani hari ini. Semua ini DNA kumpulan berkongsi asal-usul linguistik yang dikesan ke pulau yang adalah hari ini Taiwan, dan nenek moyang orang-orang purba ditemui di selatan China.
Dari zaman dulu hingga masa modern, banyak warga Indonesia yang ethnik Melayu terus berpindah ke Malaysia. Lee Kuan Yew di tahun 60'an mengatakan "Malays began to migrate to Malaysia in noticeable numbers only about 700 years ago. Of the Malays in Malaysia today, about one-third are comparatively new immigrants like (Syed Jaafar Albar), who came to Malaya from Indonesiajust before the war at the age of more than thirty." [2]
Melayu terdiri daripada 3.4% peratus populasi Indonesia (see Ethnic groups in Indonesia).
Kumpulan ethnik utama di Indonesia adalah Javanese (41.7%) dan Sundanese (31.8%) manakala kumpulan lain termasuk:
- Chinese (3.7%)
- Malay (3.4%)
- Madurese (3.3%)
- Batak (3.0%)
- Minangkabau (2.7%)
- Betawi (2.5%)
- Bugis (2.5%)
- Bantenese (2.1%)
- Banjarese (1.7%)
- Balinese (1.5%)
- Sasak (1.3%)
- Makassarese (1.0%)
- Cirebonese (0.9%)
Kebanyakan mereka tidak mengelar diri mereka sebagai Melayu di negara asal mereka di Indonesia, namun diiktiraf sebagai Melayu jika mereka merupakan Muslim. Pada zaman awal penjajahan, banci penduduk menyenaraikan kumpulan ethnik yang berlain, seperti "Malays, Boyanese, Achinese, Javanese, Bugis, Manilamen and Siamese".
Bancian pada tahun 1891 telah menyatukan kumpulan ethnik kepada 3 kumpulan kaum yang digunakan di Malaysia moden, iaitu - Chinese, ‘Tamils and other natives of India’, and ‘Malays and other Natives of the Archipelago’. Ini berdasarkan pandangan Eropah pada masa itu bahawa kaum merupakan satu kategori saintifik berdasarkan biologi.
Untuk bancian pada tahun 1901 pula, kerajaan dinasihatkan bahawa perkataan kaum patut ditukarkan kepada kewarganegaraan. [3]
Article 160 of the Constitution of Malaysia mendefinisikan seorang Melayu itu merupakan seorang warganegara Malaysia yang dilahirkan oleh warganegara Malaysia, yang menganuti agama Islam, mengunakan bahasa Melayu, mengikut adat resam Melayu, dan bermastautin di Malaysia atau Singapura. [4] Artikel 160 menggabungkan orang Melayu dari kumpulan etnik yang berbeza sebagai bangsa dominant dan dengan itu memberi mereka dengan kekuatan politik untuk menguasai dan memerintah ke atas kaum-kaum lain: Cina, India, Kadazan, Iban, Orang Asli dan lain-lain ini juga jelas dari nama UMNO (Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu), yang memainkan peranan ini. Mahathir, yang mempunyai datuk sebelah bapa India tetapi diiktiraf sebagai Melayu, membuktikan peranan ini ditakdirkan UMNO.
[sunting]Pra-Merdeka
[sunting]Early Malay nationalism
Nasionalisme Melayu sebagai gerakan politik telah lama bermula sejak pencerobohan oleh kuasa-kuasa asing. Konsep ketuanan Melayu adalah sebahagian besarnya disalahfaham oleh orang lain, etnik Cina dan India pendatang, membentuk peratusan kecil daripada jumlah penduduk, tidak melihat diri mereka sebagai penduduk Tanah Melayu. [2] A report by the British Permanent Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies in the early 1930s found that "the number of non-Malays who have adopted Malaya as their home is only a very small proportion of the whole population".[5]
Walaupun British berkesan memerintah Malaya, de jure orang Melayu yang dipaksa di bawah perjanjian palsu untuk menerima pentadbiran British melalui sistem resident. Pesuruhjaya Tinggi British Sir Hugh Clifford, menunjukkan ideologi British yang merasionalisasikan penjajahan di Tanah Melayu[6] apabila beliau menggesa "semua orang di negara ini kena sedar akan hakikat bahawa ini adalah sebuah negara Melayu, dan kita British datang ke sini diatas jemputan Raja-Raja Melayu, dan ia menjadi tanggungjawab kita untuk membantu orang Melayu untuk memerintah negara sendiri. "[7]
Lalu British mengambil terbuka "Pro-Melayu" dasar supaya orang Melayu boleh, dalam kata-kata Pesuruhjaya Tinggi Sir Laurence Guillemard, dilengkapi "untuk mengambil tempat mereka dalam kehidupan pentadbiran dan perdagangan Negeri-negeri ini."[8] Dalam realiti, Melayu bukan-elite berasa dipinggirkan oleh dasar-dasar ekonomi dan politik kerajaan kolonial, sedangkan pada hakikatnya mereka adalah tulang belakang kepada pemerintahan British, dan kedua-dua dasar-dasar pendidikan dan pekerjaan telah diasingkan mengikut garis etnik. [9]
Masyarakat bukan Melayu tempatan yang dilahirkan tidak lama lagi mula berjuang untuk pemerintahan sendiri. Pada tahun 1936, masyarakat India yang dilahirkan di Tanah Melayu meminta Pesuruhjaya Tinggi Sir Shenton Thomas untuk memberikan mereka bahagian perlantikan pentadbiran. Thomas menolak permintaan itu, merujuk kepada kaum India tempatan yang dilahirkan sebagai "orang asing". [10] Walaupun pihak British untuk melihat orang Cina sebagai tenaga buruh, "dengan statistik menunjukkan kebanyakan pendatang China akhirnya pulang, pengkritik berhujah bahawa orang yang dilahirkan di Tanah Melayu terus meningkat. Walau bagaimanapun, British menegaskan, ia akan jadi berbahaya untuk mempertimbangkan orang Cina sebagai mempunyai "kecenderungan untuk penduduk kekal"; masyarakat tempatan yang dilahirkan di India - yang terdiri daripada 20% daripada penduduk India, selebihnya pekerja manual yang berhijrah atas sebab-sebab yang serupa dengan Cina pada sekitar masa yang sama - begitu juga sebahagian besarnya diabaikan. [11]
British menurun taraf kaum Melayu kepada gaya hidup "tradisional" petani mereka seboleh-bolehnya, menyekat gerakan, perusahaan ekonomi dan pendidikan. Dasar ini adalah dikekalkan dalam kepercayaan bahawa pendidikan Benggali di India telah membawa kepada rasa tidak puas hati dan pemberontakan. [12]
Mereka melibat hanya kelas pemerintah Melayu dalam isu-isu kerajaan dan pentadbiran. Walaupun kononnya pengecualian orang bukan Melayu dari kedudukan pihak berkuasa, banyak perkhidmatan awam terdiri daripada bukan Melayu, ramai di antara mereka kaum India yang dibawa masuk secara khusus untuk tujuan ini. [11] Beberapa ahli sejarah telah menghuraikan dasar-dasar pro-Melayu seperti yang direka bentuk semata-mata untuk mengekalkan kedudukan yang British, dan bukannya untuk mengukuhkan orang Melayu, banyak ciri-ciri pendekatan British sebagai pecah dan perintah, "meletakkan bangsa bangsa berlain berasingan antara satu sama lain, untuk unsur-unsur kerja Malaya yang berlainan dalam suasana harmoni jauh". [13][14]
In the 1920s, the local-born Chinese, who retained significant economic power, began pushing for a greater role in Malayan government.[15] Much of the Chinese community, which now made up 33% of the Malayan population, still comprised transient laborers. Nevertheless, the Straits Chinese — which comprised the bulk of local-born Chinese — wanted to be given government positions and recognised as Malayans. One Straits Chinese leader asked, "Who said this is a Malay country? ... When Captain [Francis] Light arrived, did he find Malays, or Malay villages? Our forefathers came here and worked hard as coolies — weren't ashamed to become coolies — and they didn't send their money back to China. They married and spent their money here, and in this way the Government was able to open up the country from jungle to civilization. We've become inseparable from this country. It's ours, our country..." Malay intellectuals objected to this reasoning, claiming that such reasoning is totally absurd and proposing an analogy with the Chinese as masons and Malaya as a house. A paid mason, they argued, was not entitled to a share in the ownership rights to a home he built. As such, they opposed any attempt to grant the Chinese citizenship or other political rights.[16]
A number of Indonesian tribal groups such as the Javanese and Bugis had migrated within the Nesian Archipelago region throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and were most quickly assimilated into the Malay cultural identity.[17] Eventually, the Chinese-Malayan appeals appeared to have some impact on the British. In 1927, the Governor of the Straits Settlements referred to the Chinese as "indigenous inhabitants of British Malaya".[18]
Just before World War II, Malay nationalism began emphasizing ketuanan Melayu, which had once been taken for granted. It was feared that British policies now seemed geared towards creating a common Malayan nationality inclusive of the Chinese and Indians. Some Malays thus sought to preserve the status quo with the British as a bulwark against the non-Malays. Others began calling for an independent and sovereign Malay nation, such as "Greater Indonesia".[19]
[sunting]Malayan Union
Selepas Perang Dunia KEdua, British mengumumkan penumbuhan Malayan Union. Malayan Uniaon bukan sahaja melonggarkan syarat kerakyatan immigran malah turut mencabar kedaulatan Raja-Raja Melayu dan tidak mengiktiraf ketuananan Melayu menjadikan Tahah Melayu sebagai negeri naungan British. As local-born residents, most Chinese and Indians qualified for citizenship under the Union's principle of jus soli. With equal rights guaranteed to all, the Malays dissatisfied with that. Even their traditional stronghold, the civil service, would be open to all Malayans.[20][21]In the first place, the Malays did not consider themselves to be included under the label of "Malayans".[22]
The Malays became politically conscious, protesting the Union's formation. At one gathering, placards declared that "Malaya Belongs to the Malays. We do not want the other races to be given the rights and privileges of the Malays."[23] One Malay organisation told the British that the Union's citizenship provisions would lead to "the wiping from existence of the Malay race along with their land and Rulers".[24] A group of Malay royalists and civil servants led by Dato' Onn Ja'afar formed the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) to protest the Malayan Union's formation.[25] Although the Union was established as planned, the campaign continued; in 1948, the British replaced the Malayan Union with the Federation of Malaya. The Federation restored sovereignty to the Malay rulers, tightened immigration and citizenship restrictions, and gave the Malays special privileges.[26] Nevertheless, the avowed goal of the British remained the same as in 1946: to introduce "a form of common citizenship open to all those, irrespective of race, who regarded Malaya as their real home and as the object of their loyalty."[27]
Limited opposition to ketuanan Melayu and UMNO during this period came from a coalition between the All-Malaya Council of Joint Action (AMCJA) and the Pusat Tenaga Rakyat (PUTERA). Although one of PUTERA's constituent organisations had insisted on ketuanan Melayu as a "National Birthright" of the Malays, PUTERA joined the AMCJA in championing equal political rights for non-Malays. After the British refused to heed the PUTERA-AMCJA coalition, it pulled out of talks with the British, later launching a major hartal (general strike) to protest perceived defects in the new polity. After the Federation was formed over their objections, the coalition disbanded.[22]
Prior to the Federation, non-Malays were generally uninvolved in Malayan politics and nationalism, both essentially Malay in nature; being more interested in the politics of their respective homelands, non-Malays never significantly backed the Malayan Union openly but their silence was a support to it.[28] The AMCJA, though mostly non-Malay, did not represent a large section of the non-Malay communities in Malaya.[29] The lack of interest in or loyalty to Malaya amongst the non-Malays seemed to justify ketuanan Melayu — Malay self-rule.
Some historians have argued the Union's failure made the Chinese aware of the need for political representation. The Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) — a communal political party campaigning for Chinese political rights — was formed soon after the Federation's formation.[30] Others claim that the main driving force behind non-Malay involvement in Malayan politics, and their assertion of certain rights, was the increasing number of local-born non-Malays. The same report from the British Permanent Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies cited earlier stated that Malayan-born non-Malays "have never seen the land of their origin and they claim that their children and their children's children should have fair treatment."[31] The inaugural President of the MCA was Tan Cheng Lock, a local-born Chinese who had led the AMCJA until its breaking up.
[sunting]Towards independence
Its initial goals achieved, UMNO established itself as a political party to fight for independence. At the same time, the Malayan Communist Party (MCP) launched an armed insurgency to form a communist government in Malaya, culminating in the Malayan Emergency which lasted until after independence. The insurgency was marked by a clear racial divide; opposition to the insurrection was almost entirely Malay, while Chinese dominated the communist ranks. The British encouraged the establishment of the Communities Liaison Committee (CLC), comprising the top echelon of Malayan politicians from different communities, to address sensitive issues, especially those related to race. Compromises on a number of issues, including citizenship, education, democracy, and Malay supremacy, were agreed on. Eventually, a "bargain" between the Malays and non-Malays was formulated; in return for giving up ketuanan Melayu, the Malays would be assisted in closing the economic gap between the Malay and non-Malay communities. CLC member E.E.C. Thuraisingham later said, "I and others believed that the backward Malays should be given a better deal. Malays should be assisted to attain parity with non-Malays to forge a united Malayan Nation of equals."[32]
Problems continued to crop up. Many Chinese Malayan youths drafted into the army to stave off communist attacks fled the country; most participants were English- and not Chinese-educated. To the Malays, this indicated that the Chinese had no particular loyalty towards Malaya and justified ketuanan Melayu, heightening similar perceptions caused by the apparent racial dichotomy between those in fierce opposition to the communists and those supporting the MCP.[33]
In the early 1950s, Onn Ja'afar proposed to open UMNO membership to all Malayans, and renaming it the United Malayan National Organisation, which would have diluted its identity as a champion of ketuanan Melayu. Defeated in an internal power struggle, he resigned in 1951 to found the Independence of Malaya Party (IMP). He was succeeded by Tunku Abdul Rahman (often known as "the Tunku"), who insisted on initial Malay sovereignty. Expressing concern over a lack of loyalty to Malaya among non-Malays, he demanded they clarify their allegiance before being accorded citizenship, going on to state: "For those who love and feel they owe undivided loyalty to this country, we will welcome them as Malayans. They must truly be Malayans, and they will have the same rights and privileges as the Malays."[34] Not long after, in 1952, however, he appeared to contradict himself, and insisted that Malays safeguard their special position: "Malaya is for the Malays and it should not be governed by a mixture of races."[35]
During this period, some Straits Chinese began taking interest in local politics, especially in Penang, where there was an active Chinese secessionistmovement. Identifying more with the British than the Malays, they were especially angered by references to them as pendatang asing ("aliens"). Avoiding both UMNO and the MCA, they believed that while UMNO and Malay extremists were intent on extending Malay privileges and restricting Chinese rights, the MCA was too "selfish", and could not be relied on.[36] Uncomfortable about the merger of the Straits Settlements with Malaya, they did not feel a sense of belonging in a "Malaya for the Malays" where they were not considered bumiputra ("sons of the soil"). One Straits Chinese leader indignantly declared, "I can claim to be more anak Pulau Pinang [a son of Penang] than 99 per cent of the Malays living here today." With the government's stout rejection of secession, the movement eventually petered out.[37]
Some suggested that the non-Malays did not feel loyal to Malaya because they did not consider themselves to be of Malayan nationality and adhere strictly to their own ethnic cultural backgrounds. To counter this, in 1952 citizenship was granted to nearly all local-born non-Malays, and dual citizenship prohibited, forcing non-Malays to choose between their ancestral homeland and Malaya.[38] In contrast to the Malay's hypothesis, a majority of the non-Malays remained, thus proving their allegiance to Malaya. They are the ancestor of modern-day non-Malay Malaysian.
As Malaya moved to self-government, the British initiated the Member System, modeled on the cabinet system; like the CLC, it drew on members of different communities, and was later described as setting a precedent for the power-sharing multiracial Malayan and Malaysian cabinets post-independence. At the same time, the British also began laying the framework for a national education system that would create "a sense of common citizenship". The Barnes Report that they commissioned, however, was strongly objected to by the Chinese community for being "saturated with Malay nationalism" and bolstering ketuanan Melayu. The Fenn-Wu Report, favoured by the Chinese, did not meet with Malay approval. In the end, the Barnes Report's recommendations for English-medium "national schools" were implemented by the 1952 Education Ordinance, over vocal Chinese protests, who were upset by the lack of provision for non-Malay vernacular schools. In 1956, a committee headed by Tun Abdul Razak re-evaluated the education system. The "Razak Report" recommended that vernacular primary schools be permitted to continue, but share a common syllabus with national schools. Vernacular secondary schools would not be sanctioned; only national secondary schools would be funded. The Chinese community strenuously objected to the Razak Report as well, launching an organised campaign against it; the MCA's refusal to oppose the Report cost it politically in some Chinese constituencies.[39] Nevertheless, the Razak Report's recommendations were largely successful, and many of them remain in place as of 2006.
[sunting]Possible origins of ketuanan Melayu
According to many historians, the root cause of ethnic strife and ketuanan Melayu was a lack of mixing between the Malays and non-Malays. An exception to this were the Straits Chinese, who managed to assimilate reasonably well, despite the assimilation taking 600 years including intermarriage. According to the Ming Shi-lu, the ancestors of the Straits Chinese were "gifts" given to the Sultan of Malacca as a recognition of both bilateral ties between the Ming Dynasty and the sultanate, and of Malay sovereignty. At the time, most were rich merchants during British rule instead of manual labourers and many habitually spoke Malay, dressed in the Malay style, and preferred Malay cuisine.[40]
The British educational policies segregating the different races — providing minimal public education for Malays, and leaving non-Malays to their own devices — did not help matters. The Malays, predominantly rural-dwellers, were not encouraged to socialise with the more urban non-Malays.[41] The economic impoverishment of the Malays which set them apart from the better-off Chinese also fanned racial sentiments.
Another contributing factor to ketuanan Melayu was the World War II Japanese occupation. The war "awakened a keen political awareness among Malayan people by intensifying communalism and racial hatred". Japanese policies "politicised the Malay peasantry", intentionally fanning the flames of Malay nationalism. Two Malay historians wrote that "The Japanese hostile acts against the Chinese and their apparently more favourable treatments of the Malays helped to make the Chinese community feel its separate identity more acutely..." A foreign commentator agreed, stating that "During the occupation period ... Malay national sentiment had become a reality; it was strongly anti-Chinese, and its rallying cry [was] 'Malaya for the Malays'..."[42]
[sunting]The Alliance
Although UMNO supported ketuanan Melayu, it formed an "Alliance" with the MCA and the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC) to contest the 1955 Federal Legislative Council elections. This took many by surprise, as the MCA had strenuously insisted on equal political rights for all citizens. Its President, Tan Cheng Lock, was himself a Straits Chinese, albeit not as extremist as the secessionists. Although initially dismissed as a marriage of convenience, the Alliance won 51 out of 52 seats available. The sole remaining seat went to the Pan-Malayan Islamic Party (PMIP; later known as PAS), a Malay-based party and strong advocate of ketuanan Melayu. The total defeat of non-communal parties led the Alliance to perceive the political atmosphere as inhospitable for multi-racial parties. A coalition government comprising mono-racial parties in which party leaders privately brokered compromise decisions was thought more stable and better suited to Malayan politics.[43] Prior to the election, Dato' Onn Ja'afar had changed his approach, forming the Parti Negara after IMP suffered crushing losses to the Alliance in local elections. Advocating stronger pro-Malay policies recognising Malay political dominance, the Parti Negara failed to shake the Alliance's grip on power. However, some believe Parti Negara's proposals helped sway UMNO politicians towards more radically pro-Malay policies.[44][45] The British themselves insisted on handing over power only to a multiracial government, and the Alliance was considered to meet this requirement.[46]
[sunting]Independence and Malaysia
[sunting]Independence and the Constitution
The Federation of Malaya became officially independent of the British Empire in 1957. The new state's Constitution contained provisions, such as Article 153, guaranteeing the Malays certain privileges as a form of affirmative action. The Reid Commission, which drafted the Constitution, stated that Article 153 was to be temporary in nature, and should be reviewed by Parliament 15 years after independence.[47] The Constitution itself did not explicitly state this, however, nor did it clarify the purpose of Article 153. It did declare all Malayans equal under the law, without mention of "Malay sovereignty" or any other ideas related to ketuanan Melayu. Jus soli citizenship — the granting of citizenship to anyone born in the Federation — was also granted, albeit without retrospective effect; it was a major concession by the Malays, who had vigorously campaigned against jus soli citizenship in the Malayan Union.[48]
On the other hand, Malay and Islam became the national language and official religion, while the Malay rulers remained. This was taken to mean that the Malays were accorded deference as the definitive people of Malaya — i.e. being a Malayan would be the same as being a Malay — and in the eyes of many, gave Malaya a Malay identity.[49] One academic suggested that "The Malays have a deep-rooted feeling that they alone are the bumiputras, the sons of the soil, and as such have certain special rights over the land." Indeed, the Tunku said in 1964 that "It is understood by all that this country by its very name, its traditions and character, is Malay. ... In any other country where aliens try to dominate economic and other fields, eventually there is bitter opposition from the indigenous people. But not with the Malays. Therefore, in return, they must appreciate the position of the Malays..."[35] It has been suggested that a Malaysian nationality did not emerge because "all the national symbols in Malaysia were derived from the Malay tradition".[50]
The Constitutional restraint on the size of rural Parliamentary constituencies was later removed, providing what one commentator called "an indirect buttress" to Malay special rights; as Malays were concentrated in rural areas, this indirectly enhanced Malay political power. The original Constitution had implicitly followed "one man, one vote". The change was denounced as "giving one man one vote, another a number of votes: not on the basis of, say, intellectual ability or geographical accident, but in order to ensure the dominance of a particular group."[51]
The constitutional provisions, which have been referred to as the "Malay Agenda", evoked little sentiment from non-Malays, despite most of them gaining citizenship and thus becoming theoretically equal to Malay citizens under the Constitution. This could be attributed to acceptance of the social contract, of which one historian wrote: "At the elite level, non-Malays recognized that Malays were politically superior by virtue of their indigenous status and that the Malaysian polity would have a Malay character ... Malays were to be assured of safe majorities in both the state and federal parliament ... Malays would control the highest positions of the government and ... dominate members of the federal cabinet." A Malay historian wrote that "In return the Chinese gained more than overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia had dreamed of — equal citizenship, political participation and office holding, unimpaired economic opportunity, and tolerance for their language, religion, and cultural institutions."[52]
Some expressed trepidation at Article 153; shortly before independence, the China Press suggested that while special rights "may be excusable at the start of the building of a nation," if "the period of 'special rights' is not restricted, or the scope of special rights is not clearly defined, then endless disputes ... will arise later on," and argued that special rights would eventually divide instead of unite Malayans.[53] Nevertheless at the time of independence, some historians assert, "there was a genuine sense of common citizenship, common aspirations, a common destiny."[54]This was about to change.
[sunting]Merger
In 1961, when the Malayan government began discussing a possible merger with neighbouring Singapore, Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei, problems of ethnic power relations arose again. The "Malaysia" proposal sans Sabah and Sarawak went back more than a decade; earlier negotiations had proved fruitless. The Singaporeans themselves were not anxious to be ruled by what they considered a Malay government.[55] By 1961, however, Singapore had grown receptive to the idea of joining Malaysia, largely because of the prevailing idea at the time that industrial Singapore could not survive without access to Malayan markets.[56]
The Malayan government was not keen on having the Chinese Singaporean population push the Malays into a minority position in the new Malaysia. Many Malays felt that upsetting the Malay-dominated nature of the armed forces and police might place them in a dangerous situation. It was also argued that the inferior economic position of the Malays would be emphasised by the entry of even more rich Chinese, setting the stage for major discontent.[57] The Malayans decided to resolve this by merging with Sabah and Sarawak; both British colonies had large native populations whom the government considered "Malay". Under Article 160 of the Constitution, most of them were not Malay; the natives were mainly animists or Christians instead of Muslims as required. To resolve this issue, the government expanded its informal definition of "Malay" to include these people.[58]
Sabahans and Sarawakians could not see how they would benefit from merger. Many regarded Malaya as being only for the Malays, a group they did not include themselves in. The spectre of "Malaysia" — the inclusion of the phrase "Malay" being considered frightening — with its official religion of Islam and official language of Malay, did nothing to soothe their fears of "Malay domination". For merger to come about, they insisted the natives of Sabah and Sarawak be awarded the same privileges as Malays.[59] A 20-point agreement between Sabah and the Malayan government, and a slightly different 18-point agreement by Sarawak, was later agreed upon. After much negotiation and a show of support from the British for merger, the impasse was resolved. Although natives of Borneo were denied the privileges of Malays, merger was effected on 16 September 1963.
[sunting]"Malaysian Malaysia!"
In the 1963 Singapore state elections, the Alliance challenged the governing People's Action Party (PAP) through the Singapore Alliance Party. UMNO politicians actively campaigned in Singapore for the Singapore Alliance, contending that Singaporean Malays were being treated as second-class citizens under the Chinese-dominated, though ostensibly multiracial, PAP government. However, all of the UMNO-backed Malay candidates lost to the PAP. The PAP politicians, who saw this as a betrayal of an earlier agreement with the Alliance not to contest elections in Malaya and Singapore (respectively), decided to run on the mainland in the 1964 general election. Although the PAP attracted large crowds at its rallies, it won only one seat — that by Devan Nair, who represented the Bangsar constituency. It is thought by some historians that Finance Minister and MCA President Tan Siew Sin's appeal to the Chinese to avoid challenging the Malay special rights and risk merger with Indonesia helped the MCA retain its status as the "undisputed leader of the Chinese in the Malayan peninsula".[60] Nevertheless, UMNO leaders were furious with the PAP.[61][62]
New problems soon cropped up. Lee Kuan Yew, the leader of the Singaporean government and the PAP, declared his open opposition to ketuanan Melayu,; calling for a "Malaysian Malaysia" instead of the implied Malay Malaysia.[44] He argued that "Malays began to migrate to Malaysia in noticeable numbers only about 700 years ago. Of the 39% Malays in Malaysia today, about one-third are comparatively new immigrants like (Syed Jaafar Albar), who came to Malaya from Indonesia just before the war at the age of more than thirty. Therefore it is wrong and illogical for a particular racial group to think that they are more justified to be called Malaysians and that the others can become Malaysian only through their favour."[63]
Lee later lamented: "Malaysia — to whom does it belong? To Malaysians. But who are Malaysians? I hope I am, Mr Speaker, Sir. But sometimes, sitting in this chamber, I doubt whether I am allowed to be a Malaysian. This is the doubt that hangs over many minds, and ... [once] emotions are set in motion, and men pitted against men along these unspoken lines, you will have the kind of warfare that will split the nation from top to bottom and undo Malaysia."[64] At times, however, Lee worsened things by making racial comments of his own. Many of his speeches harped on the ethnic composition of Malaysia, reminding listeners that the non-Malays were now in the majority, with 61% of the population to the Malays' 39% asking at one point, "Why should we go back to old Singapore and once again reduce the non-Malays in Malaya to a minority?"[65] Lee exacerbated deteriorating PAP-UMNO relations by constantly demanding that the federal government "smack down their 'ultras'", whose ranks included prominent UMNO leaders such asSyed Jaafar Albar and Syed Nasir Ismail.[66][67]
Lee's statements upset many, especially Alliance politicians. Tan Siew Sin called him the "greatest, disruptive force in the entire history of Malaysia and Malaya."[68] The Tunku considered Lee too extremist in his views, while other UMNO politicians thought Lee was simply pandering to Malaysian Chinese with his rhetoric.[69] Lee's statement about allegedly recent Malay migration met with stinging rebuttals; Albar declared: "To say that the Malays are in the same category as other races is an insult..." The UMNO newspaper Malaya Merdeka warned: "If the Malays are hard-pressed and their interests are not protected," they would merge Malaysia with Indonesia.[70] It was this that the Tunku feared the most. To him, the ultras were not the real extremists — it was those who sought a "Greater Indonesia" to "fix" the Chinese that were the real threat.[71]
The strain in race relations led to the Singaporean 1964 Race Riots,[62] which PAP Malay politician Othman Wok later insinuated were planned beforehand by the ultras.[72] In the year following the riots, tension continued growing. Syed Jaafar Albar declared that "Wherever I am, I am a Malay", drawing harsh return fire from Lee, who stated in Parliament: "If I had been going round and saying what [he] has been saying — wherever I am, I am a Chinese — where would we be? But I keep on reminding the people that I am a Malaysian. I am learning Bahasa Kebangsaan [Malay, the national language] and I accept Article 153 of the Constitution."[73]
Lee insisted that he was not opposed to Malay special rights or Article 153, saying: "if the immigrant communities ... do not see the problems, if they can't feel what it is like to be a poor Malay, and don't feel for him, then I can say very soon he will manifest his disaffection in a very decisive way and the whole country will be thrown into turmoil."[74] Few from the Alliance took this claim seriously. UMNO politicians insisted that a "Malaysian Malaysia" implied total equality, entailing the removal of Malay privileges.[75] Senu Abdul Rahman, a federal Minister, felt Lee's advocacy of equality would deny the Malays the possibility of economic participation: "What we want is opportunity, the opportunity to obtain economic wealth for our people." Condemning Lee for stating he was a Malaysian by his own right, Senu asked: "The right which Lee is enjoying today did not fall from the sky or out of the blue. It was given to him. Doesn't he have some feeling of gratitude to the natives of this country?" Lee answered: "No, I am not enjoying anyone's hospitality. I am here as of right. And 61 per cent of the people of Malaysia have to stand by that or it is lost. Without it they would have no future."[76] Some, such as Syed Jaafar Albar, took Senu's stance further and referred to the Malays, as the Bumiputra, as "masters of the house", whose hospitality was being abused by the bangsa asing (aliens) or orang tumpangan (lodgers) such as Lee. This provoked a response from Cabinet member Lim Swee Aun insisting "we are co-owners, not lodgers, not guests."[77][78]
Some went against the common view held in UMNO. Ismail Abdul Rahman told Parliament that "...both the Alliance and the PAP subscribe to the concept of a Malaysian Malaysia," but differed in their methods. Ismail characterised the PAP's approach as "non-communalism straightaway," while the Alliance required "two steps. First, inter-racial harmony; second, and ultimate state of non-communalism." Such statements were dismissed by Lee as lip service that could not be taken seriously unless the ultras were reined in.[79][80]
[sunting]Separation
Lee continued his campaign, forming the Malaysian Solidarity Council (MSC) comprising multi-racial parties such as the PAP, the People's Progressive Party (PPP) and the United Democratic Party (UDP) in 1965. At the MSC's first and only general meeting, several leaders from these parties gave speeches supporting a Malaysian Malaysia. D.R. Seenivasagam of the PPP accused the Alliance of using Article 153 to "bully non-Malays", while Ong Kee Hui of the Sarawak United People's Party (SUPP) said that "We see an attitude of intolerance and mounting signs of denial of political equality to people who are non-Malays. For the sake of our country and ourselves, this must be stopped and the drift to narrow racialism checked. Political equality should be accorded to all who live here and make this country their home, irrespective of their racial origin."[81]
Soon after, UMNO backbencher Mahathir bin Mohamad attacked Lee in Parliament: "[The Singaporean Chinese] have never known Malay rule and cannot bear the idea that the people they have so long kept under their heels should now be in a position to rule them."[82] Lee responded with an unscripted speech made entirely in Malay opposing the government's pro-Malay policies: "Of course there are Chinese millionaires in big cars and big houses. Is it the answer to make a few Malay millionaires with big cars and big houses? ... If we delude people into believing that they are poor because there are no Malay rights or because opposition members oppose Malay rights, where are we going to end up? You let people in the villages believe that they are poor because we don't speak Malay, because the government does not write in Malay, so he expects a miracle to take place [when Malay becomes the sole national language]. The moment we all start speaking Malay, he is going to have an uplift in the standard of living, and if doesn't happen, what happens then? Meanwhile, whenever there is a failure of economic, social and educational policies, you come back and say, oh, these wicked Chinese, Indian and others opposing Malay rights. They don't oppose Malay rights. They, the Malay, have the right as Malaysian citizens to go up to the level of training and education that the more competitive societies, the non-Malay society, has produced. That is what must be done, isn't it? Not to feed them with this obscurantist doctrine that all they have got to do is to get Malay rights for the few special Malays and their problem has been resolved."[83]
Eventually, the Tunku — fed up with all the politicking and convinced that any further clashes of rhetoric would only degenerate into violence — asked Singapore to secede. Singapore became an independent nation in 1965, with Lee as its first Prime Minister.[84] Although Article 152 of the Constitution of Singapore names the Malays as "indigenous people" of Singapore and mandates special safeguarding of their rights and privileges, the article does not specify any policies for such safeguarding.
Some later blamed the formation of Malaysia for strengthening ketuanan Melayu: "A reinforcement of Malay rights — which during the previous five or six years [prior to the formation of Malaysia] had been withering away as the Reid Commission might have suspected they would — took place against a background of general unequal treatment" after Malaysia's formation.[85]
[sunting]13 May and the New Economic Policy
[sunting]Issues of language
The Constitution specified a ten-year delay after independence in changing the national language from English to Malay. As the scheduled date in 1967 drew near some Chinese began to agitate for a more liberal language policy permitting some instances of Mandarin in public affairs. Extremists from UMNO and PAS lashed out against them, but the Alliance proposed a compromise in the National Language Bill establishing Malay as the official language, but permitting English under certain circumstances and the use of non-Malay languages for non-official purposes. The Tunku described it as "a course guaranteeing peace",[86] but the Bill was widely derided by many Malays, who formed the National Language Action Front in hope of repealing or amending it. The leadership of the Tunku was also openly questioned.[87]
[sunting]13 May
In 1969, a general election was held. It was the first to be contested on a major scale by non-Malay-based opposition parties, other than the 1964 election where the PAP challenged the Alliance in Peninsular Malaysia. The two main opposition parties on this front in 1969 were the Democratic Action Party (DAP) — the Malaysian successor to the PAP, widely seen as Chinese-based — and the Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia (Gerakan), an ostensibly multiracial party led by former MCA stalwart, Lim Chong Eu, and other middle-class intellectuals like Tan Chee Khoon and Syed Hussein Alatas. Both proposed policies on language, education, and Malay rights that were diametrically opposed to those of the government, with the DAP continuing where Lee Kuan Yew had left off with the "Malaysian Malaysia" campaign. Some, mostly from the DAP, called for the elevation of English, Mandarin and Tamil to official language status, along with Malay. Stronger government support for the Chinese education stream was also demanded.[88]
PAS, on the other hand, attempted to garner votes by accusing UMNO of selling out the Malays' indigenous rights to "pendatang asing" (aliens). When the results were released, PAS had made minor inroads, but the DAP and Gerakan managed to topple the Alliance from power in three states, and nearly eradicated the Alliance's traditional two thirds majority in Parliament.[89] A large part of these gains came at the expense of the MCA, which soon announced that it would not participate in the new government after the election, as the MCA no longer had a mandate to represent Chinese interests in the government. The jubilant DAP and Gerakan organised victory parades in the national capital of Kuala Lumpur on 11 May and 12 May, where participants taunted the Malays while bearing slogans such as "Semua Melayu kasi habis" ("Finish off all the Malays"). An apology was issued soon after the rallies. Nevertheless, the shocked Malays blamed Chinese voters for betraying "the Alliance formula by voting for an opposition that had revived fundamental questions of language and Malay special rights".[90]
Malay extremists welcomed the MCA's move, feeling an UMNO- and Malay-dominated government would better serve their purposes.[91][92] UMNO held its own rally, which soon became a riot, on 13 May. This would later be euphemistically labeled as the "13 May Incident". The rally had reportedly been organised by Selangor Chief Minister Harun bin Idris, a man perceived as a Malay chauvinist.[93] UMNO supporters gathered at Harun's house on the evening of 13 May, where the rally was due to start, with many brandishing parangs (machetes) and other weapons. Some leaders condemned the "insults" of the "infidels" at the previous victory parades, calling the counter-rally a means "to teach the Chinese a lesson" for challenging Malay supremacy. Soon, the crowd began attacking passing Chinese motorists, and launched arson attacks on Chinese homes and shops. The rioting spread, and, despite the military being called in, continued for another two days.[94][95]
As a result of the riots, Parliament was suspended, and a state of national emergency was declared. A National Operations Council (NOC) was formed to oversee the administration of the country under emergency rule. Although the rioting had died down, tensions continued to simmer. A non-Malay boycott of Malay goods and services received "near total" support, while many Malays, such as Mahathir Mohamad and Raja Muktaruddin Daim began calling for an autocracy led by UMNO alone, and the removal of the Tunku. According to some sources, one group of "ultras", comprising Syed Nasir Ismail, Musa Hitam, and Tengku Razaleigh, felt that the power-sharing Constitution had failed, and agreed that the country had to be "returned" to the Malays. They allegedly agreed to summon Mahathir to Kuala Lumpur, where he led his anti-Tunku campaign.[96]
Mahathir wrote an open letter to the Tunku, accusing him of "giving the Chinese what they demand ... you have given them too much face." Soon, students at higher educational institutions across the country began to hold mass demonstrations, calling for the Tunku to step down in favour of a leader who would restore "Malay sovereignty". Sporadic rioting, believed to have been instigated by the Tunku's opponents, broke out.[97]
Instead of bowing to their demands, the Tunku had Mahathir and Musa Hitam expelled from UMNO. The Minister of Home Affairs, Ismail Abdul Rahman, alleged that "These ultras believe in the wild and fantastic theory of absolute dominion by one race over the other communities, regardless of the Constitution. ... Polarisation has taken place in Malaysian politics and the extreme racialists among the ruling party are making a desperate bid to topple the present leadership."[98]
[sunting]The Malay Dilemma and New Economic Policy
Mahathir spent his political exile writing The Malay Dilemma, where he contended "that the Malays are the original or indigenous people of Malaya and the only people who can claim Malaya as their one and only country. In accordance with practice all over the world, this confers on the Malays certain inalienable rights over the forms and obligations of citizenship which can be imposed on citizens of non-indigenous origin." (Referring to the social contract.)[99]
Mahathir expressed discomfort with "far too many non-Malay citizens who can swamp the Malays"[100] when "...suddenly it has dawned upon the Malay that he cannot even call Malaya his land. There is no more Tanah Melayu — land of the Malays. He is now a different person, a Malaysian, but a Malay Malaysian whose authority in Malaya — his land — is now not only shared with others, but shared unequally. And as if this is not enough, he is being asked to give up more and more of his share of influence."[101] Mahathir's defence of Malay rights focused both on the "definitive people" line of reasoning and the argument in favour of affirmative action, which the Reid Commission had chosen: "It is not... for reasons of Malay superiority that preferential treatment for Malays in scholarship awards was insisted upon. ... They are a means of breaking down the superior position of the non-Malays in the field of education. The Malays are not proud of this treatment."[102] Shortly after becoming Prime Minister, Mahathir denied he had altered any of his views since he wrote the book.[103]
Mahathir and Musa Hitam later rejoined UMNO and the government under Tun Abdul Razak, the second Prime Minister, whose New Economic Policy (NEP), was based on some of the reforms Mahathir's book had advocated. The NEP's stated goal was elimination of "the identification of race with economic function".[104] To achieve this, it targeted a 30% share of the economy for the "Bumiputra" — "sons of the soil," a term used to describe Malays and other indigenous peoples — by 1990. This became known as the "30 per cent solution" setting the "Bumiputra quota" for many items, including new public share listings and new private housing schemes. Certain commentators alleged that this fostered "a close to 'zero-sum' attitude chiefly between the Malays and Chinese".[105] The NEP's stated aim, however, was not to directly redistribute wealth but to enlarge the economic pie while providing a larger share of the gains for Malays, thus increasing participation in the economy for all.[106]
The main rationale for the NEP as set out in the Second Malaysia Plan was to address the "economic imbalance" between the Chinese and Malays. In 1969, the Malay share of equity reportedly stood at 1.5% while the Chinese held 22.8%; the rest was largely in foreign hands.[107] Some detractors argued that while the Chinese share of the economy had increased at the Malays' expense, more significant growth in inequality had occurred between the richest and poorest Malays — between 1957 and 1970, the wealthiest 20% of Malays' share in the Malay portion of the economy reportedly increased from 42.5% to 52.5% while the poorest 40% saw a decrease from 19.5% to 12.7%.[108]
The NOC issued a report of its own analysing the root causes of the 13 May violence, suggesting that even in the civil service, a traditional Malay employer, non-Malays outnumbered the Malays in many areas, with substantial Malay majorities only in the Police and Armed Forces. The report concluded: "Allegations that the non-Malays are excluded are regarded by the Malays as deliberate distortion. The Malays who already felt excluded in the country's economic life, now began to feel a threat to their place in the public services. No mention was ever made by non-Malay politicians of the almost closed-door attitude to the Malays by non-Malays in large sections of the private sector in this country."[109]
According to the Second Malaysia Plan, the NEP aimed to "create a Malay commercial and industrial community" through "wholly owned enterprises and joint ventures". Prior to this, the government had, in the words of a local economist, played "administrative, supportive, and regulatory" roles in attempting to address the economic imbalance, but avoided "represent[ing] direct and active efforts in promoting" Malay interests.[110] Now, the government would not only "[limit] access of the Chinese and Indian population to universities, public jobs and public money," but also actively intervene in the economy to give "[the Bumiputra] a bigger piece of the business action".[111] One criticism of this increased intervention was that UMNO supposedly "became a major beneficiary of the expanded role of the state".[112]
There had been limited affirmative action programmes before. However, these mostly focused on the civil service, as Article 153 of the Constitution did. Admission to higher education was largely merit-based. The Tunku government preferred laissez-faire policies, minimising economic intervention.[44] Although some agencies, such as the Rural Industrial Development Agency (RIDA), which attempted to aid Malay entrepreneurs, existed, their programs were criticised as being based on handouts and favouring the politically-connected. RIDA was renamed as the Majlis Amanah Rakyat (The Indigenous People's Trust Council) or MARA in 1965, and came to symbolise the development of Malay entrepreneurship.[113]
Although the NEP was aimed at addressing economic imbalances, it soon became associated with ketuanan Melayu. While the two were rarely directly equated, they were often mentioned together, with the implication that the NEP was derived from ketuanan Melayu. The NEP's greater intervention in the economy led some to "equate UMNO's monolithic image as the undisputed champion of Malay supremacy with the party's ability to shore up lucrative business deals."[114][115][116]
[sunting]Constitutional amendments and other policy changes
Parliament finally reconvened again in 1971. Although the NEP was passed without its approval, Parliament's consent was required to amend the Constitution. The government-tabled Constitution (Amendment) Act 1971, in conjunction with some amendments to the Sedition Act,[117] limited freedom of speech on "sensitive issues" such as the national language, Malay special rights, the Malay rulers, and the provisions for citizenship. These restrictions also applied to Members of Parliament, overruling their previous Parliamentary immunity. The amendments also clarified Article 152's meaning, and included the "natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak" under Article 153, extending the formerly Malay-only rights to allBumiputra.[118] In addition, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King) could now direct any university or college to implement a proportion-based quota system favouring the Bumiputra. All higher educational institutions immediately enacted quota systems on the orders of the Education Ministry; some later questioned the move's constitutionality on the grounds that the King himself had not issued any directive.[119]
To cap all this, the amendment of articles touching on the "sensitive issues" mentioned, as well as the clause governing this rule on amendments, was forbidden without the consent of the Conference of Rulers. Effectively entrenching the "sensitive" Articles, this was heavily criticised by opposition MPs. It was claimed that if Parliament could be prevented from discussing particular issue, Parliamentary sovereignty was undermined. It was also unclear if the ban from speaking on "sensitive issues" applied to the ban itself. Nevertheless, the provisions were passed.[118] The Internal Security Act (ISA), which effectively allows the government to detain anyone it deems a threat to national security for an indefinite period without judicial review, was also amended in 1971 to stress the "preservation of intercommunal harmony".[120]
Many of these changes saw fierce opposition in Parliament and abroad. When the proposed changes were first announced, the British press charged they would "preserve as immutable the feudal system dominating Malay society" by "giving this archaic body of petty constitutional monarchs incredible blocking power". The censorship of sensitive issues was labeled as paradoxical when contrasted with Tun Abdul Razak's speaking of "the full realization that important matters must no longer be swept under the carpet..."[121] Other critics argued that Article 153 was nothing more than a "paper rice bowl", and in any case, did not even include the orang asli (literally Malay for "native people") or aborigines within the scope of its privileges, rendering its rationale somewhat suspect.[122]
Another important policy change came in the field of education. In 1970, the government made Malay the medium of instruction for primary, secondary, and tertiary education, replacing English. Although government funding for the Chinese and Tamil education streams continued, many non-Malays considered this new policy to be "the most discriminatory" thus far. The government's rationale was that this would provide better educational opportunities for the Malays, especially those who formerly had to make the transition from Malay-medium primary and secondary schools to English-medium universities. It was also argued that uniting students under one language would provide for greater racial harmony, while indirectly underscoring the "Malay nature of the state".[110]
The same year that the medium of instruction was changed to Malay, the National Culture Policy (NCP) was announced. Syed Nasir Ismail described the government's policies as aimed at creating a "Bumiputra Muslim identity" (identiti Islam Kebumiputraan) for Malaysians.[123] In essence, the NCP's goal was to eventually assimilate the non-indigenous peoples into an indigenous Malaysian identity. Despite stiff opposition from Chinese pressure groups, the government refused to withdraw the NCP.[124] To foster national unity, the Rukunegara, or national ideology, was also introduced. Although the Rukunegara itself contains no references to ketuanan Melayu or the social contract, a government commentary mentioned the "position of Malays and other Natives, the legitimate interests of the other communities, and the conferment of citizenship" as key aspects of the Constitution while insisting: "No citizen should question the loyalty of another citizen on the ground that he belongs to a particular community." One political pundit described it as a formal declaration of the social contract or "Racial Bargain".[125]
[sunting]Politics and "Malay dominance"
The old Alliance model, where each race was represented by one party, was repudiated with the formation of the Barisan Nasional (BN, or the National Front) in 1974. Several former opposition parties, including Gerakan, the PPP and PAS, joined the UMNO-led BN. Although the MCA and MIC were included, their influence was diluted by other non-Malay parties in the coalition. In 1977, PAS' expulsion left UMNO as the sole Malay representative in BN, although some ostensibly multiracial parties provided token Malay representation.[126] After its departure, PAS took a different approach to Malay privileges, denouncing the NEP as racial discrimination and "unIslamic".[127]
In 1974, Mahathir was appointed as a Minister in Tun Razak's Cabinet. He became the Deputy Prime Minister just two years later, under Tun Hussein Onn, who had succeeded Tun Razak upon the latter's sudden death.[128]
During the 1970s — the heyday of the NEP — "Malay dominance" was a largely accepted fact of life for Malaysians.[128] Whereas the 1957 to 1969 period was viewed as a time when "Malay dominance" was at least tempered by a form of "inter-ethnic bargaining" within the Alliance government, from the 13 May Incident onwards, political pundits argued that the political environment was now under marked "hegemonic control" from the Malays and UMNO;[129] in 1970, one Cabinet member pronounced that Malay special rights would remain for "hundreds of years to come".[130] The Tunku observed in 1977 that "it appears in the minds of the non-Bumiputras that they are being turned into second-class citizens in the country."[131] The government's ethnic policies continued to be based on and justified by the two basic arguments Mahathir had applied in his Dilemma; the "historical" status of Malay primacy over Malaya, and the "special needs" of the Malays.[132] As public discussion or questioning of these issues had been criminalised, there were few locally-published works critically discussing Malay supremacy, complicating attempts to evaluate it or establish further grounds for government policy beyond the main two traditionally put forth.
The ultras who had allegedly plotted to exploit the post-13 May chaos were now in control of the country. Razaleigh, the Finance Minister, was hailed as the "Father of the Bumiputra Economy" .[133] Musa Hitam and Mahathir, both rising stars on the political scene, maintained their image as "ultras", although it is unclear if this was their intention. Journalist K. Das once claimed Musa had told him "that a young Malaysian politician has to play the race card to the hilt even if there was not a single chauvinistic bone in his body."[134] After retiring, Musa said that "the national leaders tend to look for a scapegoat when faced with a desperate crisis situation" and use racial tactics to fill their "empty stomach".[135]
UMNO Youth in particular maintained its "ultra" image from the 60s. One of its Vice-Presidents said in response to discussion of opening different teams in UMNO based on political ideology that "The original cause of UMNO is to fight for the interests of the Malay race and this must continue. We do not want factions in UMNO."[136] In 1980, Tun Hussein Onn announced that he would be handing power over to Mahathir due to poor health. Mahathir took office in 1981, with Musa Hitam as his deputy.
[sunting]Mahathir administration
[sunting]Affirmative action and Chinese protests
The affirmative action policies of the NEP continued under Mahathir. Political pundits considered this administration, in its early period, to be a continuation of the "hegemonic control" of Malaysian politics by the Malays, and by UMNO in particular.[129] During this time, Mahathir focused on consolidating his power within UMNO and the government.[137] As a result, there was little active confrontation between the Malays and the non-Malays on the issue of ketuanan Melayu at the time.
In 1981, the MCA assessed the NEP and other government policies from a Chinese point of view. Its findings expressed concern over a number of problems, including alleged disrespect of the citizenship of the Malaysian Chinese and the Malay-dominated civil service, claiming the NEP's goal of eradicating identification of race with economic function had been abrogated.[138] In addition, it was argued that non-Malays were under-represented in Parliament and the Cabinet because of gerrymandering; mostly Malay rural Parliamentary constituencies outnumbered heterogeneous urban constituencies, despite the total population of urban constituencies exceeding that of rural ones.[139] However, UMNO avoided directly confronting the MCA over the issue.
Tensions rose after the 1986 general election when it appeared that UMNO on its own commanded a working Parliamentary majority, allowing it to govern without the support of other parties. Several UMNO leaders seriously discussed the possibility of governing alone; one, Abdullah Ahmad, publicly espoused permanent Malay supremacy and relegating non-Malays to second-class citizenship. Such calls for unilateralism were eventually disregarded, and the Barisan Nasional government continued. However, some UMNO officials warned non-Malay parties to avoid "playing with fire" by questioning the Malays' special rights and privileges or Hak Keistimewaan Orang Melayu. At the UMNO General Assembly that year, Mahathir stated: "We do not wish to rob other people of their rights. But let no one try to rob us of our rights." When Parliament reconvened, the DAP began raising objections to what they alleged was the division of Malaysians into "first and second class citizens". In response, some UMNO MPs began referring to the non-Malays as pendatang asing (foreign immigrants, or aliens) in Parliament. When the DAP attempted to enquire about the distribution of economic equity among the races to evaluate the NEP's progress, the Standing Orders of Parliament were amended to forbid such inquiries. This led the DAP to allege that the NEP's aims had been met, and that it could be allowed to expire in 1990.[140]
Some, such as Petaling Jaya city councillor Richard Yeoh, believe that Abdullah Ahmad, an aide of Mahathir's, was the first to use the term "ketuanan Melayu". Yeoh described the context in which Ahmad used it as "a fairly benign speech and most of us might have had no problem with it, but it has been taken to mean Malay supremacy by some Umno leaders who don't necessarily know what it means."[141]
Ethnic tension continued to grow shortly after Mahathir narrowly defeated Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah for the UMNO Presidency in 1987. Around this time, several deposit-taking co-operatives(DTCs), some associated with the MCA, collapsed. To save Chinese investors, the MCA asked the government to bail out the DTCs, citing a previous bailout of Bumiputra financial institutions. UMNO's reluctance to acquiesce led MCA Deputy President Lee Kim Sai to warn that the MCA might quit the government. Later that year, the government posted several non-Chinese-educated staff to senior positions in Chinese vernacular schools. Anwar Ibrahim, then Education Minister, refused to yield to protests from the MCA, and stated that the decision was final, despite a previous informal agreement on the issue between the Malay and Chinese communities.[142]
The Gerakan, MCA and DAP held rallies and boycotted classes in Chinese primary schools to protest the move;[143] UMNO Youth held its own rallies to assert ketuanan Melayu, hosting banners with slogans such as "revoke the citizenship of those who opposed the Malay rulers", "13 May has begun", and "soak it [the keris, a Malay dagger] with Chinese blood".[144] Future Deputy Prime Minister and then UMNO Youth Chief Najib Razak (the son of Tun Razak) threatened to bathe a keris with Chinese blood. This however is not true because the keris (keris Panca Delima) was only used as a symbol in UMNO Youth Chief sector when Hishamuddin took over as its leader.Templat:Wayback</ref> The flames were fanned further when in an unrelated incident, a Malay soldier ran amok in a predominantly Chinese area, killing one and injuring another two.[143]
The government then launched Operation Lalang (Weeding Operation), detaining 55 people under the ISA. More were arrested over the next few months. Although most were opposition politicians — including Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang — a few from BN were included. All BN politicians were released from detention after two months, while those from the opposition remained in custody for much longer. The government later justified these detentions on grounds of security, stating that the detainees had played up the issue of Chinese education to incite racial sentiment.[145] Some of Mahathir's supporters saw this as a vindication of his rejection of the Tunku's "compromise" with the non-Malays, teaching the non-Malays not to criticise the government and its pro-Malay policies.[146]
Many critics did not take this explanation seriously. UMNO was in crisis at the time, with Mahathir's faction narrowly defeating Razaleigh's in the party elections. Razaleigh's supporters filed alawsuit alleging irregularities in the election process which appeared likely to succeed, triggering new party elections. In this context, one MCA politician charged that the government had pursued a "hidden agenda," deflecting public attention from UMNO's crisis with a "deviation in the implementation of the Chinese education policy." The Tunku himself claimed that Mahathir used the issue to mobilise the Malays "as a united force to a common enemy — and the imaginary enemy in this case was the Chinese community."[147]
In the end, Mahathir's camp "won" the court case when it was held that as the party was an illegal organisation under the Societies Act due to some of its branches not being formally registered, the plaintiffs' case was invalid; an illegal society could not hold new elections for its leaders. Mahathir immediately set up "UMNO (Baru)" (New UMNO), transferring all of old UMNO's assets to the new party. Most of his supporters also joined UMNO (Baru), and eventually the "(Baru)" was dropped, making it, for all intents and purposes, the same as the old UMNO. When the Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal on the case, the government suspended and later sacked Lord President Salleh Abas and five other Supreme Court judges, triggering the1988 Malaysian constitutional crisis. The new Supreme Court later dismissed the case.[148]
Razaleigh then formed the Semangat 46 (Spirit of '46) party to challenge the government. In the 1990 general election, ketuanan Melayu was used as an issue, with UMNO accusing Semangat 46, PAS, the DAP and other opposition parties of conspiring to end Malay supremacy. The government also repeatedly warned that the 13 May riots would be repeated if it did not maintain its two-thirds majority in Parliament. Full-page advertisements depicting bloodshed and carnage were published in major national newspapers. Tensions rose further when the Tunku called on voters to support Semangat 46 instead of the new UMNO, with several UMNO politicians demanding that his title of "Bapa Kemerdekaan" (Father of Independence) be withdrawn, and his statue removed from Parliament House. Despite this, the government retained its two-thirds Parliamentary majority, with Semangat 46 winning only eight seats.[149]
[sunting]Reviewing and reworking economic policies
Prior to the expiration of the NEP in 1990, there was much debate over whether the policy should be renewed, replaced, or scrapped altogether. The government organised an official review of the NEP in the years leading up to its expiration. The NEP had been faced with a number of criticisms throughout its lifetime, most of them related to political corruption and other inefficiencies.
One point of dispute was the calculation of Malay equity. Although officially, as of 1992, the Malays controlled 18% of the economy, some dismissed this figure as misleading. It was argued that as in reality, much of this amount comprised equity held by government agencies, therefore it belonged to Malaysians as a whole.[150] The practice of awarding public works contracts mainly to Bumiputras was argued to be stifling Malay competency by providing little incentive to improve. Many Bumiputra contractors in turn subcontracted their jobs to others, who were in some cases Chinese; "Ali Baba" arrangements with "the Malay [Ali] using his privileges to acquire licences and permits denied the non-Malay, then accepting a fee to be the front-man while the non-Malay [Baba] ran the business," were prevalent. Some suggested that the NEP "might have worked, if the Malay had actually wanted to learn the ropes. But more often than not, he just wanted to be rich."[151]
Some said the disbursement of shares favoured the politically-connected, many of whom immediately sold the shares at market price, reaping the arbitrage instead of holding on and increasing the Malay share of equity, which the policy was intended to do. Although the NEP managed to create a class of Malay millionaires, it was charged that this was mainly due to cronyism, benefiting only the politically-connected.[152] Some agreed, but argued against taking action; one PAS politician stated: "The Malays do not want justice to affect their interests."[153] Other commentators have suggested that although most of the benefits under the NEP accrued to the politically-connected, the government intended for them to "trickle down to the Malay masses", and also for the Malay nouveau riche to provide "entrepreneurial role models" for other Malays.[111]
During the 1980s, concern continued to grow about discrimination in higher education. At this point, the Education Minister told Parliament of "dissatisfaction" and "disappointment" among non-Malays concerning "lessening opportunities" for higher education.[154] Later in 1997, then Education Minister Najib Tun Razak defended the quotas as necessary, claiming that only 5% of all local undergraduates would be Malays if quotas were abolished.[155]
Another criticism was that the NEP and other affirmative action had actually reduced the Malays' self-confidence, despite Mahathir's intention of building a Malay business class to serve as role models for impoverished Malays. One Malay journalist opined: "[U]nder this New Economic Policy, no Bumiputra could ever be sure that such 'victories' as came his way were fully deserved."[156]The NEP was also criticised for seeking to improve the Malays' overall share of the economy, even if this share were to be held by a small number of Malays.[157] Some quarters accused the NEP of being too heavy-handed in its approach towards affirmative action, maintaining it had "deprived qualified non-Malays of opportunities for higher education and job promotions" and forcing many non-Malays to emigrate instead.[158] This, combined with the impressions of the NEP as corrupt and associated with ketuanan Melayu, led to "deep resentment", particularly among the Chinese.[159] The NEP was criticised as "set[ting] those Malaysians so honoured with it above the rest, granting them the preferential treatment of the NEP," while "divid[ing] Malaysians into first- and second-class citizens".[160]
In 1990, the NEP was replaced by the National Development Policy (NDP), which continued most of the NEP-era policies. The Malay share of the economy, though substantially larger, was not near the 30% target according to government figures. In its review of the NEP, the government found that although income inequality had been reduced, some important targets related to overall Malay corporate ownership had not been met. Both Mahathir and the Tunku had expressed concern that the Malays remained too reliant on the Chinese economically.[161][162]
Claims that the NEP had retarded economic growth were dismissed; it was posited that the NEP had managed to avert further racial rioting, which would have hurt economic growth more than the NEP. The NEP was also defended as having created a Malay middle class and improving standards of living without compromising the non-Bumiputra share of the economy in absolute terms; statistics indicated that the Chinese and Indian middle classes also grew under the NEP, albeit not as much as the Malays'. The overall Malaysian poverty rate had shrunk from 50% at independence to 7%. It was also argued that ethnic stereotypes had been largely stamped out due to the NEP's success in creating a Malay upper class. Although many of the NEP's goals were restated by the NDP, the new policy appeared to be geared more towards wealth retention and creation, as opposed to simple redistribution.[111][163][164] Nevertheless, many of the policies from the NEP era were retained under the NDP, which was set to expire in 2020.[165]
[sunting]Bangsa Malaysia and political liberalisation
During the 1990s, Mahathir and UMNO made a public about-face on the government's cultural policies, with the formation of the Wawasan 2020 (Vision 2020) and Bangsa Malaysia (Malaysian Race) plans. Mahathir named one obstacle to establishing Malaysia as a developed nation by the year 2020 as: "the challenge of establishing a matured, liberal and tolerant society in which Malaysians of all colours and creeds are free to practice and profess their customs, cultures and religious beliefs and yet feeling that they belong to one nation." Mahathir proposed the establishment of "one Bangsa Malaysia with political loyalty and dedication to the nation". After the government's 1995 general election victory, Mahathir elaborated: "Bangsa Malaysia means people who are able to identify themselves with the country, speak Bahasa Malaysia (the Malaysian or Malay language) and accept the Constitution."[166]
Mahathir later explained that "The idea before was that people should become 100 per cent Malay in order to be Malaysian. We now accept that this is a multi-racial country. We should build bridges instead of trying to remove completely the barriers separating us." Such a dramatic change was perceived by the non-Malay communities as a "complete retraction" of earlier policies emphasising assimilation of non-Malays. The government took measures to stress this change, decreasing emphasis on Malay as the one and only national language by permitting local universities to use English as the medium of instruction for certain subjects. Diplomas from the MCA-sponsored and Chinese-majority Tunku Abdul Rahman College (TARC) were officially recognised by the government for employment in the civil service.[167] For the first time, religions other than Islam were given airtime on state radio and television, although they were not allowed to proselytise.[168] Lion dances — a traditional Chinese performance which had been banned for decades — were not only permitted but even attended by Mahathir and other top government officials.[169]
Although the early 1990s saw marked economic growth, commentators suggested that Mahathir's liberal policies had played the key role in his popularity and the Barisan Nasional's landslide 1995 election victory. One pundit wrote that "Most Malaysians could not remember a time of greater prosperity or lesser inter-ethnic recrimination. ... Economic indicators alone would not have captured the pride that Malaysians had discovered, perhaps for [the] first time, in being Malaysian."[170]
Lim Kit Siang attributed the opposition's defeat to Mahathir's liberalism and the government's adoption of the DAP's stance on issues like "language, culture and education". Some, however, doubted Mahathir's sincerity. One UMNO Youth official suggested that "The Barisan government's flexible move ... only shows that we are enjoying the highest level of tolerance purely based on the level of confidence in terms of political and economic position of the Malays. We share the political power with the Chinese. When they need to increase their political support from their community it is very important for them to serve the main concerns of the Chinese. So, why shouldn't we allow that? We can ... achieve a win-win situation. This is a purely political move. ... Similarly we UMNO Youth have to be often seen as a very racialist political group fighting for the Malay interests. ... However, those finished agendas that we have done, such as Islam, Bahasa Melayu [the Malay language] and the special status of the Malays, should not be questioned in any circumstance because these are very sensitive issues."[171]
In the latter part of the 1990s, government policies were loosened to combat the Asian economic crisis by encouraging foreign investment. In 1999, a new opposition party supported by Mahathir's former deputy, Anwar Ibrahim (who had been jailed for sodomy after his controversial sacking) led to a revival of the "13 May" warnings. However, the government maintained its Parliamentary majority.[172] In 2003, Mahathir officially resigned as Prime Minister, and was succeeded by his deputy, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
Tiada ulasan:
Catat Ulasan