Tunku was right
for his times -- Raja
Click to read
KUALA LUMPUR - For Singaporeans, the demise of Malaysia's first premier, Tunku Abdul Rahman, yesterday (Dec 6, 1990) at the age of 87 years ended one of the few remaining links with the turbulent past involving the entry and separation of Singapore from the Malaysian Federation.
It was the Tunku who made the fateful decision to evict Singapore from Malaysia in August 1965, two years after the merger.
His death had come within weeks after his last public appearance on behalf of the opposition parties in the October general election. Up till the end, he did what he thought was right.
For the Tunku, whose last few years were embroiled in controversy because of his open opposition to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad, his death marked the end of a lifetime of devotion to politics, missionary work and sports.
Up to his very last moments, he took a keen interest in all three subjects despite the occasional bouts of illness and the infirmities of old age.
He was in command of all his critical faculties up to the very end, and he spoke his views candidly, without fear or favour, on any subject, be it Islam or Umno politics.
He was nobody's puppet and he never allowed himself to be used by anyone, as shown in his decision to meet Dr Mahathir last November for heart-to-heart talks in an effort to promote Malay unity.
The plea by Dr Mahathir to the Tunku to play the role of mediator in the conflict between Umno and its breakaway faction, the Spirit of '46, was a sign of his respect for the Tunku.
The Tunku was the adviser to the '46, which wants to replace Umno as the dominant political party of the Malays.
Whenever his health permitted him, he continued to campaign for the '46 party right up to last October's general election.
After the defeat of the '46 at the hands of Umno, the Tunku wistfully said that he would never go to the hustings again. Yet he stubbornly held to his belief that the Umno of Dr Mahathir was not the same Umno he once led.
It might seem strange why the Tunku, who headed Umno for more than two decades from pre-independence days, should want to oppose the party in the last years of his life.
Some people think he was motivated purely by revenge, a desire to get even with Dr Mahathir for undermining his power in the years immediately after the 1969 racial riots.
Or was he moved by his love for the old Umno, which was deregistered by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on a legal technicality and had to be reconstituted anew in early 1988 by Dr Mahathir? It is too early to make a judgment now.
There was little evidence in his youth that the Tunku was destined for the public limelight and that he would be the leader who would win independence for his country and steer it as prime minister through the difficult first decade. Like Winston Churchill, he was a late starter to greatness.
In his early years, the Tunku, a prince from the Kedah royal household, was more distinguished for his lifestyle than for his dedication to public service.
He took more than a decade to get through his Bar finals, mainly because of the varied attractions in the British Isles. No one expected him to shape up as a widely respected public figure.
But the Tunku proved all wrong by his exemplary leadership - first of the Malay community, then of the multi-racial society in successfully gaining independence for the country on Aug 31, 1957, and then as Bapa Malaysia.
In the initial years of his retirement, he involved himself in Muslim missionary work, internationally and at home.
He was the secretary-general of the Jeddah-based Islamic Secretariat. On the domestic front, he led the Malaysian Muslim welfare organisation, better known as Perkim, for decades until the last years of his life.
After returning home from Jeddah, he became an active elder statesman, eagerly keeping track of current affairs, writing his weekly columns for the Malaysian daily, The Star, and promoting Islam as a just and liberal religion.
In whatever role he played, he was always guided by reason and the spirit of moderation rather than by any dogma.
Whatever his personal shortcomings, those who knew him intimately said he was a great man to work for, understanding and patient, and loyal to a fault to his colleagues and staff.
Even when a Cabinet minister failed to clear himself of corruption charges in a libel case, he stood solidly by him.
To them, he was a prince among politicians, the leader with the common touch. They said he had nobility in him.
The personal attributes of the Tunku, his charm, his generosity to friends and foes alike, his unassuming manners and humility and his ingrained sense of fair play were never in dispute.
The honour bestowed on him in his advanced age as the father figure of his nation during the days of the third premier - Tun Hussein Onn - contrasted sharply with the scant respect for him during the immediate post-retirement years in the '70s.
He was then virtually ignored and his role in the political development of the country was underplayed by some groups within the government.
As the Tunku bitterly commented, he was not even mentioned in the chapter on the independence of Malaysia in a locally published history textbook.
Even now, there is controversy over his role as a nation builder during his tenure as the first premier of independent Malaya from 1957, which became Malaysia in 1963 with the merger of the Borneo territories and Singapore.
The outbreak of the bloody racial riots in 1969 and the subsequent imposition of national emergency and the suspension of parliamentary rule proved to be his Waterloo.
The Tunku was blamed for the breakdown in racial co-operation and neglecting Malay interests. His critics accused him of giving in too often to the demands of the economically influential Chinese community.
Sections within Umno and the Malay community applied pressure to force him to step down from office.
Dr Mahathir and his former deputy, Datuk Musa Hitam, were then among the young activists in Umno who were critical of his policies.
But the passage of time has led to a reassessment of the Tunku.
It was during Tun Hussein's time that the first step was taken to welcome him back to the Establishment.
There is no denying the pivotal role played by the Tunku in the struggle for the country's independence and the construction of the framework for political co-operation among the various races. He made the concept of the racial alliance of communally-based political parties into a living reality.
His ruling Alliance of the United Malays National Organisation (Umno), the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) was a success. Though they suffered an electoral setback in the 1969 general election, the coalition never lost power to the opposition.
The coalition parties managed to hold together despite the problems of accommodating each other's demands.
The racial riots of 1969 were not caused by the breakdown in the co-operation within the Alliance. The main cause was the excessive and conflicting demands made by both Malays and non-Malays on the government.
If any blame is to be apportioned, the responsibility must be spread to all the political parties, particularly the opposition, which championed the demands of the respective racial groups without any restraint.
In assessing the Tunku's contributions, it may be pertinent to speculate on the course of Malaysian history if he was not around.
Many of his colleagues would argue that without him at the helm of Umno, and its other partners in the Alliance, the independence struggle in the '50s might well have taken a different course.
Without him as steward of the country in the difficult first decade of the country's independence, the communal structure of politics based on the co-operation among racially-based parties might not have taken firm root.
Apart from the Tunku, no other Malay leader could possibly have done a better job of laying to rest the fears of the non-Malays and bringing their leaders together in the quest for freedom.
But sections within the Malay community and Umno accused him of giving in too much to the demands of the other communities in the post-independence era.
Many felt that the Tunku's frequent compromises with the non-Malay partners on language and economic issues in the Alliance government resulted in the slow progress of the Malays.
Under him, they said, the status quo was maintained: the Malays were dominant in politics while the Chinese and other races continued to control the economy.
Supporters of the Tunku, however, said that it was not possible for him to change the rules, as he was responsible for negotiating the communal pact with the other leaders which paved the way for independence.
Under its terms, the non-Malays agreed to the Malay character of the state, some special privileges for the Malays as the indigenous group and the dominance of the community in politics.
In turn, the non-Malays were accepted as full citizens, with sufficient guarantees for their language, religion and economic activities.
It was not in the Tunku's character to cancel it unilaterally, and for this, he will always be blamed by some for the tardy progress of the Malays during the first 1½ decades of independence.
As leader of Umno and head of the multi-racial Alliance government, he always counselled for moderation and the reconciliation of opposing interests.
His keen sense of fair play instilled confidence among all the communities, and notwithstanding the racial riots of 1969, the basic thrust of the Tunku's policies on racial accommodation is still being practised till today by the larger National Front coalition.
His main legacy to the nation is that he pioneered the path of tolerance and co-operation among the main communities in the country.
There is still no viable alternative to long-term stability and racial harmony in Malaysia other than the way showed by the Tunku. History will be kind to him.
First published in The Straits Times, Dec 7, 1990
Copyright © 1998 Singapore Press Holdings. All Rights Reserved.
