Is KL-S'pore reunification likely?

By David Chew

SINGAPORE (JP): The subject of Singapore rejoining Malaysia can arouse considerable interest among the peoples of both countries each time it is raised and discussed in public.

It is an issue close to the hearts of many people in both countries, who had been affected by the traumatic event of Singapore's exit from Malaysia 31 years ago.

This is mainly due to the special ties which continue to bind both countries together, based on economics, geography, culture, security and a common history, to name a few.

Reunification was broached by Singapore Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew at a function organized by the Press Club and Foreign Correspondents Association in Singapore on June 7. Lee, in reply to a question, mentioned the possibility of the island republic rejoining Malaysia on two possible conditions: Malaysia is to practice meritocracy and treat all races equally instead of according the indigenous Malays a privileged position. Malaysia is to successfully pursue the same goals as Singapore to bring maximum economic benefit to its people.

In his comments on media reports of the much-publicized event the next day, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad did not rule out the long-term possibility of Singapore rejoining Malaysia, but nevertheless characterized the merger of both territories, separated by a narrow causeway, as remote at this stage.

It would not be in the cards so long as some Malays were still not prepared to accept the country's Chinese and Indian minorities as equals. This made it difficult for the Malaysian government to discard or even modify its policy of affirmative action, which gives ethnic Malays special treatment. Mahathir also pointed out that Malaysia had the same right as Singapore to insist on conditions for reunification.

Lee's remarks and Mahathir's response came at a time when bilateral ties were at their most cordial level since Singapore separated from the federation on Aug. 9, 1965, following a bitter quarrel with the government over what a future multi-racial Malaysian nation should be.

The People's Action Party (PAP), led by Lee, who was prime minister from 1959 to 1990, had wanted a Malaysia where all races -- Malays, Chinese, Indians and North Bornean natives -- would have equal rights. But the Alliance, the precursor of the National Front (NF) government led by the United Malays National Organization (UMNO), stood for a Malaysian nation, where Malays as indigenous peoples would have more rights than others.

The mud-slinging between the PAP and Alliance led to racial tension. This occurred at the time president Sukarno was vigorously pursuing Indonesia's "confrontation" to crush Malaysia, which he had regarded as a British neo-colonialist plot. Fearing nationwide trouble between the Malays and Chinese, which could break up Malaysia much to the delight of Sukarno, the then Malaysian prime minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, asked Singapore to leave Malaysia.

It has taken both countries a good three decades to forge and cement their cordial ties after having first gone through the traumatic period of an operation which separated Siamese twins and then the post-operation period of adjusting to each other as separate, independent nations with all the related problems. The path to cordial ties had, as expected, been strewn with various kinds of obstacles, the biggest being the mutual suspicion and mistrust between both countries as a result of negative perceptions at the time.

While Singapore perceived Malaysia as an inept Malay-dominated society out to make things difficult for the Chinese and Indian minorities, Malaysia regarded Singapore as an unscrupulous Chinese-dominated state where the Malay minority had been effectively marginalized.

Naturally, both countries were embarking on policies to protect their respective interests. This inevitably led to rivalry, going against any built-in tendencies for both to cooperate for mutual benefit, which their shared ties of economics, geography, culture, security and history provided.

It was only from 1981 after Mahathir became prime minister that the negative perceptions each country had of the other underwent a significant change. With that, the foundation for cordial, bilateral ties was firmly laid, seeking to tap whatever advantages of cooperation that shared ties in various areas offered.

Unlike his predecessors -- especially the late Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia's first prime minister -- Mahathir had a "meeting of minds" with Lee. This had been facilitated by their close friendship right from the days when Singapore was part of Malaysia, even though Mahathir -- then an Alliance back-bencher -- clashed frequently with Lee in parliament.

The meeting of minds had enabled both leaders to clear any misunderstandings existing between the two countries, which could arise from the voluminous dealings each has with the other because of their geographical proximity and economic interdependence.

Once this premise was adopted and mutual mistrust and suspicion allayed, it was easy for both leaders to chart courses of cooperation, especially in the realm of economics, at a time when both countries were seeking agendas to improve the living standards of their respective peoples. Singapore aims to achieve 1982 Swiss living standards by 1999, while Malaysia intends to become an industrialized nation through "Vision 2020". They also encouraged their younger leaders, who had not shared a common "growing up" experience, to get to know one another better through more informal visits and contacts.

It is understandable for any cursory observer of Malaysia and Singapore affairs to conclude that growing cordial bilateral ties, especially in the realm of economics, could lead to a situation where the two countries would once again be one political entity, as they had been from 1963-1965.

The reasons may be valid, indeed even compelling. Malaysia and Singapore could benefit in more ways than one from political union, which gives government sanction to economic policies. In an era where international trade can play an important role in raising living standards, Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore can complement each other as a hinterland and port from the perspective of geography.

Malaysia, following the principle of comparative advantage to save costs, could utilize Singapore's efficiency as the world's busiest port for its burgeoning exports overseas. In turn, the land and resource-scarce island republic could once again have recourse to its traditional hinterland to ease congestion and tension in the fast-paced modern society Singapore was becoming. It would also be easier for younger Singaporeans to fan out to a bigger country to realize their dreams of owning houses and cars, which are comparatively cheaper in Malaysia.

But a closer examination of the issue points to many questions as regards what role Singapore would play in a reunion with Malaysia. This, bearing in mind that over a period of 31 years since their independence, both countries had pursued separate but successful development paths to achieve political stability and economic success.

While Singapore has become the world's busiest port, a technological hub in Southeast Asia and the gateway to the tourist resorts of the region, Malaysia's resource-rich economy is booming, having consistently recorded high growth rates of 8 percent annually for the past eight years, making it an investment haven among foreigners.

On the political front, the different nation-building policies of both countries have also crystallized since 1965. While Malaysia has reaffirmed its policy of Malay supremacy with some concession for non-Malay rights, Singapore has become a Chinese- dominated meritocracy doing its best to help the Malay minority progress. Both governments had received resounding mandates from their citizens to rule in recent general elections.

Reunification would require the leaders of both countries to work out how each can accommodate the interests and rights of the other. Given their respective strong positions, the tough bargaining is expected to be even more intense than what had transpired between Alliance and PAP leaders in London in 1962, one year before Singapore joined Malaysia.

Among the possible issues to be brought up are: Would Singapore, under the control of the Federal Government, be allowed to continue pursuing policies which have guaranteed its success over the past 31 years, but which could work to Kuala Lumpur's disadvantage? On the other side of the coin, would Malaysia be prepared to accept a situation where the influx of two million Singapore Chinese could alter the country's racial equation from one of a Malay dominance of 60 percent to a plurality where Malay comprise only 48 percent of the total population?

Given the bitterness of Singapore's brief sojourn in Malaysia, the ruling parties of both countries are unlikely to have a political reunion, simply because their core policies are too much in conflict. They would lead to a reopening of old wounds inflicted on both parties as a result of the bitter mudslinging when Singapore was part of Malaysia.

Although the NF and PAP appear to take a somewhat liberal attitude in bending backwards to accommodate minority interests, this should not be misconstrued as a reversal of their respective core policies of a Malay-dominated polity with lesser rights for non-Malays and a meritocracy with equal rights for all races. It merely means that strong government can afford to be generous in giving concessions.

Mahathir, whose UMNO appears to be stronger at every general election, has bent backwards to accommodate the non-Malays, displaying a liberal attitude towards the use of the English language in the private sector and encouraging joint ventures between the Malays and Chinese in business. These are seen by Malay radicals as compromising the unchallenged position of Bahasa Malaysia as the national language and preference in trade opportunities for ethnic Malays.

Singapore has also done much to help its Malay minority within the context of meritocracy, as evidenced by the success stories of many Malay entrepreneurs and professionals in the republic.

Since reunification is unlikely -- at least for the "next 300 years" according to a Malaysian Chinese leader Dr Ling Liong Sik -- both countries will continue to treat each other as good neighbors in the foreseeable future. It is a mutually acceptable policy in which each accepts the adage that `what is good for one may not necessarily be so for the other'. But that does not mean that both cannot cooperate to tap the advantages derived from common bonds in economics, geography, culture, security and history, for mutual benefit.

The writer is a free-lance journalist based in Singapore.