1
SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT PRESS STATEMENT
MC. JA. 86/62
EXTRACTS OF THE WINDING UP SPEECH BY THE PRIME
MINISTER, MR. LEE KUAN YEW, ON HIS MOTION ON MALAYSIA
IN THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY ON 29TH JANUARY, 1962.
We should all be grateful that this time we have been spared the ordeal of further 7 ½ hours speeches on this motion seeking the support of the House for
Malaysia in principle. Obviously the Barisan Sosialis have learned that their tiresome performance in the two weeks of repetitious speeches during the debate on the merger proposals had not won for them either praise or support of the people.
From all their arguments in this debate one thing is clear, namely , they have learnt that to say they support merger in principle and then quarrel with merger in practice has put them into an embarrassing position and confused their own supporters. So this debate on Malaysia has been cut short because they have decided to go back to the more simple and straightforward propaganda line of being against the proposal of Malaysia both in principle and practice.
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 2
What is curious is that this switch of line coincides with the policy statement of the Indonesian Communist Party attacking Malaysia as being anti-
Indonesia.
From June last year to December, the time of the Kuching conference, the line of the Barisan Sosialis as the open-front Communist political organisation has been that in principle they support Malaysia. Indeed the Secretary-General of the Barisan Sosialis, Mr. Lim Chin Siong, said in writing to the Straits Times in
June last year that he would support a confederation of all the five territories provided internal security was left outside the hands of the Central Government.
In Kuching as recently as the 17th and 18th of December the Member for
Thomson, as the representative of Barisan Sosialis from this Assembly to the
Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee Conference, said categorically that he supported Malaysia in principle. However on 30th and 31st December the
P.K.I. held their conference and denounced Malaysia as anti-Indonesia. But on the 7th of January in Kuala Lumpur at the resumption of the adjourned meeting of the Solidarity Committee, after this policy statement of the Indonesian
Communist Party condemning Malaysia as anti-Indonesia, the Member for
Thomson was the only delegate to the Solidarity Committee meeting who refused to stand up and raise his hand to say "Hidup Malaysia" when everybody else did
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 3 so at the call of Dato Mustapha, the North Borneo delegate. And at the so-called socialist-front conference in Kuala Lumpur which even the most politically blind now know to be nothing more than a Communist-front conference, the line is anti-Malaysia and instead self-determination for Singapore and Sarawak by
1963.
The Member for Havelock has alleged that I disclosed at a party meeting in June 1960 that Malaysia was a British plot. The Barisan Sosialis and Mr. Lim
Chin Siong must have been in full knowledge of all information in the possession
of the Member for Havelock when Mr. Lim Chin Siong made a written policy
statement one year after the Member for Havelock said I disclosed this British
plot of Malaysia. But how is it that in June last year knowing full well that it was
a British plot, Mr. Lim Chin Siong still advocated a confederation of all the five
states provided internal security was not left in the hands of the Central
Government? For the purposes of the record may I put the Member for
Havelock's recollection right on what was said at the party meeting. I never said
that Lord Selkirk had shown me a telegram that he sent to the Colonial Office.
No U.K. Commissioner does that, and certainly not Lord Selkirk.
I recall referring to the Russian loan of over a thousand million roubles for
the purchase of arms by Indonesia, and saying that the British understand that
general tension in the whole area must mount as a consequence. That one day in
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 4 the near future, West Irian will be settled either by force or by the imminent use of force. They must therefore be conscious of the fact that once West Irian has been removed as a colonial irritant on the Indonesian Republic, the British North
Borneo territories of Kalimantan are bound to loom large in the fore-front of the
South East Asia Horizon, and being practical people the British know it is to their advantage to move one step ahead of history.
It is not, as the Member for Thomson and the Member for Havelock have suggested, the fear of a rising tide of anti-colonialism in the Borneo territories that bothers the British. These are fanciful thoughts in the context of the reality of the Borneo situation. Neither the Member for Havelock who has not been there, nor the Member for Thomson who was there only for the first time last
December for a few days in Kuching and Brunei town has any idea of the real position.
Let me remind them of a few salient facts. Sarawak has some 750,000 people, of whom about half are Dayaks, one-quarter Malays and one quarter
Chinese. The Dayaks were once part of the kingdom of the Sultan of Brunei.
Later they were ruled by the White Rajah, who gave special privileges to the
Malays over the Dayaks. With the advent of direct British rule in 1946, the special position of the Malays under the Rajahs was wiped out and there was
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 5 complete equality between the Malays and the Dayaks. The Dayaks far from being anti-British because the British colonial government improved their position after the Second World War, are extremely happy with the present position of equality as against the previous position of inequality. The only anti- colonial elements in Sarawak are found in the towns of Kuching and Sibu, and where pro-Communist left-wing elements have over the last few years under training from elements in Sibu just begun to operate amongst a section of the
Chinese. And so it is with North Borneo. It would be 15 to 20 years before the nationalist movement of the Dayaks, the Dusuns, the Muruts and Malays and the
Chinese can reach the point where the British position will be at all threatened. It is not internal pressure that is making the British withdraw peacefully before the time is up. I suggest is it the relentless logic of external pressures.
And so when the Barisan Sosialis talk of the S.U.P.P. and Party Rakyat of
Brunei, I hope they will put these things into perspective. The influence of the
S.U.P.P. is only in one section of the total Chinese population in Kuching and
Sibu, the two main towns Sarawak, the size of Muar and Kluang respectively.
They are not the only towns in Sarawak and not the whole Chinese population live in Kuching and Sibu.
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 6
In North Borneo, there is no socialist party, but there are about 12 nationalist parties now and more are being registered. Out of a population of
430,000 three-quarters are Dusuns, Muruts and other indigenous people and one-
quarter Chinese.
In Brunei, the population is 80,000 people. Of these only 20,000 are
Chinese and although only 3,000 have citizenship rights as subjects of the Sultan,
the rest are Malays and indigenous people. No Chinese in Brunei are members
of the Party Rakyat.
Of the 60,000 Malays and indigenous people about 25,000 are adults, and
even assuming that everyone supports the Party Rakyat of Brunei, all it means is that a constituency which is about the size of Geylang Serai supports the Party
Rakyat. And when the Barisan Sosialis of Singapore and the Socialist Front in the Federation, which unfortunately today is openly and heavily Communist penetrated and dominated, though not to the same extent as the Barisan Sosialis in Singapore, talk about the anti-colonial freedom movements of Borneo, the
British officials there must be laughing their sides out. If it were only the internal pressures of the Borneo territories, the British colonialists have to contend with, then I say they could safely remain there another 15 to 20 years.
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 7
As a nationalist and a socialist party, our decisions are based not on what the colonial power does or does not do but on what is or is not in the interests of our people. The argument has been advanced by the Barisan Sosialis, in particularly by the Member for Thomson, which runs alone this line: if any proposal is supported by the colonialist then it is pro-colonial and must be opposed because obviously the proposal is in the interests of the colonialist otherwise they would not have supported it. Therefore since British colonialists have welcomed Malaysia it must be opposed by anti-colonialists. That may be the anti-colonial Communist tactics and policy, but any nationalist party that works on such a fallacious principle will wind up in the gutter. The British obviously know that withdrawing from a position of sovereignty in Singapore and the Borneo territories is in their long-term interests. And I am quite sure they are not quite happy about withdrawing from a position of sovereignty and that is why
I asked the Member for Thomson during the debate on West Irian whether he would support the liberation of the British Borneo territories if the British do not withdraw in the same way as he supports the liberation of West Irian. I regret to note that he has not replied to this position although he promised to do so during the debate on this motion. Anyway does that mean that it is against the interests of the people of Singapore, Malaya and the Borneo territories, and that we should prevent that withdrawal and insist on the British remaining all in order
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 8 that the anti-colonial struggle can go on to its final protracted conclusion which only benefit the communists?
Since the objectives of nationalism are different from the objectives of
Communism, so the yardstick of what is good and what is bad is also different.
The fact that the Malaysia plan is considered by the Indonesian Communist Party to be anti-Indonesia does not mean, first, that is in fact, anti-Indonesia. It probably means that it is against the interests of Indonesian Communist Party , and to that extent, as was stated by Mr. Lim Chin Siong, on behalf of the
Communists, it is part of the cold war strategy to prevent the Communists from expanding their influence. Secondly, even assuming for the sake of argument that is anti-Indonesia, that is, not favourable to a Communist Indonesia because the non-Communists in Indonesia are quite happy with Malaysia, why should the plan be bad for the people of Malaysia. The fact that it is bad for a Communist
Indonesia because it prevents easier expansion of its influence over first, the
Borneo territories, and later Singapore and the Federation of Malaya, may very well be a good thing for the people of Malaysia.
The trouble with Barisan Sosialis and their Communist-open front back seat drivers is that they have not sat down to calculate all the consequences of their policy statements. Mr. Lim Chin Siong said June last year that he was in favour of Malaysia provided internal security is outside the Central Government.
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 9
But at the meeting of the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee on 18th and 19th December, 1961, in Kuching with Mr. S.T. Bani present all the
Sarawak and North Borneo delegates unanimously agreed that foreign affairs, defence and internal security must go to the Central Government. Only after this, and the P.K.I. resolution on the 31st December 1961, condemning Malaysia as anti-Indonesia, have Mr. Lim Chin Siong and his Communist party lost interest in a confederation, and are now openly opposing it, both in principle and in practice.
Meanwhile, Inche Said Zahari, former editor of Utusan Melayu who was barred from the Federation of Malaya for a diversity of reasons and now prospective editor behind the scenes of the Malay edition of Barisan Sosialis, stated that the Tunku’s Malaysia plan is a fraud because Melayu Raya the original term for Malaysia or the Malaysia plan meant the incorporation of
Borneo territories, Singapore and Malaya into the heartland of Indonesia. The pro-Communist faction of the Socialist Club in the University of Malaya published with great approval, Said Zahari’s article taking this line, in the Fajar
December 1961, page 3. Then the Member for Thomson in a motion on West
Irian last week repeated the same line that the real Malaysia means Indonesia as the heartland, and that Malaysia without Indonesia as anti-Indonesia.
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 10
Obviously Barisan Sosialis fully supports the proposal that real Malaysia must be Malaya, Singapore and the Borneo territories into the heartland of
Indonesia. And since our Malaysia does not include Indonesia but only includes the Borneo territories, Singapore and Malaya, it will make it more difficult for the
P.K.I. if it were to gain control over Indonesia to absorb the Borneo territories,
Singapore and later even the Federation of Malaya. So the P.K.I. says Malaysia is anti-Indonesia. The Member for Thomson agrees with this that Malaysia is anti-Indonesia.
So the lines of Barisan Sosialis are conflicting and confusing even to their own followers. They want to oppose Malaysia or rather merger for the simple reason that internal security will be in the hands of the Central Government and
Communist activity will be conscribed. Instead of sincerely admitting this and fighting it on this ground, which they fear will get nobody’s support, they have looked for all kinds of other reasons to stop merger and now to fight Malaysia.
Now that the P.K.I. have declared Malaysia to be anti-Indonesia, they echo it.
They allege firstly it is anti-Indonesia, secondly, it is part of a British plot and conspiracy, and thirdly, there is no self-determination in the Borneo territories.
May I ask them what are their long-term objectives and where this policy of blocking the other guy is going to lead them? It is more likely that even their own followers are bewildered as to what their long-term objectives are.
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 11
What then are they in favour of? They do not want merger unless it is on terms which will allow the Communists in Singapore to capture the Federation of
Malaya. They do not want Malaysia since they have reserved that for the
Indonesian Communist Party. What they want is an internally self-governing
Singapore with defence, foreign affairs and sovereignty left in the British hands but with the Internal Security Council abolished in order that the Communists can run amok and expand their influence. But what are the long term aims of the
Communists? Surely it cannot be to create an independent Communist State of
Singapore for that would be impossible both militarily or economically. The declared aim of the Malayan Communist Party is to set up a Communist Soviet
Republic of Malaya and Singapore. And yet they do not want merger although for all these years since 1945 they have condemned the separation of these two territories for all these years as being the responsibility of the British colonialists and later of the Federation reactionary feudalists.
Quo Vadis, which means “Where are you going, brother?” This is a
question which every Communist and fellow-traveller should ask himself. As far
as socialists and nationalists are concerned the answer is quite simple. On
towards Malaysia, independence, stability, peace and prosperity in a democratic
non-Communist socialist Malaysia -- a resolution put up by the P.A.P. which the
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 12
Communist-front conference in Kuala Lumpur using the banner of socialists was afraid even to discuss last week end. When we tabled our working paper for discussion, it was rejected -- rejected by the very men who day by day are abusing the liberties of the democratic system for tirades and untruths in the name of man’s rights, liberty of speech, liberty of association.
The tragedy of the M.C.P. is that, contrary to Marxist-Leninist doctrine, it is trying to bring about a Communist revolution working not through the indigenous races, the Malays, the Dayaks, the Dusuns and the Muruts, but through the active immigrant section, the Chinese. When I say this I am quoting
Fong Swee Suan, Woodhull, James Puthucheary, adviser of Barisan Sosialis, who said that the Communist movement in Malaya failed because it did not get the support of the Malays. I am now quoting them when I say the inspiration, the impetus and the organisational techniques are those of the Chinese Communist revolution. The Communist revolution in China is one of the greatest that had ever taken place in the history of China, and has given coherence, discipline and a sense of purpose to replace the warlordship and corruption which had reduced
China to anarchy for so long. But even according to Marxist - Lenin doctrine, for a revolution to succeed it must be locally-based, and the M.C.P. will not be locally based for as long as its inspiration cannot pull at the heart strings of the indigenous people of Malaya and Malaysia. If ever one day Communism were
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 13 ever to hope to make a really massive appeal, it must be home-based and it must be able to draw the Malays, the Dayaks, the Dusuns and the Muruts, together with the Chinese and the Indians, into its whirlpool. And that day can only come if the leadership of the Communist Party passes into the hands of local Malays,
Dayaks, Dusuns and Muruts, and the inspiration of revolution comes from a
close neighbour like Indonesia with a people and a country more like Malaysia.
Hence the significance of the P.K.I.’s statement on Malaysia being anti-
Indonesia. It is easier to make Malaysia accept Communist from Indonesia
through the Dayaks, the Dusuns and the Muruts on the Indonesian side of Borneo
appealing to their kinsfolk on the Malaysian side, and through the Malays from
Minangkabau and Sumatra appealing to their kinsmen in Malaya than to get
Malaysia to go Communist from an appeal thousands of miles away from China.
The Member for Queenstown said that the Afro-Asian Solidarity Committee in
Cairo had condemned Malaysia as a British plot in the cold war. Well, Sir, I do
not know how many Communists there are in that Solidarity Committee, but I
know that India is one of the strong supporters and great leaders of the Afro-
Asian neutralist bloc.
On 9th December, when the Yang di-Pertuan Agong arrived in New Delhi,
the Vice-President of India, Dr. Radhakrishnan, at a State banquet on behalf of
the President of India who was then indisposed, stated that India hailed and
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 14 welcomed the plan to include Singapore, North Borneo, Sarawak and Brunei and the Federation in Malaysia. He expressed the hope that such a state would contribute to the peace and prosperity of Malaysia and wished Malaya success in the execution of its plan.
This statement, Sir, came from the head of the largest non-Communist neutral nation. Is the Member for Queenstown suggesting that he and his fellow adventurers in Barisan Sosialis are more anti-colonial than Mr. Nehru, Dr.
Radhakrishnan or President Prasad? Can the Indian Government be less well informed than the Afro-Asia Solidarity Committee in Cairo?
Sir, we have been accused in the course of the debate on the merger proposals of having sold out Singapore. It was my great pleasure to watch the
Member for Thomson both at Kuching and in Kuala Lumpur recently. He found the North Borneo and Sarawak delegates pressing for the same kind of concessions and safeguards the Singapore Government had obtained from the
Federation of Malaya. They wanted autonomy in a number of spheres too. They did not want to go in as a complete state like one of the 11 states in the present
Federation because they had certain local interests to protect. They wanted to prevent free migration into their territories, they pressed for Borneoisation not
Malayanisation of their Civil Service, and they made mention of a separate
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 15 citizenship in order that people from Singapore and the Federation of Malaya cannot go to North Borneo and Sarawak freely and out vote them there. Yet we were falsely and maliciously accused of having sold out Singapore, we who have obtained special nationality rights, automatic conversion for all Singapore citizens into Federation nationals with equal rights as Federation citizens, even though they could not qualify under the present Federation citizenship laws. And in passing may I suggest that the press reports referred to by the Member for
Bras Basah, Madam Ho Puay Choo, in the House earlier, about Mr. Tan Lark
Sye saying that half of the people of Singapore would be disenfranchised must be false and untrue. This is because Mr. Tan Lark Sye in November last year at a dinner with us had expressed great satisfaction to the arrangements whereby nobody in Singapore will loss his citizenship and to the fact that it is absolutely fair if Singapore citizens cannot vote in the Federation neither can Federation citizens vote in Singapore. But from time to time we get this deliberate and malicious misunderstanding or misreports and so the battle will go on until the last of every malicious lie has been nailed down to the ground.
The Member for Thomson was present when the citizenship rules for the
Borneo territories were discussed, to decide who will be citizens of Malaysia.
Only British subjects in Sarawak and North Borneo and subjects of the Sultan of
Brunei will become Federation citizens. Those who were not permanently
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 16 resident there must have both themselves and their fathers born in their territories before they could qualify for Federation citizenship. Under these conditions 90% of present Singapore citizens who were not born in Singapore would be disqualified. In other words, 90% of the 340,000 citizens by registration because they were not born here will be disqualified and so we have reached special agreement with the Federation to allow all Singapore citizens to keep their
Singapore citizenship and automatically have equal rights by becoming
Federation nationals. The Borneo territories could agree to these conditions because 95% of their population were born and bred there including the Chinese.
The immigration Laws of the Borneo territories have been strict since the war with only 5% new immigrants who have just come from outside -- from
Indonesia and China.
The curious thing the Member for Thomson had to explain away was, and
I asked him this at the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee meeting, if the agreement between Singapore and the Federation governments was a sell-out, why did the Borneo territories want the same concessions and safeguards which the Singapore Government had obtained. I asked the Member for Thomson in open session whether, by virtue of the remarks he was making about the people of Borneo, the necessity to protect them and so on, he doubted the competence or standing of the delegates from North Borneo, Sarawak and Brunei. And he stood up (this is on the record of the Kuching conference) and admitted that they were
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 17 fully competent and fully qualified to represent the people of Sarawak and North
Borneo and he knows that the representatives from Sarawak are men who have been elected in local Council elections.
Mind you, I do not know if the Member for Thomson understood the importance of the saying, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” -- and he turned up with great revolutionary fervour in Kuching to unfold the banner of revolution: took off his tie and his coat in the presence of grave elderly gentlemen, who represented thousands of people up the Baram and Rejang
Rivers, and who had turned up to do honour to the occasion with family heirlooms -- all the token of respect for the occasion. I am sorry to say that the
Member for Thomson, much to his disappointment, discovered that he was cutting no ice with men who talked politely but whose words carried the authority of the whole of the inhabitants up the various rivers and of the tributaries of those rivers.
I am told that these family heirlooms signify courage, tenacity and effectiveness. And amongst other happy events in the Solidarity Consultative
Committee meeting was the tremendous cheer from all sectors of the crowd present, when one of the Dayak chieftains said that in the neighbourhood where he came from if the Communists gave trouble, (I did not understand him
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 18 altogether because I am not very well-versed in the Dayak language, but I understood a few words here and there) by his gesticulation he left us in no doubt whatsoever what was the traditional method of Dayaks dealing with troublesome people. And there was tumultuous applause from the Chairman of the S.U.P.P. and I turned round to my colleague, Inche Ahmad Ibrahim (The Minister for
Labour) and to his right was the Member for Thomson sitting rather morose and forlorn. He was the one gentleman, (the same one gentleman in Kuala Lumpur who was reluctant to stand up and raise his right hand to say “Hidup Malaysia”) who came with revolutionary fervour without tie, when every other delegate brought out all the family heirlooms and he found more and more that he was far from unfolding the flag of revolution. In fact, it was the great catalytic effect of his timely interruptions -- always dissociating himself on behalf of these people with everything that was said by any other member of the delegations -- that convinced everybody else of the first cold draught of things to come. And they decided without further ado that external and foreign affairs and security should go to the Central Government, thanks to the Member for Thomson.
And so through all the twists and turns, the Communist-open front Barisan
Sosialis have now at last successfully isolated themselves as the only party now here which is anti-Malaysia both in principle and in practice.
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 19
I want to ask their Vice-Chairman, Mr. Sandra Woodhull, and their adviser, Mr. James Puthucheary, to ask themselves how is it they could have in writing -- one of the useful habits one acquires as a lawyer is always to have a document in writing because it helps to establish what was intended to be said accurately and I have their agreement in writing -- approving the policy statement of the Central Executive Committee even before it was published in the sixth anniversary souvenir number of 1st January, 1961, just over a year ago, defining the PAP stand on merger and supporting the first proposals on Malaysia. Now they have gone back and melted away under Communist pressure.
Unfortunately, letters and documents do not melt away under any form of pressure.
Unlike the Communists, our decisions are based on our own appraisal and our policies are designed to achieve our own political objectives. We cannot and do not switch our lines in mid-stream at the behest of an outside authority. The
Indian Communists first opposed the last war as an imperialist war and joined the
Congress Party leaders in going to prison for non-cooperation. But when Russia entered the war, it became an anti-Fascist people’s war. And contrary to Indian sentiment and national feelings, the Indian Communist organised strike-breaking to help the British war effort. It is as a result of such anti-national policies that
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 20 the Indian Communist Party today continues to be isolated from the broad mass of the Indians.
Whatever the high priest in Moscow says, or probably the local cardinal in
Indonesia says, so the parson in Barisan Sosialis repeats and parrots the sermon.
One day Stalin was a great creative Marxist-Leninist, and even Lim Chin Siong held a meeting in memoria to grieve for their departed leader, the next day he was condemned as a murderer with the personality cult. Cities, roads and squares, factories and villages were named after him. Now, new names have been given so that his memory can be erased from the mind of Russia. Even his body lying in state was pulled out from the mausoleum to be reburied, to be properly forgotten. This is the way they switch line. “I am in favour of
Malaysia”, so said the Member for Thomson in Kuching. I asked him point- blank. He stood up in clear and categorical terms asserted his support and the support of Barisan Sosialis for Malaysia in principle. Now, principles or no principles, they are against it. P.K.I. says it is anti-Indonesia. So the Member for Thomson says, “Yes, it is anti-Indonesia.” So what? Let’s assume it is anti-
Indonesia -- so what? It is pro the people of Malaysia -- that is the yardstick.
The tragedy with the Member for Thomson and his friends is that they never see the right thing. They do not know whether it is good or bad for the
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 21 people they are supposed to represent, whose interests and welfare they are supposed to advance.
When the history of this great epoch comes to be re-written in 20 or 30 years time by a Communist Government in exile somewhere, several chaps will be pulled out of their graves, put up against the walls and shot again metaphorically and re-buried. And for those unfortunate to be alive, it would be worse.
Once upon a time, Molotov, Malenkov, Kaganovich and Voroshilov were
great men. Yesterday, it was reported that a special law was being passed to
scrub out the names of these men from towns, villages, factories, schools,
universities, army units and other items. Eighty-four decrees were introduced,
over the last 30 years giving recognition to these men for their work on behalf of
the Russian Communist Party. Marshal Voroshilov was referred to 20 times and
several army units and military academies were named after him. Kaganovich
was referred to 27 times and his name was given to several stretches of railway
line and underground stations. Now they have to be wiped out. It was all a
ghastly mistake.
And so, I say, history will record that this folly of fighting merger and
Malaysia is one ghastly mistake in which all those who participated in either
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 22 making the decision or executing the orders of those who wrongly and erroneously and criminally made this decision and I hope, there is an honest non-
Communist socialist Professor of History in the University of Singapore who will ensure that they will be given a decent footnote, “These were misguided by ineffective men” so that their crime is mitigated by the ineffectiveness of the evil intention they are unable to execute.
From being pro-Malaysia in principle provided security is not in the hands of the Central Government or provided they capture the Central Government they have done one complete right about turn. The new line is that Malaysia is anti-
Indonesia and is to be opposed in principle. To them Malaysia has become a
British colonialist plot and its creation would result in “neo-colonialism.”
What has happened between June last year and now to have made the local Communists do a right about turn? What new information has dawned upon them? What startling new analysis has been discovered which they did not know or could not have analysed six months ago or even one month ago in
Kuching, when the Member for Thomson supported the concept of Malaysia.
But then that is their tragedy. The line has been set for them by the P.K.I. from
Jakarta. By keeping in line with decisions of Communist parties outside
Malaysia, they are slowly becoming isolated in Malaysia. Just as the Indian
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 23
Communist Party by toeing the Moscow line became anti-nationalist, so will be the fate of our local Communists.
This amendment moved by the Member for Anson and supported by the
Member for Hong Lim, is an amendment in form. The substance remains that they support the principle of Malaysia. We agree to the amendment because it also quite clearly isolates the Barisan Sosialis as the only party out of the six in this Chamber that is against Malaysian solidarity and against the Malaysian nation. It is a bad start for them to be against the nation even before the nation has been established, for he who is anti-the nation now even before its inauguration has every reason to find his political life difficult after the nation has been established.
We are here as a Government prepared to do all that is necessary in the interests of the people, regardless of personal abuse and smears that have been showered on me, my colleagues, the PAP and the Government. We are what we are and always have been. Fortunately, my colleagues and I are not desperate men because we have no reason to be desperate. I would like to assure my enemies that desperation is an ailment that afflicts only those who are on the verge of dire disaster. We have no dire disaster gaping in front of us.
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 24
We are going through with merger and Malaysia, and it is our responsibility and duty to the people to see that their security and their prosperity are ensured. Nothing will deter us from this task. If it was power we wanted, then we would not have contemplated resigning after Hong Lim. Nor would we have chosen the more difficult way of taking a nationalist stand and defending it from attack by the Communists and their supporters.
Why take a more difficult road if it is personal interest that moves us? The difficult road of explaining to the people of Singapore why they must be part of a larger entity for their own survival instead of taking the cheaper and easier slogan of anti-colonialism and full internal self-government without the Internal Security
Council.
And indeed right up to May in Hong Lim, and even in June last year just before Anson, the Communist front organisations in the unions and the most important Communist-front leader, Mr. Lim Chin Siong, were inviting us the
PAP to take the lead in the anti-colonial struggle and to press on for the abolition of the Internal Security Council as the next step forward. All we need have done in Anson if it was power that we were interested in for our own selves was to pay lip-service to anti-colonialism as defined by the Communists, and promise to ask for the abolition of the Internal Security Council in 1963, and when 1963 comes and there is no abolition of the ISC to lead the agitation for its abolition to
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC 25 greater heights of mass popularity all in the Communist anti-colonial movement.
That was the easy way and would have kept us our safe majority this time and perhaps bring us into power the next time. But it would have brought ruin and perdition to the people of Singapore and the people of the Federation and
Malaysia for if Singapore goes, with it will go the whole of the Borneo territories.
The Communists have made very grave miscalculations as to our firmness of intention and tenacity of purpose, and they would do well before they go on with their anti-merger and anti-Malaysia campaign, to ask where all this will lead them to. On issues of life and death such as merger and Malaysia, considerations of the personal fate and fortunes of Assemblymen and Ministers are utterly and completely irrelevant. And let Barisan Sosialis remember this and let the
Communist front leaders take this into calculation before they mount their final assault.
January 31, 1962 (Time issued: 1900 hours)
LKY/1962/LKY0129.DOC