Essay On Singapore

Sngapore’s seperation from Malaysia was caused by UMNO’s policies.

The spotlight of this statement is the correspondance of the seperation of Singapore from Malaysia, due to the policies carried out by the United Malay National Organisation. During this post-war period, although Singapore was already a part of Malaysia, their relationship was uncertain due to the political tension and differences in ideology between Singapore and the Malayan states at that time. It has been reviewed that Source A and B talks about the policies of UMNO that has been executed at that time, where as Source C, gives more or less a neutral remark towards the statement, however has a controversial policy present in it. Yet, Sources D and E also provides information on the policies taken by the UMNO.
In accordance to the statement, Source A and B gave information on the unfair policies executed by the UMNO. Both sources highlights on the inequality of political and racial roles in Malaysia. For instance, Source A talks about the restriction of number Dewan Ra’ayat seats given to Singapore which does not correspond with the population they have at that time which was 1,750,000 people. This can be justified as unfair, because Sarawak at that time, having a lesser population which was no more than 800,000 were given twenty four seats as opposed to the fifteen seats given to Singapore. This obvious restriction bore resentment in PAP leaders towards the UMNO. Not in a form of retaliation, but more in a form of rights and equality, a convention was held with the rallying motto being ‘Malaysian Malaysia’ by Lee Kuan Yew, with the aim of seeking political affilition on the basis of common politcal ideologies. However, was looked down upon by the Government due to the fact that Lee Kuan Yew was widely associated with this. This convention however would lead to the expiration of Article 153 in the constitution of Malaysia, whereby this article gave or safeguards Malay people’s position in Malaysia. Tunku Abdul Rahman however, thought that the Malays wouldn’t survive without these special rights and privelages and thus opposed this convention. Where as Lee Kuan Yew opposed the ideal or racial policies and discrimination. Therefore creating a difference in ideology and policies. Consequently, the sources support that UMNO policies was the aspect for Singapore’s seperation from Malaysia.
After evaluating the sources, it has been decided that the sources foundation is quite concrete as they come from offical declarations or events. The sources are relatively reliable as it is associated with an event, for example Source A was taken on the account of the Seperation. In addition, the author’s name was mentioned, raising this sources’ validity. Similar to this, Source B was taken from the Declaration by convernors of Malaysian Solidarity Convention, it was offical and this offical event may have been recorded in a timeline and may support the reliability of this source.
Sources C discuss about the roles of the indegineous races in Malaysia, and their participation in developing their country. This source primarily concentrates on Malays and Chinese, stating that these both races are able to work together. The Malays were absolutely dominant in ruling the administration and government where as the chinese, according to the source, were business minded and went for the economy. However, this may also be considered a stereotypical remark on the chinese, seeing as the Chinese only wanted to gain profit and contribute not much more. This policy on Malays solely running the administration was unfair, as other indigenous races may also want to participate or contribute to the government. This was then, opposed by Lee Kuan Yew who was against racial discrimination. Seeing as the Malays were given special status and privelages Lee Kuan Yew wanted equality of all indigenous races. This oppositon then contributed on the idea of seperating Singapore from Malaysia. Therefore, this source giving a more or less neutral remark, also agrees upon the statement.
However, Source C reliability is uncertain. According to the source, it was taken from a UMNO meeting, and this source was given verbally. In addition to this, it only came from a Malay’s perspective on should or should not other indigenous races be a part of the government. This soure is bias towards Malays, and also does not take account on other races such as Indians who were large in numbers during this period. Although, this source also gave a high remark on each roles of the indigenous races in Malaysia, stating that each of them has a role in order to keep the country stable, and if one were to give up on this will bring conflict and disruption in the country. This however was in correspondance to UMNO’s policies on indigenous participation, which was mainly opposed by Singapore’s Peoples Action Party. This however is a fact that PAP leaders, especially Lee Kuan Yew was as stated before, against it. Therefore, contributing to the fact that Singapore was seperated from Malaysia due to UMNO policies.
Source D and E talks about the actions taken by the PAP to oppose UMNO policies and their intention to put a stong foothold in the central government. Sources D highlights on the action taken by PAP leaders who directly challenged the UMNO policies. The source also highlights that the PAP has such an ambition and objective that they took this action and participated in the elections in the Malayan states, Associated with this, Source E shows the results of the federal selections in which, Mr Lee’s PAP contested. Their intention being replacing the Malayan Chinese Association. However Mr Lee’s party only won one seat. It is also stated that, not many were in favour of Mr Lee and his party. Simultaneously after this challenge, Mr Lee Kuan Yew founded the Malaysian Solidarity Convention. According to the source, it is to build a multi racial front of oppositon parties for a ‘Malaysian Malaysia’ and to break down ‘communal politics’. However, the UMNO is predominant in the Tunku Alliance. Consisting of Malay, Indian and Chinese parties. This convention gave the impression that the PAP leaders were targetting the UMNO, and judging by their actions taken the UMNO was threatened. Therefore, Sources D and E agrees with the statement that Singapore was expelled due to UMNO policies.
However, this source does not highlight as to why the PAP leaders took such action. And the reasons as to why they wanted to gain a strong foothold in the central government. PAP leaders took such action as a form retaliation and to further ideological grounds, in response to the Alliance party that ran elections in Singapore which, were formed by the UMNO in 1963. Thus stimulated their inent in gaining a stronger foothold in the central government. It is also evaluated that in order to prevent further ‘bloodshed’ Tungku Abdul Rahman, in the end, suggested the idea of seperating Singapore.
In conclusion, all of the sources does agree with the statement of Singapore being expelled from Malaysia due to UMNO policies. The sources reliability may be considered concrete but biased on their own perspectives. As these sources only come from an Indigenous perspective and not from a third party who’s view may not be bias or less bias.