Write History as It is

by Din Merican

On September 25, the mainstream media front paged the honors conferred on Temengong Kanang anak Langkas (left) a Sarawak Datukship. Also prominently featured is the award of the commando beret of VAT 69 to Apot Saad.

Kanang and Apot are indigenous bumiputeras, the former from Sarawak and the latter from Perak. Both honours are for bravery and gallantry in fighting the communists during the Emergency (1948-1960). They certainly deserved the honors as heroes of our country. No complaints about that.

The Criminal Defamation Charge Against Mat Sabu

But why weren’t these heroes honored much earlier? Why only now? Has this to do with Mat Sabu, Deputy President of PAS, who was charged for criminal defamation last Wednesday September 21. Is UMNO- BN making political mileage of history?The charge against Mat Sabu followed weeks of debate after he said that there were many other freedom fighters who have been totally forgotten.

Mat Sabu then drew our attention to Mat Indera who played a prominent role in the 1950 attack on the Bukit Kepong police station. This was immortalised in a movie played by the legendary actor-director Tan Sri Dr. Jins Shamsuddin. The Policemen were portrayed as heroes who fought against the communists who were portrayed as villains and traitors. Thus, Mat Indera, who was allegedly a communist cadre , was cast as a traitor. However, a book by the Johor government in 2004 named Mat Indera as an insurgent freedom fighter and celebrated him as a Johor hero. So, was Mat Indera a hero or a traitorous ruffian?

This stereotyping of Malaysians into heroes and villains shows our failure as a nation to accept historical facts and our lack of appreciation for humanistic contributions.

And the moment politicians get involved in historical discourses and debates, then intellectual dishonesty creeps in and history is distorted for political and other self serving ends.The truth of history becomes irrelevant. Sir Winston S.Churchill once said : “History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.”

For this reason, I am grateful to my friend, lawyer Rosli Dahlan, who insisted that I should read the writings of Tunku Zain Al’Abidin Muhriz, founding president of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS) in his book, Abiding Times.

It seems that Rosli is an ardent admirer of this young royalty whose hands he declared politely to me he would readily kiss, despite their age difference. Having just read Tunku Zain Al’Abidin’s piece, Roaming Beyond the Fence(see link :http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/43492-lets-reclaim-history-for-ourselves), I can now understand why Rosli is impressed with this young man’s intellectualism and maturity.

Yam Tuan Antah of Negri Sembilan

The intellectual honesty and capacity of Tunku Zain Al’Abidin (left) in evaluating history is revealed when he compared his ancestors, Yam Tuan Antah, and his great great grandfather, Tuanku Muhamad, whose son,Tuanku Abdul Rahman, became our first Yang Di Pertuan Agong (YDPA).

Yam Tuan Antah had waged war against the British in 1875 which invited the British retaliation by an artillery force which cannon-shot that destroyed Yam Tuan Antah’s camp. The British advanced to Seri Menanti where they burnt down the Istana. Subsequently, Yam Tuan Antah was recognised only as Yam Tuan of Seri Menanti, rather than of Negri Sembilan as a whole. Yam Tuan Antah is celebrated in the same breath with Datuk Maharaja Lela and Mat Salleh as valiant defenders of their race, religion and nation.

Reclaim History for Ourselves

Yet, his son, Tuanku Muhammad, enjoyed much better relations with the British. He was educated at the English High School in Malacca and even received compliments from the British Resident, Sir Frank Swettenham, who wrote that he was an “example of the best type of intelligent, straightforward Malay Raja”.

Thus, Tunku Zain’s piece raised a most pertinent question and I quote the young Prince: “Clearly, my two ancestors employed different strategies in dealing with the British. Was one a hero and the other a traitor? No, they were merely individuals trying to abide by their adat while dealing with the exigencies of global British power…The only way to fix this is for us to reclaim history for ourselves. Politicians must be removed from the process of writing the curriculum, and professors granted the academic freedom to include controversial viewpoints……Most importantly, the entire basis of the education system urgently needs to change from the rote learning of acceptable “facts” to the equipping of young brains to appreciate and analyse different opinions.”

Isn’t this the same thing that Mat Sabu had said? So, why does Mat Sabu’s statement constitute criminal defamation? Did A-G Gani Patail not advise the government on this? Or is A-G Gani Patail again playing politics with the absolute powers vested in him as the Public Prosecutor to commit selective prosecution?

That history must be put in its proper perspective is again amplified in an article by my journalist-author friend and fellow Kedahan, Tan Sri Zainudin Maidin , which appeard appeared on page 8 of Mingguan Malaysia(September 25, 2011) under the title – “Api ini terus menyala”.

Tan Sri Zainuddin Maidin

Zainudin wrote that in the 1930’s, Utusan Melayu emerged from a very narrow nationalistic feelings as an expression of anti-Indian Muslim and Anti-Arab sentiments because these two races had humiliated the Malays and exploited the Malay economy. The Malays through Utusan Melayu thus labeled these two groups as DKK (Darah Keturunan Keling) dan DKA (Darah Keturunan Arab).

On this platform alone, Dr Mahathir and many Penang Malays, including my ancestors, the Mericans, who are DKKs would have been the enemy of Utusan Melayu. And also all the Arab Syeds like Dato’ Jaffar Albar and his son Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar who are DKAs would also have been the “enemy”!

Malays must stop blaming others

Malays blaming other Malaysians for their state of affairs is therefore not new. Previously it was the DKK and the DKA. Now it is the DKC (Darah Keturunan China). This siege mentality will have to stop if the Malays are to progress. There will always be a convenient bogeyman and dishonest politicians to boot who will always capitalize on the race card.

Dato’ Onn Jaafar

It is to the credit and scrupulous intellectual honesty of Dato’ Onn Jaafar, a Malay of Turkish descent, that he had the courage and temerity to defuse and correct this narrow ethnic prejudices. Dato’ Onn rose to be the first UMNO President, but died outside of UMNO when he was rejected for his ambitious plans to open UMNO to non-Malays.

This is what Tan Sri Zainuddin wrote:“Bagaimanapun Presiden UMNO yang pertama Dato’ Onn Jaafar meluaskan takrifan itu dengan memasukkan keturunan Arab dan India sebagai Melayu kerana mereka berugama Islam dan mengamalkan adat-istiadat Melayu untuk membesarkan kelompok Melayu yang diperlukan untuk perjuangan besar bagi menentang Malayan Union dalam 1946. Tabir perjuangan Utusan Melayu berubah dari semasa ke semasa oleh tuntutan dan tekanan politik tetapi terbukti, baik ketika didukung oleh pejuang kiri atau ketika dikuasai oleh pejuang kanan, namun kejatian diri Utusan tetap tidak berubah malah lebih menyerlah dalam keadaan yang tercabar.”

Even Dato’ Usman Awang (later decorated as a National Poet Laureate) was considered a leftist in Utusan Melayuwhen he opposed the takeover attempt ofUtusan Melayu by UMNO. But the then new UMNO President and first Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, insisted on the takeover to prevent Utusan Melayufrom continuing to be a leftist newspaper. If Usman Awang is to be judged by the same yardstick as Mat Sabu, would he also be called a traitor today and be charged in court?

Despite once being UMNO’s propaganda chief, I commend Tan Sri Zainuddin for attempting some intellectual honesty in his book “Api ini terus menyala” by revealing the facts as they are to us.

We would be a better nation if we can acknowledge all our past, warts and all, instead of distorting history to suit our momentary needs, like the center fold flavor of the month of a Penthouse magazine. That is how contrived we have become to the extent that we would deny that we were once colonized by the British. Is that what we want to be – a nation of liars?

If Prime Minister Najib truly wants to move the nation forward in implementing reforms, then he should be bold enough to accept Chin Peng’s challenge in his book “My Side of History” when Chin Peng concluded:

“I thought I would relate my side of history to make documentation of these years a little less lopsided…… I fought a liberation war. To ask whether I would do it again is idle talk. I was a young man in an entirely different setting but the realities and the lessons I learned from that time comprised a body of values I can share with the young who may wish to look beyond their palmtops and understand how history is shaped. I would like to be involved in a forum. It is the exchange of ideas that ultimately moved the world. The barter of views still exhilarates me. You can tell me I was wrong. You can tell me I failed. But I can also tell you how it was and how I tried.”

Hegel is unfortunately right when he said “What experience and history teaches us is that people and governments have never learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it.” We do not want to know historical truth, in stead we merrily go along with history as written by those in power.

No wonder, Churchill, author of The History of The English Speaking Peoplesand History of The Second World War, was never bothered whether history was kind to him since he was its author. Sir Winston obviously knew his own people well and believed that by winning the Battle of Britain against Hitler and the Germans he had the credibility to tell his side of the story to adoring Britons. True to his words, he wrote history as he had intended.

That said, we should write history as it is since history is about who we are as a people and a nation and our collective achievements and failures. By distorting it, we are only deceiving ourselves and those after us, that is we are lying to ourselves and deluding future generations.

E.H. Carr, the author of What is History, had this to say about his time: “History is sick. But then our society too is sick”. Is our history sick too? If so, what does that say of us as a people and country?