Malaysia not the original concept

By Anonymous
Malaysia as it is today is not the original concept the KL snake oil salesmen sold to our grandparents- being 5 countries as equal partners in a confederation which looked after defence and foreign affairs!

The original concept was a recycled 1942 British war time forward planning idea to consolidate the 3 British Borneo Protectorates (from 1888) Brunei North Borneo & Sarawak with Malaya and Singapore under one colonial admin and military command.

After WW2 this idea was not feasible as Britain feared being bogged down fighting money draining independence wars it was facing where ever the sunset in its Empire.

UN De-colonization Committee had announced that all colonies should be de-colonised and UK wanted to be a seen as a good world citizen.

So the next best solution was to flog the same idea on its chosen successor the Malayan UMNO regime to transfer the 3 Borneo colonies to UMNO rule under the sandiwara of forming Malaysia.

The 18 & 20 Points Agreement support the confederation concept by preserving all aspects of self-government (the illusory "autonomy") for Sabah and Sarawak respectively except defence and foreign affairs.

This concept broke down before it even got started. 5 countries became 4 when Brunei most wisely stayed out of this Ponzi scheme and then became 3 when Singapore left in 1965. The concept was dead and should have been re-negotiated or Malaysia dismantled.

But they pushed ahead with the MA63. It was signed on 9 July 1963 by UK, Malaya and S'pore with North Borneo and Sarawak as colonies.

1. The issue of S'pore "expulsion" should have been discussed by all the signatories and Malaya had no power to kick out S'pore.

Further there was no clause governing such a situation in the M'sia Agreement. So the matter would have to go to the British courts. But they played dirty and ignored SS's rights.

FYI the Tunku & his protection gang fiercely opposed the Lansdowne committee which was drafting the 18 & 20 Points Agreement from including an exit clause. Recently Najib declared that SS are forever part of Malaysia.
One blogger said if SS left the Malayans would bring guns.

Now we know the reason why UMNO insisted no exist clause in the Points Agreement. They imprinted their colonizing intentions by insisting on a clause which "prohibits secession".

Now this is against the rules of free association. Lord Lansdowne who did not want an exit clause said on this point that Malaysia was a free association and North Borneo (then) and Sarawak had an "INTRINSIC RIGHT to secede at will"!

But for both SS and S'pore the situation was deemed a fait accompli and S'pore is happy and lucky to be out of the nasty abusive relationship!

SS are not happy!

2. Sabah and Sarawak were described as colonies in the MA63 and who signed the doc for them?

SS became independent after 9 July 1963 before Proclamation on Malaysia & everyone- SS SOVEREIGNTY WAS NOT TRANSFERRED TO MALAYA AT THIS MOMENT!

Question: does the MA63 bind Sabah Sarawak when they became independent? Did the act of independence invalidate the MA63? Especially when Malaya had not sunk its crocodile jaws on the 2 colonies?

This issue caused a major uproar between UK and UMNO. The Tunku even threatened to call of "Malaysia" - WISH HE DID!

Malaysia Day had to be changed to 16 September because of this oversight by UK in not getting an Order in Council to formally transfer sovereignty to Malaya. This upset the Tunku, Razak and Ghazali big time and they were abusive and tearing their hair.

In soon to be revealed Colonial Papers, it will be exposed to the world that Britain and Malaya conspired to annex the 3 colonies into Malaysia with S'pore as a willing partner.
But do bear in mind the Malaysia concept had changed 3 times. The first 2 are mentioned above.

The third change is when Sabah and Sarawak were converted to Malayan colonies.