Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T11:15:51.445Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Malaysia-Singapore Relations: Crisis of Adjustment, 1965–68

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Lau Teik Soon
Get access

Extract

Ever since the Separation on 9th August 1965, the principal leaders of Malaysia and Singapore have expressed the view that their separated states would be compelled by the forces of historical, geographical, economic and social ties to reunite some day. When this would be accomplished has not been clearly defined nor has the manner of their reunification been suggested. Tengku Abdul Rahman, the Prime Minister of Malaysia, merely stated that Singapore would be welcomed back sometime in the future, while Lee Kuan Yew, the Singapore Prime Minister, admitted that it could be a task for the next generation to seek reunification. However, both were hopeful that at some future date circumstances would be more conducive than they were prior to 1965, for another attempt at merger. It is generally agreed that the Separation was a political separation arising from the incompatibility of the political views of the Alliance-controlled central government and the state government of Singapore in the hands of the People's Action Party (PAP). It has also been implied that the fact of their interdependency in several basic fields even after Separation could well provide a strong basis for some form of reunification.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian History , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , January 1969 , pp. 155 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. See, for example, Grossholtz, Jean, ‘An Exploration of Malaysian Meanings’, Asian Survey, 04 1966, vol. VI, no. 4, pp. 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Professor C. P. Fitzgerald explains the predicament of the Overseas Chinese during this period in The Third China, chapters 3 and 4.

3. There existed a strong communal rift between the Malays and Chinese during the Japanese Occupation and the Emergency — the anti-Japanese and anti-British forces comprised a large Chinese element whereas the Malays were mainly pro-government. The Civil War in China added to the confusion of the Chinese as they debated the question of allegiance either to Malaya or China.

4. See Wah, Yeo Kim, ‘Political Development in Singapore, 1945–1955,’ Unpublished M.A. thesis. University of Singapore, 1967Google Scholar. Leifer, Michael, ‘Politics in Singapore The First Term of the People's Action Party 1959–1963’, Journal of Commonwealth Political Studies, 05 1964, pp. 102–119.Google Scholar

5. See Leifer, Michael, ‘Communal Violence in Singapore’, Asian Survey, 10 1964, vol. IV, no. 10, pp. 1115–1121Google Scholar; Von der Mehden, Fred R., ‘Religion and Politics in Malaya’, Asian Survey, 12 1963, vol. III, no. 12, pp. 609615Google Scholar; Roff, Margaret, ‘The Politics of Language in Malaya’, Asian Survey, 05 1967, pp. 316–328.Google Scholar

6. See Smith, T. E., The Background to Malaysia, (Royal Institute of International Affairs, O.U.P., 1965)Google Scholar; The Battle for Merger, (Government Printing Office, Singapore).

7. See Milne, R. S., ‘Singapore's Exit from Malaysia; The Consequences of Ambiguity’, Asian Survey, 03 1966, vol. VI, no. 3, pp. 175–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. For a good account, see Catley, R., ‘Malaysia: The Lost Battle for Merger’, Australian Outlook, 04 1967, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 44–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9. See Vasil, R. K., ‘The 1964 General Elections in Malaya’, International Studies, 07 1965, vol. VII, no. 1, pp. 20–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; The Battle for a Malaysian Malaysia, (Government Printing Office, Singapore).

10. Straits Times, 9 08 1965Google Scholar. Indonesian Herald, 16 08 1965.Google Scholar

11. New York Times, 11 08 1965Google Scholar; Straits Times, 11 08 1965.Google Scholar

12. Tan Siew Sin revealed that the question of Singapore's separation had been considered as far back as December 1964. Straits Times, 16 08 1965.Google Scholar

13. Lee Kuan Yew described the event as ‘a moment of anguish’, while to Tengku Abdul Rahman it was ‘an odious task’. It was reported that in Malaysia the Malays cheered and in Singapore ‘thunderous explosion of firecrackers’ was heard. Straits Times, 10 08 1965.Google Scholar

14. Straits Times, 25 11 1965.Google Scholar

15. Straits Times, 27 08 1966.Google Scholar

16. Straits Times, 12 10 1965.Google Scholar

17. Tan Sri (Dr.) Lim Swee Aun, the Malaysian Commerce Minister, admitted that a Common Market would put Malaysian factories out of business. Straits Times, 13 10 1965.Google Scholar

18. Straits Times, 12 10 1965.Google Scholar

19. See Drake, P. J., ‘Singapore and Malaysia: The Monetary Consequences’, Australian Outlook, 04 1966, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 28–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lee, S. Y.'s article in Straits Times, 22 07 1966.Google Scholar

20. Straits Times, 22 08 1966.Google Scholar

21. The Malaysian government was also affected by the hartal and racial riots in northern Malaysia, which arose out of the protest against the government's devaluation of the old notes. Straits Times, 6 12 1967.Google Scholar

22. Straits Times, 19 03 1966.Google Scholar

23. Refer to Separation Agreement. For a brief summary of the main points, see The Japan Times, 10 08 1965Google Scholar; Straits Times, 10 08 1965.Google Scholar

24. It was noted at the time that the British in Singapore offered temporary accommodation for the Malaysian troops, but this was rejected by the Malaysian government on the ground that it was inadequate.

25. The Age, 17 02 1966Google Scholar; The Times, 22 02 1966.Google Scholar

26. New York Times, 14 08 1965.Google Scholar

27. The five Power Defence talks were held in Kuala Lumpur in June 1968. Malaysia and Singapore have begun discussions on a common air defence system.

28. Lee Kuan Yew in December 1965 said that the Malaysian government was still under the illusion that Singapore was vulnerable because it fought for merger, and that ‘one cannot destroy the other without great consequences all round’. Straits Times, 15 12 1965, 26 February 1966.Google Scholar

29. Straits Times, 9 06 1966.Google Scholar

30. Straits Times, 18 09 1965Google Scholar; Indonesian Herald, 20 09 1965.Google Scholar

31. Straits Times, 18 09 1965.Google Scholar

32. Ibid.

33. Straits Times, 22 10 1965.Google Scholar

34. Ibid.

35. See pp. 173–4 below

36. Straits Times, 16 06 1966.Google Scholar

37. Even at the height of the Emergency (1948–1960) there was no such control over the movements of people across the Causeway.

38. According to Bennetts, John, Canberra TimesGoogle Scholar Southeast Asia correspondent, the Singapore Labour Minister, Thong, Jek Yuen, was ‘saddled with responsibility for the work permits bungle’Google Scholar, and was demoted in the recent cabinet reshuffle to become Minister for Culture. Canberra Times, 18 04 1968.Google Scholar

39. Straits Times, 22 11 1966.Google Scholar

40. Straits Times, 14 04 1967.Google Scholar

41. See Peritz, Rene, American-Malaysian Relations: Substance and Shadows', Orbis, 03 1967, pp. 532–550Google Scholar and Boyce, P.: Malaysia and Singapore in International Diplomacy: Documents and Commentaries, Chapter IV.Google Scholar

42. The Times, 23 08 1966.Google Scholar

43. The Economist, 14 08 1965.Google Scholar

44. Straits Times, 23 04 1960.Google Scholar

45. The Age, 13 04 1966.Google Scholar

46. The Age, 26 04 1966.Google Scholar

47. The Economist, 10 09 1966.Google Scholar

48. Straits Times, 14 04 1966.Google Scholar

49. Straits Times, 3 06 1966.Google Scholar

50. Lee Kuan Yew at the opening of the Seminar on Economic and Political Co-operation between South and Southeast Asian Nations in Singapore on 15 February 1968. The Mirror, 26 02 1968.Google Scholar

51. Indonesian Herald, 11 06 1966.Google Scholar

52. Straits Times, 10 03 1968Google Scholar; Warta Malaysia, 03 14, 1968.Google Scholar