Blogging Dummipedia

“No Arab has any superiority over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an Arab. Nor does a white man have any superiority over a black man, or the black man any superiority over the white man. You are all the children of Adam, and Adam was created from clay.” — Prophet Muhammad

nil

Hishammuddin‘’s keris in perspective.

Ketuanan Melayu (Malay for Malay supremacy or Malay dominance) is the claim that the Malay people are the tuan (masters) of Malaysia, while non-Malays (mostly Malaysian Chinese and Malaysian Indians) who form a significant minority in excess of 30%  are considered beholden to them for granting them citizenship. This quid pro quo “logic” is usually referenced by politicians from the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) as the so-called “Social Contract“.

The original Constitution of 1957 declared that all Malayans are equal under the law, without mention of “Malay sovereignty” or any other ideas relating to Ketuanan Melayu. Citizenship was granted to anyone born in the Federation under the concept of jus soli, albeit without retrospective effect. The new state’s Constitution also contained provisions, such as Article 153, guaranteeing the Malays certain privileges as a form of affirmative action in view of the inferior economic position of the Malays at the time. The Reid Commission, which drafted the Constitution, however, stated that Article 153 was to be temporary in nature, and should be reviewed by Parliament, 15 years after independence. This was never done in 1972.

The concept of Ketuanan Melayu runs contrary to the teachings of Islam which not only recognizes absolute equality between men, irrespective of any distinction of colour, race or nationality, but makes it an important and significant principle. According to Islam, God has given man this right of equality as a birthright. This has been exemplified by Prophet Muhammad in one of his sayings thus: “No Arab has any superiority over a non-Arab, nor does a non-Arab have any superiority over an Arab. Nor does a white man have any superiority over a black man, or the black man any superiority over the white man. You are all the children of Adam, and Adam was created from clay.” It was this that prompted the noted historian, Arnold J. Toynbee, to write in his Civilization on Trial: “The extinction of race consciousness between Muslim is one of the outstanding moral achievements of Islam and in the contemporary world, there is, as it happens, a crying need for the propagation of this Islamic virtue.”

Tunku Abdul Rahman, the first Prime Minister of Malaysia and the chief architect of the Social Contract, could barely contain his contempt for Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad for promoting brash nationalism (i.e. Ketuanan Melayu) that went totally against the spirit of the original Constitution and brought about serious racial segregation. Yet, it is understandable why Mahathir, who is an Indian Muslim by paternal descent and a Malay only by legal definition, would promote Ketuanan Melayu so aggressively for he had a real personal Achilles’ heel to protect in his position as Prime Minister of Malaysia, by virtue of his descent. During the late 1990s, however, Mahathir rejected his Ketuanan Melayu approach, replacing it with his Bangsa Malaysia policy that emphasized a Malaysian instead of a Malay identity for the country. That gesture, seemingly altrustic, could not have been further from the truth for the Prime Minister was hardly known for his humanitarian principles. In the 1999 general election, his Barisan Nasional coalition returned one of the lowest results ever by the ruling coalition since independence, due to the Anwar Ibrahim scandal, and it was only through the strong support of the Chinese voters then that saved his day. Furthermore, his retirement was long overdue and he was planning to step down anytime then. Additionally, he had already more than fulfil his parental obligation. Under affirmative action, his three sons, Mukhriz, Mokhzani, and Mirzan, and two daughters, Marina and Melinda, are conservatively estimated to be worth at least three billion ringgit. Among them, his three sons hold well over 200 company directorships and interests in an array of businesses, many of them publicly listed.

Apart from the Tunku, there are also some other UMNO politicians who went against the common view held within the party. As early as 1951, Onn Jaafar began to feel disgusted with what he considered to be UMNO’s communalist policies, and called for party membership to be opened to all Malayans, and for UMNO to be renamed as the “United Malayans National Organisation”. Ismail Abdul Rahman who was then the Deputy Prime Minister, for example told Parliament that “…both the Alliance and the People’s Action Party (PAP) subscribe to the concept of a Malaysian Malaysia,” but differed in their methods. Ismail characterised the PAP’s approach as “non-communalism straightaway,” while the Alliance required “two steps. First, inter-racial harmony; second, an ultimate state of non-communalism.”

Nevertheless, during the 2000s, politicians under the Badawi administration began to stress Ketuanan Melayu again. This recent cry for Ketuanan Melayu has been brought about as a way to justify the continuance of the New Economic Policy (NEP) which was promulgated in 1971 as an affirmative action to eliminate the identification of ethnicity with economic function. The initial target was to move the ratio of economic ownership in Malaysia from a 2.4 : 33 : 63 ratio of bumiputeras, other Malaysians, and foreigner ownership to a 30 : 40 : 30 ratio. While the formula seemingly appears also to benefit the non-Malays at the expense of foreign ownership, in actuality, however, it was the “other Malaysians” share of the economic pie that was and is still cannibalized, as foreign direct investment is crucial and essential to the country’s development. As a matter of fact, foreign investors were welcome with more than open arms, so long as they allocated 30% to the Malays. Eventually, the 30% requirement was dropped, except for selected sectors, as it affected the growth of foreign investments. Now that a University of Malaya report released in 2002 found that Bumiputera equity had already achieved its NEP target in 1992, UMNO leaders are fighting to have the NEP extended indefinitely under the name of Ketuanan Melayu (”Malay supremacy” or Malay “dominance”). Greed knows no bounds, notwithstanding that Islam is the official religion of the country.

Lest it be misunderstood that I am against the NEP… no, I am not, but I am definitely against Ketuanan Melayu, the crux of this article. I think the NEP, with the stated goal of “eventually eradicat[ing] poverty… irrespective of race” through a rapidly expanding economy, which would reduce the non-Malay share of the economy in relative terms while increasing it in absolute terms, is a highly commendable one for the country. But has the Malaysian government ever did what it said it was trying to do, or was it dishonestly fighting for Ketuanan Melayu all these while? While the Malay community did initially benefit much from the NEP, the ultimate beneficiaries these days are none other the powers in UMNO, derogatively called “UMNOputras”.