Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T23:19:16.942Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The British and Malayan Nationalism, 1946–1957*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

James P. Ongkili
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Nationalism developed in a peaceful constitutional and political manner in Malaya during the 1950s. Beginning with the reactions to the Malayan Union scheme and the contrasting political attitudes towards the 1948 Federation proposals, political bargaining led to the emergence of various political parties advocating different platforms and adopting contrasting policies on the major issues facing Malaya until the first federal elections in 1955. However, it is significant that political parties were formed and party politics grew principally as the result of constitutional changes which were introduced during that period. Constitutionalism and the rise of party politics thus combined to help Malaya achieve its ultimate goal of independence and nationhood.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 5 , Special Issue 2: The Centenary of British Intervention in Malaya , September 1974 , pp. 255 - 277
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1974

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 Allen, J. de V., The Malayan Union, New Haven, 1967Google Scholar; and Tadin, Ishak bin, ‘Dato Onn and Malay Nationalism, 1946–1951’, Journal of Southeast Asian History (JSEAH), I, 1, March 1960, 56–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 See Federation of Malaya, The Emergency Regulations Ordinance 1948 (amended up to 31 March 1953), Kuala Lumpur, 1953Google Scholar; Renick, R. du Jr., ‘The Emergency Regulations of Malaya’, unpublished M.A. thesis, Tulane University, 1967Google Scholar; and Boestamam, Ahmad, Merintis Jalan Ke Punchak, Kuala Lumpur, 1972, bab 7, 14 and 25.Google Scholar

3 See Sopiee, Mohamed Noordin, From Malayan Union to Singapore Separation; Political Unification in the Malaysia Region 1945–65, Kuala Lumpur, 1974, chs. II and III.Google Scholar

4 Malayan Union Government, Constitutional Proposals for Malaya: Report of the Working Committee Appointed by a Conference of His Excellency the Governor of the Malayan Union, Their Highnesses the Rulers of the Malay States and the Representatives of the United Malays National Organization, Kuala Lumpur, 1946, p. 66.Google Scholar

5 Ratnam, K. J., Communalism and the Political Process in Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 1965, p. 84.Google Scholar

6 Federation of Malaya, Federation of Malaya (Amendment) Ordinance, 1952, Kuala Lumpur, 1952, Article 124 (f).Google Scholar

7 The definition of a ‘Malay’ was, and has been until this writing, constitutionally a person who (a) habitually spoke the Malay language; (b) professed the Muslim religion; and (c) conformed to Malay custom. It is interesting to note that the Menteri Besar (Chief Minister) of Kedah Dato Syed Ahmad Shahabuddin, recently asserted in the state Legislative Assembly that “Melayu [or Malay] is any person who professes the Islamic Religion, customarily speaks the Malay language and has, at least, one of his parents a Malay or an Arab … An Indian or a Chinese Muslim is not a Malay … Likewise, an Indonesian, although normally known as a Malay, is officially also not a Malay”. Straits Times, Kuala Lumpur, 24 April 1974.Google Scholar

8 Ibid.; and Federation of Malaya, State Nationality Enactments, 1952, Kuala Lumpur, 1952, Article 5.

9 N. Barber, The War of the Running Dogs; How Malaya Defeated the Communist Guerrillas, 1948–60, London, 1972, pp. 162–3. For figures of those who gained federal citizenship through registration and naturalization from 1949 to 15 September 1952, see Federation of Malaya, Annual Report, 1952, Kuala Lumpur, 1953, p. 33. As of 15 September 1952, the total of such citizens was only 351,826.

10 K. J. Ratnam, p. 93.

11 Gullick, J. M., Malaya, 2nd ed., London, 1964, p. 240Google Scholar

12 Four months after the death of Sir Henry Gurney in October 1951, General Sir Gerald Templer assumed duties as High Commissioner and Director of Operations in February 1952. He held these combined appointments until his departure from Malaya in June 1954. Born in 1898, educated at Wellington and Sandhurst, Olympic hurdler in 1924, bayonet-fighting champion in the Army, Templer had a distinguished Second World War record, commanding several divisions, becoming the youngest lieutenant-general in the British Army at 44, and being appointed Director of Military Government in West Germany following Hitler's defeat. Subsequently, he was appointed Director of Military Intelligence in the War Office, London. Templer was a professional soldier who had an unusually acute understanding of political matters.

13 Purcell, V., Malaya: Communist or Free?, London, 1954, quoted on pp. 86–7Google Scholar. Purcell castigated many of Templer's Emergency measures, and at one stage burst out that by 1952 “Malaya had become a vast armed camp in which no one could call his soul his own, and the clock of progress, it seemed, had been stopped for the duration of the Emergency. The basic policy was a crude ‘Divide and Rule’.” Ibid., pp. 5–6.

14 For an appraisal on this aspect, see Ongkili, J. P., ‘Darurat dan British, 1948–1960: Suatu Penghargaan’, Jernal Sejarah, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, XII, 1973/1974, h. 58–73.Google Scholar

15 MacDonald, Malcolm was born in 1901 and had been a British M.P. since as early as 1929. He was Secretary of State for the Colonies, 1935 and 1938–1940; Minister of Health, 1940–1941; United Kingdom High Commissioner in Canada, 1941 -1946; Governor-General of the Malayan Union and Singapore, May-July 1946; Governor-General of Malaya, Singapore and British Borneo, 1946–1948; Commissioner-General for the United Kingdom in Southeast Asia, 1948–1955; High Commissioner for the United Kingdom in India, 1955–1960; Chancellor of the University of Malaya, 1949–1961. He still pays periodical visits to Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei.Google Scholar

16 See Tadin, Ishak bin; and Abdullah, Anwar, Dato Onn; Riwayat Hidup, Kuala Lumpur, 1971, h. 165–8 and 237–9.Google Scholar

17 See especially Straits Times, 11 Jan., 10 Aug. and 18 Sept. 1949; and 19 April 1950.

18 Means, G. P., Malaysian Politics, London, 1970, p. 130n.Google Scholar

19 The members of the CLC were E. E. C. Thuraisingham (chairman), Dato Onn bin Jaafar, Tan Cheng Lock, Dato Panglima Bukit Gantang, Yong Shook Lin, Sir Roland Braddell, Dr. Mustapha bin Osman, Lee Tiang Keng, Saleh Hakim, C. C. Tan, Zainal Abidin bin Haji Abbas, and Malcolm MacDonald (first as ‘liaison officer’ and later as an observer).

20 Tan Cheng Lock to chairman of the CLC, 6 May 1949 (privately published, n.p., n.d.). See also Morrison, I., ‘Aspects of the Racial Problem in Malaya’, Pacific Affairs, XXII, 3, Sept. 1949, 250.Google Scholar

21 See Federation of Malaya, Report of the Committee to Consider the Problem of Malay Education, Kuala Lumpur, 1951Google Scholar; Malayan Union Government, Annual Report on Education in the Malayan Union for 1947, Kuala Lumpur, 1948, pp. 21–6Google Scholar; and Federation of Malaya, Chinese Schools and the Education of Chinese Malayans: The Report of a Mission Invited by the Federation Government to Study the Problem of Education of Chinese in Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 1951.Google Scholar

22 Personal Communication, Thuraisingham, Dato E. E. C. to the present writer, 20 Nov. 1973.Google Scholar

23 Federation of Malaya, Annual Report, 1951, Kuala Lumpur, 1952, p. 289.Google Scholar

24 Federation of Malaya, Annual Report, 1953, Kuala Lumpur, 1954, pp. 375–9. The seven Malayans in the Member System were Dato Sir Onn bin Jaafar (Home Affairs), Tengku Yaacob ibni Al-Marhum Sultan Abdul Hamid Halim Shah (Natural Resources), Dr. Lee Tiang Keng (Health), Dato E. E. C. Thuraisingham (Education), H. S. Lee (Transport), Dato Nik Ahmad Kamil bin Haji Mahmood (Local Government, Housing and Town Planning), and Dato Mahmud bin Mat (Posts and Telecommunications).Google Scholar

25 See Soenarno, Radin, ‘Malay Nationalism 1900–1945’, JSEAH, I, 1, March 1960, pp. 1–28.Google Scholar

26 See Mohamed Noordin Sopiee; and Wah, Yeo Kim, “The Anti-Federation Movement in Malaya, 1946–48’, Journal of Southeast Asian Studies (JSEAS), IV, 1, March 1973, 31–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

27 For more detailed backgrounds to the main political parties of the 1950s, see K. J. Ratnam, ch. V.

28 See Federation of Malaya, Report on the Introduction of Elections in the Municipality of George Town, Penang, 1951, Kuala Lumpur, 1953. See also footnote 37 below.Google Scholar

29 Straits Times, 16 Oct. 1949.

30 Ishak bin Tadin, pp. 77–83. Twenty-two years later, Dato Onn's son, Dato Hussein Onn, who had risen to become Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Trade and Industry of Malaysia, said of his father's wish to open the UMNO to non-Malay membership: “Apakah ayah saya salah atau betul tidak boleh hendak diukur oleh sesiapa pada waktu itu. Cadangan ayah saya dibuat kerana pandangannya yang jauh. Cadangan itu bukan tidak baik, tetapi boleh jadi terlalu awal untuk dikemukakan. Orang Melayu belum dapat menerimanya lagi. Perkara saperti ini hanya dapat ditentukan oleh masa dan sejarah”. — “Whether my father was right or wrong could not be measured by anyone at that time. My father's proposal was made because of his far-sightedness. The proposal was not bad, but may be it was premature to suggest it. A matter of this nature can only be decide by time and history'. Mastika, bil. 10, Tahun Ke-33, Oktober 1973, h. 4–5. All translations from Bahasa Malaysia into English are by the present writer.

31 Silcock, T. H. and Aziz, Ungku Abdul, ‘Nationalism in Malaya’, Holland, W. L. (ed.), Asian Nationalism and the West, New York, 1953, p. 334.Google Scholar

32 K. J. Ratnam, p. 155.

33 Tengku Abdul Rahman was born in 1903, a son of Al-Marhum Sultan Abdul Hamid Halim Shah of Kedah. Educated in Malaya, obtained his B.A. from Cambridge, and became Barrister-at-Law from Inner Temple, London, in 1949. Joined the Kedah and later Federal Legal Department. Became president of the UMNO in 1951, and Chief Minister following the Alliance victory in the first Malayan federal elections in 1955. Led Malaya to independence in 1957, and became the nation's first Prime Minister. Led the formation of Malaysia until its inauguration in 1963. Prime Minister of Malaysia until he voluntarily resigned the post in September 1970. He thereafter became Secretary-General of the Islamic Secretariat in Jeddah until 1973. See also Miller, H., Prince and Premier; A Biography of Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj, First Prime Minister of the Federation of Malaya, London, 1959.Google Scholar

34 Social welfare lotteries were run to raise funds for charitable works among the Chinese squatters of the New Villages. It has been observed that “for several years the MCA exploited the Chinese love of gambling to pay for welfare programs which incidentally helped to consolidate its power among the Chinese of Malaya”. G. Means, p. 121. See also MCA Headquarters, MCA 20th Anniversary Souvenir, Kuala Lumpur, 1969, pp. 55–66.Google Scholar

35 See Roff, M., ‘The Malayan Chinese Association, 1948–1965’, JSEAH, VI, 2, Sept. 1965, 4–53Google Scholar; Chee, Chan Heng, “The Malayan Chinese Association’, unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Singapore, 1965Google Scholar; and Kok, Lim San, ‘Some Aspects of the Malayan Chinese Association, 1949–69’, Journal of the South Seas Society, XXVI, 2, 1971, 31–48.Google Scholar

36 Speech by Tan Cheng Lock on the 27th February 1949, at The Inaugural Meeting Of The Proposed Malayan Chinese Association At Kuala Lumpur, (privately published, n.p., n.d.), pp. 1–2. Emphasis in the original.

37 The municipalities of George Town (Penang) and Malacca Town and Fort had existed since the beginning of 1948, while the Kuala Lumpur municipality was established later in the same year. “Local matters in other town and village areas were controlled by Town Boards in the States and in the Settlements by Rural Boards under the chairmanship of the local administrative officer”. Federation of Malaya, Annual Report on the Federation of Malaya, 1948, Kuala Lumpur, 1949, p. 171Google Scholar. See also Hawkins, G., ‘First Steps in Malayan Local Government’, Pacific Affairs, XXVI, 2, June 1953, 155–8.Google Scholar

38 In 1952, the grass-root democracy of “elected Local Councils was gradually implemented. Some 135 Local Councils came into being during that year in addition to [twelve] Town Councils”. Federation of Malaya, Federation of Malaya Annual Report, 1953, Kuala Lumpur, 1954, p. xiv. Templer explained many years later: “It was clear that independence was to be given to Malaya; but this could not be done unless the enemy was defeated. I had to start with the grass-root level, and encourage local councils as the beginnings of future political parties”. Interview by the present writer, London, June 1972.Google Scholar

39 ‘Alliance Manifesto for Federal Elections’, Tan Cheng Lock Papers (hereinafter referred to as TCLP), deposited “papers in the custody of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies under conditions set out by Deed”. The Institute is at Cluny Road, Singapore 10; and the TCLP comprise eighteen folios consisting of approximately 2,000 documents mostly in mimeographed form.

40 Federation of Malaya, Report of the Committee Appointed to Examine the Question of Elections to the Federal Legislative Council (hereinafter referred to as the Elections Committee Report), Kuala Lumpur, 1954, para. 1.Google Scholar

41 Ibid., para. 14.

42 Ibid., para. 19.

43 Ibid., para. 63. It is worthy of note that the Elections Committee set up a Working Party from among its members to study the issues involved, and among them were Dato Sir Onn bin Jaafar, Tengku Abdul Rahman, Dato Abdul Razak bin Hussein, Dr. Ismail bin Dato Abdul Rahman, Dato E. E. C. Thuraisingham, Dato Nik Ahmad Kamil, Colonel H. S. Lee, Yong Shook Lin, P. P. Narayanan, and Dato Zainal Abidin: all of whom, in varying degrees, were to continue to play prominent roles in the progress of Malaya towards nationhood. Most of them, including Tan Siew Sin and Leong Yew Koh, were at one with the Alliance demand that the elections should be held, “if practicable, not later than November, 1954”. Ibid., para. 2 and 108.

44 Ibid., para. 51–2, 83, 88 and 96.

45 Federation of Malaya, Report of the Constituency Delineation Commission, Kuala Lumpur, 1954, para. 57Google Scholar and Appendix I. The final allocation of constituencies was as follows: Penang, four; Malacca, two; Perak, ten; Selangor, seven; Negri Sembilan, three; Pahang, three; Johore, eight; Kedah, six; Kelantan, five; Trengganu, three; and Perlis, one. Also interview with Corry, W. C. S., who was a member of the three-man Constituency Delineation Commission, London, April 1972.Google Scholar

46 Despatch from High Commissioner to Colonial Office, 10 April 1954, Federation of Malaya, No. 695/54 and No. 967A, para. 4.

47 Just before the 1955 federal elections, the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC) became the third partner of the Alliance.

48 T. E. Smith, Report of the First Election of Members to the Legislative Council of the Federation of Malaya (hereinafter referred to as First Election Report), Kuala Lumpur, 1955, para. 68. See K. J. Ratnam, ch. V; and G. Means, chs. 10 and 11 for more detailed backgrounds of the various parties.Google Scholar

49 First Election Report, para. 67. Out of 1,280,000 who were registered as voters, 84–86 per cent cast their votes in these first federal elections.

50 Of the seven political parties which contested the 1955 elections, the Alliance polled 79–6 per cent of the total votes while the Party Negara captured 7–6 per cent without, however, winning any seat. The PMIP, which won the only remaining seat after the Alliance romped home in fifty-one constituencies, managed to get only 3–9 per cent of the votes.

51 See Gamba, C., ‘Labour and Labour Parties in Malaya', Pactfic Affairs, XXXI, 2, June 1958, 117–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

52 It must be borne in mind that of the total registered voters in the elections, 84–2 per cent were Malays. First Election Report, para. 23.

53 Carnell, F. G., ‘The Malayan Elections’, Pactfic Affairs, XXVIII, 4, Dec. 1955, 319.Google Scholar

54 G. Means, p. 229.

55 Ibid., p. 168n.

56 Despatch from Colonial Office to High Commissioner, 20 April 1954, Federation of Malaya, No. 967A, para. 4.

57 See H. Miller, pp. 169–71 and 216–7.

58 Sin, Tan Siew, The National Language, Department of Information, Kuala Lumpur, [1967?], p. 13.Google Scholar See also MCA Headquarters, Memorandum on Chinese Education in the Federation of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 1954.Google Scholar

59 Pakistanis and Ceylonese were excluded from full membership of the MIC. See also Arasaratnam, S., ‘Political Attitudes and Organization Among Malayan Indians 1945–1955’, Jernal Sejarah, X, 1971/1972, 1–6.Google Scholar

60 The 1954 Alliance delegation consisted of Tengku Abdul Rahman, Dato Abdul Razak (deputy president of the UMNO) and T. H. Tan (executive secretary of the MCA).

61 Miller, H., A Short History of Malaysia, New York, 1966, p. 191.Google Scholar

62 The Road to Independence’, Mimeographed, TCLP.

63 See Brimmell, J. H., A Short History of the Malayan Communist Party, Singapore, 1956Google Scholar; Hanrahan, G. Z., The Communist Struggle in Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 1971Google Scholar (reprint of 1954 edition); and Clutterbuck, R., Riot and Revolution in Singapore and Malaya, 1945–1963, London, 1973.Google Scholar

64 ‘The Road to Independence’, TCLP.

65 Pye, L. W., Guerrilla Communism in Malaya, New Jersey, 1956, p. 11.Google Scholar

66 See Lim, Soh Eng, ‘Tan Cheng Lock; His Leadership of the Malayan Chinese’, JSEAH, I, 1, March 1960, 44–7; and footnote 35 above.Google Scholar

67 Dato Onn who founded and led the IMP and Party Negara apart from holding the post of Member for Home Affairs has been thought to have “had ambitions to become the Malay Deputy to the High Commissioner and resented the Rulers’ rejection of the plans”. Allen, R., Malaysia: Prospect and Retrospect, London, 1968, p. 104Google Scholar

68 ‘The Road to Independence’, TCLP.

69 For the present writer's definition of the meaning, origins and development of nationalism as a world-wide phenomena, see J. P. Ongkili, Perkembangan Nasionalisma, serialized as ‘Takrif Nasionalisma Setakat ini’, ‘Nationalisma Berkembang Dengan Tokoh-Tokohnya’ and ‘Nasionalisma Berkembang Mengikut Zaman’, Mastika, Tahun Ke-33, October, November and December 1973 respectively.

70 ‘The Road to Independence’, TCLP.

71 Federation of Malaya, Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Conference Held in London in January and February, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as Constitutional Conference Report), Kuala Lumpur, 1956.Google Scholar

72 Interview by the present writer, Kuala Lumpur, April 1973. Tun Sambanthan was president of the MIC from 1955 to 1973.Google Scholar

73 It was because Britain amply succeeded in providing for the future of her economic and strategic interests in Malaya that where the granting of full independence was concerned, “the Tunku and other ministers went to London in January 1956 expecting some hard bargaining on the issue. To their surprise and gratification their demand was immediately met”. J. Gullick, p. 120.

74 Constitutional Conference Report, para. 75.

75 Ibid., para. 70–2.

76 Ibid., Appendix E, Revised Clause 23 (2) (a).

77 ‘The Road to Independence’, TCLP.

78 The ‘Round Table’ meetings were conducted between the UMNO and the MCA leaders with the basic aim of arriving at Sino-Malay agreement on social, economic and political issues while working for full self-government and independence. Minutes of the meetings on 17 and 28 January, and 9 February 1954, TCLP.

79 ‘The Road to Independence’, TCLP. Tun Sambanthan confirmed these reasons for appointing the non-Malayan Constitutional Commission in an interview by the present writer, Genting Highlands, March 1974.

80 When the Constitutional Commission was finally approved by Her Majesty the Queen and the Conference of Rulers in March 1956, it comprised Lord Reid (a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary, and chairman of the Commission) and Sir Ivor Jennings (a noted constitutional lawyer) of Britain; Sir William McKell (a former Governor-General) of Australia; Mr. B. Malik (a former Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court) of India; and Mr. Justice Abdul Hamid of Pakistan. A member was nominated by the Canadian Government but he had to withdraw at the last moment on medical grounds. See Federation of Malaya, Report of the Federation of Malaya Constitutional Commission, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as Constitutional Commission Report), Kuala Lumpur, 1957, para. 2.Google Scholar

81 ‘The Road to Independence’, TCLP.

82 Rahman, Tengku Abdul, ‘The Position of the Rulers and Constitutional Reforms’, 17 March 1955, Mimeographed, TCLP.Google Scholar

83 Constitutional Commission Report, para. 179.

84 Ibid., para. 59. The Governors of Penang and Malacca were excluded from election to the post of Yang Dipertuan Agung, although they were obliged to attend all meetings of the Conference other than those convened for the purpose of such an election.

85 The Supreme Head of the Federation was initially recommended to be called the ‘Yang di-Pertuan Besar’ but, to avoid confusion with the title of the Head of State of Negri Sembilan which bore the same name, it was subsequently designated ‘Yang Dipertuan Agung’. See Federation of Malaya, Federation of Malaya Constitutional Proposals, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as Constitutional Proposals), Kuala Lumpur, 1957, para. 15.Google Scholar

86 The Yang Dipertuan Agung was the symbol of the unity of the country. High Commissioners from Commonwealth countries and Ambassadors or other diplomatic representatives from foreign countries were to be accredited to him. He was to be kept informed with regard to important public affairs and to make his views known to the Prime Minister. He was entitled to confer honours; and commissions and appointments were to be granted or made by him or in his name. Among his formal functions were to choose the Prime Minister, to open and dissolve Parliament as well as to give assent to bills passed by it, to receive visiting foreign Heads of State, and “to grant pardons, reprieves and respites in respect of all offences which have been tried by court martial”. Constitutional Proposals, para. 19. For the functions of the constitutional monarch in Britain, see SirJennings, Ivor, Cabinet Government, 3rd ed., London, 1959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

87 Rahman, Tengku Abdul, ‘Form of Government’, 21 March 1955, Mimeographed, TCLP.Google Scholar

88 Constitutional Commission Report, ch. IV; and Constitutional Proposals, para. 15–23.

89 Constitutional Proposals, para. 22.

90 See above, ‘Political Development Until 1955’.

91 Constitutional Commission Report, para. 36.

92 Ibid.

93 Constitutional Proposals, para. 6. Merdeka Day was 31 August 1957.

94 Constitutional Commission Report, para. 38.

95 However, in 1962, a modification was enacted which required that at least one parent must be ordinarily resident in the Federation at the time of the child's birth. Federation of Malaya, Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1962), Kuala Lumpur, 1962. It was further stipulated that the child of a foreign diplomat or of an enemy alien did not qualify.

96 See also above, ‘Political Development Until 1955’.

97 Constitutional Proposals, para. 6.

98 Constitutional Commission Report, para. 40 and 41.

99 See footnote 69 above.

100 Constitutional Proposals, para. 10.

101 Ibid., para. 14.

102 Mentri Penerangan Republik Indonesia, ‘Proklamasi Kemerdekaan Melahirkan Disiplin Bernegara’, Pusat, Panitia, Menjambut Malaya Merdeka, [n.p.], Djakarta, 1957, h. 7: “The independence of Malaya as those of other nations is certain to bring about new tasks and burdens on the peoples’ shoulders. The independence of Malaya brings about a new consequence which in no small way requires the sweat and rolling-up of sleeves in the future. The term ‘independence’ is not a panacea which without effort can bring earthly contentment to Malaya; rather it requires far more sacrifice. The term ‘independence’ cannot function like Aladdin's lamp”. All translations from Bahasa Indonesia into English are by the present writer.Google Scholar

103 For good treatments of the Indonesian nationalist struggle, see Kahin, G. M., Nationalism and Revolution in Indonesia, Ithaca, 1952Google Scholar; Kartodirdjo, Sartono, ‘Kolonialisme dan Nasionalisme di Indonesia Abad XIX-XX’, Lembaran Sedjarah, no. 1, Jogjakarta, December 1967; and Suwondo, ‘Sedjarah Pergerakan Nasional’, Himpunan Mahasiswa Mesin, Universitas Trisakti, Djakarta, [n.d.], Mimeographed.Google Scholar

104 Manan, Ibrahim, “Chairman's Address at the Closing of the Merdeka Convention”, Medeka Convention, Papers and Documents, London, 1957, Mimeographed.Google Scholar

105 Ibid.