Today, Singapore marks its return to the Malaysian top leagues and historical Malaysia Cup. Many fans, including myself, have spoken to FAS president Zainudin Nordin, to return to Malaysian competitions in order to improve the state of local football. My joy to the eventual return couldn’t be any greater. I am overjoyed, I bought a pair of grandstand season tickets to watch the Lions Malaysian Super League games.

Unfortunately, this return has been criticized by many quarters of local fans, especially those who are supportive of the S-League. For many of them, this return is seen as a regressive step towards the development of Singapore football, as if to suggest that the neighbour’s football league is of a lower quality than ours.

The same set of fans certainly cannot decide if this experiment will succeed or blow up in the face of the FAS. It seems that some may be eager that we forget about Malaysia and refocus on our only professional football league to achieve greater heights.

I call this the Singaporean Malaysia Cup disconnect syndrome.

Historical Argument

It has been 17 years since Singapore left the Malaysia Cup, the oldest football tournament in Asia, of which Singapore played the first edition and defeated Selangor 2-1. It was the foundation of football in then-Malaya, where 2 bitter rivals would lock horns for the next 70 years.

For the majority of those years, Singapore, administered as part of the Straits Settlements together with Malacca and Penang, was part of the British Protectorate of Malaya, a territory which Singapore residents, were not alien to. The Malaysia Cup was conceived during a time when Singapore was never seen as another country, and our opponents were a state of the Malayan peninsula, who share the same struggles of colonialism as us.

One must understand that Malaysian state football associations are not clubs. They’re of the same status as the Football Association of Singapore. They administer football at the state level, many times bigger than the size of Singapore.

To imply that a country, the size of Singapore should not play in a league against teams in a state, many times our size would be arrogant and ignorant of the long history Singapore has had in the Malaysian competitions. That is why we’ve maintained friendly, competitive ties with our brothers across the international border, via the Sultan of Selangor Cup, and the Royal Malay Cup, a Malaysia Cup-like competition for state teams, of which Singapore is represented by the Singapore Malays Football Club, which we’ve dominated as much as Selangor as the competition shared players from the main squad.

Just because we have separated from Malaysia politically, does not mean we should sever all ties with our neighbours over differences between our governments. The Malaysia Cup was both a bond and rivalry that Malaysian states, former and current, share.

When we played in the Malaysia Cup, Singapore football was very exciting. People cared about grassroots football. The papers covered even the Semi-Professional Premier League, and constituency sports tournaments. We would go down to watch kampong football for free when our neighbors or family are representing their towns or clubs. There was even a competitive Business Houses league which FAS administered where local companies participated and old boys from the national team retired to playing for their employers.

This nostalgic, historical tournament was the lifeblood of the nation. It is not a foreign tournament. It has always been a part and parcel of our Singapore DNA. To refute that is akin to denying Singapore’s deep roots and history with Malaysia.

Quality Argument

Some fans suggest that returning to the Malaysia Cup is a regressive step. It doesn’t improve the national team. I feel that this premise is flawed. When Singapore was playing in the Malaysian tournaments, the team played high-impact matches regularly. The team was kept together for many seasons. This was what gave the Singapore team match fitness when it participated in international tournaments. This was also what both Malaysia and Singapore have been doing by keeping the youth squads compete in a league for several seasons to improve their football.

The LionsXII is mostly an under-23 side. It is a developmental team, and the same line of argument applies. It will improve the match fitness of these players.

These fans argue that the way to improve our national team is by improving the S-League, and that going back to the Malaysia Cup is sending the wrong signal by ignoring our local league. I feel that these fans have forgotten that it is a 2-way deal. The Malaysian Harimau Muda, the u-23 national team, who are the current 2-time back to back SEA Games Champion, that also forms the bulk of the current AFF Cup winning squad is participating in the S-League. I don’t think that this is ignoring the local league. I find this argument puzzling when the FAS has increased the number of teams playing and included 2 neighbouring teams which are proven quality.

Because of the Malaysia Cup buzz surrounding the LionsXII, the Harimau Muda is certain to pull in the crowds for the S-League especially against established clubs like Geylang United, Tampines Rovers, and even the Courts Young Lions.

Conclusion

The Malaysia Cup Disconnect Syndrome exists due to the long hiatus of Singapore from its original motherland. Leaving the Malaysia Cup abruptly, with an arrogant mind to build a premature S-League was a poorly conceived one. Especially when the Asian Financial Crisis took its toll in local football resulting in a mass exodus of talent driven away by unachieved expectations and prolonged low wages.

With its re-entry, Singapore football would only improve. We cannot do this alone. If we are to make it some day to the World Cup, Singapore must realize that it’s neighbours can help them and we should create a win-win situation like the new government of both nations have in recent years to achieve a long-lasting, mutually beneficial bilateral relationship, burying old prejudices and arguments, and building a new Malaysia and Singapore of the future.

Majulah!

I’ll be representing Singapore WordPress User Group with the hope of attracting sponsors for the upcoming WordCamp Singapore 2011.

Tune in for the iStrategy 2010 Social Media Conference at abanghazrul.com from Dec 1 to 2 2010 for live coverage.

Page will poll updates automatically.

Updates will begin at 8.45am on Dec 2 2010.

I’ll be representing Singapore WordPress User Group in the hopes of getting sponsors for our WordCamp Singapore 2011. Tune in for the iStrategy 2010 Social Media Conference at abanghazrul.com from Dec 1 to 2 2010 for live coverage.

Page will poll updates automatically. Updates every 15 minutes average.

Updates will begin at 8.45am on Dec 1 2010.

I had posted a comment on one of The Online Citizen (TOC)’s Facebook links regarding a New Paper article by veteran journalist, Sylvia Toh Paik Choo, and perhaps my words struck a chord with many of TOC’s readers. I did not expect such strong support for what I had to say and perhaps, it was the most Likes I’ve earned from fellow netizens. So I decided to re-post this on my blog for the benefit of all Singaporeans whom I hope can now better frame their heritage in the proper context. I would like to point my readers to this article (Google Translated from Malay to English), this article and this video, for a better perspective of how I draw my arguments. As a continuing student of local history, I’m amazed how much information we Singaporeans don’t really know about Singapore. So I hope, I’ve contributed somewhat to a more enlightened Singapore society.

A People's History of Malaya. A book written by members of Federation of United Kingdom & Eire Malaysian & Singaporean Student Organizations

Sylvia. You forget that when you migrated to Singapore from Penang 60 years ago, we weren’t yet another country. I’m sorry but Singapore was still considered a part of Malaya. Penang was still a Straits Settlement and so was Singapore. The governor, my dear, was still the same white man.

So your argument that you were an immigrant is complete moot. None of us were immigrants. If you were born in Malaya before 1965, anywhere in Malaya, you were local born.

I remember another young man born in Penang and migrated to Singapore. His name is legendary in these parts. Have you heard of P. Ramlee who became Malaya’s silver screen hero in the 50s? I’m sure you know that P. Ramlee made a living in Singapore. Did you forget that Singapore was the center of Malaya’s movie making industry? Front and center, Singapore was the poster boy of a new, independent Malaya.

So when August 9, 1965 came, did we all suddenly become immigrants? Sylvia my dear, we were always local born. It’s our bloody text books that sold us this idea that Singaporeans were made up of immigrants.

Now, I have no problem with foreigners. But please don’t make me a foreigner in my own country. I’m a 3rd generation Singaporean. But my grandparents who called this place home came from Johor and Java. They never saw this place as a foreign land. Indonesia didn’t even exist before 1945. There was freedom of movement. Malayans from Johor joined Malayans in Singapore. And fellow friends from across the Malay archipelago in Riau, Sumatra and Java joined us too. Did they see Singapore as another country and therefore considered themselves immigrant? No. We lived in colonial times. There was no such thing as borders.

Immigrant nation? Nope. Not Singapore. Not even Chinese and Indians born anywhere in Malaya. That includes you Sylvia.

It’s been more than a month since Dr Mahathir Muhammad made this blazing comment that drew strong responses from the Malay community here. But I’ve ignored it because it wasn’t worth commenting until now. You see, Tun may no longer be Prime Minister, and he’s not even an MP, but he’s still an UMNO member, and in his own words “I’m a politician, through and through”. So what he said was simply for political mileage and to drive home the point to vote UMNO.

Why was it picked up by the media and regurgitated across the causeway? Because his comments critiqued Singapore.

Anyone who criticizes a country that he is not a citizen of, especially if he’s a politician will definitely raise furore. Take for example MM Lee’s blazing generalised comment over Taiwanese and Hong Kongers. I’m certain the Chinese over there would take offense at being called such things.

But what I’d like to comment on is Singapore’s Berita Harian’s editor, Guntor Sadali’s speech at the Anugerah Jauhari BH 2010 (Malay Achiever of the Year Award) (PDF file) and perhaps some corrections to point out to Dr M (hey, I’ve got to be fair no?).

It was well written. It gave me a feel good aftertaste. It was rhetorical. And that’s just it.

This award, what it means, what it represents, is rhetorical. It’s to tell our Malays in Singapore that it’s ok that we don’t need to secure political power to safeguard our interests. We just need knowledge, here and there, and that would mean we’re powerful, and here’s someone who did just that.

I don’t disagree with Mr Guntor on many of his points. But I don’t think being a minority has anything to do with being different in our mindsets and outlook. Take for example the 2 Koreas or China/Taiwan. They are of the same race, but their mindset and outlook is clearly quite different. So our difference in attitudes has nothing to do with the numbers within our population.

Singaporean Malays are different out of culture. We have always been that way since pre-separation times. Many of our former residents travelled down here to make a living because Singapore was the most vibrant out of all the 14 Malaysian states. We were, in the words of the first Malaysian Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, the New York of Malaysia and KL was its Washington DC. And clearly, New Yorkers are very different from their DC cousins. As it stands today, Johor Malays are in fact very different from Kelantan Malays and you can make the same observations as you travel state-by-state. Malays are not the same, whether in Singapore, Johor, KL or Sabah.

But what exactly is this Singaporean Malay attitude? Are we independent? Are we competitive? Are we self-reliant? Are we meritocratic?

To suggest any of these things does not define the entire Malay population in Singapore. In fact, these traits are common in every ethnicity you can find here. It doesn’t make us Malays in Singapore more competitive than the average Malay-Malaysian simply because Singapore has a kiasu culture. Neither does it make Chinese-Singaporeans more self-reliant simply because the government does its majority race no favours.

We are who we are because we were forced out of a Federation of Malaysia, and became a sovereign nation without the consent of its people. We had to survive. Tunku probably thought that it would make Lee Kuan Yew so unpopular that it would cause the PAP’s downfall because how can Singapore, the pride of Malaysia, with its vibrancy, the Movie capital of South-East Asia, the trading centre of the Peninsula, the beacon of non-censorship at the time (Malay intellectuals flocked to Singapore because we did not practise censorship as with the other UMNO-ruled states), and a pride of the University of Malaya with its outstanding Medical College be separate from its motherland? To Singapore Malaysians, now Singaporeans, it must have been unthinkable. It probably still was for some time. But we got used to sovereignty as Singapore nation, rather than a Malaysian one, and eventually, not only did we survive, we prospered, and so did our Malaysian brethren. So to suggest Malaysia wasn’t competitive would be a fallacy. We’re bitter rivals.

The premise of Dr Mahathir’s comments was one based on political influence. We were formerly part of Malaysia, and Malays here in Singapore (like anywhere else in Malaysia) had significant political advantage simply for being Malay. His whole point on warning Malaysian Malays that PAS and PKR is causing the Malay electorate to lose its political advantage as an ethnic ruling elite, would throw the Malays in Malaysia into a state of zero power, just like Singapore Malays.

If he left it at that, well, isn’t it true? Malays in Singapore have no political advantage. Meritocracy did not give us enough influence not just to safeguard our communal interests, but also to maintain and prosper them.

But the honourable Tun had to say “kowtow to the Chinese”. I can understand how Singapore Malays are angry at this. In fact, we are upset at only this part of his statement, because it’s a sweeping generalisation. Just like how MM Lee’s generalisation on Taiwanese and Hong Kongers drew much flak.

But what’s wrong with this statement, and what is right with it?

Firstly, Malay Singaporeans are equal citizens to Chinese Singaporeans. We’re equal in terms of citizenship, and therefore, this equality makes us Malays inherit equal rights to Chinese Singaporeans. Malays and Chinese here have the same rights. So no, we don’t kowtow to the Chinese at all simply for being citizens of our cili padi nation.

Secondly, meritocracy gave us Malays a chance to compete for the best education, the best jobs, the best everything. So if we have Malays who excel, they excelled because they truly deserved it. Not because my government gave me preferential treatment. That’s not an achievement worth bragging.

So what’s right with Dr M’s statement?

We’re a minority. In a democracy, especially one without representative parliament like ours, we don’t carry equal influence to protect, preserve and further our communal interests. Malays are by definition of our own constitution, the rightful indigenous people of Singapore. Article 152(2) and (3) specifically bestows the Government of Singapore, the responsibility to protect, preserve and further the Malay people’s language, culture and religion and to ensure the well-being and education of its people.

However, this is what I’d call political baggage. Our constitution was derived from the Constitution of Malaysia. In fact, if you compare the 2 country’s constitution, you would find that they are almost similar to each other. If our ethos are about merit without regards to race, language or religion, then why keep this clause? It is, perhaps an appeasement tactic to pacify the Malays that the Government will not ignore the interests of the Malays despite no longer being of political influence. And Lee Kuan Yew himself ensured that with the creation of Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura through the Administration of Muslim Law Act, to take care of the religious affairs of the Malays, the only religion in Singapore to have this privilege to have a government vehicle.

But you must understand, in exchange for these privileges, what must the Malays of Singapore give in return to the PAP? Obviously, like everyone else who votes for the incumbent, it’s silent compliance, and therefore, kowtow. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out where Singapore Malays, in terms of language, in terms of the extent of its freedom to practise their religion, and in terms of how much the state is willing to further the progress its traditional culture is hampered.

Is this definitive of Singapore Malays? Dr Mahathir, with all respect (I do really respect you sir), you are mistaken. It is definitive of all Singaporeans who decides to reap the benefits of PAP rule. I am sure that if a Malay Malaysian votes for you, they will kowtow to you too. Just because you fight for Malay rights, does not mean you are not the Masters of the Malays themselves. In fact, UMNO, the party of royalists, have shown to preserve titah tuanku more than it preserves the interests of Malays themselves. Of course, only you sir, being the first commoner PM, have had the audacity to try to reduce the political influence of the royalty during your term in office. But how else can you explain this trend of Malay Malaysians choosing to vote the opposition?

But I agree. We should not be like Singapore Malays. We have problems like a below-average pass rate at every level of examinations (heck, we can’t even be average!), broken and low-income families, Malays in prison, Malays in financial desperation, Malays without homes, and so many other social problems that seem to creep up every year under this often, uncaring, meritocratic rule. And who comes to save the day? Sir, we do. Just like you, Malays help themselves. Unlike you, we don’t have the resources. When Singapore Malays do have success, are we the best? Hardly. That’s why awards like Anugerah Jauhari is a feel good award. It’s to help us be less angry. It’s a corrective policy the same way NEP is a corrective policy, so the irony in Guntor’s speech is how the premise of this award seems very much the intent of creating the illusion of a successful Malay community. But not to take away the shine and glimmer of this year’s winner, Mr Shafie Samsudin definitely deserved this award in my book. For Mr Shafie, he deserves every bit of this award. For the Malay community as a whole however, just because we share in his success, doesn’t mean we had anything to do with it.

The Malays here may have equal rights. But we as a people (as with you over there), never started on an equal platform in the first place after centuries and centuries of regressive colonial rule. So I can understand the intent of your corrective economic policies. What I don’t understand is why are you obsessed about the quantity of wealth afforded to the Malays, when you should be more focused on the quality of Malays regardless of their income. I’m certain, a poor Malay is not a lesser Malay than a wealthier one.

What’s the point of a wealthy Malay? For what? To prevent Malays from being unhappy that another race gets wealthier at the expense of Malay land? Sir, the Chinese in Singapore don’t own a lot of land either. It is not Chinese land to begin with. It’s indigenous Malay land. But they get rich anyway. If wealth or the lack of it makes a Malay unhappy, it is not the Chinese we should be angry at. It’s us for not taking advantage of being given such preferential treatment. Despite the Chinese Malaysians having limited access to government contracts, they’re still richer than Malay Malaysians. So who are we, Singapore Malays angry at? Definitely not the Chinese.