Introduction
Malaya's post-war political developments posed a considerable challenge to the returning British colonial administration. The Malayan Union — a system of unitary government imposed on the entire peninsula — announced by the Colonial Office in late 1945 and which came into effect on 1 April 1946, provoked the most serious opposition to British plans.Footnote 1 The Malays opposed in particular the introduction of new citizenship criteria that enabled the large domiciled Chinese and Indian communities to acquire Malayan citizenship and the transfer of the Malay Rulers' sovereignty to the British Crown under the Malayan Union. Led by Dato' Onn Jaafar, a Malay leader from Johore, the Malays held nationwide protests against the Malayan Union in 1946. Alarmed by the massive protests, the British entered into negotiations with Onn's newly formed United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) and the Rulers.Footnote 2 Following the negotiations, the Malayan Union was dissolved and replaced with the 1948 Federation of Malaya Agreement, which required a longer period of residence for domiciled non-Malays to qualify for federal citizenship. The sovereignty of the Malay Rulers was also restored.
Overlapping these developments were reactions from the non-Malays. The All-Malaya Council of Joint Action (AMCJA) led by the Chinese leader Tan Cheng Lock held demonstrations in 1947 to protest the lack of consultation with the non-Malay communities on the constitutional changes.Footnote 3 The outbreak of the communist insurgency in June 1948 posed a new and more serious challenge to the government.Footnote 4 The insurgency challenged intercommunal relations that had already been seriously damaged by the Japanese Occupation, the immediate post-war racial clashes and the Malayan Union controversy.Footnote 5 Senior British administrators and local political elites considered different approaches to resolving intercommunal problems. One such effort was to encourage private discussion of these issues at the elite level between the leaders of the main ethnic groups. The British administrators, particularly the Commissioner-General for Southeast Asia, Malcolm MacDonald, believed that such confidential discussions would help resolve many outstanding issues amicably and improve relations between the communities.
These efforts led to the formation of the Communities Liaison Committee (CLC) in early 1949. The CLC was an informal body of community leaders that met to discuss intercommunal differences and strengthen race relations. The setting up of the CLC was a genuine attempt at achieving national consensus and nation-building. Despite being informal, many agreements reached at the CLC meetings were adopted by the government. The CLC's own records indicate that the body also served as a useful platform for the colonial administration to test new ideas and potential policies with leading Malayan minds. The CLC was in essence an early model of consociationalism, Arend Lijphart's concept of elite ethnic power-sharing in plural societies within a democratic framework,Footnote 6 that was to become more rooted in Malaya following the introduction of electoral politics from 1951 and eventually in the parliamentary form of governance. The CLC deliberations were an attempt by the Malayan elites, with some help from senior British officials, to address major intercommunal problems and to participate in the limited colonial power-sharing arrangement.
The role and influence of this early political body has not been adequately examined, however. While Karl von Vorys's discussion on the CLC is significant, he was not able to provide a substantive discussion of its impact because of the unavailability of relevant Colonial Office records at the time.Footnote 7 Other scholars have briefly discussed the CLC as part of their research on other aspects of Malayan political history. Heng Pek Koon, for example, has rightly noted that the CLC was an effort by the British to promote inter-elite co-operation and a forerunner of successive multiracial political coalitions such as the Alliance.Footnote 8 She felt that the CLC's impact on the development of Malayan politics was far-reaching, but did not examine the work of the body substantively.Footnote 9 Tim Harper argued that the CLC set a pattern for elite intercommunal bargaining in private: ‘It set a precedent by which the cardinal principles of public policy would be composed by a process of bargaining in private, and then marketed for popular opinion.’Footnote 10 He too, however, only provides a brief discussion of the CLC's deliberations. Other works have also briefly noted the CLC's significance.Footnote 11 While all these scholars have recognised the Committee's importance to the development of Malayan politics, none has examined its workings and its impact on policy-making in any depth. This is largely due to the previous inaccessibility of the official records of the CLC discussions and related Colonial Office reports.
This article analyses the CLC deliberations to discern the nature of the issues discussed, the body's influence on resolving intercommunal problems through elite bargaining and its impact on government policies. It draws mainly from the official records of the committee's deliberations,Footnote 12 the records of CLC deliberations in the Colonial Office files and personal documents of leading participants, in particular, Tan Cheng Lock and Malcolm MacDonald. This investigation shows that the CLC was more influential than previously recognised or acknowledged in earlier studies in shaping government policy on intercommunal issues. The discussions were frank, complex and tough, and at times verged on failure. Nevertheless, the CLC made considerable progress in enhancing intercommunal relations and addressing some key demands of the various ethnic groups. On a broader level, the CLC provided a pragmatic framework for elite inter-ethnic bargaining in private that influenced considerably the emergence of consociational politics in Malaya.
The origin of the Communities Liaison Committee
Previous studies have traced the origins of the CLC to leading Malayan political figures such Dato' Onn Jaafar and Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) president Tan Cheng Lock. Others have alluded to the important role played by Malcolm MacDonald, the British Commissioner-General for Southeast Asia.Footnote 13 Colonial Office documents on the CLC deliberations and the notes of the committee's deliberations reveal that the formation of the CLC was largely the result of MacDonald's initiatives to foster intercommunal ties in Malaya during a critical period. Following the Malayan Union controversy and the introduction of the Federation of Malaya Agreement in February 1948, relations between the communities had deteriorated largely because of stricter citizenship requirements for the non-Malays and the fact that the constitutional discussions had only been held between British and Malay leaders. This was compounded by the revolt against the British launched by the Malayan Communist Party (MCP). In June 1948, following a spate of murders of British planters in Perak, a state of emergency was declared.Footnote 14 As the majority of the MCP members were Chinese, the communist revolt was viewed by the Malays as a Chinese-led insurrection and this aggravated the tensions between the communities.
Interestingly, the trigger for the chain of events that led to the emergence of the CLC was Onn's visit to London in November 1949 and his discussions with the Secretary of State for the Colonies. His media interviews in London created some political turbulence in Malaya, particularly among the Chinese leaders who felt that Onn had only focused on Malay interests in his talks with the Colonial Office. On his return to Malaya in early November 1949 from a trip to London, MacDonald noted concerns among Chinese leaders over Onn's discussions with the Secretary of State. For instance, Onn had urged the Colonial Office to appoint more Malays as heads of federal departments, sought the appointment of a Malay deputy high commissioner, and requested a £10 million grant from Britain to assist Malay economic development.Footnote 15 Newspaper reports of Onn's discussions in London had upset the Chinese leaders considerably.Footnote 16 These leaders felt that Onn had made representations only on behalf of the Malays.Footnote 17
MacDonald feared that these tensions could aggravate Malay–Chinese relations in the Federation and held several personal discussions separately with leaders of both communities. As a result, he felt there was a need for the Malay and Chinese leaders to come together to discuss outstanding intercommunal political and economic issues and encouraged leaders from both communities to meet. He told Onn about the concerns raised by the Chinese leaders on the latter's return from London and Onn agreed to ‘do anything to undo the damage’.Footnote 18 It was originally planned that MacDonald would invite these leaders to his residence in Bukit Serene in Johore Bahru, but Onn suggested it would have a more positive impact if he [Onn] invited the Chinese leaders. He told MacDonald: ‘You know, I believe it would be better if I invited our Malay and Chinese friends to dine with me at my house. It would be a gesture from us Malays to the Chinese.’Footnote 19 MacDonald agreed that this would be better and in late December 1948 Onn held a dinner meeting with Malayan Chinese leaders, including Tan Cheng Lock, at his house in Johore Bahru. The first meeting was very encouraging and was followed soon after by a second similar meeting in Penang hosted by the Penang Chinese councillors. MacDonald participated in both meetings, which produced much goodwill and hope for an amicable resolution of intercommunal issues.
MacDonald's role in these early deliberations is clearly revealed in a note he sent to the Secretary of State on 12 January 1949 wherein he expressed much hope that these talks would later address more serious issues while at the same time indicating a note of caution. ‘These two talks revealed a possible basis for agreement between Malays and Chinese on both economic and political questions. It would be foolish to overestimate their importance at this stage, for discussions were concerned mostly with general principles.’Footnote 20 Even at this early stage, it is interesting that the leaders had discussed some major issues including the question of federal citizenship which had been a thorny issue following the coming into force of the Federation of Malaya Agreement in February 1948. It was only after both these initial meetings that a firmer plan for an intercommunal body began to take shape and a group of five Malays and five Chinese, headed respectively by Onn and Cheng Lock, were tasked to continue discussions to work out further details.Footnote 21
At their meeting in Johore Bahru on 9 February the members of the committee (then known as the Liaison Committee of Malay and Chinese leaders) had requested MacDonald to become the chairman of the committee but he declined, preferring to remain a neutral observer.Footnote 22 He also wanted the participating leaders to take responsibility for the committee's decisions. Onn, too, declined, as he wanted to take an active part in the discussions. Onn then nominated lawyer Dato' E.E.C. Thuraisingham, a Federal Legislative Councillor of Ceylonese origin and a close friend, as chairman and the committee accepted his proposal. The meeting unanimously agreed that invitations should be sent to leading European, Indian and Eurasian representatives to join the committee to make it more inclusive of all the communities.Footnote 23 The meeting decided that decisions were to be in the form of ‘agreed views’ and that implementation was to be discussed only after the committee was able to reach a consensus on each problem.Footnote 24 It was thus at this meeting in Johore Bahru in February 1949 that the community leaders decided to call the body the ‘Communities Liaison Committee’ and the CLC was formally constituted. The committee comprised six representatives from the Malay community, six Chinese and one each from the Indian, Eurasian, European and Ceylonese communities. The Indians were a little underrepresented considering the political and constitutional significance of the issues to be discussed and the lone voice was often muted. This drew some criticisms from the Indian community whose leading political organisation, the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC), was already boycotting the Federation Agreement.
Early discussions and the ‘economic adjustment’
Despite stating at the outset that it was an informal body of community leaders attending in their personal capacities,Footnote 25 the CLC quickly entered into substantive discussions of economic and political issues at its second formal meeting on 18 February 1949 in Kuala Lumpur. At the heart of the discussions were Malay leaders' concerns to ensure that real assistance was forthcoming from the government and the Chinese community to improve Malay participation in the national economy, which was dominated by the Europeans and the Chinese.Footnote 26 This situation was acknowledged by the Chinese leaders who, on the other hand, were eager to liberalise the federal citizenship requirements under the 1948 Federation of Malaya Agreement and safeguard the vernacular schools and languages.Footnote 27 They also wanted greater non-Malay participation in the political affairs of the country, including wider representation in the civil service. The political and economic relations between the two major communities invariably were a central element in the CLC discussions. Thus the early discussions, while exploratory and broad-based, were underlined by these broader ethnocentric aspirations.
The initial discussions represented a testing of the waters, each group proposing the discussion of issues that were central to their respective communities. Among the early issues discussed at the preliminary CLC meeting in Johore Bahru in February 1949 were the economic position of the Malays (employment of Malays in industry; assumption of Malays to positions of responsibility in business affairs), the political relations between the Malays and non-Malays (such as the introduction of non-Malays into the Administrative Services) and the qualifications for federal citizenship. The committee then tackled education, which it felt was central to the creation of a Malayan outlook among the diverse population. MacDonald noted in a telegram to the Secretary of State that after discussion of the economic and political relations between the communities:
[…] we were to tackle the problem of education, with a view to the children in Malaya being brought up as Malayans with a sense of Malayan citizenship and patriotism, instead of a narrow, communal Malay, Chinese, Indian, etc, outlook on Malayan affairs. These discussions would therefore have launched us into the main intercommunal problems.Footnote 28
The CLC was thus also an attempt by the British administration and the community leaders to encourage in the long term the development of a ‘Malayan’ national consciousness and a greater sense of patriotism that went well beyond merely addressing intercommunal grievances. The discussions, which at times were very intense and emotional, were closely guided by MacDonald who acted as a moderator. The CLC meeting on 9 February 1949 was, however, disrupted momentarily by the activities of the Penang Secessionist Movement, which planned to move a motion for the secession of the northern state from the Federation of Malaya at the Penang Settlement Council on 10 February.Footnote 29 Interestingly, the motion was to be seconded by the CLC member from Penang, Dr Lee Tiang Keng. The Malay members argued that that this showed there was little goodwill among the members of the other communities towards ‘a movement for intercommunal cooperation’.Footnote 30 They wondered if the CLC discussions should continue. Timely intervention by MacDonald saved the committee from a premature demise. MacDonald said that this was ‘an unreasonable and unfair attitude’, and argued that the committee should continue its meetings regardless of the Penang secessionists' activities.Footnote 31 After further discussion, the CLC decided that they should proceed with the agreed agenda.Footnote 32
The first full meeting of the CLC was held in Kuala Lumpur on 18–19 February 1949 and the committee began to tackle more substantive issues. A frank and vigorous exchange ensued. First among these was the problem of ‘economic adjustment’, which in essence referred to the poor economic position of the Malays.Footnote 33 The economic backwardness of the Malays had always been a cornerstone of Malay demands in the post-war period. Dato' Panglima Bukit Gantang, the Mentri Besar (chief minister) of Perak, who was invited by the chairman E.E.C. Thuraisingham to open the discussions, complained that Malays had been left behind in ‘commercial undertakings’, and their living conditions had declined.Footnote 34 He listed a range of economic sectors in which the Malays, who he said had previously dominated, had now been overtaken by the other communities and the Europeans. Malay undertakings in the tin mining industry, he noted, had become negligible due to the encroachment of the non-Malays and in the rubber industry, the non-Malays predominated. Malay presence in fishing, coconut plantations and road transportation sectors, he argued, had also declined after ‘encroachment’ by non-Malays. In addition, Bukit Gantang contended that Malays had suffered a loss of land in the towns as well as on road frontages through sale of land to non-Malays.Footnote 35 As a result, he summed up, the living conditions of the Malays had deteriorated because of the loss of commercial control in many sectors: ‘Malays, who used to be a proud race, were forced to begging and the ultimate result of all these would be discontent, jealousy and hatred,’ he told the committee at its first meeting.Footnote 36 Cheng Lock interjected to say that the points raised by Bukit Gantang were controversial and some ‘were past history’, and stressed that the committee should confine its work to resolving some of the problems faced by the Malays.Footnote 37 He noted that the Chinese were also suffering and suggested the formation of limited liability companies with Malay–Chinese capital in equal proportion to address the lack of Malay presence in the commercial sectors. C.C. Tan from Singapore disagreed that the Malays had been reduced to begging, but felt that the problems could be resolved by ‘proper and intelligent enforcement of laws’ and through some voluntary measures, such as providing financial assistance.Footnote 38 The British colonial administration was not absolved of some of the blame for the economic backwardness of the Malays. C.C. Tan remarked that in respect of medical and educational facilities, the British administration should ‘do their duties to the Malays’.Footnote 39
As the debate became a little emotional and robust, MacDonald intervened to moderate the discussion. He agreed with the principle of parity between the communities espoused by the Malay leaders, but reminded the committee that they should agree on a common statement of principles on these issues first and then proceed to discuss the implementation of measures to achieve their agreements.Footnote 40 He urged the committee to discuss implementation which could be made by the committee and other measures that could be enforced through legislation. On the latter, he urged the committee to agree on resolutions which should then be forwarded to the government. The committee then discussed practical ways in which the Malays could be assisted economically and some interesting and innovative measures were suggested. There was considerable discussion on the problems faced by the Malays in relation to business. It was observed that certain business sectors such as road transport and haulage were monopolised by the Chinese.Footnote 41 The committee discussed ways in which Malay participation in this business could be gradually increased and partnerships between Chinese and Malay businesses developed. It was suggested that where new businesses were being developed in Malay majority areas, priority should be given to Malay businessmen to increase their participation. In the road transport sector, the committee was even able to agree on a proportionate division of the issuing of permits for bus companies based on the dominant population along the routes.Footnote 42 This resolution was subsequently communicated to the federal government.
After the first full meeting of the CLC, MacDonald felt that if sufficient progress was made in relation to the Malay economic position and if the Malays were reassured that they were benefiting from the discussions, it would then be possible to move on to other political questions.Footnote 43 The discussions in Kuala Lumpur made considerable breakthroughs on intercommunal issues and some concrete measures were identified to address the economic problems. MacDonald observed that the Chinese and other non-Malay leaders showed much readiness to make concessions to the Malays who, on their part, were ‘impressed with this and lost something at least of their suspicions of the bona fides of the non-Malays in the Committee’.Footnote 44
Almost a month later, the CLC issued its first formal statement on 15 March 1949 after meeting in Ipoh, stating the committee's purpose and objectives. The CLC's press statement, however, was quite bland despite the intense discussions, merely indicating that all the races should help the Malays and that the committee was examining the various economic activities to achieve this objective.Footnote 45 Interestingly, the draft of this statement was prepared by MacDonald at the request of the CLC members and the text was fully accepted. The statement noted that the committee had held several meetings and had begun examining all aspects of the relations between the communities in Malaya — the economic, social and political — and that these meetings had ‘promoted mutual confidence between them’.Footnote 46 The importance of economic assistance for the Malays was clearly emphasised in the statement:
It is the agreed view of this Committee that, in the common interest of all in Malaya, it is of paramount importance that the non-Malays shall make every endeavour to co-operate amongst themselves and with the Malays to improve the economic position of the Malays, so that they — the Malays — can take their rightful and proper place and share fully in the economic life of Malaya.Footnote 47
Following this, the committee examined other aspects of major economic activities such as plantations, mining and road transport to identify ways to increase Malay participation.Footnote 48
In the statement, the committee also noted somewhat modestly that it was an informal and advisory body and had no power to reach decisions that were binding on the government or other organisations.Footnote 49 In reality, as we will see, the decisions and agreements of the CLC were transmitted to the federal government for further action. Considerable progress had been made following the Ipoh meeting on 14 and 15 March; some of the resolutions of the CLC in relation to road transport haulage were discussed with the Commissioner of Road Transport in the Federation.Footnote 50 MacDonald was greatly encouraged:
Their discussions are businesslike and thorough. No issue is baulked [at] and everyone speaks with complete frankness. Nevertheless every subject discussed so far has produced a unanimous agreement. This is largely due to the fact that those present are now prepared for real give and take between their respective communities.Footnote 51
Nonetheless, he felt that the real test would come when the political issues were discussed. This was a reference to the anticipated more difficult discussions on federal citizenship and nationality.
The CLC held four meetings in April 1949 and made much progress on issues relating to mining, plantations, trading and other activities and some practical solutions, such as the formation of Sino–Malay companies, were identified. There was, however, some resistance from the heads of departments and leading business figures when the increased involvement of the Malays in the mining, transport, rubber and textiles sectors were discussed. The Commissioner for Road Transport, A.A. Forward, for example, bluntly told the committee that ‘there was no room for expansion in bus services’, and suggested that Malays should acquire shares in existing companies.Footnote 52 J.A. Mead, speaking for the tin mining industry, felt that Malays should change their attitudes towards mining and noted that he had friends who had disposed their mining rights to Chinese businessmen.Footnote 53 The mining industry, he noted, was not willing to take risks to help the Malays with capital. Zainalabidin bin Haji Abas from Selangor, however, countered that the Malays would be prepared to invest in mining ‘if they had confidence that those who were in charge had the necessary qualifications and capabilities to carry out the work’.Footnote 54 A senior official from the Federation's Economic Adviser's Department in his briefing on the textiles industry told the committee that Malays were ‘unknown as importers’ and asked why, if the Malay Chambers of Commerce were capable of importing direct, they had not done so in 1947 or 1948.Footnote 55 Zainalabidin responded that the Malays were now interested in textiles. Khoo Teik Eee, also from Selangor, supported his colleague, saying he would like the Malays to come into the trade and asked if it would be possible to help them.Footnote 56 Amid the heated exchanges, CLC chairman Thuraisingham defended the work of the committee. He argued that the CLC's work was a ‘new aspect’ in enhancing intercommunal relations and it was trying to adjust the disparities that existed in the economy and felt that Malays should be given a percentage of the quota for textiles imports.Footnote 57 The CLC eventually agreed that in future when quotas were issued to traders for importing merchandise, a certain percentage would be reserved for Malay traders.Footnote 58 Some of the recommendations of the committee were sent to the government, but the committee decided against making public their views and recommendations.
With considerable progress made at the meetings in the first two months, the CLC chairman Thuraisingham suggested at the meeting on 19 April 1949 that some political issues should be examined in view of contemporary developments. He was referring to the formation of the MCA in February 1949 and vocal statements made by its leader Tan Cheng Lock as well as the activities of the MIC,Footnote 59 all of which he felt had a ‘prejudicial impact’ on the work of the committee. He noted that some newspapers had given much publicity on the citizenship issue and questioned non-Malay allegiance to Malaya and remarked that ‘this was not strengthening the CLC's activities’.Footnote 60 There was also some criticism of MCA leader Cheng Lock following remarks he had made to the newspapers implying that the federal constitution was undemocratic.Footnote 61 Zainal Abidin noted that Cheng Lock's remarks had put Malay members ‘in an awkward position’ while Haji Mohd Eusoffe said such utterances were ‘opening up old wounds’.Footnote 62 Another MCA leader, Khoo Teik Ee, managed to defer further discussion by suggesting that the matter should be discussed when Cheng Lock was present.
Despite the altercation, the committee nevertheless agreed that it would consider the issues of federal citizenship, a Malayan nationality, the subject of allegiance to Malaya and the role of the Malayan communal associations in achieving the CLC's objectives at the following meeting.Footnote 63 Encouraged by this, MacDonald asked the Colonial Office to request the Secretary of State to send the committee a congratulatory message for the progress made in the discussions, but the Colonial Office felt this was premature, partly because the committee was an informal body.Footnote 64 The following meeting in Kuala Lumpur was held only for a day on 12 May, as several senior leaders such as Onn, Cheng Lock and others were unable to attend because of other commitments, and it was agreed that the committee should next meet on 14–16 June 1949.Footnote 65 MacDonald observed that there was some nervousness among some of the members over the upcoming discussions of political issues, alluding to the contentious citizenship issues that had been criticised by the Malay press. The next meeting, however, only took place in August. This was the beginning of a more advanced stage of the discussion of intercommunal issues and grappling with the vexed federal citizenship issue that was to lead to some disagreements and further compromises on several CLC proposals.
Advanced discussions and the question of ‘political adjustment’
After an interval of three months the CLC met in Kuala Lumpur on 13 and 14 August 1949 and began to tackle major political issues such as federal citizenship, nationality, self-governance and elections, collectively referred to as ‘political adjustment’.Footnote 66 MacDonald, in setting the tone for the discussions, stressed that there should be complete agreement among the leaders on the broader aim of creating a ‘united Malayan nation’.Footnote 67 Otherwise, he felt, the political and other problems would become so complicated that a solution to them would be ‘extremely difficult’.Footnote 68 One of the principal agreements reached at this meeting was the establishment of self-government with sovereign status and the creation of a ‘nationality’ that would be open to all qualified citizens.Footnote 69 Second, the committee unanimously agreed that legislation should be introduced for the holding of elections in the States and Settlements as a step towards the introduction of eventual elections to the Federal Legislative Council.Footnote 70 The committee felt that this gradual move would give locals some experience in ‘popular elections’ and administration before the more sophisticated ‘democratic politics’ were introduced at the federal level.Footnote 71 The committee affirmed that elections at the level of municipality should be introduced at an early date.
Nonetheless, the key point of discussion was the further liberalisation of federal citizenship, which would pave the way for the introduction of nationality.Footnote 72 There was unanimous agreement that only those who ‘owe Malaya their loyalty and regard Malaya as their permanent home should qualify for citizenship’.Footnote 73 Sir Roland Braddell suggested that all British subjects born anywhere in the Federation and permanently domiciled there should enjoy the same right to citizenship by law as those born in the Settlements.Footnote 74 This would broaden the eligibility of federal citizenship by operation of law to anyone born in the rest of the Federation. Onn and his Malay colleagues indicated that they were ready to consider this proposal. The Chinese representatives in the committee, on the other hand, suggested that all non-Malays born in the Federation and permanently domiciled there should become citizens automatically by process of law (as suggested in the Minority Report in the Cheeseman Consultative Committee Report) as provided under the principle of jus soli.Footnote 75 The MCA also wanted the period of residence required to qualify for citizenship through naturalisation reduced from ten years to five. Braddell argued that the legal conception of domicile as provided by international law, rather than the period of residence, should be the test of qualification for citizenship. Onn reiterated that Malay opinion had become more accepting of these suggestions in recent years and in principle accepted that ‘everyone, irrespective of race, who really owes undivided loyalty to Malaya and really regards the country as his permanent home, where he will live and die, should be admitted to the Federal Citizenship’.Footnote 76 He noted at the same time that there was scepticism about the strength of some people's loyalty. The committee agreed that Braddell should prepare a memorandum on the subject incorporating the suggestions made at the meeting. Broader issues of nation-building, including the issue of a common language, were also discussed. The committee felt that the citizens of the emerging nation-state should speak a common language and that the teaching of Malay should be made compulsory in all government and state-aided primary schools.Footnote 77 MacDonald was quite pleased with the progress achieved at this meeting which he felt took place amid a ‘most comradely spirit’, but again cautioned that these were ‘tentative agreements’ and much further discussions lay ahead on these issues.Footnote 78
Following the meeting of the CLC held in Johore Bahru on 14–16 September 1949 the committee circulated a statement of some of its general agreements with an inherent long-term perspective, the ‘Agreed Views’. Some media reported this statement as a ‘blueprint for Malaya’,Footnote 79 because of the wide-ranging consensus on a number of issues. The five major points stated in this memorandum related to the issue of self-government, elections to municipal councils and state legislatures, the qualifications for franchise, and education.Footnote 80 The committee noted that the aim of the federation should be the ‘attainment of self-government with sovereign status and the creation therein of a nationality’. And in order to achieve this aim, the statement declared, elections to municipalities and state legislatures should be held early. The committee felt that the franchise for elections should be based on federal citizenship. The teaching of Malay and English, it said, should be compulsory in all government and government-aided schools. The CLC statement, apart from stating the principal agreements, went further to explain some of the rationale underlying their views.Footnote 81
The CLC agreements were commendable considering the diversity of opinions among the different community leaders, but there was a mixed response from the local media. While the English daily, the Straits Times, was supportive of the CLC statements, the Utusan Melayu, the Malay daily, was more critical, viewing the CLC statement as a ‘cheap imitation of other people's ideas’, and nothing new.Footnote 82 The paper argued that the left-wing parties such as the Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM) had proposed these ideas three years earlier. Following the discussions in the CLC on the introduction of local elections, High Commissioner Sir Henry Gurney wrote to the Colonial Office suggesting a timetable for the introduction of local elections in the major towns in Malaya.Footnote 83 As a result of these initiatives, the first local election was held in George Town in Penang in December 1951 and the second, the Kuala Lumpur municipal election, in February 1952. Clearly the CLC recommendations had much influence on government policies at the time. The Manchester Guardian, in reporting the ‘Agreed Views’ of the CLC, recognised that the committee was able to reach agreement on a range of issues that would not have been possible a year or two earlier at the height of the Malayan Union controversy: ‘This is heartening. The movement must come from the Malayans themselves; Britain can only encourage it.’Footnote 84
The question of a Malayan identity was an important focus of the committee's deliberations. The CLC provided a broad definition of the term ‘Malayan’ and in its statement said it referred to ‘the inhabitants of Malaya’.Footnote 85 In this context, the committee was keen to ensure that the young grew up thinking of themselves as Malayans: ‘The immediate problem is to send boys and girls out into the world with a Malayan mind and so strongly Malayan-minded that they will pass it on in due course to their children.’Footnote 86 Federal citizenship was invariably a central issue in the CLC's agreed views. The statement emphasised that the provisions on citizenship in the 1948 Federation of Malaya Agreement should be reconsidered ‘to bring into the fold of Federal Citizenship people of the type that will build up into a Malayan nation’.Footnote 87 MacDonald, in a note to the Secretary of State, remarked that the committee was doing ‘remarkable constructive work’.Footnote 88 The Secretary of State for the Colonies, while acknowledging the progress made by the Committee, cautioned of the difficulties that surrounded the issues of citizenship and nationality: ‘[…] the subject bristles with technical difficulties, and unless these are clearly seen and understood by all concerned from the outset, the Committee may find itself in deep waters’.Footnote 89 While most of the media commented favourably on the agreed views of the committee, some Malay organisations pointed out that the committee had no authority to make decisions on, for example, the issue of a single Malayan nationality.Footnote 90
There remained considerable differences of opinion within the CLC despite the publication of its agreed views. Not surprisingly, the next stage of the CLC discussions became more difficult and there were disagreements. At the CLC meeting in Penang on 29–31 December 1949, the Malay representatives raised the need to reconsider the economic issues first before further discussions on the political questions, especially the issue of a Malayan nationality, were held. The Malay leaders clearly wanted more commitments on economic assistance to the Malays. Onn was conspicuously absent from this meeting, citing tiredness from his visit to Indonesia. MacDonald thought this was a tactical move to allow the two Mentris Besar to raise several prickly issues.Footnote 91 While the ‘Agreed Views’ of the CLC published in September 1949 were generally well-received, some concerns were raised among sections of the Malay community that the committee was moving too fast on the issue of nationality while there had not been significant movement on the economic issues.Footnote 92 After some discussion it was agreed that a ‘Federal Malay Development Board’ would be set up to plan improvements in the economic and social position of the Malays.Footnote 93 This is another clear instance where the decision of the CLC was quickly transformed into government policy with the setting up of the Rural and Industrial Development Authority (RIDA) in 1950 headed by Onn.
The CLC met again in Kuala Lumpur on 10–11 February 1950, and continued discussions on economic and political issues. The quid pro quo element in the discussions was evidently strong. The committee agreed that effective machinery should be set up to improve the socio-economic well-being of the Malays. The Malay leaders cautioned that it would be difficult to persuade Malay opinion to make political concessions to the non-Malays unless the economic development plans for the Malays were more clearly an integral part of the overall plan.Footnote 94 A separate committee was set up by the CLC to discuss this issue and formulate more definite plans. The committee was able to reach agreement on amending the federal constitution in relation to federal citizenship. A state nationality was to be introduced to enable Malayans without citizenship to be admitted as federal citizens. Legislation was to be introduced in the states admitting all Asians and Eurasians born in the state as natural-born subjects of the state Rulers.Footnote 95 This was a significant breakthrough in the intercommunal discussions. MacDonald concluded that this agreement was ‘eminently satisfactory’ to the Chinese and other non-Malays.Footnote 96 He noted that the proposal was acceptable to all the Malay members as well as the Mentris Besar present at the meeting. High Commissioner Gurney was also supportive of the proposals made by the committee. With this agreement, MacDonald felt that the CLC had brought them ‘within sight of a far-reaching and constructive political reform’,Footnote 97 and that the agreement was an important step in the long-term goal of creating a Malayan nationality.
Nevertheless, in spite of the progress made, the committee's discussions faced further obstacles. The agreed views of the CLC met considerable resistance from some UMNO branchesFootnote 98 and Malay organisationsFootnote 99 and the committee recognised that some changes were necessary to placate Malay opinion.Footnote 100 The colonial administration sought to convince the Malays that considerable efforts were being made to improve their economic position and the citizenship proposals in this respect were fair in view of the assistance being given to the community. Gurney's office played a delicate balancing act between the demands of the Malays and the Chinese in respect of the revision of the citizenship provisions. Onn's role was also crucial. Onn had told Gurney that while the UMNO General Assembly would accept the principle of State nationality, the categories of persons who would be eligible would be more restrictive than the CLC's proposals.Footnote 101 To assist Onn to obtain support for the CLC's revised citizenship proposals from his Malay colleagues, Gurney wrote to Onn explaining the various development programmes that were implemented by the government to support Malay involvement in the economy.Footnote 102 He pointed out to Onn that a large proportion of the $31.7 million capital expenditure for agricultural and drainage and irrigation programmes in the Draft Development Plan for Malaya would directly benefit Malay agricultural production and explained the setting up of RIDA.Footnote 103 The Malay media, however, largely ignored the economic development assistance that had been put in place to assist the Malays and focused on the citizenship proposals, which it depicted as a threat to Malay interests.Footnote 104
Impasse over citizenship issue and the loss of Gurney and Onn
Both MacDonald and Gurney had considerable misgivings over the negative Malay response towards the CLC citizenship proposals. Onn, nevertheless, was confident that UMNO would accept the proposals in a modified form.Footnote 105 Onn made a strong case for supporting the CLC's citizenship proposals at a special session of UMNO in May 1950 shortly after the CLC published its ‘Agreed Views’.Footnote 106 The UMNO Executive Committee met in Kuala Lumpur on 6–7 May 1950, and accepted the CLC's proposals on citizenship with minor changes, at the urging of Onn.Footnote 107 Onn had emphasised that the British administration was taking certain measures to improve the economic well-being of the Malays and pointed to the establishment of RIDA.Footnote 108 There was, however, broader resistance in the party and this was reflected in the special general assembly of the party that debated the CLC proposals further on 20 May and suggested further changes.Footnote 109 In June, Onn and his Executive Committee in fact resigned en masse from UMNO to force the issue of citizenship.Footnote 110 Onn later returned to lead the party when it was more forthcoming on the issue.
Meanwhile, the Colonial Office was none too pleased with the impasse. It disagreed with Gurney's idea to leave it to the CLC and the states to resolve the matter and felt that Gurney should take the lead to address the matter.Footnote 111 A draft bill to introduce amendments in the federal constitution produced by Gurney met considerable opposition from the Rulers at the 12th meeting of the Rulers Conference on 31 August 1950. The Rulers felt that the Federation Agreement should be allowed time to work ‘until normal conditions in this country have been attained so that all matters pertaining to citizenship, education could be properly formulated.’Footnote 112 Gurney argued that one of the main purposes of this bill was to get the law to define who was a subject of His Highnesses. In the absence of any written law, he noted, anyone who is born in a Malay state will be the subject of His Highness. Gurney continued to push the federal and state bills related to citizenship and tried to deflect criticismsFootnote 113 that the work of the CLC was not making much headway.Footnote 114 He told the Colonial Office: ‘The Communities Liaison Committee discussions have, in fact, borne fruit and vindicated the belief that real constitutional progress can only come “through conference and consent”.’ He was able to get the agreement of the Conference of Rulers to the bills and planned to introduce the Federal Bill after 25 April 1951 when the federal legislative council met and then refer it to a Select Committee.Footnote 115 He, however, decided to postpone the introduction of the Federal Bill scheduled for April to allow the state legislatures to debate the related state bills and anticipated some difficulty in the states of Kedah, Perlis and Kelantan.Footnote 116 After the Federal Select Committee had read the Bill for the first time on 8 August 1951, Gurney again cautioned the need to proceed slowly on the Bill to ensure ‘its ultimate acceptance by a majority of the population’.Footnote 117
On 6 October 1951, shortly after these discussions, Gurney was killed in a communist ambush. Another serious setback was Onn's announcement earlier in June 1951 that he would be leaving UMNO to form a new non-communal party — the Independence of Malaya Party (IMP).Footnote 118 This had a depleting effect on the work of the CLC, as Onn could no longer claim to be speaking on behalf of the Malays in spite of being a member of the federal legislative council. UMNO under the new leadership of Tunku Abdul Rahman was charting a path of its own and distanced itself from Onn's undertakings in the CLC. The bill containing the amendments to the citizenship provisions in the federal constitution was read a second time on 11 July 1951.Footnote 119 Following Gurney's death in October 1951, the CLC itself seemed to have reached something of an impasse although the Officer Administering Government (OAG) A.T. Newboult continued to maintain the momentum. A Select Committee of the Federal Legislative Council was appointed to examine the bill to amend the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1948 to provide for state nationalities.Footnote 120 This report was completed in February 1952.Footnote 121 These amendments were eventually passed by the Federal Legislative Council after further debate.
The introduction of a state nationality in 1952 was among the more significant achievements of the CLC. This allowed for a broader extension of federal citizenship to non-Malays born in the federation and domiciled there through becoming subjects of the Rulers. There were some misgivings among the Chinese and Indian members of the Select Committee of the Federal Legislative Council on the final form of the legislation containing these amendments as it was deemed restrictive (the period of residence to qualify for application by naturalisation was not reduced) but it was a compromise nevertheless. The Bill [The Federation of Malaya Agreement (Amendment) Ordinance, 1952] was passed by the Federal Legislative Council on 8 May 1952 and was seen as a ‘most notable achievement’ among the differing views.Footnote 122 The CLC never met again after May 1950 although a meeting had been planned for January 1951. Onn's departure from UMNO and Gurney's death deprived the committee of two crucial players. Nevertheless, the CLC's achievements in terms of enhancing intercommunal relations and laying the framework for resolving contentious intercommunal issues were clearly significant.
Conclusion
This article shows that the CLC played a significantly bigger role in Malayan political development between 1949 and 1950 than previously recognised. This experiment in elite intercommunal negotiations at a formative stage of nation-building achieved considerable success in reaching compromises on complex intercommunal issues that had been a source of much disagreement in the post-war years. Despite being an informal body of community leaders without decision-making powers, the CLC in reality played a significant role on three levels. First, the CLC helped to enhance relations between the Malay and non-Malay communities through open and frank discussion of long-standing intercommunal issues such as Malay economic backwardness, citizenship and nationality, language and education. The CLC discussions helped to provide the basis for intercommunal agreements on these contentious issues and in particular enhance Malay participation in the economy. Second, the CLC paved the way for political and constitutional reforms and helped to speed up the decolonisation process by urging the British administration to introduce local elections to the states and settlements to enable the local elites to play a more significant role in the political decision-making process. Third, the CLC approach to intercommunal bargaining through confidential discussions among the elites proved fairly effective in addressing complex issues and became an essential part of the emerging pattern of Malayan politics.
Many of the resolutions and agreements reached at the CLC were adopted and implemented by the government. The federal citizenship, for example, was widened with the enactment of the State Nationality Act in 1952 to enable a large section of the domiciled non-Malay community to acquire citizenship. At the same time, as a quid pro quo, several measures were taken by the British administration following the CLC discussions to improve Malay participation in the national economy. RIDA was set up in 1950 to assist Malay participation in the agricultural and industrial sectors. Special assistance was given to Malay farmers in terms of subsidies, irrigation works and rice milling. Equally significant, the CLC discussions led to the formulation of a basic national framework for the education system in Malaya with a Malayan outlook, essentially providing for the compulsory teaching of English and Malay in the national schools and considerable protection for the vernacular schools through grants-in-aid. Most importantly, the CLC provided an early model of consociationalism which enabled leaders from the various communities in Malaya to resolve intercommunal disputes amicably and which consequently became entrenched in the political system.
