COMMENT One of the first sins committed by the early orientalists upon their arrival in South-East Asia was the assumption that the natives merely adopt external influences as the crux of their culture. The natives, it was said, possess no culture of their own. Not unlike onions, it was said, the natives possess multiple layers but are void of a strong core.

But such a simplistic and condescending view of the natives is now passe, albeit its prevalence among many urban Malaysians today. It is as if our society is still wrapped in Victorian weltanschauung.

In the words of Schrieke (1957) “much like how the sheen of the world religions and foreign cultural forms is a thin and flaking glaze; underneath it the whole of the old indigeinous forms has continued to exist”.

In other words, the South-East Asians are not mere tabula rasa, or a blank slate that merely absorbs new colour that is splashed unto it. Its social dynamics, including politics - are distinct and unique. The so-called influences, are mere superficial in nature.

Likewise, the Sarawakians, being a proud family of the South-East Asian family, are far from a tabula rasa. Despite the fact that a substantive number of West Malaysians purport the view that native Sarawakians are devoid of cultural core - and thus could be easily subdued by the power that be, the truth is far from that.

Foreign culture, political views and religion may be adopted and suited to their way of life, but one should never expect these foreign elements could be imposed in toto in Sarawak.

This may seem confusing to those who perceive James Brooke’s rule as in contradiction to what was explained in the earlier paragraph. Indeed, Brooke sounded a lot like a foreign swashbuckler arrogantly declaring himself Rajah and passively accepted by the locals. Among West Malaysians, this is how most of them perceived the early history of Sarawak. It also didn't help that our national narrative has always been Malayan-centric.

However, this narrative neglects the social and political dynamics at play during Brooke’s arrival and how his ascendancy as the Rajah was a form of the locals’ manifestation of freedom.

Upon James Brooke’s arrival in Kuching, the Malays and Ibans of Sarawak were at war with the Bruneians, who came to impose heavy taxes and enslave the locals. Initially, he refused to intervene in the local politics. The second time however, after being offered the position of a governor by the Bruneian sultanate and establishing good rapports with the local - he agreed.

Later, he would declare Sarawak free from Bruneian rule and crown himself Rajah. In all these, one wonders why did the Sarawakians not declare themselves free of any other foreign rules?

The reason is as simple as reality. Sarawakians, which was then only the size of Kuching proper, was sandwiched by the Dutch, the English capitalists (such as the likes of Baron Von Overbeck), the British Empire and the Bruneian kingdom.

Bulwark against threats

Having a European king whom they can negotiate and influence seem to be a potent bulwark against the threats listed earlier, particularly Western capitalists’ interests. The Bidayuh were more than happy to welcome him.

Persecuted by other races, his arrival marked a new dawn for the Bidayuh. The Iban warriors were consolidated into what would later be referred to as the Sarawak Rangers - giving them prestige without the need to headhunt. The Malay nobilities were absorbed into Sarawak’s civil service. Local customs were protected and codified.

However, it should be noted that the Brooke Dynasty was not a utopia, but the political template protects the locals’ way of life and the sustainability of their livelihood. The social and political landscape was such that all the different ethinicities feel safe and protected by the rule of one despot - so much so that disturbing this political arrangement will upset the fine balance achieved through this proto-consociationalism.

Despite its relatively successful political construct Brooke thought that Sarawak was a failed enterprise (he did not die as rich as he might have wanted to) and was intent on selling Sarawak to the British. This was when the Malay Datus played their part in ensuring that Sarawak remained independent and sovereign (yes, we were a sovereign Kingdom, recognised as such by the USA in 1850 and the UK in 1864) under its White Rajah.

The British intervention would mean that local law, customs and hierarchy will be trumped by the British. Sarawak, they feared, will be exposed to foreign capitalists intent on building huge plantations in which the locals will be enslaved to serve like what happened in the Dutch Indies. The fact that some Malays in Sarawak were descended from those who rebelled against the Dutch in Kalimantan may have influenced and fanned the fear against direct colonisation.

It was only after much persuasion by the local elites that he eventually continued to be the Rajah. If it wasn’t for the local nobilities, his rule might have lasted only for a few years before the British swoop in and colonise Sarawak.

Now, this is where the crux of Sarawak’s fierce nationalism stands. A white family’s rule serves as a thin veneer that serves to protect the current way of life and social structure. A politics of patronage it may be, but it kept in essence a Sarawakian taste.

Fast forward to present time, not much has changed in the social dynamics. Sarawakians, though a part and parcel of Malaysia - are still fiercely independent in spirit. Resentment against perceived foreign intervention in their daily lives played a central role for the umpteenth time.

While it is on the outset a state ruled by Barisan Nasional, the blue tint is but a mere sheen of Malaysian politics imported from the peninsula that serves as a thin flaking glaze that covers what lies underneath; the old indigenous socio-political dance that continues to exist.

West Malaysians, particularly politicians seem to be hell bent in committing the sin of early orientalists’ and should accept the fact that the Bornean socio-political dynamic will be distinct from West Malaysia for a very long time. The dynamics of Sarawak BN are distinct and different from the Umno-led coalition in federal politics. The way this consociationalism glued together to form the state ruling coalition is different.

Not jiving with local sentiment

Sarawakians in general resented the political narratives in West Malaysia, as it does not jive with the local sentiment. The bourgeoisie/Marhaenis divide that so often became the leitmotif in West Malaysian politics is unheard of in Sarawak. So as the remnants of Malay nationalism that form a huge narrative in West Malaysia. The inclusion of Islamism in the federal political dynamics further pushed Sarawakians to the periphery.

Modern Sarawak politics were not so much born out of idealism but out of necessity and the fear of being left behind in the administration. The birth of SUPP and the progenitors of current component political parties did not follow the same Left/Right narrative as in the peninsula.

These political parties in Sarawak were formed around groups of similar interest, usually tailored but not necessarily along racial lines rather than ideological. Indeed, the Left vs Right divide has never taken the centre stage of Sarawak politics (save perhaps for the battle against communism). Race-based politics, particularly the rise of Dayakism in the 80s faltered and gave way to the politics of consociationalism.

Sarawakians will hitherto remain comfortable with consociationalism for a long while, particularly in the rural areas. While consociationalism is not always ideal with arm-twisting by a stronger partner being a prominent feature, it is the safest bet for many Sarawakians.

This is the reason why the splinter parties such as the United People's Party and Teras are eager to join in the fold of Sarawak BN. This situations will definitely be unheard of in the peninsula. The force is strong in the ‘dacing’ here.

The seats won by the opposition parties in Sarawak’s legislative assembly were never captured because the voters share the same sentiment with their distant cousins in the peninsula, but because of local grievances. YB Baru Bian and other native candidates banked in on local issues and the perceived failure of the ruling party and incumbent to perform in the previous term within their respective constituencies rather than decrying the fate of Anwar Ibrahim.

As for the urban voters, it was the great desire to have a sense of check and balance. Sorry to burst your bubbles, Pakatan hardcores, but 1MDB, Anwar Ibrahim and the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma) will never influence Sarawakian voters in this upcoming election. Save perhaps for the very few among urban voters.

And since the ruling government has been steadfast in permitting the usage of ‘kalimah Allah’ by non-Muslims as well as the assurance that hudud will not be implemented in the state since the era of Taib Mahmud - the silver bullet used by the opposition in the peninsula, particularly in non-Malay majority areas will be useless.

The construction of many huge churches in the state as well as religious processions of various faiths being permitted are in direct contrast to situation that is happening in the peninsula - BN-ruled or otherwise.

‘No one is a pendatang in Sarawak’

West Malaysians, particularly Pakatan hardcores, may decry Adenan Satem as doing a ‘wayang’ when he said that no one is a pendatang in Sarawak. But Sarawakians of various political beliefs know that the man meant what he said. Indeed, both the Sarawak BN and Sarawak Pakatan had for many times decried in unison the divisive politics which seem to be rife and alive in the peninsula.

In Sarawak, religious intolerance is not viewed through the prism of BN vs Pakatan but Sarawak vs Malaya.

The fight in the next state election will be an all-Sarawak affair. Indeed, this time it is the fight to realise Sarawak’s nation-of-intent. By nation-of-intent, I am referring to Rustam A Sani and Samsul AB’s conceptualisation of nation-of-intent, built on the rubrics of ideas postulated by the late Benedict Anderson.

A nation-of-intent is a ‘more or less precisely defined idea of a nation’ based on the local population, territory, language, culture, symbols and institutions. Thus, the next election will hinge heavily on who gets to realise the ultimate Sarawak’s nation-of-intent.

The opposition, particularly the DAP, has sabotaged what remained of the fickle trust between the state DAP and PKR, as well as other Sarawak-based rights movement. It is also an open secret that Sarawak PKR is uneasy with DAP’s efforts to expand its influence on what PKR perceived to be its ground - they have often attacked each other in the social media.

The local-based rights movements, too, are uneasy with Sarawak DAP - evidenced thruogh the heated public exchanges during the previous ‘Sarawak for Sarawakians’ rally.

Unlike Sarawak BN which has the PBB as the primus inter pares, thus acting as the tie-breaker: Sarawak’s Pakatan has none. BN, and Umno in particular is smart enough to let Adenan run the show. It is after all, an all-Sarawak affair.

West Malaysians, either those from the ruling coalition or the opposition must put their heads together and learn to understand Sarawakians’ history, dreams, ambitions, hopes and fears if they are to keep the nation whole. The political leaders of both sides must at all costs avoid the simplistic and condescending view of the Sarawakians as a mere passive subordinate and learn as much as they could of Sarawakians’ collective worldview.

SYED NIZAMUDDIN SAYED KHASSIM believes in good governance, meritocracy and confluence of ideas. He is also a founding member of the BIMP-EAGA (Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines East Asean Growth Area) Young Entrepreneurs’ Chamber and is also a ranking member in the International Relations and Diplomacy Committee in the Malaysian Youth Parliament. Proudly born and bred in Sarawak.