COMMENT Looking at different political developments around the world, we can see a growing trend of regionalist sentiments or political regionalism, which basically focuses on the normative interest of a particular region while demanding for greater political power and influence for the residents of that particular region.

Their demands can come in many forms: whether in “strong” ones such as separatism, secession or even independence, or in other “moderate” forms of demands such as those for greater autonomy, decentralisation or devolution of powers. However, each of these movements may even have different interpretations of each of the demands.

With this, we see multiple political parties emerging from secessionist sentiments such as the Scottish National Party (UK), Democratic Convergence of Catalonia (Spain), Parti Québécois (Quebec) and also the Basque Country (Spain and France) among others.

Even Sarawak is not eluded from this growing trend. The growing sense of state pride and a strong sense of origin - especially among Sarawakians - gave birthed to, or more likely re-popularised the sentiment ‘Sarawak for Sarawakians’ (S4S) which has caught relatively strong support among the locals.

These sentiments rise especially due to multiple awareness campaigns by civil society and NGOs, including the recently declared legal Sarawak Association for Peoples' Aspiration (Sapa), after it was previously deemed illegal by the Home Ministry for harbouring secessionist sentiments.

This local political awareness movement has morphed, and through that their own political aspirations were born through the setting up of their own front to face the state election known as the Calon Independent Alliance (CIA). In the forefront of their manifesto is, of course, their claims of “state nationalism, self-governance and referendum”, which is just another phrase for secessionism and deemed seditious by our federal government.

All these demands are based on the alleged breach of the Malaysian Agreement 1963 and the Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) report.

Romanticising Sarawak’s ‘lost’ history

The romanticising of our “lost” state history, the perceived violation of the Malaysian Agreement as well as the IGC report seems to be the “in thing”, with multiple politicians from both divides jumping on the issue and demanded that we be awarded back what is rightfully our under the first agreed Malaysian Agreement.

Whatever their intentions may be, politics tend to play on sentiments, and right now these sentiments are definitely the flavour of the month and could be the deciding factor of the coming state elections.

Don’t get me wrong, state nationalism birthed out through regionalism is a good thing, pride for our own state is essential; knowing our real history and where we come from is vital. However, in our growing awareness of state rights and state-identity, we should also be aware not to tilt to the negative extreme of regionalism.

In our growing sense of state pride and desire for self-governance, it is very easy to tilt to the extreme of what I like to call “regional racism”. Fact is, we are threading on a very thin line now and we do see remnants of these negative extreme regionalist traits in the local S4S movement and even among the local BN government, who is taking full advantage of this very sentiment.

Sarawak BN has rolled out their election machinery and started campaigning with the slogan, “Kamek Anak Sarawak”. It in itself is a good thing, and I myself love how it portrays the diversity among us, yet still united under the common bond of our birth land.

However, it is also used to create a ‘perception’ of a divide between us and the so-called “outsiders” which are basically the Malayan people. This has fostered an culture of “regional racism” to their advantage and even went on further to harp on common S4S sentiments to force out all “Malayan-based” political parties from the state in their manifesto.

Since taking over the reign of chief minister, Adenan Satem has also been very strategic with his move and has been very calculated in his words. His choice to refer West Malaysians as “Malayans” was probably engineered to further enforce that perception of a divide.

I am not saying it is completely wrong - as it does show certain ownership of our special autonomous rights - but again these regionalist sentiments can swerve to an extreme, which are seen to be in play here.

He has probably also created the perception of a siege mentality among the people in the state. It is us against them, and the border of the South China Sea that divides us must continue to remain wide.

In many of his speeches, he has repeated rallied the people of Sarawak to reject the influence of Malaya and even the so-called “Malayan-based” opposition political parties.

Who knows S’wak better than Sarawakians?

His rally calls of “who knows better how to rule the state” and “who knows better what Sarawakians need than Sarawakians” have caught certain traction and been heavily used by other BN component parties in the state, and even S4S sympathisers - to an extent of some calling the state opposition as “Orang Malaya”.

They have cultivated the perception of invaders from the opposite shore and even went to the extent of questioning Sarawakians’ “loyalty”, especially towards those leaning to national parties.

Isn’t this the very same ‘divide and rule’ sentiment and siege mentality that Umno uses? For them, it’s always them protecting the sanctity of ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ against the enemies of Islam - including DAP and the Christians.

Well, apparently the fruit doesn’t fall far from the tree, and Sarawak BN is using the same sentiment to “protect” Sarawak from a perceived Malayan invasion.

However, the last time I check, members of the state opposition (DAP, PKR, Amanah) are Sarawakians as well. The cry that Sarawakians know best also applies to them as they are Sarawakians themselves; and since we claim to believe in the potential of Sarawakians, wouldn’t it be hypocritical to think that that very potential will diminish just because they join a party originating from Malaya?

It is as if we lose our identity and statehood simply because we choose to associate ourselves with a non-local base association.

This is definitely an extreme form of regionalism and is a clear form of demographic discrimination. Would they rather vote in a local-based political party even though they have been stealing and ravaging the state for years, just so that we keep intact the pure breed of Sarawakians without Malayan contamination?

Even Umno, dare I say, is widely rejected by majority of Sarawakians - not because of its origin, but because of its racist stands, cronyism and for building a widespread corrupt culture in our country. Umno is rejected because it is responsible for the different mess we see in our country, as well as their tendencies to project themselves above the law of the land.

Let us be reminded of the core reason of such rejection, and not be caught in sentiments of rejecting anything that eat or breaths Malaya. It is what the party stands for, not its demographics.

On top of that, there are even more extreme calls for West Malaysians to “go back” and stop them from penetrating our borders, or be part of our workforce. Look, I’m not in any way denying the fact that we Sarawakians are at the losing end of the Malaysian Agreement and have over the years been short-changed, used, and milked dry of our resources to further expand the interest of the federal government.

But in all that dissatisfaction, isn’t it a tad extreme to make such calls? Are we going to deny the positive influence and contributions of West Malaysians on our land over the course of our history? I personally know of many who gave their life investing into the state, both in the civil service and also the private sector. Many of them have actually built a family and even settled down in the state.

Learn from Japan and Singapore

Pre-war Japanese society had once prided itself for being ethnically homogenous. The wartime militarist government fostered racism and eschewed any need for cooperation with other nations. Japanese multinationals practised a “Japanese only” rule for promotion of employees to senior ranks.

After its stupendous post-war transformation, Japan fell in 1993 into decades-long economic stagnation, partly because it was unable to find its foot in a heterogeneous world. As a measure of how Japan’s wealth has dropped, the Nikkei 225 limped into 2015 way below 20,000 index points, which is only half its peak level of 39,000 points in 1989.

I’m not saying that ethnic homogeneity was the sole reason of the stagnation of Japan in the 1990s, but it’s an example how extreme regionalism - or in this case, ethnic homogeneity - can have heavy negative effects on a country, and that could very well be a time bomb against us as well.

On the other hand, Singapore since their independence had recognised the need for foreign talents, and it was on that belief that they built their country. The greatest asset the Singaporean government has is their skilled and intellectual workforce, and a huge chunk of it actually comes from Malaysia.

Things would have been so different if they had held on to extreme regionalist sentiments and not welcome the influence of Malaysia into their country.

In recent memoirs of the late Singapore prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew, he stated that one of the saddest moments in his political career was when Singapore was forced out of Malaysia. He could have very well felt hard done by, felt bitter, narrowed his vision and turn Singapore into an extremely exclusive country. But instead, he thought bigger and recognise that Singapore couldn’t thrive on their own.

That is why I strongly believe that we as a state, we cannot afford to go down the line of extreme regionalism and start isolating ourselves from the world. In Sarawak, we have always celebrated our diversity - both in cultures and religion - and pride ourselves at the level of tolerance and respect we have for one another.

Let that spirit of unity and tolerance also extend towards others and not be afraid of external culture. I believe in the potential of the state and our capacity to compete with these external influences.

We are at a pendulum right now, and it’s easy for us to blur the lines and swing to an extreme in the guise of state nationalism. We cannot live in denial and must have the integrity to examine ourselves in ensuring that the best interest of the state is at heart, not just the desire to remain exclusive from one another.

Adenan is playing his political game and is portrayed as the saviour of such a divide. The siege mentality that has been indoctrinated may actually gather him support and votes, but in the long-term, these regionalist sentiments may just be hazardous and damaging to the state.

DR KELVIN YII is a parliamentary assistant to Stampin MP Julian Tan.