Used for Unity? Malaysia's Formation, Native Identity, and Broken Promises

We are often taught a simple history: Tunku Abdul Rahman was the Architect of Malaysia, uniting Malaya, Singapore, Sabah, and Sarawak for mutual independence in 1963. But when you look closely at the political arithmetic of that time, the picture becomes much more complex—and frankly, deeply uncomfortable for those of us in Borneo.

The Uncomfortable Truth: An Ethnic Balancing Act

My recent studies and chat history have revealed some historical nuances that challenge the common narrative.

Firstly, the initial idea for a federated country wasn't even Malaya’s—it was first suggested by Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore. More critically, the reason our regions, Sabah and Sarawak, were brought in appears to have been less about mutual interest and more about ethnic mathematics.

My revision notes brought this into sharp focus:

“The inclusion of the Borneo territories was vital to maintain the racial balance of the new federation, preventing the Chinese majority in Singapore from upsetting the Malay majority in the overall new nation. It was a political manoeuvre to ensure continued Malay political dominance.”

Tunku Abdul Rahman was reportedly reluctant to merge with Singapore because of the fear that its large Chinese population would upset the existing delicate ethnic balance in Malaya. This suggests that the final shape of Malaysia was primarily about securing a specific ethnic political outcome for the peninsular leadership, making our regions the necessary counterweight.

This leaves us with an inevitable question: Were the people of Sabah and Sarawak used simply as pawns in a political game of ethnic balancing?

An Insult to the Momogun: Who Are We?

This historical context makes the xenophobia and discrimination we face today even more painful.

As a Momogun (meaning "people of the land" or "Earth"), it is insulting and exhausting to constantly defend our existence against baseless claims that native Sabahans, especially the Kadazandusun/KDMR, are "outsiders" who supposedly migrated from Taiwan or Mongolia.

These claims, often spread through misleading infographics masquerading as (look-alike) verified knowledge, are a betrayal of our native identity. They show a blatant disregard for our deep roots in this land.

If some people rely on ancient human migration theory to suggest the KDMR came from Taiwan, then why can’t we apply the same logic and suggest that the people of Taiwan must have come from Sabah? This two-way street exposes the bias and unfairness in those who seek to deny us our rightful place as the true natives of this Malaysian territory. We are not outsiders; we are Malaysians, and we are the indigenous people of our land.

Where is the 'Common Interest'?

Tunku Abdul Rahman famously affirmed that Malaysia's formation was for the common interest of all parties and would accelerate the independence of the Borneo territories, not impose a new form of "colonialism."

To this day, my fellow Borneo defenders and I ask: "Mana janji nya lol?" (Where is the promise?). The sentiment we share is: “Cehhh, manis di awal panit di hujung” (Sweet at the start, bitter at the end).

The reality is that good intention doesn't always equal actual effort. The proclaimed "common interest" feels like a promise broken.

While huge corporations like Petronas can easily exploit Sabah's natural resources under the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74), our people continue to face endemic poverty and underdevelopment. The wealth generated from our land is extracted, yet the benefits rarely seem to return to the people who need them most.

The struggle for the rights and recognition of the natives of Borneo is not just about historical grievances; it is about addressing the ongoing injustices that began with a political calculation over ethnic balance and continue to this day through economic marginalisation. We are tired, but our fight for a just and equitable future for Sabah is far from over.