I refer to the Malaysiakini article Who is to be blamed - Chin Peng or Tunku?

There has been some reference in the media with regards to the fact that it is the Malays who cannot forget the Emergency' and that ‘class struggles' have no relevance to today's generation'.

Judging from the strong sentiments expressed in the media, there is no question accepting this contention for the simple reason that it was mostly the Malays themselves, compared to all other ethnic/racial groups, who directly suffered in the military ‘war' front.

This involved the vast majority of the local armed as well as auxiliary back-up forces pitched in the forefront of the battle lines. It is not surprising therefore that these Malays should have suffered ‘blood, sweat and tears'.

Not only on the battle front itself but also as a result of certain ‘atrocities' committed by the Malayan Communist Party for instance at ‘Bukit Kepong'.

But the point that must be emphasised is that these Malays were employed as regular members of the colonial armed forces and it was therefore not only their duty, but also the test of their loyalty to defend the British for which they were paid salaries.

Indeed, it is on record that they showed their loyalty in being recognised as some of the fiercest fighters particularly as Special Constables.

The evidence confirms that they would unhesitatingly grab their rifles and rush to the assistance of their friends caught in an ambush, despite it being virtually certain that they themselves might face death.

It is one of the tragedies of the Emergency that the vast majority of the members of the MCP, on the other hand, were among the local Chinese with whom, largely because of overarching institutional divide and rule colonial policies, the relationship with the Malays had never been cordial.

Therefore, understandably, there was also the perception that they were being attacked by immigrant ‘orang Cina'. Indeed, it needs to be recognised that the same scenario, perhaps to a lesser extent, also happened when the army and police fought with the Japanese against the MPAJA which was again predominately Chinese

What this brief overview tells us is that the Malay rakyat were mere ‘pawns' in fighting for the Japanese and the consolidation of British rule with the support of the mainly feudal elitist class (bangsawan) sections of Malay society.

The end result was to re-affirm the political status quo of pre-colonial Malaya after the World War II in that the Malay-MCP relationship as projected by the British was irreversible and intrinsic component of racial conflict. Therefore possibilities of national unity for political independence would be impossible.

There is another important, though seldom mentioned dimension, to the question as to why the Malays cannot forget the Emergency. This is because of the impact of political and religious opposition by Malay social movements against British rule in the struggle for independence.

Documentation provides ample evidence of repression and suppression through repeated arbitrary arrests and indefinite detention of Malays associated with political movements involving the Malay left.

Indeed, the evidence shows that at least one whole ‘kampung' was forcibly relocated on the grounds that its residents were involved in activities associated with political independence.

The ‘punishment' meted out was often equally, if not more devastating, through ‘subtle' means. Members of such movements, their families, and even close relatives were constantly discriminated against for any employment in the government.

More importantly, their children were barred from government scholarships or aby other financial assistance that in some cases continued through the generations

As for class struggles, this question would be an excellent topic for a doctorate thesis, and therefore obviously cannot be dealt with in any detail here.

However if by ‘class' we mean individuals and groups who perceive themselves as being politically alienated, economically below the ‘poverty line', socially isolated and marginalised, then the truth of the matter is not only that ‘class' divisions would be alive but very much relevant for today's generation.

I believe many political analysts would contend that the results of the last general election would reflect voting along class lines. (For an analysis of abject class deprivation in an urban setting I would refer readers to this excellent article ).

But the concern here is on ‘class struggle' and perhaps it might be useful to just focus on the contention that there was a ‘struggle' in Pahang that resulted in the formation of the Malay Tenth Regiment of the MCP.

However, little attention is given even today to some of the dire socioeconomic conditions that exist in the rural economy for the vast majority of Malay farmers, agricultural workers, fishermen and odd-job workers.

In the first place they do not receive a regular monthly wage. The implications of this as one of the causal factors for the perpetuation of chronic poverty, and yet continues to be ignored, is quite unbelievable.

Finally, it might be useful to point out that even the devastating impact of annual flooding of the Sungei Pahang and the severe disruption of the basic living standards of the people is only now beginning to be addressed.

As social welfare officers manning 24-hour air-borne relief operations, because the devastation caused by the flooding was so widespread there were even requests to air ‘drop' large cooking pots and pans!

Then again, in our case studies for the Pahang Tenggara Regional Master Plan way back in 1970, we pointed out the impact on annual flooding also in terms of seriously negating the motivation for entrepreneurship and social change.

Our report's conclusion was that the Malays who had very kindly shared their livelong experiences with us certainly did not need a ‘mental revolution'.